PDF generated using the open source mwlib toolkit. See http://code.pediapress.com/ for more information.PDF generated at: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 13:41:21 UTC

Citizens United

ContentsArticles

Citizens United 1Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission 4501(c) organization 17527 organization 22America Coming Together 28Joint Victory Campaign 2004 29Media Fund 29Service Employees International Union 30Progress for America 39Republican Governors Association 42Democratic Governors Association 45American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees 50Swift Vets and POWs for Truth 53MoveOn.org 67College Republicans 72New Democrat Network 78Club for Growth 79Sierra Club 86EMILY's List 96AFL–CIO 98League of Conservation Voters 105America Votes 108Progress for America 109International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers 113Economic Freedom Fund 115Laborers' International Union of North America 117Progressive Majority 120Political action committee 121Federal Election Campaign Act 125Corporate personhood 128Natural person 136Corporation 136Legal personality 150

ReferencesArticle Sources and Contributors 154Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors 158

Article LicensesLicense 159

Citizens United 1

Citizens United

Citizens United

Motto Dedicated to restoring our government to citizen control.

Formation 1988

Type Non-profit

Headquarters Washington, DC

President, Chairman David Bossie

Website http:/ / www. citizensunited. org

Citizens United is a conservative non-profit organization in the United States. Its president and chairman is DavidBossie.

OverviewCitizens United describes its mission as being dedicated to restoring the United States government to "citizens'control" and to "assert American values of limited government, freedom of enterprise, strong families, and nationalsovereignty and security." To fulfill this mission, Citizens United undertakes various educational projects, includingtelevision advertising and feature-length documentaries.[1]

Citizens United was founded in 1988. David Bossie has been its president since 2000. Its offices are on PennsylvaniaAvenue in the Capitol Hill area of Washington, D.C. The associated Citizens United Foundation is a tax-exempt501(c)(3) organization.

AdvocacyCitizens United is known for supporting conservative causes even when they conflict with the Washingtonestablishment of the Republican Party. The group produced a television advertisement that reveals several"surprisingly liberal" legislative actions taken by John McCain,[2] which aired on Fox News Channel.[3] On October2, 2006, in reaction to revelations of a GOP cover-up of inappropriate communications between Congressman MarkFoley and teenage pages, Citizens United president David Bossie called on Dennis Hastert to resign over his role incovering up the scandal.[4]

Citizens United 2

American Sovereignty ProjectThe American Sovereignty Project is the lobbying arm of Citizens United, focused on issues related to Americansovereignty and national security. Its goals include a complete withdrawal from the United Nations, defeat of thetreaty establishing a permanent International Criminal Court, and "rejection of one-world government".[1]

LeadershipCitizens United's current leadership includes David N. Bossie, President and Chairman; Michael Boos, VicePresident and General Counsel; Douglas L. Ramsey, Secretary-Treasurer; and Directors Ron Robinson, John Bliss,Kirby Wilbur.

Citizens United ProductionsCitizens United Productions, headed by president David Bossie, has released 20 feature-length documentaries. Thefollowing is a list of films produced by Citizens United Productions.• ACLU: At War with America• America at Risk• Battle for America• Blocking 'The Path to 9/11'• Border War: The Battle Over Illegal Immigration• Broken Promises: The UN at 60• Celsius 41.11• Fire From The Heartland: The Awakening of the Conservative Woman• Generation Zero• Hillary: The Movie• HYPE: The Obama Effect• Nine Days that Changed the World• Perfect Valor• Rediscovering God in America• Rediscovering God in America II: Our Heritage• Ronald Reagan: Rendezvous with Destiny• We Have the Power: Making America Energy Independent

Rediscovering God in America, Rediscovering God in America II, Ronald Reagan: Rendezvous with Destiny, WeHave the Power, and Nine Days That Changed The World were hosted by the married couple Newt Gingrich andCallista Gingrich.

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

Citizens United was the plaintiff in a Supreme Court case which began as a challenge to various statutory provisions of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA), known as the "McCain-Feingold" law. The case revolved around the documentary Hillary: The Movie which was produced by Citizens United. Under the McCain-Feingold law, a federal court in Washington D.C. ruled that Citizens United would be barred from advertising its film.[5] The case (08-205 [6], 558 U.S. 50 (2010)) was heard in the United States Supreme Court on March 24, 2009. During oral argument, the government argued that under existing precedents, it had the power under the constitution to prohibit the publication of books and movies if they were made or sold by corporations. [7] After that hearing, the Court requested re-argument specifically to address whether deciding the case required the Court to reconsider those earlier decisions in Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce and McConnell v. FEC. The case was re-argued on September 9. On January 21, 2010, the Supreme Court overturned the provision of McCain-Feingold barring

Citizens United 3

corporations and unions from paying for political ads made independently of candidate campaigns.[8]

A dissenting opinion by Justice Stevens[9] was joined by Justice Ginsburg, Justice Breyer, and Justice Sotomayor. Itconcurred in the Court's decision to sustain BCRA's disclosure provisions, but dissented from the principal holdingof the majority opinion. The 90-page dissent argued that the Court's ruling "threatens to undermine the integrity ofelected institutions across the Nation. The path it has taken to reach its outcome will...do damage to this institution."The dissent also argued that the Court's holding that BCRA §203 was facially unconstitutional was ruling on aquestion not brought before it by the litigants, and so claimed that the majority "changed the case to give themselvesan opportunity to change the law." Stevens concluded his dissent with:

At bottom, the Court's opinion is thus a rejection of the common sense of the American people, whohave recognized a need to prevent corporations from undermining self government since the founding,and who have fought against the distinctive corrupting potential of corporate electioneering since thedays of Theodore Roosevelt. It is a strange time to repudiate that common sense. While Americandemocracy is imperfect, few outside the majority of this Court would have thought its flaws included adearth of corporate money in politics.

In September 2010, Americans United for Life Action - a 501(c)4 affiliated with Americans United for Life - ranradio ads[10] advocating that incumbent Members of Congress John Boccieri, Chris Carney, and Baron Hill bedefeated. News reports at the time indicated that the ads were "among the first ads to capitalize"[11] on the decision.

Nuisance phone callsCitizens United is known for making repeated unsolicited calls to home phones. The organization will remove aphone number when a call is returned to the organization and option #3 is chosen, thus avoiding future calls.

References[1] About Citizens United (http:/ / www. citizensunited. org/ about. aspx), CitizensUnited.org[2] Surprisingly Liberal (http:/ / media. citizensunited. org/ Surprisingly. htm), Citizens United.[3] Citizens United Against McCain (http:/ / www. elephantbiz. com/ 2008/ 01/ citizens_united_against_mccain. html), January 31, 2008.[4] Conservative Activists Call on Hastert To Resign (http:/ / thinkprogress. org/ 2006/ 10/ 02/ hastert-resign/ ), ThinkProgress, October 2, 2006.[5] Barnes, Robert (2009-03-14). "'Hillary: The Movie' to Get Supreme Court Screening" (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ content/

article/ 2009/ 03/ 14/ AR2009031401603_pf. html). The Washington Post: p. A5. .[6] http:/ / www. supremecourt. gov/ Search. aspx?FileName=/ docketfiles/ 08-205. htm[7] "The Myth of Campaign Finance Reform" (http:/ / nationalaffairs. com/ publications/ detail/ the-myth-of-campaign-finance-reform). National

Affairs. 2010. .[8] "Justices Block Key Part of Campaign Law" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ aponline/ 2010/ 01/ 21/ us/

AP-US-Supreme-Court-Campaign-Finance. html). Associated Press / New York Times. 2010-01-21. .[9] Stevens opinion (http:/ / www. law. cornell. edu/ supct/ html/ 08-205. ZX. html) at ibid.[10] http:/ / takeaction. aul. org/ 2010/ 09/

aul-action-begins-radio-campaign-holding-lawmakers-accountable-for-supporting-taxpayer-funded-abortion/[11] http:/ / www. google. com/ hostednews/ ap/ article/ ALeqM5gqAH3m4ghI6hi0dSDW2dwOzCwgjAD9I0245O1

External links• Citizens United (http:/ / www. citizensunited. org) official website• Citizens United (http:/ / www. imdb. com/ company/ co0134333/ ) at the Internet Movie Database• Citizens United v FEC (http:/ / publicservice. evendon. com/ CitizensUnited_v_FECM. htm) DC District Court

Opinion

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission 4

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

Supreme Court of the United States

Argued March 24, 2009Reargued September 9, 2009

Decided January 21, 2010

Full case name Citizens United, Appellant v. Federal Election Commission

Docket nos. 08-205 [6]

Citations 558 U.S. [1] (more)130 S.Ct. 876

Prior history denied appellants motion for a preliminary injunction 530 F. Supp. 2d274 (D.C. 2008)[2] probable jurisdiction noted U.S.

Argument Oral argument [3]

Reargument Reargument [4]

Opinion Announcment Opinion announcement [5]

Holding

A provision of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act prohibiting unions, corporations and not-for-profit organizations from broadcastingelectioneering communications within 60 days of a general election or 30 days of a primary election violates the free speech clause of the First

Amendment to the United States Constitution. United States District Court for the District of Columbia reversed.

Court membership

Case opinions

Majority Kennedy, joined by Roberts, Scalia, Alito; Thomas (all but Part IV);Stevens, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor (only as to Part IV)

Concurrence Roberts, joined by Alito

Concurrence Scalia, joined by Alito; Thomas (in part)

Concur/dissent Stevens, joined by Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor

Concur/dissent Thomas

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. _ [6] (2010), was a landmark decision by the UnitedStates Supreme Court holding that the First Amendment protects corporate and union funding of independentpolitical broadcasts in candidate elections. The 5–4 decision originated in a dispute over whether the non-profitcorporation Citizens United could air a film critical of Hillary Clinton, and whether the group could advertise thefilm in broadcast ads featuring Clinton's image, in apparent violation of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act,commonly known as the McCain–Feingold Act, in reference to its primary Senate sponsors.[7]

The decision reached the Supreme Court on appeal from a January 2008 decision by the United States District Courtfor the District of Columbia. The lower court decision had upheld provisions of the 2002 act, which prevented thefilm Hillary: The Movie from being shown on television within 30 days of 2008 Democratic primaries.[2] [8]

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission 5

The Supreme Court reversed the lower court, striking down those provisions of the McCain–Feingold Act thatprohibited all corporations, both for-profit and not-for-profit, and unions from broadcasting “electioneeringcommunications.”[7] An "electioneering communication" was defined in McCain–Feingold as a broadcast, cable, orsatellite communication that mentioned a candidate within 60 days of a general election or thirty days of a primary.The decision overruled Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce (1990) and partially overruled McConnell v.Federal Election Commission (2003).[9] McCain–Feingold had previously been weakened, without overrulingMcConnell, in Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. (2007). The Court did upholdrequirements for disclaimer and disclosure by sponsors of advertisements. The case did not involve the federal banon direct contributions from corporations or unions to candidate campaigns or political parties, which remain illegalin races for federal office.[10]

BackgroundThe Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA) (McCain–Feingold Act), 2 U.S.C. § 441b [11], prohibitedcorporations and unions from using their general treasury funds to make "electioneering communications" (broadcastads mentioning a candidate within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of a general election). During the 2004presidential campaign, Citizens United, a conservative nonprofit 501(c)(4) organization, filed a complaint before theFederal Election Commission (FEC) charging that ads for Michael Moore's film Fahrenheit 9/11, which was criticalof the Bush administration's response to the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, constituted political advertisingand thus could not be aired 60 days before an election or 30 days before a party convention. On August 5, the FECdismissed the complaint finding no evidence that the movie's ads had broken the law.[12] The FEC dismissed afurther complaint filed in 2005, holding:

The complainant alleged that the release and distribution of FAHRENHEIT 9/11 constituted an independentexpenditure because the film expressly advocated the defeat of President Bush and that by being fully orpartially responsible for the film’s release, Michael Moore and other entities associated with the film madeexcessive and/or prohibited contributions to unidentified candidates. The Commission found no reason tobelieve the respondents violated the Act because the film, associated trailers and website represented bona fidecommercial activity, not “contributions” or “expenditures” as defined by the Federal Election CampaignAct.[13]

In the wake of these decisions allowing the promotion of the documentary Fahrenheit 9/11 during the 2004campaign, Citizens United sought to run television commercials during the 2008 campaign promoting its politicaldocumentary Hillary: The Movie, which is critical of then-Senator Hillary Clinton, and to air the movie onDirecTV.[14] In January 2008, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that thecommercials violated provisions in the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (McCain–Feingold) restricting"electioneering communications" 30 days before primaries. Though the political action committee claimed that itsfilm was fact-based and nonpartisan, the lower Court found that the film had no purpose other than to discreditClinton's candidacy for President.[15] The Supreme Court docketed the case on August 18, 2008,[16] and heard oralargument on March 24, 2009.[14] [17] [18] In the course of the original oral argument, then-Deputy Solicitor GeneralMalcolm L. Stewart, representing the FEC, argued that under the Austin decision, the government would have thepower to ban books, if those books contained even one sentence expressly advocating the election or defeat of acandidate, and were published or distributed by a corporation or union.[19] Under questioning from the Court,Stewart further argued that under "Austin" the government could ban the distribution of political books overAmazon's Kindle, or prevent a union from hiring a writer to author a political book.[20]

On June 29, 2009, the Supreme Court issued an order directing the parties to reargue the case on September 9 after briefing whether it might be necessary to overrule Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce and/or McConnell v. Federal Election Commission to decide the case.[21] Justice Stevens noted in his dissent that in its prior motion for summary judgment Citizens United had abandoned its facial challenge to Section 203, with the parties agreeing to

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission 6

the dismissal of the claim. Stevens argued that the Court chose to hear argument on issues the parties had agreedwere not to be presented to the Court and that it reached a decision on constitutionality when it could have found forthe plaintiffs on narrower grounds.[22]

The case, on reargument, was the first to be heard by Justice Sotomayor and the first case to be argued in theSupreme Court by Solicitor General Elena Kagan. Also arguing before the Court were former Bush solicitor generalTed Olson and First Amendment lawyer Floyd Abrams for Citizens United, and former Clinton solicitor general SethWaxman defending the statute on behalf of various intervenors that supported the law.[23] Legal scholar ErwinChemerinsky called it "one of the most important First Amendment cases in years".[24]

Opinion of the Court

Justice Kennedy, the author of theCourt's opinion.

The majority opinion,[25] authored by Justice Kennedy, found that 2 U.S.C. §441(b)'s prohibition of all independent expenditures by corporations andunions was invalid and could not be applied to spending such as that inHillary: The Movie. Kennedy wrote: "If the First Amendment has any force,it prohibits Congress from fining or jailing citizens, or associations ofcitizens, for simply engaging in political speech." He also noted that sincethere was no way to distinguish between media and other corporations, theserestrictions would allow Congress to suppress political speech in newspapers,books, television and blogs.[7] The Court overruled Austin v. MichiganChamber of Commerce, which had previously held that a Michigan campaignfinance act that prohibited corporations from using treasury money to supportor oppose candidates in elections did not violate the First and FourteenthAmendments. The Court also overruled the part of McConnell v. FederalElection Commission that upheld BCRA's extension of the Federal ElectionCampaign Act's restrictions on independent corporate expenditures to include"electioneering communications".

The Court found that BCRA §§201 and 311 (provisions requiring disclosureof the funder) were valid as applied to the ads for Clinton and to the movieitself.[25]

ConcurrencesChief Justice Roberts, with whom Justice Alito joined, wrote separately "to address the important principles ofjudicial restraint and stare decisis implicated in this case".[26]

Chief Justice Roberts wrote to further explicate and defend the court's statement that "there is a difference betweenjudicial restraint and judicial abdication". The Chief Justice argued that there are times during which overruling priordecisions is necessary. Had the courts never gone against stare decisis, "segregation would be legal, minimum wagelaws would be unconstitutional, and the Government could wiretap ordinary criminal suspects without first obtainingwarrants". Roberts' concurrence recited a plethora of case law in which the court had ruled against jurisprudence.Ultimately, however, Roberts argued that "stare decisis is a doctrine of preservation, not transformation. It counselsdeference to make past mistakes, but provides no justification for making new ones".Justice Scalia joined the opinion of the Court, but also wrote a concurring opinion which was joined by Justice Alito in full and by Justice Thomas in part.[27] Scalia addressed Justice Stevens's dissent, specifically with regard to the notion that the court's decision was not supported by the original understanding of the First Amendment. Scalia stated that Stevens dissent was "in splendid isolation from the text of the First Amendment. It never shows why 'the freedom of speech' that was the right of Englishmen did not include the freedom to speak in association with other

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission 7

individuals, including association in the corporate form." He further considered the dissent’s exploration of theFramers’ views about the "role of corporations in society" to be misleading, and even if valid, irrelevant to the text.Scalia principally argued that the first amendment was written in "terms of speech, not speakers" and that "Its textoffers no foothold for excluding any category of speaker."

Dissents

Justice Stevens, the author of thedissenting opinion.

A dissenting opinion by Justice Stevens[28] was joined by Justice Ginsburg,Justice Breyer, and Justice Sotomayor. To emphasize his unhappiness withthe majority, Stevens took the relatively rare step of reading part of his 90page dissent from the bench.[29] Stevens' concurred in the Court's decision tosustain BCRA's disclosure provisions, but dissented from the principalholding of the majority opinion. The dissent argued that the Court's ruling"threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions across the Nation.The path it has taken to reach its outcome will, I fear, do damage to thisinstitution." The dissent also argued that the Court's holding that BCRA §203was facially unconstitutional was ruling on a question not brought before it bythe litigants, and so claimed that the majority "changed the case to givethemselves an opportunity to change the law." Stevens concluded his dissent:

At bottom, the Court's opinion is thus a rejection of the common senseof the American people, who have recognized a need to preventcorporations from undermining self government since the founding,and who have fought against the distinctive corrupting potential of corporate electioneering since the days ofTheodore Roosevelt. It is a strange time to repudiate that common sense. While American democracy isimperfect, few outside the majority of this Court would have thought its flaws included a dearth of corporatemoney in politics.

Justice Thomas wrote a separate opinion concurring in all but part IV of the Court's decision (upholding thedisclosure provisions). In order to protect the anonymity of contributors to organizations exercising free speech,Thomas would have struck down the reporting requirements of BCRA §201 and §311 as well, rather than allowingthem to be challenged only on a case-specific basis. Thomas's primary argument was that anonymous free speech isprotected and that making contributor lists public makes the contributors vulnerable to retaliation, citing instances ofretaliation against contributors to both sides of a then recent California voter initiative. Thomas also expressedconcern that such retaliation could extend to retaliation by elected officials. Thomas did not consider "as-appliedchallenges" to be sufficient to protect against the threat of retaliation.[30]

Subsequent developmentsThere was a wide range of reactions to Citizens United v. FEC from politicians, academics, attorneys, advocacygroups and journalists.

Support

Politicians

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who attended the announcement of the ruling, said the court "struck ablow for the First Amendment".[31]

Republican campaign consultant Ed Rollins opined that the decision adds transparency to the election process andwill make it more competitive.[32]

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission 8

Advocacy groups

Citizens United, the group filing the lawsuit said, "Today's U.S. Supreme Court decision allowing Citizens United toair its documentary films and advertisements is a tremendous victory, not only for Citizens United but for everyAmerican who desires to participate in the political process."[33] During litigation, Citizens United had support fromthe United States Chamber of Commerce and the National Rifle Association.[31]

Campaign finance attorney Cleta Mitchell, who had filed an amicus curiae brief on behalf of two advocacyorganizations opposing the ban, wrote that "The Supreme Court has correctly eliminated a constitutionally flawedsystem that allowed media corporations (e.g., The Washington Post Co.) to freely disseminate their opinions aboutcandidates using corporate treasury funds, while denying that constitutional privilege to Susie's Flower Shop Inc. ...The real victims of the corporate expenditure ban have been nonprofit advocacy organizations across the politicalspectrum."[34]

Heritage Foundation fellow Hans A. von Spakovsky, a former Republican member of the Federal ElectionCommission, said "The Supreme Court has restored a part of the First Amendment that had been unfortunately stolenby Congress and a previously wrongly-decided ruling of the court."[35]

Libertarian Cato Institute analysts John Samples and Ilya Shapiro wrote that restrictions on advertising were basedon the idea “that corporations had so much money that their spending would create vast inequalities in speech thatwould undermine democracy.” However, “to make campaign spending equal or nearly so, the government wouldhave to force some people or groups to spend less than they wished. And equality of speech is inherently contrary toprotecting speech from government restraint, which is ultimately the heart of American conceptions of freespeech.”[36]

The American Civil Liberties Union filed an amicus brief that supported the decision,[37] saying that "section 203should now be struck down as facially unconstitutional", though membership was split over the implications of theruling and its board sent the issue to its special committee on campaign finance for further consideration.[38]

Academics and attorneys

Professor of Law Bradley A. Smith, former chairman of the FEC, founder of the Center for Competitive Politics anda leading proponent of deregulation of campaign finance, wrote that the major opponents of political free speech are"incumbent politicians" who "are keen to maintain a chokehold on such speech". Empowering "small and midsizecorporations—and every incorporated mom-and-pop falafel joint, local firefighters’ union, and environmentalgroup—to make its voice heard" frightens them.[39] In response to statements by President Obama and others that theruling would allow foreign entities to gain political influence through U.S. subsidiaries, Smith pointed out that thedecision did not overturn the ban on political donations by foreign corporations and the prohibition on anyinvolvement by foreign nationals in decisions regarding political spending by U.S. subsidiaries, which are coveredby other parts of the law.[40]

Campaign finance expert Jan Baran, a member of the Commission on Federal Ethics Law Reform, agreed with thedecision, writing that "The history of campaign finance reform is the history of incumbent politicians seeking tomuzzle speakers, any speakers, particularly those who might publicly criticize them and their legislation. It is a loteasier to legislate against unions, gun owners, 'fat cat' bankers, health insurance companies and any other industry or'special interest' group when they can't talk back." Baran further noted that in general conservatives and libertarianspraised the ruling's preservation of the First Amendment and freedom of speech, but that liberals and campaignfinance reformers criticized it as greatly expanding the role of corporate money in politics.[41]

Attorney Kenneth Gross, former associate general counsel of the FEC, wrote that corporations relied more on thedevelopment of long-term relationships, political action committees and personal contributions, which were notaffected by the decision. He held that while trade associations might seek to raise funds and support candidates,corporations which have “signed on to transparency agreements regarding political spending” may not be eager togive.[34]

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission 9

The New York Times asked seven academics to opine on how corporate money would reshape politics as a result ofthe court's decision.[42] Three of these wrote that the effects would be minimal or positive: Christopher Cotton, aUniversity of Miami School of Business assistant professor of economics, wrote that “There may be very littledifference between seeing eight ads or seeing nine ads (compared to seeing one ad or two). And, voters recognizethat richer candidates are not necessarily the better candidates, and in some cases, the benefit of running more ads isoffset by the negative signal that spending a lot of money creates.[42] University of California professor of lawEugene Volokh held that the “most influential actors in most political campaigns” are media corporations which“overtly editorialize for and against candidates, and also influence elections by choosing what to cover and how tocover it.” Holding that corporations like Exxon would fear alienating voters by supporting candidates, the decisionreally meant that voters would hear “more messages from more sources.”[42] Joel Gora, a professor at Brooklyn LawSchool who had previously argued the case of Buckley v. Valeo on behalf of the American Civil Liberties Union,said that the decision represented "a great day for the First Amendment" writing that the Court had "dismantled theFirst Amendment 'caste system' in election speech".[42]

Journalists

The Editorial Board of the San Antonio Express-News, criticized McCain–Feingold's exception for mediacorporations from the ban on corporate electioneering, writing that it “makes no sense” that the paper could makeendorsements up until the day of the election but advocacy groups could not. "While the influence of money on thepolitical process is troubling and sometimes corrupting, abridging political speech is the wrong way tocounterbalance that influence.”[43]

Anthony Dick in National Review countered a number of arguments against the decision, asking rhetorically, "isthere something uniquely harmful and/or unworthy of protection about political messages that come fromcorporations and unions, as opposed to, say, rich individuals, persuasive writers, or charismatic demagogues?" Henoted that "a recent Gallup poll shows that a majority of the public actually agrees with the Court that corporationsand unions should be treated just like individuals in terms of their political-expenditure rights".[44] A Gallup polltaken in October 2009 and released soon after the decision showed 57 percent of those surveyed agreed thatcontributions to political candidates are a form of free speech and 55 percent agreed that the same rules should applyto individuals, corporations and unions. Sixty-four percent of Democrats and Republicans believed campaigndonations are a form of free speech.[45]

Chicago Tribune editorial board member Steve Chapman wrote "If corporate advocacy may be forbidden as it wasunder the law in question, it's not just Exxon Mobil and Citigroup that are rendered mute. Nonprofit corporations setup merely to advance goals shared by citizens, such as the American Civil Liberties Union and the National RifleAssociation, also have to put a sock in it. So much for the First Amendment goal of fostering debate about publicpolicy."[46]

Criticism

Politicians and political parties

President Barack Obama stated that the decision "gives the special interests and their lobbyists even more power inWashington — while undermining the influence of average Americans who make small contributions to supporttheir preferred candidates".[47] Obama later elaborated in his weekly radio address saying, "this ruling strikes at ourdemocracy itself" and "I can't think of anything more devastating to the public interest".[48] On January 27, 2010,Obama further condemned the decision during the 2010 State of the Union Address, stating that, "Last week, theSupreme Court reversed a century of law[49] to open the floodgates for special interests — including foreigncorporations — to spend without limit in our elections. Well I don't think American elections should be bankrolledby America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities."

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission 10

Democratic senator Russ Feingold, a lead sponsor of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, stated "Thisdecision was a terrible mistake. Presented with a relatively narrow legal issue, the Supreme Court chose to roll backlaws that have limited the role of corporate money in federal elections since Teddy Roosevelt was president."[50]

Representative Alan Grayson, a Democrat, stated that it was "the worst Supreme Court decision since the Dred Scottcase, and that the court had opened the door to political bribery and corruption in elections to come.[51] Democraticcongresswoman Donna Edwards, along with constitutional law professor and Maryland Democratic State SenatorJamie Raskin, have advocated petitions to reverse the decision by means of constitutional amendment.[52] Rep.Leonard Boswell introduced legislation to amend the constitution.[53] Senator John Kerry also called for anAmendment to overrule the decision.[54]

Republican Senator John McCain, co-crafter of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act and the party's 2008presidential nominee, said "there's going to be, over time, a backlash ... when you see the amounts of union andcorporate money that's going to go into political campaigns".[55] McCain was "disappointed by the decision of theSupreme Court and the lifting of the limits on corporate and union contributions" but not surprised by the decision,saying that "It was clear that Justice Roberts, Alito and Scalia, by their very skeptical and even sarcastic comments,were very much opposed to BCRA."[50] He pointed out that "Justice Rehnquist and Justice O'Connor, who had takena different position on this issue, both had significant political experience, while Justices Roberts, Alito and Scaliahave none."[55] (In fact, Rehnquist had joined Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Kennedy in dissenting in McConnell v.FEC). Republican Senator Olympia Snowe opined that "Today's decision was a serious disservice to ourcountry."[56]

Sanda Everette, co-chair of the Green Party, stated that "The ruling especially hurts the ability of parties that don'taccept corporate contributions, like the Green Party, to compete." (In fact, 2 U.S.C. 441i, which was not altered bythe decision in Citizens United, prohibits all parties from accepting corporate contributions). Another Green Partyofficer, Rich Whitney, stated "In a transparently political decision, a majority of the US Supreme Court overturnedits own recent precedent and paid tribute to the giant corporate interests that already wield tremendous power overour political process and political speech."Ralph Nader, a lawyer who placed third in the popular vote in the last three presidential elections, condemned theruling,[57] saying that "With this decision, corporations can now directly pour vast amounts of corporate money,through independent expenditures, into the electoral swamp already flooded with corporate campaign PACcontribution dollars." He called for shareholder resolutions asking company directors to pledge not to use companymoney to favor or oppose electoral candidates.[58] Pat Choate, Reform Party candidate stated, "The court has, ineffect, legalized foreign governments and foreign corporations to participate in our electoral politics."[59]

International

Ambassador Janez Lenarčič, speaking for the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe's election body,which has overseen over 150 elections, stated that the ruling may adversely affect the organization's twocommitments of "giving voters a genuine choice and giving candidates a fair chance" in that "it threatens to furthermarginalize candidates without strong financial backing or extensive personal resources, thereby in effect narrowingthe political arena".[60]

Academics and attorneys

The constitutional law scholar Laurence H. Tribe wrote that the decision "marks a major upheaval in First Amendment law and signals the end of whatever legitimate claim could otherwise have been made by the Roberts Court to an incremental and minimalist approach to constitutional adjudication, to a modest view of the judicial role vis-à-vis the political branches, or to a genuine concern with adherence to precedent" and pointed out that "Talking about a business corporation as merely another way that individuals might choose to organize their association with one another to pursue their common expressive aims is worse than unrealistic; it obscures the very real injustice and distortion entailed in the phenomenon of some people using other people’s money to support candidates they have

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission 11

made no decision to support, or to oppose candidates they have made no decision to oppose."[61]

Former supreme court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor criticized the decision only obliquely, but warned that “Ininvalidating some of the existing checks on campaign spending, the majority in Citizens United has signaled that theproblem of campaign contributions in judicial elections might get considerably worse and quite soon.”[62]

Richard L. Hasen, professor of election law at Loyola Law School, argued that the ruling "is activist, it increases thedangers of corruption in our political system and it ignores the strong tradition of American political equality". Healso described Justice Kennedy's "specter of blog censorship" as sounding more like "the rantings of a right-wingtalk show host than the rational view of a justice with a sense of political realism".[63]

Three other scholars writing in the aforementioned New York Times article were critical.[42] Heather K. Gerken,Professor of Law at Yale Law School wrote that "The court has done real damage to the cause of reform, but thatdamage mostly came earlier, with decisions that made less of a splash." Michael Waldman, director of the BrennanCenter for Justice at N.Y.U. School of Law, opined that the decision "matches or exceeds Bush v. Gore inideological or partisan overreaching by the court" and Fred Wertheimer, founder and president of Democracy 21considered it "a disaster for the American people".[42]

Subsequent research by John Coates, Professor of Law at Harvard Law School, has shown that corporations withweaker, less shareholder-friendly corporate governance have been more likely to engage in corporate politicalactivity, and spend more when they do.[64]

Professors Lucian Bebchuk at Harvard Law School and Richard Squire at Columbia Law School argue that theinterests of directors and executives may significantly diverge from those of shareholders with respect to politicalspeech decisions, that these decisions may carry special expressive significance from shareholders, and that as aresult of the Citizens United decision, new laws providing shareholders with a greater role in determining howcorporate money is spent on political activity would be beneficial to shareholders.[65]

Advocacy groups

A year after the decision, the liberal advocacy group Common Cause asked the Department of Justice to investigateconflicts of interest on the part of two of the Justices in the majority. The organization said that Thomas's wife wasthe founder and president of Liberty Central, a conservative political advocacy group that would be empowered toaccept corporate contributions to run campaign advertisements, and that Scalia and Thomas had participated inpolitical strategy sessions organized by David H. Koch and Charles G. Koch, who stood to "benefit from thedecision" by taking advantage of the rights upheld by the Court.[66]

Journalists

The New York Times stated in an editorial, "The Supreme Court has handed lobbyists a new weapon. A lobbyist cannow tell any elected official: if you vote wrong, my company, labor union or interest group will spend unlimitedsums explicitly advertising against your re-election."[67] Jonathan Alter called it the "most serious threat to Americandemocracy in a generation".[68] The Christian Science Monitor wrote that the Court had declared “outright thatcorporate expenditures cannot corrupt elected officials, that influence over lawmakers is not corruption, and thatappearance of influence will not undermine public faith in our democracy.”[69]

Some journalists and politicians reacted strongly to the decision. An online media journal Veterans Today called forthe "immediate arrest" of the justices voting in the majority for treason.[70] Keith Olbermann of MSNBC said thatwith this decision "within ten years every politician in this country will be a prostitute" and compared it to the caseDred Scott v. Sandford, an 1857 case that held that African-Americans could not be citizens.[71]

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission 12

Media coverage

Political blogs

Most blogs avoided the theoretical aspects of the decision and focused on more personal and dramatic elements,including the Barack Obama-Samuel Alito face-off during the President's State of the Union address. There,President Obama argued that the decision "reversed a century of law" (strictly, the federal ban on corporate andunion expenditures dates from 1947) and that it would allow "foreign corporations to spend without limits in ourelections," during which Justice Alito, in the audience, perceivably mouthed the words “not true.” This event wasextensively commented by most political bloggers, with a big chunk of the coverage concentrated on whether or notforeign corporations would be able to make substantial political contributions in US elections. "In 1910, Congressenacted the Federal Corrupt Practices Act. See 36 Stat. 822. The disclosure requirements of the Federal CorruptPractices Act were upheld by the Supreme Court in Burroughs v. United States, 54 U.S. 287 (1934), as aConstitutional exercise of Congressional power to prevent corruption in elections: 'The power of Congress to protectthe election . . . from corruption being clear, the choice of means to that end presents a question primarily addressedto the judgment of Congress…. Congress reached the conclusion that public disclosure of political contributions,together with the names of contributors and other details, would tend to prevent corrupt use of money to affectelections. The verity of this conclusion reasonably cannot be denied.'"[72] Citizens United clearly impugned a centuryof jurisprudence that affirmed the constitutionality of legislative checks and oversight of election financing, i.e. thepower of congress to regulate and protect the electoral process.

Election law blogs

On specialized blogs, the Citizens United v. FEC ruling increased traffic by about tenfold for a few days. Traffic alsochange in quality terms; a disproportionately large and diverse set of websites linked to their posts about the ruling,when compared to other topics addressed by these specialized blogs.

Opinion polls

ABC-Washington Post poll results.

An ABC-Washington Post poll conducted February 4 to 8, 2010,showed that 80% of those surveyed opposed (and 65% stronglyopposed) the Citizens United ruling which the poll described assaying "corporations and unions can spend as much money as theywant to help political candidates win elections". Additionally, 72%supported "an effort by Congress to reinstate limits on corporateand union spending on election campaigns".[73] [74] [75]

A Gallup Poll conducted in October 2009, after oral argument, butreleased after the Supreme Court released its opinion, found that57 percent of those surveyed “agreed that money given to politicalcandidates is a form of free speech” and 55 percent agreed that the“same rules should apply to individuals, corporations and unions.”However, in the same poll respondents by 52% to 41% prioritizedlimits on campaign contributions over protecting rights to supportcampaigns and 76% thought the government should be able toplace limits on corporation or union donations.[76] [77]

Separate polls by the plaintiff, Citizens United, and the Center forCompetitive Politics found support for the decision.[78] In particular, the Center for Competitive Politics poll[79]

found that by a 51% to 17% margin respondents agreed that Citizens United should have a right to air Hillary: TheMovie.

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission 13

Legislative responses

Legislative impactThe New York Times reported that 24 states with laws prohibiting or limiting independent expenditures by unionsand corporations would have to change their campaign finance laws because of the ruling.[80]

Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) proposed that candidates who sign up small donors receive $900,000 in public money.Others proposed that laws on corporate governance be amended to assure that shareholders vote on politicalexpenditures.[68]

In February 2010, Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, immediate past Chairman of the Democratic SenatorialCampaign Committee, and Representative Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, Chairman of the DemocraticCongressional Campaign Committee, outlined legislation aimed at undoing the decision.[81] In April 2010, theyintroduced such legislation in the Senate and House, respectively.[82] On June 24, 2010, H.R.5175 (The DISCLOSEAct) passed in the House of Representatives but failed in the Senate. It would have required additional disclosure bycorporations of their campaign expenditures. The law, if passed, would also have prohibited political spending byU.S. companies with twenty percent or more foreign ownership, and by most government contractors.[83]

The DISCLOSE Act included exemptions to its rules given to certain special interests such as the National RifleAssociation and the American Association of Retired Persons. These gaps within the proposal attracted criticismfrom lawmakers on both political parties. "They are auctioning off pieces of the First Amendment in this bill... Thebigger you are, the stronger you are, the less disclosure you have," said Republican Congressman Dan Lungren ofCalifornia. Democratic Congressman Adam Schiff of California commented, "I wish there had been nocarve-outs".[84]

The DISCLOSE Act twice failed to pass the U.S. Senate in the 111th Congress, in both instances reaching only 59 ofthe 60 votes required to overcome a unified Republican filibuster.[85] [86]

Notes[1] http:/ / supreme. justia. com/ us/ 558/ / case. html[2] "Summary [[Citizens United (http:/ / topics. law. cornell. edu/ supct/ cert/ 08-205)] v. Federal Election Commission (Docket No. 08-205)"].

Cornell University School of Law. .[3] http:/ / www. oyez. org/ cases/ 2000-2009/ 2008/ 2008_08_205/ argument/[4] http:/ / www. oyez. org/ cases/ 2000-2009/ 2008/ 2008_08_205/ reargument/[5] http:/ / www. oyez. org/ cases/ 2000-2009/ 2008/ 2008_08_205/ opinion/[6] http:/ / supreme. justia. com/ us/ 558/ _/ case. html[7] Liptak, Adam (2010-01-21). "Justices, 5-4, Reject Corporate Spending Limit" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2010/ 01/ 22/ us/ politics/

22scotus. html). New York Times. .[8] Liptak, Adam (2009-08-29). "Supreme Court to Revisit 'Hillary' Documentary" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2009/ 08/ 30/ us/ 30scotus.

html). New York Times. .[9] Hasen, Richard (2010-01-21). "Money Grubbers: The Supreme Court kills campaign finance reform" (http:/ / www. slate. com/ id/ 2242209).

Slate. .[10] Carney, Eliza (2010-01-21). "Court Unlikely To Stop With [[Citizens United (http:/ / www. nationaljournal. com/ njonline/

rg_20100121_2456. php)]"]. National Journal. . Retrieved 2010-01-21.[11] http:/ / www. law. cornell. edu/ uscode/ 2/ 441b. html[12] FEC finding (http:/ / www. fec. gov/ press/ press2004/ 20040806mur. html) August 6, 2004[13] FEC finding (http:/ / www. fec. gov/ press/ press2005/ 20050809mur. html) August 9, 2005[14] Barnes, Robert (2009-03-15). "'Hillary: The Movie' to Get Supreme Court Screening" (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ content/

article/ 2009/ 03/ 14/ AR2009031401603_pf. html). The Washington Post. . Retrieved 2009-03-22.[15] "Memorandum Opinion" (https:/ / ecf. dcd. uscourts. gov/ cgi-bin/ show_public_doc?2007cv2240-39) (PDF). Citizens United v. Federal

Elections Commission. District Court for the District of Columbia. 2008-01-15. . Retrieved 2010-02-01.[16] "Docket for 08-205" (http:/ / www. supremecourt. gov/ Search. aspx?FileName=/ docketfiles/ 08-205. htm). U.S. Supreme Court.

2008-08-18. .[17] Ross, Lee (2009-03-18). "March 24: Hillary Clinton Film Challenged" (http:/ / www. foxnews. com/ story/ 0,2933,509712,00.

html?sPage=fnc/ us/ supremecourt). Fox News. . Retrieved 2009-03-22.

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission 14

[18] Holland, Jesse J. (March 22, 2009). ""Hillary: The Movie" next on Supreme Court docket" (http:/ / seattletimes. nwsource. com/ html/politics/ 2008901901_nationweek22. html). Seattle Post-Intelligencer. Associated Press. . Retrieved May 10, 2011.

[19] Liptak, Adam (March 25, 2009). "Justices Seem Skeptical of Scope of Campaign Law". The New York Times: p. A16.[20] Smith, Bradley. "The Myth of Campaign Finance Reform" (http:/ / www. nationalaffairs. com/ publications/ detail/

the-myth-of-campaign-finance-reform). .[21] Barnes, Robert (2009-06-30). "Justices to Review Campaign Finance Law Constraints" (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/

content/ article/ 2009/ 06/ 29/ AR2009062903997_pf. html). The Washington Post. .[22] CounterPunch, 4 February 2010, Chucking Precedent at the High Court (http:/ / www. counterpunch. org/ brauchli02042010. html)[23] "Hillary: The Oral Argument" (http:/ / voices. washingtonpost. com/ postpartisan/ 2009/ 09/ hillary_the_oral_argument. html). The

Washington Post. .[24] Liptak, Adam (2009-08-06). "Sotomayor Faces Heavy Workload of Complex Cases" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2009/ 08/ 07/ us/ politics/

07scotus. html). The New York Times. .[25] Syllabus (http:/ / www. law. cornell. edu/ supct/ html/ 08-205. ZS. html) and Majority opinion (http:/ / www. law. cornell. edu/ supct/ html/

08-205. ZO. html) at the Cornell University Law School Supreme Court Collection site[26] Roberts opinion (http:/ / www. law. cornell. edu/ supct/ html/ 08-205. ZC. html) at ibid.[27] Scalia opinion (http:/ / www. law. cornell. edu/ supct/ html/ 08-205. ZC1. html) at ibid.[28] Stevens opinion (http:/ / www. law. cornell. edu/ supct/ html/ 08-205. ZX. html) at ibid.[29] McElroy, Linda (January 22, 2010). "Citizens United v. FEC in plain English" (http:/ / www. scotusblog. com/ 2010/ 01/

citizens-united-v-fec-in-plain-english/ ). SCOTUSblog. . Retrieved October 4, 2011. "Finally, unusual detail number four. Justice Stevens readhis dissent (or some of it – if he had read all ninety pages, we'd still be in Court) from the bench."

[30] Thomas opinion (http:/ / www. law. cornell. edu/ supct/ html/ 08-205. ZX1. html) at ibid.[31] Stohr, Greg (January 21, 2010). "Corporate Campaign Spending Backed by U.S. High Court" (http:/ / www. bloomberg. com/ apps/

news?pid=20601110& sid=aU. fsorJbt3E). Bloomberg. .[32] Rollins, Ed (2010-01-22). "Another shock to the Washington system" (http:/ / www. cnn. com/ 2010/ OPINION/ 01/ 21/ rollins. campaign.

rules. obsolete/ index. html). CNN. . Retrieved 2010-01-26.[33] "Statement from David N. Bossie" (http:/ / citizensunited. org/ blog. aspx?entryid=8225648). Citizens United Blog. 2010-01-21. . Retrieved

2010-01-22.[34] "Who is helped, or hurt, by the [[Citizens United (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ content/ article/ 2010/ 01/ 22/

AR2010012203874. html?hpid=opinionsbox1)] decision?"]. The Washington Post. 2010-01-24. .[35] Dinan, Stephen (2010-01-21). "Divided court strikes down campaign money restrictions" (http:/ / www. washingtontimes. com/ news/ 2010/

jan/ 21/ divided-court-strikes-down-campaign-money-restrict/ ?page=2). The Washington Times. p. 2. .[36] Samples, John; Shapiro, Ilya (2010-01-21). "Free Speech for All" (http:/ / www. cato. org/ pub_display. php?pub_id=11159). Cato Institute.

.[37] "Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission" (http:/ / www. aclu. org/ free-speech/ citizens-united-v-federal-election-commission),

American Civil Liberties Union, July 29, 2009, retrieved June 27, 2011[38] Goldstein, Joseph (2010-01-24). "ACLU May Reverse Course On Campaign Finance Limits After Supreme Court Ruling" (http:/ / www.

nysun. com/ national/ aclu-may-reverse-course-on-campaign-finance/ 86899/ ). New York Sun. . Retrieved 2010-01-26.[39] Smith, Bradley (2010-01-25). "The Citizens United Fallout, Democrats plan to redouble their efforts to stifle corporate free speech" (http:/ /

www. city-journal. org/ 2010/ eon0125bs. html). City Journal. .[40] Smith, Bradley (2010-01-27). "President Wrong on Citizens United Case" (http:/ / corner. nationalreview. com/ post/

?q=ZTVkODZiM2M0ODEzOGQ3MTMwYzgzYjNmODBiMzQzZjk=). National Review. .[41] Baran, Jan Witold (2010-01-25). "Stampede Toward Democracy" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2010/ 01/ 26/ opinion/ 26baran. html). The

New York Times. .[42] "How Corporate Money Will Reshape Politics: Restoring Free Speech in Elections" (http:/ / roomfordebate. blogs. nytimes. com/ 2010/ 01/

21/ how-corporate-money-will-reshape-politics). The New York Times blog. 2010-01-21. . Retrieved 2010-01-21.[43] "High court ruling protects speech" (http:/ / www. mysanantonio. com/ opinion/ 82636522. html). San Antonio Express-News Editorial

Board. Hearst Newspapers. 2010-01-26. . Retrieved 2010-01-26.[44] Dick, Anthony (2010-01-25). "Defending Citizens United" (http:/ / bench. nationalreview. com/ post/

?q=NTk4OTA4YzlkMDg5ZmQyMWQ3OTFiZjM4OWIxMmYxNGI=). National Review. .[45] Fabian, Jordan (2010-01-23). "Poll: Public agrees with principles of campaign finance decision" (http:/ / thehill. com/ blogs/

blog-briefing-room/ news/ 77629-poll-public-agrees-with-principles-of-campaign-finance-decision). The Hill. . Retrieved 2010-01-24.[46] Chapman, Steve (2010-01-24). "Free speech, even for corporations" (http:/ / www. chicagotribune. com/ news/ opinion/

ct-oped-0124-chapman-20100122,0,1729158. column). Chicago Tribune Opinion. . Retrieved 2010-01-24.[47] "Obama Criticizes Campaign Finance Ruling" (http:/ / politicalticker. blogs. cnn. com/ 2010/ 01/ 21/

obama-criticizes-campaign-finance-ruling). CNN Political Ticker. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc.. 2010-01-20. . Retrieved 2010-01-22.[48] Superville, Darlene (2010-01-23). "President Blasts Supreme Court Over Citizens United Decision" (http:/ / www. huffingtonpost. com/

2010/ 01/ 23/ obama-weekly-address-vide_n_434082. html). The Huffington Post. . Retrieved 2010-01-23.[49] This has been argued to refer to the Tillman Act of 1907 and/or a 1912 Montana voter initiative that banned corporate contributions to state

campaigns, and subsequent campaign finance laws like the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act, brookings.edu (http:/ / www. brookings. edu/ gs/ cf/

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission 15

sourcebk/ chap2. PDF), blogs.wsj.com (http:/ / blogs. wsj. com/ law/ 2010/ 01/ 29/ on-obama-v-alito-whos-right-heres-your-answer/ tab/article/ ). Others suggested that he paraphrased a sentence in Justice Stevens' dissent: "[t]he Court today rejects a century of history when ittreats the distinction between corporate and individual campaign spending as an invidious novelty born of Austin v. Michigan Chamber ofCommerce, 494 U.S. 652 (1990)." jurist.law.pitt.edu (http:/ / jurist. law. pitt. edu/ forumy/ 2010/ 02/ constructive-criticism-presidential. php)

[50] Hunt, Kasie (2010-01-21). "John McCain, Russ Feingold diverge on court ruling" (http:/ / www. politico. com/ news/ stories/ 0110/ 31810.html). Politico.com. .

[51] Baumann, Nick (2010-01-22). "Grayson: Court's Campaign Finance Decision "Worst Since Dred Scott"" (http:/ / motherjones. com/ mojo/2010/ 01/ grayson-courts-campaign-finance-decision-worst-dredd-scott). Mother Jones. Mother Jones and the Foundation for NationalProgress. . Retrieved 2010-01-26.

[52] "Group Calls For Constitutional Amendment to Overturn High Court’s Campaign Finance Ruling" (http:/ / pubrecord. org/ multimedia/6674/ congresswoman-professor-movement/ ). The Public Record. 2010-01-21. . Retrieved 2010-01-26.

[53] Hancock, Jason (2010-01-21). "Boswell pushes constitutional amendment to overturn SCOTUS ruling" (http:/ / iowaindependent. com/26145/ boswell-pushes-constitutional-amendment-to-overturn-scotus-ruling). The Iowa Independent. . Retrieved 2010-01-26.

[54] Crabtree, Susan (2010-02-02). "Sen. Kerry backs changing Constitution to deal with Supreme Court decision" (http:/ / thehill. com/homenews/ senate/ 79289-kerry-backs-changing-constitution-to-deal-with-scotus-decision). The Hill. Capitol Hill Publishing Corp.. .Retrieved 2010-02-06.

[55] Amick, John (2010-01-24). "McCain skeptical Supreme Court decision can be countered" (http:/ / voices. washingtonpost. com/ 44/ 2010/01/ mccain-skeptical-supreme-court. html?wprss=44). The Washington Post. .

[56] "Snowe troubled by U.S. Supreme Court ruling to remove limits on corporate and union spending in political campaigns" (http:/ / snowe.senate. gov/ public/ index. cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom. PressReleases& ContentRecord_id=52d6486c-802a-23ad-4fb5-e34d8249a594)(Press release). United States Senate. 2010-01-21. . Retrieved 2010-01-26.

[57] Nader, Ralph (2010-01-22). "Time to Reign in Out-of-Control Corporate Influences on Our Democracy" (http:/ / www. nader. org/ index.php?/ archives/ 2168-Time-to-Reign-in-Out-of-Control-Corporate-Influences-on-Our-Democracy. html). .

[58] Nader, Ralph (2010-01-22). "The Supremes Bow to King Corporation" (http:/ / www. counterpunch. org/ nader01222010. html).CounterPunch. .

[59] "Decision May Mean More Foreign Cash" (http:/ / www. politico. com/ news/ stories/ 0110/ 31845. html). Politico.com. 2010-01-21. .Retrieved 2010-01-22.

[60] "Head of OSCE election body concerned about U.S. Supreme Court ruling on election spending" (http:/ / www. osce. org/ odihr/item_1_42468. html) (Press release). Warsaw: Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (http:/ / www. osce. org/ odihr/ ).2010-01-22. . Retrieved 2010-01-26.

[61] Tribe, Laurence (2010-01-24). "What Should Congress Do About Citizens United? An analysis of the ruling and a possible legislativeresponse" (http:/ / www. scotusblog. com/ 2010/ 01/ what-should-congress-do-about-citizens-united/ ). SCOTUSblog. .

[62] Liptak, Adam (2010-01-26). "O’Connor Mildly Criticizes Court’s Campaign Finance Decision" (http:/ / thecaucus. blogs. nytimes. com/2010/ 01/ 26/ oconnor-mildly-criticizes-courts-campaign-finance-decision/ ?hp). The Caucus Blog. New York Times Company. .

[63] Slate.com (http:/ / www. slate. com/ id/ 2242209/ pagenum/ all)[64] Coates, John (2010). Corporate Governance and Corporate Political Activity: What Effect Will Citizens United Have on Shareholder

Wealth?. Harvard Law and Economics Discussion Paper No. 684. SSRN 1680861.[65] Bebchuk, Lucian A.; Jackson, Robert J., Jr. (2010). "Corporate Political Speech: Who Decides?" (http:/ / www. harvardlawreview. org/

media/ pdf/ vol_12401bebchuk_jackson. pdf). Harvard Law Review 124 (1): 83–117. .[66] Cummings, Jeanne (January 19, 2011). "Reform group: Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas had Citizens United conflicts of interest" (http:/ /

www. politico. com/ news/ stories/ 0111/ 47855. html#ixzz1BaRI8zuA). Politico. . Retrieved 2011-01-22.[67] Kirkpatrick, David (2010-01-22). "Lobbyists Get Potent Weapon in Campaign Financing" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2010/ 01/ 22/ us/

politics/ 22donate. html). New York Times. . Retrieved 2010-01-27.[68] Alter, Jonathan (2010-02-01). "High Court Hypocrisy: Dick Durbin's got a good idea" (http:/ / www. newsweek. com/ id/ 232147).

Newsweek (Newsweek, Inc.). . Retrieved 2010-01-27.[69] "A Bad Day for Democracy" (http:/ / www. csmonitor. com/ Commentary/ Opinion/ 2010/ 0122/

Supreme-Court-s-campaign-ruling-a-bad-day-for-democracy). The Christian Science Monitor. . Retrieved 2010-01-22.[70] "Call for Immediate Arrest of Five Supreme Court Justices for Treason" (http:/ / www. veteranstoday. com/ 2010/ 01/ 22/

call-for-immediate-arrest-of-5-supreme-court-justices-for-treason/ ). VeteransToday.com. 2010-01-22. . Retrieved 2010-01-22.[71] Olbermann, Keith (2010-01-21). "U.S. Government for Sale" (http:/ / www. msnbc. msn. com/ id/ 34981476/ ). Countdown with Keith

Olbermann (http:/ / www. msnbc. msn. com/ id/ 3036677/ ). MSNBC. . Retrieved 2010-01-22.[72] Siglman, Joel. "Reflections on Citizens United" (http:/ / www. rochester. edu/ president/ memos/ 2010/ citizens-united. html). . Retrieved

2011-04-21.[73] Washington Post-ABC News poll (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-srv/ politics/ polls/ postpoll_021010. html) of Feb 4–8, 2010.[74] Gary Langer, In Supreme Court Ruling on Campaign Finance, the Public Dissents (http:/ / blogs. abcnews. com/ thenumbers/ 2010/ 02/

in-supreme-court-ruling-on-campaign-finance-the-public-dissents. html), ABC News, February 17, 2010.[75] Dan Eggan, Poll: Large majority opposes Supreme Court's decision on campaign financing (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/

content/ article/ 2010/ 02/ 17/ AR2010021701151. html), The Washington Post, February 17, 2010.

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission 16

[76] Lydia Saad, Public Agrees With Court: Campaign Money Is "Free Speech" but have mixed views on other issues at heart of new SupremeCourt ruling (http:/ / www. gallup. com/ poll/ 125333/ Public-Agrees-Court-Campaign-Money-Free-Speech. aspx), Gallup, January 22, 2010

[77] Jordan Fabian, Poll: Public agrees with principles of campaign finance decision (http:/ / thehill. com/ blogs/ blog-briefing-room/ news/77629-poll-public-agrees-with-principles-of-campaign-finance-decision), The Hill, January 23, 2010.

[78] Citizensunited.org (http:/ / www. citizensunited. org/ press. aspx?entryid=6526738)[79] Campaignfreedom.org (http:/ / www. campaignfreedom. org/ docLib/ 20100304_CCPpoll03042010. pdf)[80] Urbina, Ian (2010-01-22). "24 States' Laws Open to Attack After Campaign Finance Ruling" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2010/ 01/ 23/ us/

politics/ 23states. html). New York Times. . Retrieved 2010-01-23.[81] Kirkpatrick, David (February 11, 2010). "Democrats Try to Rebuild Campaign-Spending Barriers" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2010/ 02/

12/ us/ politics/ 12citizens. html). The New York Times: p. A19. . Retrieved February 14, 2010. "Congressional Democrats outlined legislationThursday aimed at undoing a recent Supreme Court decision that allows corporations and interest groups to spend freely on politicaladvertising."

[82] Eggen, Dan (April 29, 2010). "Top Democrats Seek Broad Disclosure on Campaign Financing," (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/wp-dyn/ content/ article/ 2010/ 04/ 29/ AR2010042903165. html). The Washington Post. .

[83] Thehill.com (http:/ / thehill. com/ homenews/ house/ 105507-disclose-act-passes)[84] "Who's exempted from 'fix' for Supreme Court campaign finance ruling?" (http:/ / www. csmonitor. com/ USA/ Politics/ 2010/ 0625/

Who-s-exempted-from-fix-for-Supreme-Court-campaign-finance-ruling). Christian Science Monitor. June 25, 2010. .[85] "Bill on political ad disclosures falls a little short in Senate" (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ content/ article/ 2010/ 07/ 27/

AR2010072704656. html). The Washington Post. July 28, 2010. .[86] "Disclose Act fails to advance in Senate" (http:/ / articles. latimes. com/ 2010/ sep/ 24/ nation/ la-na-disclose-act-20100924). Los Angeles

Times. September 24, 2010. .

References• J Seligman, ' Is the corporation a person? Reflections on Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (http:/ /

www. rochester. edu/ president/ memos/ 2010/ citizens-united. html)' (6 May 2010)

External links• Court documents (http:/ / www. scotuswiki. com/ index. php?title=Citizens_United_v.

_Federal_Election_Commission).• Oral Argument Transcript, PDF (http:/ / www. supremecourt. gov/ oral_arguments/ argument_transcripts/

08-205[Reargued]. pdf)• Text of Supreme Court decision, PDF (http:/ / www. supremecourt. gov/ opinions/ 09pdf/ 08-205. pdf)• Text of Supreme Court decision, HTML (http:/ / www. law. cornell. edu/ supct/ html/ 08-205. ZS. html)

501(c) organization 17

501(c) organizationColloquially, a 501(c) organization or simply "a 501(c)" is an American tax-exempt, nonprofit corporation orassociation. Section 501(c) of the United States Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. § 501(c) [1]), provides that 28types of nonprofit organizations are exempt from some federal income taxes. Sections 503 through 505 set out therequirements for attaining such exemptions. Many states refer to Section 501(c) for definitions of organizationsexempt from state taxation as well.

TypesAccording to the IRS Publication 557, in the Organization Reference Chart section, the following is an exact list of501(c) organization types and their corresponding descriptions.[2]

• 501(c)(1) — Corporations Organized Under Act of Congress (including Federal Credit Unions)• 501(c)(2) — Title Holding Corporation for Exempt Organization• 501(c)(3) — Religious, Educational, Charitable, Scientific, Literary, Testing for Public Safety, to Foster National

or International Amateur Sports Competition, or Prevention of Cruelty to Children or Animals Organizations• 501(c)(4) — Civic Leagues, Social Welfare Organizations, and Local Associations of Employees• 501(c)(5) — Labor, Agricultural, and Horticultural Organizations• 501(c)(6) — Business Leagues, Chambers of Commerce, Real Estate Boards, etc.• 501(c)(7) — Social and Recreational Clubs• 501(c)(8) — Fraternal Beneficiary Societies and Associations• 501(c)(9) — Voluntary Employee Beneficiary Associations• 501(c)(10) — Domestic Fraternal Societies and Associations• 501(c)(11) — Teachers' Retirement Fund Associations• 501(c)(12) — Benevolent Life Insurance Associations, Mutual Ditch or Irrigation Companies, Mutual or

Cooperative Telephone Companies, etc.• 501(c)(13) — Cemetery Companies• 501(c)(14) — State-Chartered Credit Unions, Mutual Reserve Funds• 501(c)(15) — Mutual Insurance Companies or Associations• 501(c)(16) — Cooperative Organizations to Finance Crop Operations• 501(c)(17) — Supplemental Unemployment Benefit Trusts• 501(c)(18) — Employee Funded Pension Trust (created before June 25, 1959)• 501(c)(19) — Post or Organization of Past or Present Members of the Armed Forces• 501(c)(21) — Black lung Benefit Trusts• 501(c)(22) — Withdrawal Liability Payment Fund• 501(c)(23) — Veterans Organization (created before 1880)• 501(c)(25) — Title Holding Corporations or Trusts with Multiple Parents• 501(c)(26) — State-Sponsored Organization Providing Health Coverage for High-Risk Individuals• 501(c)(27) — State-Sponsored Workers' Compensation Reinsurance Organization• 501(c)(28) — National Railroad Retirement Investment Trust

501(c) organization 18

General compliance issuesUnder Section 511, a 501(c) organization is subject to tax on its "unrelated business income," whether or not theorganization actually makes a profit, but not including selling donated merchandise or other business or trade carriedon by volunteers, or certain bingo games.[3] Disposal of donated goods valued over $2,500, or acceptance of goodsworth over $5,000 may also trigger special filing and record-keeping requirements.Note that "tax exempt" also does not excuse an organization from maintaining proper records and filing any requiredannual or special-purpose tax returns.[4] Previously, annual returns were not generally required from an exemptorganization accruing less than $25,000 in gross income yearly.[5] However, from 2008 onwards, many suchorganizations must file a yearly "e-Postcard" known as Form 990-N, or risk losing their exemption.[6]

Failure to file required returns such as Form 990 (Return of Organization Exempt From Income Tax) may result inmonetary fines of up to $250,000 per year. Exempt or political organizations (excluding churches or similar religiousentities) must make their returns, reports, notices, and exempt applications available for public inspection. Theorganization's Form 990 (or similar such public record as the Form 990-EZ or Form 990-PF) is generally availablefor public inspection and photocopying at the offices of the exempt organization, through a written request andpayment for photocopies by mail from the exempt organization, or through a direct Form 4506-A Request for PublicInspection or Copy or Political Organization IRS Form request to the IRS of the exempt organization filing of Form990 for the past three tax years. The Form 4506-A also allows the public inspection and/or photocopying access toForm 1023 Application for Recognition of Exemption or Form 1024, Form 8871 Political Organization Notice ofSection 527 Status, and Form 8872 Political Organization Report of Contribution and Expenditures. Internet accessto an organization's 990 and some other forms is available through information services such as GuideStar.Failure to file such timely returns and to make other specific information available to the public also is prohibited.[7]

501(c)(3)501(c)(3) exemptions apply to corporations, and any community chest, fund, cooperating association or foundation,organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary, oreducational purposes, to foster national or international amateur sports competition, to promote the arts, or for theprevention of cruelty to children or animals.[8] [9] . These bodies are often referred to in shorthand form as "Friendsof" organizations[10] [11] [12] [13] [14] .Another provision, 26 U.S.C. § 170 [15], provides a deduction, for federal income tax purposes, for some donors whomake charitable contributions to most types of 501(c)(3) organizations, among others. Regulations specify whichsuch deductions must be verifiable to be allowed (e.g., receipts for donations over $250). Due to the tax deductionsassociated with donations, loss of 501(c)(3) status can be highly challenging to a charity's continued operation, asmany foundations and corporate matching programs do not grant funds to a charity without such status, andindividual donors often do not donate to such a charity due to the unavailability of the deduction.Testing for public safety is described under section 509(a)(4) of the code, which makes the organization a publiccharity and not a private foundation,[16] but contributions to 509(a)(4) organizations are not deductible by the donorfor federal income, estate, or gift tax purposes.The two exempt classifications of 501(c)(3) organizations are as follows:[17]

A public charity, identified by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) as "not a private foundation," normally receives asubstantial part of its income, directly or indirectly, from the general public or from the government. The publicsupport must be fairly broad, not limited to a few individuals or families. Public charities are defined in the InternalRevenue Code under sections 509(a)(1) through 509(a)(4).A private foundation, sometimes called a non-operating foundation, receives most of its income from investments and endowments. This income is used to make grants to other organizations, rather than being dispersed directly for charitable activities. Private foundations are defined in the Internal Revenue Code under section 509(a) as 501(c)(3)

501(c) organization 19

organizations, which do not qualify as public charities.Before donating to a 501(c)(3) organization, a donor may wish to review IRS Publication 78, which listsorganizations currently exempt under 501(c)(3).[18] Donors may also verify 501(c)(3) organizations on theweb-based, searchable IRS list of charitable organizations[19] as well as on lists maintained by the states, typically onstates' Departments of Justice websites. Churches, however, have specific requirements to obtain and maintain taxexempt status; these are outlined in IRS Publication 1828: Tax guide for churches and religious organizations. [20]

This guide clearly outlines activities allowed and not allowed by churches under the 501(c)(3) designation. Aprivate, nonprofit organization, GuideStar, also provides reputable and detailed results for web-based searching toverify information on 501(c)(3) organizations.[21] .Consumers may file IRS Form 13909 with documentation to complain about inappropriate or fradulent (i.e.,fundraising, political campaigning, lobbying) activities by any 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization.[22] .

Obtaining statusMost organizations acquire 501(c)(3) tax exemption by filing IRS Form 1023 [23]. The form must be accompaniedby a $850 filing fee if the yearly gross receipts for the organization are expected to average $10,000 or more.[24] [25]

If yearly gross receipts are expected to average less than $10,000, the filing fee is reduced to $400.[24] [25] There aresome classes of organizations that automatically are treated as tax exempt under 501(c)(3), without the need to fileForm 1023:• Churches, their integrated auxiliaries, and conventions or associations of churches[26]

• Organizations that are not private foundations and that have gross receipts that normally are not more than$5,000[27]

The IRS also expects to release a software tool called Cyber Assistant, which will assist with preparation of theapplication for tax exemption.

Political activitySection 501(c)(3) organizations are subject to limits or absolute prohibitions on engaging in political activities.

Elections

Organizations described in section 501(c)(3) are prohibited from conducting political campaign activities tointervene in elections to public office.[28] The Internal Revenue Service website elaborates upon this prohibition asfollows:

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly orindirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) anycandidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position(verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for publicoffice clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may resultin denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.Certain activities or expenditures may not be prohibited depending on the facts and circumstances. Forexample, certain voter education activities (including presenting public forums and publishing voter educationguides) conducted in a non-partisan manner do not constitute prohibited political campaign activity. Inaddition, other activities intended to encourage people to participate in the electoral process, such as voterregistration and get-out-the-vote drives, would not be prohibited political campaign activity if conducted in anon-partisan manner.On the other hand, voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias that (a) would favor onecandidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have the effect of favoring a candidate

501(c) organization 20

or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or intervention.The Internal Revenue Service provides resources to exempt organizations and the public to help themunderstand the prohibition. As part of its examination program, the IRS also monitors whether organizationsare complying with the prohibition.

Lobbying

In contrast to the absolute prohibition on political campaign interventions by all section 501(c)(3) organizations,public charities (but not private foundations) may conduct a limited amount of lobbying to influence legislation.Although the law states that "No substantial part..." of a public charity's activities can go to lobbying, charities withlarge budgets may lawfully expend a million dollars (under the "expenditure" test), or more (under the "substantialpart" test) per year on lobbying.[29] To clarify the standard of the "substantial part" test, Congress enacted §501 (h)(called the Conable election after its author Representative Barber Conable). The section establishes limits based onoperating budget that a charity can use to determine if it meets the substantial test. This changes the prohibitionagainst direct intervention in partisan contests only for lobbying. The organization is now presumed in compliancewith the substantiality test if they work within the limits. The Conable Election requires a charity to file a declarationwith the IRS and file a functional distribution of funds spreadsheet with their Form 990. IRS form 5768[30] isrequired to make the Conable election.

501(c)(4)501(c)(4) organizations are generally civic leagues and other corporations operated exclusively for the promotion ofsocial welfare, or local associations of employees with membership limited to a designated company or people in aparticular municipality or neighborhood, and with net earnings devoted exclusively to charitable, educational, orrecreational purposes.[31] 501(c)(4) organizations may lobby for legislation, and unlike 501(c)(3) organizations theymay also participate in political campaigns and elections, as long as campaigning is not the organization's primarypurpose.[32] The tax exemption for 501(c)(4) organizations applies to most of their operations, but contributions maybe subject to gift tax, and income spent on political activities - generally the advocacy of a particular candidate in anelection - is taxable.[33]

Contributions to 501(c)(4) organizations are not deductible as charitable contributions for the U.S. income tax.501(c)(4) organizations are not required to disclose their donors publicly.[34] This aspect of the law has led toextensive use of the 501(c)(4) provisions for organizations that are actively involved in lobbying, and has becomecontroversial.[35] [36] In 2010, a bill (the DISCLOSE Act) was passed by the U.S. House of Representatives thataddressed identification of donors to organizations involved in political advocacy,[37] but the bill failed to pass in theSenate.[38]

501(c)(6)501(c)(6) organizations include Business Leagues, Home Builders Association, Chambers of Commerce, Real EstateBoards, etc. such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce political action committee and the National Football League.

References[1] http:/ / www. law. cornell. edu/ uscode/ 26/ 501(c). html[2] IRS, Publication 557 "Tax-Exempt Status For Your Organization", pp. 65-66, (Rev. June 2008), Cat. No 46573C. IRS.gov (http:/ / www. irs.

gov/ pub/ irs-pdf/ p557. pdf), Retrieved 1/27/2009.[3] 26 U.S.C. § 513(f) (http:/ / www. law. cornell. edu/ uscode/ 26/ 513(f). html).[4] E.g., 26 U.S.C. § 6033 (http:/ / www. law. cornell. edu/ uscode/ 26/ 6033. html) and 26 U.S.C. § 6050L (http:/ / www. law. cornell. edu/

uscode/ 26/ 6050L. html).[5] Internal Revenue Bulletin 23, 1982, exercising 26 U.S.C. § 6033(a)(2)(B) (http:/ / www. law. cornell. edu/ uscode/ 26/ 6033(a)(2)(B). html).

501(c) organization 21

[6] "Annual Electronic Filing Requirement for Small Exempt Organizations — Form 990-N (e-Postcard)" (http:/ / www. irs. gov/ charities/article/ 0,,id=169250,00. html). Irs.gov. . Retrieved 2009-05-28.

[7] 26 U.S.C. § 6652 (http:/ / www. law. cornell. edu/ uscode/ 26/ 6652. html) and 26 U.S.C. § 6104 (http:/ / www. law. cornell. edu/ uscode/26/ 6104. html).

[8] Exempt Purposes - Internal Revenue Code Section 501(c)(3) (http:/ / www. irs. gov/ charities/ charitable/ article/ 0,,id=175418,00. html).[9] IRS Public ation 557 "Tax-Exempt Status For Your Organization", Page 19, (Rev. June 2008), Cat. No 46573C. (http:/ / www. irs. gov/ pub/

irs-pdf/ p557. pdf), Retrieved 2009-03-09.[10] Hopkins, Bruce R. (2011), The Law of Tax-Exempt Organizations (10 ed.), John Wiley and Sons, p. 879, ISBN 9780470602171[11] Judith S. Ballan, "How To Aid a Foreign Charity Through an 'American Friends of Organization," in Proceedings of the Twenty-Third New

York University Conference on Tax Planning.[12] "Legal Dimensions of International Grantmaking: How a Private Foundation Can Use "Friends of" Organizations" (http:/ / www. usig. org/

legal/ friends_of_organizations. asp). Usig.org. . Retrieved 2011-06-07.[13] "Giving Insights: Meet the expert: Suzanne M. Reisman, Law Offices of Suzanne M. Reisman" (http:/ / gi. philanthropycapital. org/ views/

33/ meet-the-expert-suzanne-m-reisman-law-offices-of-suzanne-m-reisman). Gi.philanthropycapital.org. 2010-03-03. . Retrieved 2011-06-07.[14] Larkin, Richard F.; DiTommaso, Marie (2011), Wiley Not-for-Profit GAAP 2011: Interpretation and Application of Generally Accepted

Accounting Principles, John Wiley and Sons, p. Ch.11, ISBN 9780470554456[15] http:/ / www. law. cornell. edu/ uscode/ 26/ 170. html[16] IRS, Publication 557 "Tax-Exempt Status For Your Organization", p. 43, (Rev. June 2008), Cat. No 46573C. IRS.gov (http:/ / www. irs.

gov/ pub/ irs-pdf/ p557. pdf), Retrieved 2009-03-09.[17] IRS, "Life Cycle of a Public Charity/Private Foundation", IRS.gov (http:/ / www. irs. gov/ charities/ charitable/ article/ 0,,id=136459,00.

html), Retrieved 2009-03-09.[18] "Publication 78: Seek confirmation from the IRS of whether a 501(c)(3) exemption is in place" (http:/ / www. irs. gov/ app/ pub-78/ ).

Internal Revenue Service. .[19] "IRS Search for Charities" (http:/ / www. irs. gov/ charities/ article/ 0,,id=96136,00. html). Internal Revenue Service. . Retrieved

04/24/2011.[20] "Tax guide for churches and religious organizations" (http:/ / www. irs. gov/ pub/ irs-pdf/ p1828. pdf). 26 USC 501(c)(3). Internal Revenue

Service. . Retrieved 04/24/2011.[21] "Review a Charity" (http:/ / www2. guidestar. org/ rxg/ give-to-charity/ review-a-charity. aspx). GuideStar. . Retrieved 04/24/2011.[22] "Form 13909: Tax-Exempt Organization Complaint (Referral) Form" (http:/ / www. irs. gov/ pub/ irs-pdf/ f13909. pdf). Internal Revenue

Service. . Retrieved 04/24/2011.[23] http:/ / www. irs. gov/ pub/ irs-pdf/ f1023. pdf[24] IRS Form 1023 (http:/ / www. irs. gov/ pub/ irs-pdf/ f1023. pdf) (Rev. 6-2006), p. 12.[25] IRS Exempt Organizations Website (http:/ / www. irs. gov/ charities/ article/ 0,,id=212562,00. html) Retrieved on 2009-09-07.[26] 26 U.S.C. § 508(c)(1)(A) (http:/ / www. law. cornell. edu/ uscode/ 26/ 508. html#c_1_A)[27] 26 U.S.C. § 508(c)(1)(B) (http:/ / www. law. cornell. edu/ uscode/ 26/ 508. html#c_1_B)[28] "The Restriction of Political Campaign Intervention by Section 501(c)(3) Tax-Exempt Organizations" (http:/ / www. irs. gov/ charities/

charitable/ article/ 0,,id=163395,00. html). Irs.gov. 2009-05-11. . Retrieved 2010-11-23.[29] "Political and Lobbying Activities" (http:/ / www. irs. gov/ charities/ charitable/ article/ 0,,id=120703,00. html). Irs.gov. 2009-05-11. .

Retrieved 2009-05-28.[30] "Form 5768" (http:/ / www. irs. gov/ pub/ irs-pdf/ f5768. pdf). .[31] See 26 U.S.C. § 501(c)(4)(A) (http:/ / www. law. cornell. edu/ uscode/ 26/ 501(c)(4)(A). html).[32] "Internal Revenue Manual 501(c)(4) Nonprofit Organizations" (http:/ / www. irs. gov/ irm/ part7/ irm_07-025-004. html#d0e332). .[33] "Comparison of 501(c) (3)s, 501(c)(4)s, and political organizations" (http:/ / www. afj. org/ assets/ resources/ resource1/

Comparison-of-501C3S-501C4S. pdf). Alliance for Justice. July, 2007. .[34] "Political activity of environmental groups and their supporting foundations" (http:/ / epw. senate. gov/ public/ index.

cfm?FuseAction=Files. View& FileStore_id=142d595f-411a-4057-b495-029a095fe25f). U. S. Senate Committee on Environment and PublicWorks. September 2008. p. 6. . Retrieved 2010-03-10.

[35] Adair, Bill (December 11, 2006). "Groups hide behind tax code" (http:/ / www. sptimes. com/ 2006/ 12/ 11/ Worldandnation/Groups_hide_behind_ta. shtml). St. Petersburg Times. .

[36] Luo, Michael; Strom, Stephanie (September 20, 2010). "Donor Names Remain Secret as Rules Shift" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2010/ 09/21/ us/ politics/ 21money. html). The New York Times. .

[37] Huey-Burns, Caitlin (June 25, 2010). "House Passes Campaign Finance Disclose Act" (http:/ / www. usnews. com/ news/ articles/ 2010/ 06/25/ house-passes-campaign-finance-disclose-act). U.S. News and World Report. .

[38] Memoli, Michael A. (September 24, 2010). "Disclose Act fails to advance in Senate" (http:/ / articles. latimes. com/ 2010/ sep/ 24/ nation/la-na-disclose-act-20100924). The Los Angeles Times. .

501(c) organization 22

External links• "IRS list of charities eligible to receive deductible contributions search or download" (http:/ / www. irs. gov/

charities/ article/ 0,,id=96136,00. html). Internal Revenue Service.• "IRS Publication 557" (http:/ / www. irs. gov/ pub/ irs-pdf/ p557. pdf). Internal Revenue Service. Publication 557

governs 501(c) organizations.• "Look up funds in a 501(c)(3) (990 search)" (http:/ / tfcny. fdncenter. org/ 990s/ 990search/ esearch. php).

Foundation Center.• "Historical data regarding the number of 501(c) organizations in the U.S." (http:/ / www. data360. org/

graph_group. aspx?Graph_Group_Id=267). Data 360.• "Number, Finances and other data on 501(c) organizations" (http:/ / nccs. urban. org). National Center for

Charitable Statistics.

527 organizationA 527 organization or 527 group is a type of American tax-exempt organization named after "Section 527" of theU.S. Internal Revenue Code. A 527 group is created primarily to influence the selection, nomination, election,appointment or defeat of candidates to federal, state or local public office.There are no upper limits on contributions to 527s and no restrictions on who may contribute. There are no spendinglimits imposed on these organizations; however, they must register with the IRS, publicly disclose their donors andfile periodic reports of contributions and expenditures.[1]

Because they may not advocate for specific candidates or coordinate with the candidate’s campaign, many 527s arerun by interest groups and used to raise money to spend on issue advocacy and voter mobilization outside of therestrictions on PACs. Examples of 527s include American Solutions for Winning the Future, EMILY's List, SwiftBoat Veterans for Truth, Texans for Truth, The Media Fund, America Coming Together, the Progress for AmericaVoter Fund, Secretary of State Project, United American Technologies, American Right To Life Action and theNovember Fund. MoveOn.org was previously a 527, until they decided to shut down their 527 group as a result of"new politics offered by Barack Obama".[2]

Legal historyThe line between issue advocacy and candidate advocacy is the source of heated debate and litigation.• During April of 2004, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) held hearings to determine whether or not 527s

should be regulated under campaign finance rules. The Commission ultimately decided that the law did not coverthese independent 527 organizations unless they directly advocated the election or defeat of a candidate. FederalElection Commission rulings after the 2004 election put advertisements which questioned a candidate’s characterand fitness for office off limits to 527s specifically.[3]

• On September 18, 2009, the Federal Appeals Court in Washington, D.C., ruled that these groups have a FirstAmendment right to raise and spend freely to influence elections so long as they do not coordinate their activitieswith a candidate or a party. [4] [5]

• In January 2010, the Supreme Court held that the government may not keep corporations or unions from spendingmoney to support or denounce individual candidates in elections. While corporations or unions may not givemoney directly to campaigns, they may seek to persuade the voting public through other independent expenditure.[6]

• In July 2010, the Supreme Court ruling in Speechnow.org v. Federal Election Commission created independent expenditure-only committees known as Super PACs which, like 527s, can raise unlimited amounts of money from

527 organization 23

individuals, unions, associations and corporations to influence elections. These PACs must also disclose theirfinances to the FEC and cannot coordinate with candidates or political parties. The difference is that they maydirectly advocate for or against a candidate.[7]

Current litigationCarey et al. v. FEC – RADM James J. Carey, USN (ret), chairman of the National Defense PAC, along with thePAC and a prospective donor, brought suit after the FEC deadlocked on a 2010 Advisory Opinion Request (see AO2010-20), in which the PAC sought permission to operate a "Super-Duper" PAC, combining an independentexpenditure-only PAC and PAC that makes direct contributions to candidates as a single entity for FEC purposes. [8]

Public opinionAn October 2010 Bloomberg poll found that 47 percent of Americans say they would be less likely to support apolitical candidate if his campaign was supported by advertising paid for by anonymous business groups. 41 percentsaid that it would not matter, and 9 percent said they would be more likely to back the candidate.[9]

A February 2010 poll from the Pew Research Center found that 68 percent of Americans disapprove of the SupremeCourt’s decision to allow corporations to make expenditures on behalf of candidates during elections. 17 percentapprove of the expenditures, and 15 percent of respondents said they were unsure.[10]

2004 election controversyThe 2004 presidential election was the first time that 527 organizations played such a major role in a campaign.Under federal election law, coordination between an election campaign and a 527 group is not allowed. The heavyspending of key 527 groups to attack presidential candidates brought complaints to the Federal ElectionsCommission of illegal coordination between the groups and rival political campaigns. These formal complaintsincluded:• On May 5, 2004, the Republican National Committee accused MoveOn.org, The Media Fund, America Coming

Together and America Votes of coordinating their efforts with the John Kerry campaign.• On August 20, 2004, John Kerry's campaign accused Swift Boat Veterans for Truth of coordinating their efforts

with the George W. Bush campaign.Several people who were involved with both organizations removed themselves to avoid the appearance of conflict.Attorney Benjamin Ginsberg pointed out that it was not uncommon or illegal for lawyers to represent campaigns orpolitical parties while also representing 527 groups. For example, Washington attorney Joe Sandler simultaneouslyrepresented the Democratic National Committee and a 527 group airing anti-Bush ads, the MoveOn.org Voter Fund.In 2006 and 2007 the FEC fined a number of organizations, including MoveOn and Swift Boat Veterans for Truth,for violations arising from the 2004 campaign. The FEC's rationale was that these groups had specifically advocatedthe election or defeat of candidates, thus making them subject to federal regulation and its limits on contributions tothe organizations.[11]

527 organization 24

Top 20 federally focused and state-focused 527 groups, 2010 election cycleSome of these listings identify a parent organization that has created a 527 group but that also engages in manynonpolitical activities. Democratic/liberal leaning groups are highlighted in blue, Republican/conservative leaninggroups are highlighted in pink.A total of $415,784,148 was spent by these organizations alone, $201,203,605 of which was spent byDemocratic/liberal groups and $214,580,543 of which was spent by Republican/conservative groups.[12] [13]

Rank Name 2010 Fundraising 2010 Expenditures

1 Republican Governors Association $117,129,464 $131,823,354

2 Democratic Governors Association $55,362,218 $64,708,253

3 American Federation of State, County, Municipal Employees $47,068,586 $46,520,548

4 Republican State Leadership Committee $29,504,912 $29,911,967

5 American Solutions Winning the Future $28,233,447 $28,419,764

6 Service Employees International Union $14,923,663 $15,534,072

7 Citizens United $9,211,311 $9,185,145

8 EMILY'S List $9,001,964 $10,439,329

9 America Votes $8,883,561 $11,237,974

10 Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee $8,684,721 $10,949,775

11 College Republican National Committee $8,389,738 $8,621,662

12 National Education Association $7,394,838 $7,503,113

13 Citizens for Strength and Security $7,127,814 $7,216,173

14 American Crossroads $6,700,312 $1,408,323

15 Democratic Attorneys General Association $6,365,202 $7,206,207

16 GOPAC $5,600,547 $5,210,328

17 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers $5,354,930 $6,685,747

18 ActBlue $4,994,165 $4,719,415

19 Laborers Union $4,578,278 $4,361,153

20 American Federation of State, County, Municipal Employees $4,123,743 $4,121,846

Top 20 federally focused and state-focused 527 groups, 2008 election cycleSome of these listings identify a parent organization that has created a 527 group but that also engages in manynonpolitical activities. Democratic/liberal leaning groups are highlighted in blue, Republican/conservative leaninggroups are highlighted in pink.A total of $303,309,245 was spent by these organizations alone, $178,397,267 of which was spent byDemocratic/liberal groups and $117,112,322 of which was spent by Republican/conservative groups.[12] [13]

527 organization 25

Rank Name 2008 Fundraising 2008 Expenditures

1 Republican Governors Association $58,942,154 $44,625,517

2 Democratic Governors Association $35,831,960 $26,376,784

3 American Federation of State, County, Municipal Employees $32,867,824 $30,652,149

4 Service Employees International Union $27,432,667 $27,839,177

5 America Votes $25,959,173 $24,491,324

6 American Solutions for Winning the Future $22,722,547 $22,966,088

7 Republican State Leadership Committee $19,961,136 $20,981,193

8 Change to Win $13,917,202 $7,799,656

9 EMILY'S List $13,659,555 $12,910,515

10 The Fund for America $12,142,046 $12,142,044

11 Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee $9,989,627 $12,665,087

12 GOPAC $9,322,764 $9,407,146

13 Patriot Majority Fund $8,266,627 $8,108,121

14 College Republican National Committee $6,956,285 $7,537,976

15 RightChange.com $6,736,563 $5,578,187

16 Democratic Attorneys General Association $6,704,076 $5,441,100

17 UNITE HERE $6,480,432 $6,957,280

18 Citizens United $6,477,080 $6,016,215

19 All Children Matter $6,031,500 $3,368,861

20 Progressive Majority $5,743,779 $7,444,825

Top 20 federally focused and state-focused 527 groups: 2006 election cycleSome of these listings identify a parent organization that has created a 527 group but that also engages in manynonpolitical activities. Democratic/liberal leaning groups are highlighted in blue, Republican/conservative leaninggroups are highlighted in pink.A total of $171,045,165 was spent by these organizations alone, $121,665,587 of which was spent byDemocratic/liberal groups and $49,379,578 of which was spent by Republican/conservative groups.[14] [15]

Rank Name 2006 Fundraising 2006 Expenditures

1 Republican Governors Association $28,798,367 $15,993,537

2 Service Employees International Union $25,053,546 $28,212,510

3 Democratic Governors Association $18,526,787 $8,508,850

4 America Votes $14,391,893 $14,106,236

5 EMILY's List $11,776,201 $11,128,005

6 Republican State Leadership Committee $11,340,863 $10,132,510

7 American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees $9,599,404 $8,336,574

8 Club for Growth $7,217,080 $8,157,383

9 Change to Win $7,061,423 $2,592,376

10 Progress for America $6,175,025 $13,000,574

527 organization 26

11 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers $5,538,113 $5,529,067

12 September Fund $5,230,500 $4,950,861

13 Economic Freedom Fund $5,050,450 $4,835,805

14 America Coming Together $4,494,107 $6,998,238

15 Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee $4,365,495 $3,928,487

16 Democratic Attorneys General Association $4,083,576 $2,630,350

17 College Republican National Committee $3,720,110 $10,260,343

18 Laborers' International Union of North America $3,688,250 $3,762,110

19 Progressive Majority $3,262,427 $4,845,486

20 Bluegrass Freedom Fund $3,150,125 $3,135,863

As of June 30, 2008. Source:[14] Source:[15]

Top 20 federally focused and state-focused 527 groups: 2004 election cycleSome of these listings identify a parent organization that has created a 527 group but that also engages in manynonpolitical activities. Democratic/liberal leaning groups are highlighted in blue, Republican/conservative leaninggroups are highlighted in pink.A total of $439,709,105 was spent by these organizations alone, $307,324,096 of which was spent byDemocratic/liberal groups and $132,385,009 of which was spent by Republican/conservative groups.[12] [13]

Rank Name 2004 Fundraising 2004 Expenditures

1 America Coming Together $79,795,487 $78,040,480

2 Joint Victory Campaign 2004* $71,811,666 $72,588,053

3 Media Fund $59,414,183 $57,694,580

4 Service Employees International Union $48,385,367 $47,695,646

5 Progress For America $44,929,174 $35,631,378

6 Republican Governors Association $33,848,421 $34,301,889

7 Democratic Governors Association $24,172,761 $24,125,938

8 American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees $22,227,050 $22,332,587

9 Swift Vets and POWs for Truth $17,008,090 $22,565,360

10 MoveOn.org $12,956,215 $21,565,803

11 College Republican National Committee $12,780,126 $17,260,655

12 New Democrat Network $12,726,158 $12,524,063

13 Citizens for a Strong Senate $10,853,730 $10,228,515

14 Republican State Leadership Committee $10,762,907 $10,682,312

15 Club for Growth $10,645,976 $11,943,415

16 Sierra Club $8,727,127 $6,261,811

17 EMILY's List $7,739,946 $8,100,752

18 Voices for Working Families $7,466,056 $7,202,695

19 AFL-CIO $6,583,572 $6,473,110

20 League of Conservation Voters $6,049,500 $5,078,116

527 organization 27

As of June 30, 2008.[12] [13]

*Joint Victory Campaign 2004 is a joint fund-raising committee run by America Coming Together and the MediaFund. Money raised by JVC is divided between these two beneficiaries. Combining receipts for these three groupswould result in double-counting.

References[1] The Center for Public Integrity, 527 Frequently Asked Questions http:/ / projects. publicintegrity. org/ 527/ default. aspx?act=faq#5[2] MoveOn To Close Its 527 In Response To Obama's Candidacy (http:/ / tpmelectioncentral. talkingpointsmemo. com/ 2008/ 06/

moveon_to_close_its_527. php), talkingpointsmemo.com[3] Luo, Michael (2008-06-12). "Ready to Attack Obama, if Some Money Arrives" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2008/ 06/ 21/ us/ politics/

21ads. html?hp=& pagewanted=all). New York Times. .[4] EMILY’s List v. FEC, 581 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2009).[5] Court Backs Outside Groups' Political Spending http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2009/ 09/ 19/ us/ politics/ 19donate. html[6] Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission : SCOTUSblog (http:/ / www. scotusblog. com/ case-files/ cases/

citizens-united-v-federal-election-commission/ )[7] Super PACs | OpenSecrets (http:/ / www. opensecrets. org/ pacs/ superpacs. php?cycle=2010)[8] Former FEC Chair Smith joins litigation team to create "Super-Duper" PACs - The Republican Lawyer Blog (http:/ / rnla. org/ Blogs/ blogs/

public/ archive/ 2011/ 04/ 27/ former-fec-chair-smith-joins-litigation-team-to-create-quot-super-duper-quot-pacs. aspx)[9] Bloomberg national poll, conducted Oct 7-10 2010, http:/ / media. bloomberg. com/ bb/ avfile/ rUtERn9eLmGU[10] Midterm Election Challenges for Both Parties http:/ / people-press. org/ 2010/ 02/ 12/ midterm-election-challenges-for-both-parties/[11] 20061213murs (http:/ / www. fec. gov/ press/ press2006/ 20061213murs. html)[12] Top 50 Federally Focused Organizations (http:/ / opensecrets. org/ 527s/ 527cmtes. php?level=C& cycle=2004), opensecrets.org[13] State-Focused 527 Committees Only (http:/ / opensecrets. org/ 527s/ 527cands. php?cycle=2004), opensecrets.org[14] Top 50 Federally Focused Organizations (http:/ / opensecrets. org/ 527s/ 527cmtes. php?level=C& cycle=2006), opensecrets.org[15] State-Focused 527 Committees Only (http:/ / opensecrets. org/ 527s/ 527cands. php?cycle=2008), opensecrets.org

External links• 527s: Advocacy Group Spending in the 2010 Elections (http:/ / www. opensecrets. org/ 527s/ ) from

OpenSecrets.org• Top 50 Federally Focused Organizations (http:/ / www. opensecrets. org/ 527s/ 527cmtes. php?level=C)

• Silent Partners (527 Organizations) (http:/ / www. publicintegrity. org/ 527/ ) from Center for Public Integrity,publicintegrity.org

• Tax Information for Political Organizations (http:/ / www. irs. gov/ charities/ political/ index. html) from theInternal Revenue Service, irs.gov

• "RNC opens assault on anti-Bush groups" (http:/ / www. cnn. com/ 2004/ ALLPOLITICS/ 03/ 31/ gop.complaint/ ), CNN.com, May 6, 2004

• "Kerry files FEC complaint against swift boat group" (http:/ / www. cnn. com/ 2004/ ALLPOLITICS/ 08/ 20/kerry. swiftboat/ ), CNN.com, August 21, 2004

America Coming Together 28

America Coming TogetherAmerica Coming Together (ACT) was a liberal, political action,527 group dedicated to get-out-the-vote activities. ACT did notspecifically endorse any political party, but mostly worked onbehalf of Democratic candidates. It was the largest 527 group in2004 and was planning to be involved in future races. The groupwas primarily funded by Peter Lewis, George Soros, and laborunions, especially the Service Employees International Union, andwas led by Steve Rosenthal, a former political director of theAFL-CIO.

In the last three weeks before the 2004 presidential and congressional elections, ACT planned on funding over 12million phone calls to targeted voters and having canvassers hand-deliver 11 million pieces of literature at targeteddoorsteps. On Election Day, ACT had projected to have 45,000 paid canvassers in the battleground states and spentover $10 million on Election Day. It had 86 offices open every day, a staff of 4000 and a goal of reinforcing thearmy of 45,000 paid canvassers with 25,000 volunteers.

In the fall of 2004, ACT was featured in the Frontline Documentary, The Persuaders [1], which described ACT's useof narrowcasting.In 2005 ACT was in the process of being wound down.[2] Its website was not renewed and is no longer operational.The Federal Election Commission announced on August 29, 2007, that it had reached a settlement agreement withACT for violations of various federal campaign finance laws during the 2004 US presidential campaign. ACT hasagreed to pay $775,000 in fines. [3]

References[1] http:/ / www. pbs. org/ wgbh/ pages/ frontline/ shows/ persuaders/[2] Edsall, Thomas B. (2005-08-03). "Soros-Backed Activist Group Disbands as Interest Fades" (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/

content/ article/ 2005/ 08/ 02/ AR2005080201849. html). Washington Post (The Washington Post Company): pp. A06. . Retrieved2007-09-21.

[3] FEC Press Release August 29, 2007 http:/ / www. fec. gov/ press/ press2007/ 20070829act. shtml

External links• Opensecrets.org ACT Profile (http:/ / www. opensecrets. org/ 527s/ 527events. asp?orgid=10)

Joint Victory Campaign 2004 29

Joint Victory Campaign 2004Joint Victory Campaign 2004 is the second largest 527 group in the United States by income and expenditures. Itwas started by America Coming Together and The Media Fund, and its fundraising is divided between the twogroups' projects. The campaign was led by Steve Rosenthal and Harold Ickes.Major JVC2004 contributors include George Soros, Peter B. Lewis, Steve Bing, Linda Pritzker, Dan Lewis, AgnesVaris, Herb Sandler, Marion Sandler, S. Daniel Abraham, Harold Snyder, Lewis B. Cullman, Anne Getty Earhart,Marcy Carsey, Susie Tompkins Buell, and Richard Rosenthal.

Media FundThe Media Fund is a 527 group, active in U.S. politics, which supported Democrat John Kerry's campaign forPresident. It was formed in 2002, and is led by Harold M. Ickes, a former aide to President Bill Clinton. Its chieffundraiser is Ellen Malcolm, a former fundraiser for EMILY's List. Billionaire George Soros was among the largestdonors to the Fund. According to the New York Times, the Media Fund raised $45 million to run issue ads in keyswing states. The Media Fund is one of several 527 groups which supported Kerry; others include America ComingTogether and MoveOn.org. After the election, the group experienced a dramatic drop in fundraising success; mediareports speculated that major donors had given up on the organization, and were turning their attention to other, morelong-term Democratic projects.

Legal IssuesFollowing the campaign of John Kerry, the Federal Election Commission unanimously voted to levy a $580,000 fineagainst the Fund. The penalty was the seventh largest in FEC history. The FEC determined that more than 90 percentof the $60 million raised by the Media Fund came from labor unions, corporations or from donors who gave more$5,000 — all contributions barred by federal election rules. Lyn Utrecht represented the Media Fund in thesettlement. Erik Smith, president of the Media Fund, would later issue a statement pointing out that the FECsettlement did not find his group in violation of the law.The FEC had already fined a number of the other major 527sfor illegal spending during the 2004 elections, including the Democratic-leaning groups MoveOn.org and the GeorgeSoros-backed America Coming Together, as well as the Republican-supporting groups Progress for America VoterFund and Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

External links and references• "California Group Steps into Vacuum on Left", Washington Post, by Thomas B. Edsall and Chris Cillizza,

October 23, 2005• "FEC slaps Media Fund with huge fine", "POLITICO", by Kenneth P. Vogel, December 19, 2007

Service Employees International Union 30

Service Employees International Union

Service Employees International Union (SEIU)

Founded 1921 as BSEIU

Members 1,857,136 (March 31, 2010)[1]

Country United States, Canada and Puerto Rico

Affiliation Change to Win Federation, and CLC

Key people Mary Kay Henry, International President

Office location Washington, D.C.

Website seiu.org [2]

Service Employees International Union (SEIU) is a labor union representing about 1.8 million workers in over100 occupations in the United States (including Puerto Rico), and Canada.[1] SEIU is focused on organizing workersin three sectors: health care (over half of members work in the health care field), including hospital, home care andnursing home workers; public services (local and state government employees); and, property services (includingjanitors, security officers and food service workers).SEIU is the fastest growing labor union in the United States[3] [4] and has over 150 local branches. It is affiliated withthe Change to Win Federation and the Canadian Labour Congress. SEIU is based out of Washington, D.C., and hasseveral internal divisions which include: Communications, Government Affairs, New Media, Organizing, Political,Global Strength, Pension/Benefits, Community Strength, Research, and Legal.The union states that its top priorities are to stand up for working families to help bring economic relief to millionsacross the country, fix the nation's broken health care system, and fight to guarantee workers' rights on the job. SEIUis sometimes referred to as the "purple ocean" at political events because of the union's recognizable purple shirts.The union is also known for its Justice for Janitors program and strong support for Democratic candidates. It spent$28 million supporting Barack Obama in the 2008 presidential election, making it the "organization that spent themost to help Barack Obama get elected president."[5]

HistoryThe SEIU was founded in 1921 in Chicago as the Building Services Employees Union (BSEU); its first memberswere janitors, elevator operators, and window washers. Membership increased significantly with a 1934 strike inNew York City's Garment District. Growth from organizing new members, and affiliating with other unions, itincludes more than 225,000 janitors in at least 29 cities in the United States and at least four cities in Canada, andmergers with other unions resulted in a membership working in industries well beyond BSEIU's initial boundaries. In1968 it renamed itself Service Employees International Union. In 1980 it absorbed the International Jewelry WorkersUnion, later the Drug, Hospital, and Health Care Employees Union (Local 1199), and the Health & Human ServicesWorkers.In 1995, SEIU President John Sweeney was elected president of the AFL-CIO, the confederation of labor unions in the United States and Canada. After Sweeney's departure, former social worker Andrew Stern was elected president

Service Employees International Union 31

of SEIU. In the first ten years of Stern's administration, the union's membership grew rapidly, making SEIU thelargest union in the AFL-CIO by 2000.In 2003, SEIU was a founding member of the New Unity Partnership, an organization of unions that pushed forreforms at the national level, and a greater commitment to organizing unorganized workers into unions. In 2005,SEIU was a founding member of the Change to Win Coalition, which furthered the reformist agenda, criticizing theAFL-CIO for focusing its attention on electoral politics, instead of taking sufficient action to encourage organizing inthe face of decreasing union membership.In June 2004, SEIU launched a non-union-member affiliate group called Purple Ocean to stand with workers in thefight for economic justice.On the eve of the 2005 AFL-CIO convention, SEIU, along with its Change to Win partners, the Teamsters union,and the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, announced that it was disaffiliating from the AFL-CIO afterthe 50-year-old labor federation declined to pass the Coalition's suggested reforms.[6] The Change to Win Federationheld its founding convention in September 2005, where SEIU Secretary-Treasurer Anna Burger was announced asthe organizations' Chair. As with other Change to Win unions, many individual SEIU locals remain affiliated toregional AFL-CIO bodies through "solidarity charters."

Presidents of SEIU• William Quesse (1921–1927)• Oscar Nelson (1927)• Jerry Horan (1927–1937)• George Scalise (1937–1940)• William McFetridge (1940–1960)• David Sullivan (1960–1971)• George Hardy (1971–1980)• John Sweeney (1980–1995, former president of the AFL-CIO)• Richard Cordtz (1995–1996)• Andy Stern (1996–2010)• Mary Kay Henry (2010-)

SEIU International Leadership• President - Mary Kay Henry• Secretary-Treasurer - Eliseo Medina• Executive Vice President - Tom Woodruff• Executive Vice President - Gerry Hudson• Executive Vice President - Dave Regan• Executive Vice President - Mitch Ackerman• Executive Vice President - Bruce Raynor

Recent organizingIn Missouri, 12,000 home care attendants in the Consumer Directed Services program voted to unite in the MissouriHome Care Union, a joint local of AFSCME and SEIU.[7] In Wisconsin, 5,500 home care providers voted 'yes' tounite in SEIU.[8] In a landslide vote, part-time adjunct faculty members in the Maine Community College Systemformed a union [9] with the Maine State Employees Association, Local 1989 of SEIU. And in New York, 30,000SEIU Local 32BJ apartment building workers—doormen, security guards, bellhops, and others—averted a strike andwon a new contract.[10]

Service Employees International Union 32

Over the course of the past several years, the union has made a concerted effort to expand outside of its traditionalbase on the coasts.Notable health care organizing successes in 2009 include more than 800 healthcare workers at St. Elizabeth'sMedical Center, the largest medical center in Boston's Caritas Christi Health Care chain, voting to unite together [11]

with thousands of health care workers in 1199SEIU. And in July 2009, 13,000 home care attendants in the state'sconsumer directed home care program voted to join [12] the Missouri Home Care Union, a statewide union of homecare attendants.In 2009, the union launched a nationwide campaign [13] against Sodexo to improve wage and job standards. CleanUp Sodexo [14] serves as the online voice of the workers at Sodexo, many of whom make near poverty-level wagesworking as food service workers at universities around the country.Since 2004, the union has seen success organizing workers in Texas, Florida, Nevada, and Arizona in particular.Over 5,000 janitors organized with SEIU in Houston, Texas in 2005, which was especially significant due to the sizeof the campaign and its location in an area with low union density.[15] In Florida, a high-profile strike at theUniversity of Miami which lasted nine weeks and included a hunger strike, ended with the union winningrepresentation of 425 janitors on campus.[16] This victory was shortly followed by another 600 workers at NorthShore Medical Center, also in Miami, voting to join the SEIU in early 2006.[17]

One of the major potential areas of union growth in the United States is organizing workers usually hithertoconsidered "unorganizable," especially low-wage service sector workers, in what is often called "social movementorganizing."[18] Many of these service sector workers are minorities, immigrants, and women.[19]

As an example of this, in 2006 and 2007 Oregon's SEIU Local 503, OPEU (Oregon Public Employees Union) builton its earlier successes in organizing state-paid "long-term care providers", including homecare workers (in-homecare providers) and family-child-care providers, by organizing "commercial" adult foster home providers whoreceive state funding. Commercial providers are licensed to operate foster homes with up to five senior or disabledresidents. By forming a union, providers would for the first time be able to collectively bargain a contract with thestate over service fees, benefits, regulations, and respect.In the spring of 2007 the state Employment Relations Board (ERB) verified that a significant majority of thecommercial providers across Oregon had signed authorization cards supporting forming a union, and Governor TedKulongoski signed an executive order recognizing commercial adult foster care providers as a union, and openingthe path to contract bargaining.[20] Following the governor's executive order, the Oregon legislature passed a bill, onJune 28, 2007,[21] codifying the executive order and making the adult foster care providers state employees solely forthe purpose of collective bargaining. After successfully organizing commercial providers, SEIU 503 continued thecampaign and organized "relative" adult foster home providers, who are licensed and paid by the state to providecare for senior or disabled family members.In November 2007 the Oregon ERB verified that a significant majority of relative providers had signed authorizationcards and Governor Kulongoski signed Executive Order No. 07-20 recognizing them as part of the union.[20] Withthe success of the two stages of this organizing campaign, adult foster care providers were able to form a union forthe first time in the United States.[22] In August 2008, the new adult foster care providers in SEIU Local 503 and theState of Oregon completed negotiations on the first adult foster care provider union contract in the US.[23]

Service Employees International Union 33

Notable localsMore and more SEIU Locals have embraced free social networking and microblogging service Twitter to help getout their message online in 2009 and 2010. The International maintains a Locals Twitter list [24], which pulls intweets from every SEIU Local on Twitter.There is a joint local of SEIU and the New York-based union UNITE HERE called Service Workers United [25],which represents food service, facilities, and laundry workers.

1199SEIU United Healthcare Workers EastSEIU's largest local union, 1199SEIU United Healthcare Workers East has a membership of roughly 300,000 andclaims to be the largest local union in the world. It represents workers in various parts of New York state, chiefly inNew York City, Syracuse, and Buffalo, with additional members located in and around the Canton-Potsdam andPlattsburgh areas of northern New York, as well as Maryland, Washington, D.C., and Massachusetts.

SEIU United Healthcare Workers WestSEIU United Healthcare Workers West (UHW West) is a large (150,000 member) local union based in Oakland,California. In August 2008, the international union announced plans for a hearing to consider trusteeing UHW West.On January 27, 2009, SEIU placed UHW West under trusteeship and dismissed 70 of the local's executives,including president Sal Rosselli.[26] [27] Rosselli and other ousted leaders reformed under the National Union ofHealthcare Workers and pushed for UHW West members at 60 facilities to vote to decertify SEIU.[28] As of March22, 2009, a total of 91,000 UHW West members (a majority of UHW West members) signed decertification petitionsto leave SEIU and join NUHW.[29]

SEIU Local 32BJSEIU 32BJ is a politically outspoken building services local based in New York. 32BJ represents 120,000 propertyservice workers,[30] and is part of SEIU Justice for Janitors, Stand for Security [31] and Multi Service Workerscampaigns.Recently, SEIU 32BJ's Thomas Shortman Training Fund was awarded a $2.8 million grant[32] by the Department ofLabor, as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act aiming to create jobs in expanding green industriesover the next two years. The program (1,000 Green Supers [33]) will help train 2,200 NYC building superintendentsin energy efficiency.

SEIU Local 1000SEIU Local 1000 is affiliated with the California State Employees Association (CSEA) with one other union, theCalifornia State University Employees Union, SEIU Local 2579, and two other non-union affiliates of unrepresentedmanagers, confidential and supervisory employees and an affiliate of retired state employees. Yvonne Walker hasbeen president since 2008.[34] It is the exclusive legal representative for 95,000 California state employees. Local1000 deals with issues of concern to current rank-and-file state employees, such as salaries, benefits, workingconditions and contract negotiations. Local 1000 has nine bargaining units and represents a variety of state workers,including DMV employees, prison support staff (excluding uniformed guards), information technology workers,nurses and administrative staff.Negotiations for a new contract between the state and Local 1000 bogged down in 2005-6.[35] [36] On June 12, unionmembers voted to authorize a strike in the event negotiations failed.[37] [38] [39] This would have been the first strikeby state employees in California history.[40] However, a deal was reached on June 17.[41] The new contract wasapproved by union members in July,[40] and signed into law on September 6.[42]

Service Employees International Union 34

Local 1000 played a prominent role in opposing Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's response to the budget crisis of2008-9, much of which focused on cutting public services such as home care and education in order to reduce thedeficit.In September 2011, a small group of members proposed raising the Executives of SEIU 1000 annual salaries by upto 300%. The proposal was not going to be voted on by the regualar membership, but only the executivemembership. When news of this proposal made it to the rank-and-file members a huge email campaign startedStatewide calling for the resignation of the current leadership. During the Executive meeting in Oakland, CA wherethe proposal was to be voted upon a last minute decision was made by Yvonne Walker to pull the topic from theagenda with the comment that the pay proposal "would be studied further."[43]

SEIU Healthcare Illinois & IndianaSEIU Healthcare Illinois & Indiana was founded in 2008, when members of three SEIU locals (Local 4, Local 20,Local 880) voted to join and create a single entity across the two states. The organization has 85,000 members SEIUHealthcare Illinois & Indiana [44].

SEIU Local 87One of the first SEIU locals was Local 87, a local that can trace its origins [45] back to the 1920s, when it was knownas Local 9 of the Building Service Employees International Union (BSEIU). Labor legend George Hardy[46] got hisstart organizing janitors with Local 9, where he helped quickly grow its membership; improving wages, benefits andworking conditions for the janitors who worked in San Francisco's office buildings. Under future leaders such asHerman Eimers, Rex Kennedy, and Robert Parr, members of Local 87 continued to enjoy improved wages, benefitsand working conditions. These victories were all won with very few strikes. Unfortunately during the 1990s and thefirst few years of the 21st Century, workloads in many of San Francisco's high-rise office buildings drasticallyincreased along with a deterioration of working conditions.

SEIU Local 1 CanadaThe largest local in Canada is SEIU Local 1 Canada. It represents over 46,000 health care and community servicesworkers in Ontario. Its members work in hospitals, home care, nursing and retirement homes and communityservices throughout the province.

SEIU Local 473/395a, Allentown, Pa.In November 2009, national news media reported that Nick Balzano, president of SEIU Local 473/395a inAllentown, Pennsylvania threatened to file a grievance against the town for allowing a Boy Scout, Kevin Anderson,to voluntarily clear a walking path for the town. Balzano said that, because several SEIU members had been laid off,"there are to be no volunteers." He continued to state that, "We'll be looking into the Cub Scout or Boy Scout whodone the trails." The local mayor as well as U.S. Rep. Charlie Dent, R-15th District, criticized Balzano and called onhim to apologize to the city and city residents. Following the backlash, Balzano resigned as head of the local chapter.SEIU members from Allentown, Philadelphia and New Jersey joined the Boy Scouts to help with the project and tomake an apology. Wayne MacManiman, SEIU district leader stated "Kevin's doing an amazing thing.…We'vealways supported the Boy Scouts, whether it's here in Allentown, Bethlehem or Philadelphia."[47]

Service Employees International Union 35

In popular cultureSEIU's Los Angeles Justice for Janitors campaign was portrayed in the motion picture Bread and Roses.On the popular long-running television show ER, the service employee Jerry Markovic (played by AbrahamBenrubi) often wears an SEIU t-shirt, reflecting SEIU representation of hospital service workers in the United States(approximately 250,000).SEIU's Popular Media Organizing Program is an initiative [48] to connect popular culture and the labor movement'splatform with support from the creative arts. In 2008, SEIU partnered with Manifest Hope: DC, MoveOn PAC andObey Giant to launch a nationwide online contest [49] to gather the best artwork celebrating the grassroots campaignthat helped elect Barack Obama as president. The winning artwork [50] was displayed to DC area residents andmillions of people expected to gather in Washington for Barack Obama's inauguration. SEIU has also produced a"Social Justice" calendar featuring the work of Manifest Hope artists in 2009 [51] and 2010 [52].The non-profit 501c3 Bread and Roses program started by 1199SEIU was founded in 1978 as a cultural resource [53]

for union members and students in New York who, for the most part, are not reached by traditional arts institutionsand programs. Since that time, the Bread and Roses program has spread widely beyond the New York City area. In2006, “Unseen America”--a book of photography taken by 1199SEIU members and other workers—waspublished,[54] with New York’s Guggenheim Museum hosting a party to celebrate Bread and Roses’ “UnseenAmerica” project,[55] which was one of dozens of events held in cities around the U.S.

ControversyIn January 2011, The National Labor Relations Board issued a report finding that SEIU unlawfully threatened KaiserPermanente employees with loss of wages and benefits if a rival union won the election and that SEIU had engagedin various acts of physical force and violence against supporters of a rival union.[56]

In April 2010, The National Labor Relations Board regional office in Winston-Salem, North Carolina issued afederal complaint against a local SEIU chapter for maintaining an “annual objection” policy designed to forcenursing home workers into full union dues payments against their will.[57]

In June 2003 SEIU was found guilty of violating security workers' rights and ordered to pay back dues and fees toover 400 workers.[58]

In December 2010, SEIU agreed in a settlement to stop trying to prevent workers who do not support its activitiesfrom coming to work at Morehouse College dining venues operated by Sodexo. The settlement also forces SEIU topost notice that it will not "restrain or coerce" Sodexo employees.[59] According to Sodexo, SEIU leads a smearcampaign to spread misinformation about Sodexo in an attempt to drive out UNITE HERE and other unions thathave historically operated within the food service industry.[60]

Sodexo USA filed a civil lawsuit against SEIU under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act onMarch 17, 2011. In the complaint, Sodexo alleges that SEIU engaged in blackmail, vandalism, trespassing,harassment, and lobbying law violations, referring to the "Clean Up Sodexo" campaign as "old-fashioned, strongarmtactics" and SEIU behavior as "egregious" and "illegal."[61] [62]

During a drive to organize 10,000 healthcare workers in November 2009, SEIU was accused of ballot rigging andusing intimidation to persuade workers to vote in SEIU instead of the National Union of Healthcare Workers as theirrepresentative.[63] [64]

Aramark employees from Johns Hopkins University, Towson University, Morgan State University and Coppin StateUniversity, as well as students from all four universities, participated in a protest alleging SEIU was acting toprevent a fair employee representation by the union of their choice.[65]

In response to an article on the official SEIU website attacking DiversityInc's awards to companies for Diversity,[66]

Luke Visconti, the founder and CEO of DiversityInc accused SEIU of libel and pointed out the lack of a diversity

Service Employees International Union 36

plan on SEIU's website.[67]

The SEIU's tactics were featured in a book entitled The Devil At My Doorstep chronicling the 3 year battle betweenthe union and an Indiana based building services company [68] .

Further reading• Fink, Leon, and Brian Greenberg. Upheaval in the Quiet Zone: 1199/SEIU and the Politics of Healthcare

Unionism (2nd ed. 2009)• Fletcher, Bill, and Fernando Gapasin. Solidarity Divided: The Crisis in Organized Labor and a New Path toward

Social Justice (2009)• Lopez, Steven Henry. Reorganizing the Rust Belt: An Inside Study of the American Labor Movement (2004),

focus on SEIU in Pittsburgh• Plumer, Bradford. "Labor's Love Lost," New Republic, April 23, 2008, Vol. 238, Issue 7 online in Academic

Search Premier, focus on conflict between Stern and Rosselli

References[1] Office of Labor-Management Standards. Employment Standards Administration. U.S. Department of Labor. Form LM-2 labor Organization

Annual Report. Service Employees International Union. File Number: 000-137 (http:/ / kcerds. dol-esa. gov/ query/ orgReport. do). DatedMarch 31, 2010. Retrieved August 15, 2010.

[2] http:/ / www. seiu. org/[3] Rosenkrantz, Holly (2010-04-14). "SEIU's Stern Leaves With Obama Access Up, Rolls Down" (http:/ / www. businessweek. com/ news/

2010-04-14/ stern-leaving-seiu-with-white-house-access-up-union-rolls-down. html). Business Week. . Retrieved 2010-08-21.[4] Gonzalez, Juan (2010-04-14). "Fierce succession battle shapes up as SEIU leader mulls stepping down" (http:/ / www. nydailynews. com/

news/ 2010/ 04/ 14/ 2010-04-14_labor_union_surprise_exit_fierce_succession_battle_shapes_up_as_seiu_leader_mull. html). New York DailyNews. . Retrieved 2010-08-21.

[5] Carney, Timothy (2011-02-23) Obama's top funder also leads the nation in White House visits (http:/ / washingtonexaminer. com/ blogs/beltway-confidential/ 2011/ 02/ obamas-top-funder-also-lead-nation-white-house-visits), Washington Examiner

[6] Edsall, Thomas B. (July 26, 2005). "Two Top Unions Split From AFL-CIO, Others Are Expected To Follow Teamsters" (http:/ / www.washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ content/ article/ 2005/ 07/ 25/ AR2005072500251. html). The Washington Post. . Retrieved 2009-08-12.

[7] Lieb, David (2010-05-05). "In-home care workers opt for union representation" (http:/ / www. businessweek. com/ ap/ financialnews/D9FGU5H80. htm). Business Week. Associated Press. . Retrieved 2010-08-21.

[8] Wahlberg, David (2010-05-06). "Home care workers vote to join union" (http:/ / host. madison. com/ wsj/ news/ local/ health_med_fit/article_a81dc94a-5969-11df-a1c8-001cc4c002e0. html). Wisconsin State Journal. . Retrieved 2010-08-21.

[9] http:/ / wbztv. com/ wireapnewsme/ Maine. Community. College. 2. 1672030. html[10] "NYC Doorman Strike Averted; Tenants Avoid Trash Duty" (http:/ / www. businessweek. com/ news/ 2010-04-21/

nyc-doorman-strike-averted-as-residents-relieved-of-trash-duty. html). Business Week. 2010-04-21. . Retrieved 2010-08-21.[11] http:/ / www. usatoday. com/ news/ nation/ states/ massachusetts/ 2009-04-09-1631272198_x. htm[12] http:/ / www. aahsa. org/ article. aspx?id=9661[13] http:/ / www. politico. com/ blogs/ bensmith/ 0110/ SEIU_to_hit_Sodexo_at_mayors_conference. html[14] http:/ / www. cleanupsodexo. org[15] Steven Greenhouse, "Janitors' Union, Recently Organized, Strikes in Houston," New York Times, November 3, 2006.[16] Steven Greenhouse, "Walkout Ends at University of Miami as Janitors' Pact Is Reached," New York Times, May 2, 2006.[17] "NLRB Election Report. Cases Closed: February 2006" (http:/ / www. nlrb. gov/ nlrb/ shared_files/ brochures/ Election Reports/ Feb. 2006.

pdf). Washington, D.C.: National Labor Relations Board. March 10, 2006. . Retrieved 2007-04-07.[18] Clawson, Dan. The Next Upsurge: Labor and the New Social Movements. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2003. ISBN 0801488702;

Tait, Vanessa. Poor Workers' Unions: Rebuilding Labor from Below. Cambridge, Mass.: South End Press, 2005. ISBN 089608714X;Fantasia, Rick and Voss, Kim. Hard Work: Remaking the American Labor Movement. Berkeley, California: University of California Press,2004. ISBN 0520240901

[19] Plumer, Bradford. “Labor’s Love Lost.” The New Republic. (April 23, 2008)[20] "Collective Bargaining With Adult Foster Home Providers. Executive Order No. 07-07" (http:/ / governor. oregon. gov/ Gov/ pdf/ eo0720.

pdf) (PDF). Executive Office of the Governor. State of Oregon.. June 1, 2007. . Retrieved 2007-04-07.[21] "Enrolled Senate Bill 858 - AN ACT Relating to adult foster care providers" (http:/ / www. leg. state. or. us/ 07reg/ measpdf/ sb0800. dir/

sb0858. en. pdf) (PDF). 74th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY--2007 Regular Session. June 28, 2007. . Retrieved 2009-08-12. "Stateof Oregon shall recognize as the exclusive representative of adult foster care home providers the labor organization that was recognized as themajority representative of adult foster care home providers under Executive Order 07-07..."

Service Employees International Union 37

[22] "State Government" (http:/ / www. statesmanjournal. com/ apps/ pbcs. dll/ article?AID=/ 20071111/ STATE/ 711110312/ 1042). StatesmanJournal (Oregon's mid-Willamette Valley: Gannett). .

[23] "Adult foster care workers receive raise" (http:/ / www. bizjournals. com/ portland/ stories/ 2008/ 08/ 04/ daily32. html). Portland BusinessJournal (Portland, Oregon: American City Business Journals). August 6, 2008. . Retrieved 2009-08-12. "Adult foster home care providersreached a one-year agreement with the State of Oregon after seven months of bargaining, becoming the first such workers in the U.S. to win aunion contract.

The program aims to support the home-based caregiving -- a lower-cost alternative to institutional care that has lostmany providers in recent years due to low rates and tough working conditions.The settlement covers about 2,000 professional caregivers who serve up to five clients, and another 1,500 individualswho care for relatives in the Medicaid-funded adult foster care program. The workers are represented by Local 503of the Service Employees International Union."[24] http:/ / twitter. com/ SEIU/ seiu-locals/ members[25] http:/ / serviceworkersunited. org/[26] "SEIU Takes Over West Coast Union", San Francisco Chronicle (January 28, 2009) (http:/ / www. sfgate. com/ cgi-bin/ article. cgi?f=/ c/ a/

2009/ 01/ 27/ BURV15I9NA. DTL)[27] Steven T. Jones, "Union Showdown", San Francisco Bay Guardian (January 28, 2009) (http:/ / www. sfbg. com/ entry.

php?entry_id=7946& catid=& volume_id=398& issue_id=416& volume_num=43& issue_num=18)[28] George Raine, "Ousted SEIU Leaders Push Decertification Vote", San Francisco Chronicle (February 3, 2009) (http:/ / www. sfgate. com/

cgi-bin/ article. cgi?f=/ c/ a/ 2009/ 02/ 03/ BU1L15LO03. DTL)[29] http:/ / www. dailykos. com/ story/ 2009/ 3/ 22/ 711746/ -My-letter-to-SEIU[30] http:/ / marketplace. publicradio. org/ display/ web/ 2010/ 01/ 27/ pm-seiu-teamsters/[31] http:/ / www. seiu. org/ standforsecurity/[32] http:/ / www. dol. gov/ opa/ media/ press/ eta/ eta20091526. htm[33] http:/ / www. 1000supers. com/[34] Raine, George (2008-05-24). "SEIU elects first black woman president" (http:/ / www. sfgate. com/ cgi-bin/ article/ article?f=/ c/ a/ 2008/

05/ 24/ BUC210S5VH. DTL). San Francisco Chronicle. .[35] Furillo, Andy (2006-01-03). "Unions, state ready to talk?" (http:/ / www. accessmylibrary. com/ article-1G1-140463737/

unions-state-ready-talk. html). The Sacramento Bee. .[36] Furillo, Andy (2006-03-30). "Workers call for contract: Union-organized rallies seek to pressure state." (http:/ / www. accessmylibrary.

com/ article-1G1-143866910/ workers-call-contract-union. html). The Sacramento Bee. .[37] Davis, Aaron (2006-06-12). "State workers authorize strike as talks continue" (http:/ / www. signonsandiego. com/ news/ state/

20060612-1721-ca-strikevote. html). Associated Press / Union-Tribune. .[38] Furillo, Andy (2006-06-13). "State union members OK strikes: Despite threat of walkout, both sides see progress in talks." (http:/ / www.

accessmylibrary. com/ article-1G1-146974879/ state-union-members-ok. html). The Sacramento Bee. .[39] Jimenez, Sarah (2006-06-13). "Nearly 85% authorize union strike: Service workers for the state go nearly a year without a new pact." (http:/

/ www. accessmylibrary. com/ article-1G1-146947465/ nearly-85-authorize-union. html). The Fresno Bee. .[40] Thompson, Don (2006-07-16). "Largest state employees union ratifies new $500 million contract" (http:/ / www. nctimes. com/ news/

state-and-regional/ article_e0c5b9e7-5c4f-543d-8b65-1e451aab633e. html). Associated Press / North County Times. .[41] Smith, Dan (2006-06-18). "State, workers reach contract deal: Pact averts possible strike by 87,000 public employees." (http:/ / www.

accessmylibrary. com/ article-1G1-147184015/ state-workers-reach-contract. html). The Sacramento Bee. .[42] "State worker pacts now law; Governor signs contracts boosting pay of employees." (http:/ / nl. newsbank. com/ nl-search/ we/

Archives?p_product=SB& p_theme=sb& p_action=search& p_maxdocs=200& p_topdoc=1& p_text_direct-0=11403BDF8BD524F0&p_field_direct-0=document_id& p_perpage=10& p_sort=YMD_date:D& s_trackval=GooglePM). The Sacramento Bee. 2006-09-07. .

[43] http:/ / blogs. sacbee. com/ the_state_worker/ 2011/ 09/ seiu-local-1000-council-to-con. html[44] http:/ / www. seiuhealthcareilin. org/[45] http:/ / content. cdlib. org/ view?docId=tf5t1nb19q& chunk. id=bioghist-1. 7. 4& brand=oac[46] Cook, Joan (September 18, 1990). "George Hardy, 79, Pioneer Leader Of Service Worker Union, Is Dead" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/

1990/ 09/ 18/ obituaries/ george-hardy-79-pioneer-leader-of-service-worker-union-is-dead. html?scp=1& sq=George Hardy& st=cse). TheNew York Times. . Retrieved May 23, 2010.

[47] "Scout, union clear brush, bury hatchet" (http:/ / articles. mcall. com/ 2009-11-28/ news/4483641_1_seiu-members-nick-balzano-boy-scouts). November 28, 2009. . Retrieved October 25, 2010.

[48] http:/ / mydd. com/ 2008/ 11/ 2/ popular-media-organizing[49] http:/ / www. monstersandcritics. com/ arts/ news/ article_1450717. php/

Manifest_Hope_sponsors_online_art_contest_celebrating_Presidential_Inauguration[50] http:/ / www. manifesthope. com/ gallery-dc. html[51] http:/ / www. justseeds. org/ justseeds_collaborations/ 17seiu. html[52] http:/ / www. seiu. org/ 2010/ 01/ 2010-social-justice-calendar-featuring-work-of-manifest-hope-artists. php

Service Employees International Union 38

[53] http:/ / www. 1199seiu. org/ media/ magazine/ olat_april_2009/ olat_409_bread_roses. cfm[54] http:/ / www. photovoice. org/ html/ projects/ forumprojects/ breadandroses. html[55] Poncavage, Joanna (April 30, 2006). "A new perspective" (http:/ / articles. mcall. com/ 2006-04-30/ entertainment/

3671809_1_bread-and-roses-latest-photos-schools). The Morning Call. .[56] "Federal Government Announces Hearing on Possible Illegal Collusion Between SEIU and Kaiser" (http:/ / www. nuhw. org/ media/ 2011/

1/ 19/ federal-government-announces-hearing-on-possible-illegal-col. html). National Union of Healthcare Workers. 2011-01-19. . Retrieved2010-02-03.

[57] "Labor Board Announces Prosecution of SEIU Union Bosses for Illegal Union Membership Opt-Out Policy" (http:/ / www. nrtw. org/ en/press/ 2010/ 04/ labor-board-announces-prosecution-seiu-district99-04062010). The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.2010-04-06. . Retrieved 2010-02-03.

[58] "SEIU FOUND GUILTY of VIOLATING SECURITY OFFICERS RIGHT" (http:/ / portland. indymedia. org/ en/ 2003/ 06/ 266691.shtml). Portland Independant Media Center. 2003-06-20. . Retrieved 2010-02-03.

[59] "SEIU Settles With NLRB, Must Post Notice That It Will Not 'Restrain or Coerce' Sodexo Employees Who Choose Not to Participate inUnion Activity at Morehouse College" (http:/ / www. prnewswire. com/ news-releases/seiu-settles-with-nlrb-must-post-notice-that-it-will-not-restrain-or-coerce-sodexo-employees-who-choose-not-to-participate-in-union-activity-at-morehouse-college-113344454.html). PR Newswire. 2011-01-23. . Retrieved 2010-02-03.

[60] "The Facts Behind SEIU's Smear Campaign Against Sodexo" (http:/ / www. sodexousa. com/ usen/ newsroom/ press/ press10/sodexostatement. asp). .

[61] "Food Service Giant Sodexo Files RICO Suit Against SEIU" (http:/ / legaltimes. typepad. com/ blt/ 2011/ 03/food-service-giant-sodexo-files-rico-suit-against-seiu. html). The Blog of LegalTimes. 2011-03-18. . Retrieved 2011-05-06.

[62] "Sodexo, Inc. v. Service Employees International Union et al" (http:/ / dockets. justia. com/ docket/ virginia/ vaedce/ 1:2011cv00276/264094/ ). Justicia.com Dockets and Filings. 2011-03-17. . Retrieved 2011-05-06.

[63] "Former SEIU staff blow the whistle on SEIU's illegal Fresno campaign" (http:/ / www. nuhw. org/ seiu/former-seiu-staff-blow-the-whistle-on-seius-illegal-fresno-c. html). National Union of Healthcare Workers. 2009-11-12. . Retrieved2010-02-03.

[64] "New Salvo Fired as Unions Battle Over Workers" (http:/ / online. wsj. com/ article/ SB125798836244044493. html). Wallstreet Journal.2009-11-12. . Retrieved 2010-02-03.

[65] "Aramark workers protest union conflict" (http:/ / www. jhunewsletter. com/ home/ index. cfm?event=displayArticle&ustory_id=71d4ebb9-58d7-49b8-bd31-0bd6a4ba84b1). The Johns Hopkins Newsletter. 2010-04-22. . Retrieved 2010-02-03.

[66] http:/ / www. seiu. org/ 2010/ 04/ behind-sodexos-awards-sodexo-and-diversityinc. php[67] "DiversityInc Responds to SEIU’s Deceptive "Investigation" of its Award Program" (http:/ / sodexoresponds. com/ ?p=51). Sodexo

Responds. 2010-04-30. . Retrieved 2010-02-03.[68] http:/ / www. thedevilatmydoorstep. com/

External links• SEIU International (http:/ / www. seiu. org/ )• SEIU Blog (http:/ / www. seiu. org/ blog. php)• SEIU's official Flickr account (http:/ / www. flickr. com/ photos/ seiu/ sets/ )• SEIU's YouTube channel (http:/ / www. youtube. com/ user/ seiu)• SEIU on Twitter (http:/ / www. twitter. com/ seiu)• SEIU on Facebook (http:/ / www. facebook. com/ SEIU)• Change to Win Federation (http:/ / www. changetowin. org/ )• Nurse Alliance (http:/ / www. nursealliance. org/ )• SEIU Collections at Walter P. Reuther Library (http:/ / www. reuther. wayne. edu/ use/ seiu. html) at Wayne State

University• (http:/ / www. thedevilatmydoorstep. com/ )

Archives• Building Service Employees' International Union, Local 6 Records (http:/ / www. lib. washington. edu/

specialcoll/ findaids/ docs/ papersrecords/ BuildingServiceEmployeesInternationalUnionLocal6SeattleWash3140.xml), 1937-1955. At the Labor Archives of Washington State, University of Washington Libraries SpecialCollections (http:/ / www. lib. washington. edu/ specialcoll/ laws).

Progress for America 39

Progress for AmericaProgress for America (PFA) (a 501(c)(4)) and its affiliate Progress for America Voter Fund (PFA-VF) (a 527committee) are national tax-exempt organizations in the United States. PFA was established in 2001 to supportGeorge W. Bush's "agenda for America." The PFA Voter Fund, which was set up in 2004, raised $38 million insupport of Bush's 2004 election bid.

HistoryPFA was registered as a 501(c)(4) group in February 2001 by Tony Feather, a political director of the Bush-Cheney2000 campaign and partner at DCI Group as well as at the affiliated telemarketing and fundraising firm of FeatherLarson Synhorst-DCI (FLS-DCI). Feather set up PFA as a “grassroots organization that mobilizes the public tocontact their members of Congress about pending legislation and to write local newspapers to publicize the WhiteHouse’s agenda,” the Center for Public Integrity wrote in 2002. During the first part of the Bush Administration, itled campaigns to support tax cuts, conservative judicial appointments and energy legislation.Feather told the Washington Post in August 2002 that PFA was simply a vehicle for building grassroots support forBush Administration policies. However others said it was intended to accept soft money donations which politicalparties were barred from accepting starting in 2002.[1] Feather left PFA in 2003 after receiving a legal opinion thathis involvement with it and the Bush-Cheney campaign could violate regulations barring coordination between theentities.[2]

PFA spin-offs and projects

Progress for America Voter FundOn July 21, 2004, complaints were filed with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) by Democracy 21, theCampaign Legal Center, and the Center for Responsive Politics. The Complaints charged that Progress for AmericaVoter Fund (PFA-VF) was illegally raising and spending soft money to influence the 2004 presidential elections.On February 28, 2007 the Federal Election Commission (FEC) reached a settlement with Progress for Americarelated to its activities in 2004.[3] In the 2004 election cycle, the Fund had raised $45 million. Under the terms of thesettlement, PFA-VF did not admit to any wrong doing, and agreed to pay $750,000 and to register as a politicalcommittee if it undertakes any activities similar to those in 2004. The FEC stated: "Over $41 million of those fundsconsisted of excessive contributions from individuals, while over $2 million came from sources prohibited frommaking contributions . . . ."[4]

Ashley and friendsIn the last three weeks leading up to the November 2, 2004, election, Progress for America Voter Fund (PFA-VF)outspent the next largest spending Democratic 527 group three-to-one on political ads. It bought $16.8 million worthof television and radio ad time. According to Federal Election Commission data, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth camein second with $6.3 million in ad spending. In third place was Democrat Harold Ickes’ Media Fund, which spent $5million.[5] PFA produced two “harshly anti-Kerry ads that have become the subjects of controversy and debate,especially in the battleground states of Wisconsin and Iowa where they are running frequently,” the WashingtonPost’s Thomas Edsall wrote.PFA-VF spent $14.2 million on ad time for “Ashley’s Story,” which ran on cable stations and in nine key states.According to USA Today, the ad was supported by ashleysstory.com, as well as “e-mails, automated phone calls and2.3 million brochures” mailed to voters.[6]

Progress for America 40

"Ashley's Story" made Advertising Age columnist Bob Garfield's list of top 10 "Ads I Loved" for 2004. Garfieldwrites, "We said, 'It might come down to one commercial,' and it may well have. A retelling of candidate Bush'sencounter with an Ohio Teenager answered undecideds' doubts. The president wasn't a dry-well-drilling gambler,moron and fool... he's a fearless leader who will hug us."

The push for privatized Social SecurityAfter winning re-election in 2004, Bush emphasized changes in Social Security as a major domestic goal of hissecond term. He called for partial privatization of the system. PFA "has estimated it will spend $20 millionpromoting private accounts. It has run a series of ads on cable television, including a spot that invokes the legacy ofDemocratic President Franklin Roosevelt, who signed the legislation creating the retirement system", the HoustonChronicle reported in February 2005.The Chronicle raised the question whether investment firms, "which are trying to keep a low profile in the currentdebate, will quietly contribute to a number of groups promoting Social Security overhaul because private accountswill increase their business." PFA's McCabe denies "his group would serve as a front for investment firms." But PFA"will be soliciting from donors who have helped the organization in the past." The head of the prominent investmentfirm Charles Schwab contributed $50,000 to the group's political arm in 2004. Schwab also gave $75,000 to the Clubfor Growth, which is also lobbying for Social Security privatization.[7]

The advantage of arrangements between corporate donors and groups like PFA, however, is acknowledge. ThomasEdsall wrote in the Washington Post, "For corporations wary of publicity over their involvement in [promotingSocial Security privatization, tort reform] and other controversial issues, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Institutefor Legal Reform, the Club for Growth and Progress for America pointedly offer donors the promise ofanonymity."[8]

In late February 2005, the Houston Chronicle reported that Texas A&M University economics professor Thomas R.Saving had joined up with Progress for America as an advisor and spokesman. Saving, however, is serving as one ofseven trustees for the Social Security Administration, raising questions about potential conflicts of interest betweenhis advocacy work at PFA and his role as a Social Security "trustee." Saving is also a fellow at the National Centerfor Policy Analysis. According to the Chronicle, former U.S. Treasurer Rosario Marin joined PFA as an advisor aswell.[9]

"I'm interested in the issues and I'm working on them and I'll continue to work on them", Saving told the Chronicle."I already do an awful lot of speeches about Social Security and Medicare."

Federal judicial battlesIn May 2005, PFA began running ads targeted at pressuring Republicans Senators into supporting a ban on Senatefilibusters for judicial nominations. Associated Press reported that PFA would spend $350,000 on "radio ads onChristian stations" and $1.5 million on television ads to be run in Alaska, Arkansas, Maine, North Dakota, Nebraskaand Rhode Island as well as nationally.[10]

In June 2005, The Hill reported that PFA intended to "spend at least $18 million on the expected fight to replaceWilliam Rehnquist, chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court." PFA's campaign would include "national cable-newsand broadcast-television ads in targeted states. The group will also coordinate grassroots organizers andpublic-relations specialists in 18 states, including states represented by centrist Republican senators such as Arizona,Maine and Oregon" The Hill wrote. The groups will also use phone-bank and direct-mail in its campaign. "BeforeSenate confirmation of Owen and Brown, PFA claims to have helped generate nearly 80,000 telephone callssupporting their nominations", The Hill reported. PFA will work closely with the Judicial Confirmation Network andthe Committee for Justice on the campaign.[11]

On June 22, 2005, PFA issued a press release announcing a $700,000 campaign in anticipation of a Supreme CourtJustice vacancy during the Court's summer break. The campaign included buys on big newspapers' Internet sites, and

Progress for America 41

a roll-out of a new website: upordownvote.com.

Iraq War advertising campaignStarting in 2006, Progress for America began an ad campaign in support of the Iraq War, with a 1 million dollar adcampaign in Minnesota.[12] Progress for America spokesman Stuart Roy said the group purchased "a saturation buy"in Minnesota and said that bolstering support for the war now "will be a major focus, if not the major focus ofProgress for America."[12] These ads often feature war veterans speaking in support for the war and for thenpresident Bush.

ContactProgress for AmericaPO Box 19242Washington, DC 20036Phone: 888-261-1938Website: http:/ / www. progressforamerica. org/ pfa/

References[1] Edsall, Thomas B. (August 25, 2002). "New Ways To Harness Soft Money In Works; Political Groups Poised To Take Huge Donations". The

Washington Post: p. A.01.[2] Edsall, Thomas B. (May 25, 2004). "GOP Creating Own '527' Groups; Unregulated Funds Can Be Raised". The Washington Post: p. A.15.[3] "Progress For America voter fund statement on the announced settlement with the Federal election commission" (http:/ / i. a. cnn. net/ cnn/

2007/ images/ 02/ 28/ pfa. statement. pdf). Progress For America. February 28, 2007. . Retrieved 8 March 2010.[4] http:/ / i. a. cnn. net/ cnn/ 2007/ images/ 02/ 28/ fec. pdf[5] Alex Knott, Aron Pilhofer and Derek Willis (November 3, 2004). "GOP 527s Outspend Dems in Late Ad Blitz" (http:/ / projects.

publicintegrity. org/ 527/ report. aspx?aid=421). The Center for Public Integrity. . Retrieved 8 March 2010.[6] Keen, Judy; Mark Memmott (2004-10-18). "Most expensive TV campaign ad goes for emotions" (http:/ / www. usatoday. com/ news/

politicselections/ nation/ president/ 2004-10-18-adwatch-ashley_x. htm). USA Today. . Retrieved 8 March 2010.[7] Bennett Roth (February 14, 2005). "Social Security lobbying war is on" (http:/ / www. chron. com/ disp/ story. mpl/ politics/ 3038264. html).

Houston Chronicle. . Retrieved 8 March 2010.[8] Thomas B. Edsall (February 13, 2005). "Conservatives Join Forces for Bush Plans" (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ articles/

A19782-2005Feb12. html). Washington Post. . Retrieved 8 March 2010.[9] Don Jordan (February 24, 2005). "A&M professor to advise Social Security reformers" (http:/ / www. chron. com/ disp/ story. mpl/ nation/

3056334. html). Houston Chronicle. . Retrieved 8 March 2010.[10] Joel Roberts (May 2, 2005). "Judge Wars Hit Airwaves" (http:/ / www. cbsnews. com/ stories/ 2005/ 05/ 02/ politics/ main692369. shtml).

CBS News. . Retrieved 8 March 2010.[11] Alexander Bolton (June 16, 2005). "Conservative groups to spend over $20M on Supreme Court" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/

20060215185646/ http:/ / www. thehill. com/ thehill/ export/ TheHill/ News/ Frontpage/ 061605/ conservative. html). The Hill. Archived fromthe original (http:/ / www. thehill. com/ thehill/ export/ TheHill/ News/ Frontpage/ 061605/ conservative. html) on 15 February 2006. .Retrieved 8 March 2010.

[12] Mike Dorning (28 February 2006). "TV Ads Push Iraq War Support" (http:/ / www. truthout. org/ article/ tv-ads-push-iraq-war-support).The Chicago Tribune. . Retrieved 9 March 2010.

Progress for America 42

External links• " Progress for America (http:/ / www. opensecrets. org/ 527s/ 527cmtedetail. php?cycle=2008&

ein=201170395)", OpenSecrets.org.• Nicholas Confessore, "Bush's Secret Stash," (http:/ / www. washingtonmonthly. com/ features/ 2004/ 0405.

confessore. html) Washington Monthly, May 1, 2004.• Glen Justice and Jim Rutenberg, " Advocacy Groups Step Up Costly Battle of Political Ads (http:/ / www.

nytimes. com/ 2004/ 09/ 25/ politics/ campaign/ 25ads. html?ex=1097173535& ei=1& en=838272668336c46e)",The New York Times, September 25, 2004, A10.

• Glen Justice, " New Pet Cause for the Very Rich: Swaying the Election (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2004/ 09/25/ politics/ campaign/ 25donors. html?ex=1097173)", The New York Times, September 25, 2004, A10.

• Thomas Edsall, " After Late Start, Republican Groups Jump Into the Lead (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ac2/ wp-dyn/ A38749-2004Oct16?language=printer)", Washington Post, October 17, 2004, page A17.

• Laura Miller, "The Fix Behind Fixing Social Security," (http:/ / www. prwatch. org/ prwissues/ 2005Q1/ ssfix.html) PR Watch, 2005 (Vol. 12, No. 1).

• Glen Justice, "Social Security Fight Begins, Over a Bill Still Nonexistent," (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2005/ 02/17/ politics/ 17lobby. html) New York Times, February 17, 2005.

Republican Governors AssociationThe Republican Governors Association is a Washington, D.C.-based 527 organization founded in 1963,[1]

consisting of U.S. state and territorial governors affiliated with the Republican Party.Its Democratic Party counterpart is the Democratic Governors Association. The RGA is not directly affiliated withthe non-partisan National Governors Association.Its current Chairman is Governor Bob McDonnell of Virginia, who assumed the office in August 2011 afterGovernor Rick Perry of Texas announced he was running for president in 2012. [2]

• Bobby Jindal, Governor of Louisiana, Gala Chairman• Nikki Haley, Governor of South Carolina, Recruitment Chairwoman• Susana Martinez, Governor of New Mexico, at-large• Chris Christie, Governor of New Jersey, at-large

Mission statement1. To assist in the election of Republican gubernatorial candidates and the reelection of incumbent Republican

Governors.2. To utilize the talent, knowledge, creativity of the governors to effectively debate and shape public policy on

issues affecting the states; and3. To enable Republican Governors to express, develop and promote the philosophy of the Republican party at the

state and local levels nationwide.

List of current Republican governors

Republican Governors Association 43

Current Governor State Past Took office Seat Up

Robert J. Bentley Alabama List 2011 2014

Sean Parnell Alaska List 2009 2014

Jan Brewer Arizona List 2009 2014

Rick Scott Florida List 2011 2014

Nathan Deal Georgia List 2011 2014

Butch Otter Idaho List 2007 2014

Terry Branstad Iowa List 2011 2014

Mitch Daniels Indiana List 2005 2012 (term limits)

Sam Brownback Kansas List 2011 2014

Bobby Jindal Louisiana List 2008 2011

Paul LePage Maine List 2011 2014

Rick Snyder Michigan List 2011 2014

Haley Barbour Mississippi List 2004 2011 (term limits)

Dave Heineman Nebraska List 2005 2014

Brian Sandoval Nevada List 2011 2014

Chris Christie New Jersey List 2010 2013

Susana Martinez New Mexico List 2011 2014

Jack Dalrymple North Dakota List 2010 2012

John Kasich Ohio List 2011 2014

Mary Fallin Oklahoma List 2011 2014

Tom Corbett Pennsylvania List 2011 2014

Nikki Haley South Carolina List 2011 2014

Dennis Daugaard South Dakota List 2011 2015

Bill Haslam Tennessee List 2011 2014

Rick Perry Texas List 2000 2014

Gary Herbert Utah List 2009 2012

Bob McDonnell Virginia List 2010 2013 (Term limits)

Scott Walker Wisconsin List 2011 2014

Matt Mead Wyoming List 2011 2014

In addition to the states, the Republicans also hold the governorship of the U.S. territories of Guam, the NorthernMariana Islands, and Puerto Rico:

Republican Governors Association 44

Governor Territory Prev Took office Seat Up

Eddie Calvo Guam List 2011 2014

Benigno Fitial Northern Mariana Islands List 2006 2015

Luis Fortuño Puerto Rico List 2009 2012

FundraisingIn the 18 months ending June 30, 2010, the RGA raised $58 million, while its counterpart DGA raised $40 million."Unlike the national political parties and federal candidates, the governors’ associations can take in unlimitedamounts from corporations," according to Bloomberg Businessweek, which notes that the RGA recently received $1million from Rupert Murdoch's NewsCorp, the parent corporation of Fox News, and $500,000 from WellPoint, amajor US health insurance firm.[3]

References[1] "About the RGA" (http:/ / www. rga. org/ default. asp?pt=doc& doc=about). .[2] http:/ / www. rga. org/ homepage/ rga-announces-new-leadership/[3] Jonathan D. Salant (August 16, 2010). "Republicans See Gains in Governors’ Races as Funding Hits Peak" (http:/ / www. businessweek. com/

news/ 2010-08-16/ republicans-see-gains-in-governors-races-as-funding-hits-peak. html). Business Week. . Retrieved August 17, 2010.

External links• RGA Official Website (http:/ / www. rga. org/ )• Contributors (http:/ / www. opensecrets. org/ 527s/ 527cmtedetail_contribs. php?ein=113655877) and

Expenditures (http:/ / www. opensecrets. org/ 527s/ 527cmtedetail_expends. php?ein=113655877) atOpenSecrets.org

Democratic Governors Association 45

Democratic Governors Association

Democratic GovernorsAssociation

Chair Martin O'Malley (MD)

Vice Chair Bev Perdue (NC)

Finance Chair Pat Quinn (IL)

Chair Emeritus Jack Markell (DE)

Executive Committee Mike Beebe (AR)Jerry Brown (CA)Andrew Cuomo (NY)Jay Nixon (MO)Brian Schweitzer (MT)

Founded 1983

Headquarters 1401 K Street, NW,Washington, D.C., 20005

Governorships

20 / 50

Website

democraticgovernors.org [1]

The Democratic Governors Association is a Washington, D.C. based 527 organization founded in 1983, consistingof U.S. state and territorial governors affiliated with the Democratic Party. The mission of the organization is toprovide party support to the election and re-election of Democratic gubernatorial candidates. The DGA's Republicancounterpart is the Republican Governors Association. The DGA is not directly affiliated with the non-partisanNational Governors Association. Colm O'Comartun is currently the Executive Director of the DGA.

Founding and Early YearsThe DGA in its current form was founded by Virginia Governor Chuck Robb in 1983 with the help of DemocraticNational Committee Chairman Chuck Manatt. The purpose of the committee was to raise funds to elect Democratsto governorships and to improve the partnership between Democratic governors and the Democratic leadership of theHouse and Senate.

1990sThe DGA played a pivotal role in the election of Bill Clinton to the Presidency in 1992. Under the leadership ofDGA Chair and Colorado Governor Roy R. Romer, the DGA helped organize Clinton's "winning the West"campaign tour through Colorado, Wyoming, Montana, Washington, Oregon, Nevada and California. Republicanshad handily won in all but Washington and Oregon the previous three elections. According to The WashingtonPost,[2] it was "all but unthinkable to Republicans that the GOP could lose such stalwart pieces of the party'selectoral base as Wyoming and Nevada." Clinton lost Wyoming but carried Nevada, Colorado, Montana,Washington, Oregon, and California.

Democratic Governors Association 46

Recent HistoryIn the past 30 years Democratic Governors have served in various other government positions after their tenure. Thefollowing list provides recent positions from the Clinton and Obama administrations.Democratic Governors elected as President: Governor Bill Clinton: President of the United States (1992-2000)Governor Jimmy Carter: President of the United States (1976-1980)Democratic Governors appointed to Cabinet, Ambassadorship, or Chairs of the Democratic NationalCommittee: Governor Richard Riley: US Secretary of Education 1993-2000 (Clinton) Governor Richard Celeste:US Ambassador to India (Clinton) Governor James Blanchard: US Ambassador to Canada (Clinton) Governor MikeSullivan: US Ambassador to Ireland (Clinton) Governor Bruce Babbitt: US Secretary of the Interior (Clinton)Governor Ray Mabus: US Ambassador to Saudi Arabia (under President Clinton) and US Secretary of the Navy(under President Obama) Governor Gary Locke: US Secretary of Commerce and US Ambassador to China (Obama)Governor Tom Vilsack: US Secretary of Agriculture (Obama) Governor Janet Napolitano: US Attorney, District ofArizona, (Clinton) Arizona Attorney General, and US Secretary of Homeland Security (Obama) Governor KathleenSebelius: US Secretary of Health and Human Services (Obama) Governor Bill Richardson: US Secretary of Energy(Clinton), then was elected as Governor of New MexicoDNC Chairs Governor Roy Romer: Chairman of the Democratic National Committee (1992-2000) GovernorHoward Dean: Chairman of the Democratic National Committee (2004-2008) Governor Tim Kaine: Chairman of theDemocratic National Committee (Obama)Democratic Governors elected to the US Senate: Governor Dale Bumpers Governor Jeanne Shaheen GovernorMark Warner Governor Jay Rockefeller Governor Joe Manchin Governor Tom Carper Governor Evan BayhGovernor Ben Nelson

2010-2011 DGA leadershipThe leadership of the DGA consists of elected Democratic governors. The current leadership assumed their positionsin 2010.

Office Officer State Since

Chair Martin O'Malley Maryland 2010

Vice Chair Bev Perdue North Carolina 2010

Finance Chair Pat Quinn Illinois 2010

Chair Emeritus Jack Markell Delaware 2010

NGA Chair Chris Gregoire Washington 2010

CEO Roundtable Chair Dan Malloy Connecticut 2010

Executive Committee Mike Beebe Arkansas 2010

Executive Committee Jerry Brown California 2010

Executive Committee Andrew Cuomo New York 2010

Executive Committee Jay Nixon Missouri 2010

Executive Committee Brian Schweitzer Montana 2010

Democratic Governors Association 47

List of current Democratic GovernorsThere are currently 20 Democratic governors:

Current Governor State Past Took office Seat Up

Mike Beebe Arkansas List 2007 2014

Jerry Brown California List 2011 2014

John Hickenlooper Colorado List 2011 2014

Dan Malloy Connecticut List 2011 2014

Jack A. Markell Delaware List 2009 2012

Neil Abercrombie Hawaii List 2010 2014

Pat Quinn Illinois List 2009 2014

Steve Beshear Kentucky List 2007 2011

Martin O'Malley Maryland List 2007 2014

Deval Patrick Massachusetts List 2007 2015

Mark Dayton Minnesota List 2011 2014

Jay Nixon Missouri List 2009 2013

Brian Schweitzer Montana List 2005 2012

John Lynch New Hampshire List 2005 2012

Andrew Cuomo New York List 2011 2014

Beverly Perdue North Carolina List 2009 2012

John Kitzhaber Oregon List 2011 2014

Peter Shumlin Vermont List 2011 2012

Christine Gregoire Washington List 2005 2012

Earl Ray Tomblin West Virginia List 2010 2011

In addition to the states, the DGA also holds membership for governors of US Territories.

Current Governor Territory Past Took office Seat Up

Togiola Tulafono American Samoa List 2003 2013

John de Jongh U.S. Virgin Islands List 2007 2015

List of DGA ChairsList of current and former DGA Chairs.

Democratic Governors Association 48

Year Chair State Executive Director

2011 Governor Martin O'Malley Maryland Colm O'Comartun

2010 Governor Jack Markell Delaware Nathan Daschle

2009 Governor Joe Manchin West Virginia Nathan Daschle

2008 Governor Brian Schweitzer Montana Nathan Daschle

2007 Governor Kathleen Sebelius Kansas Nathan Daschle

2006 Governor Bill Richardson New Mexico Penny Lee

2005 Governor Bill Richardson New Mexico Penny Lee

2004 Governor Tom Vilsack Iowa BJ Thornberry

2003 Governor Gary Locke Washington BJ Thornberry

2002 Governor Parris Glendening Maryland BJ Thornberry

2001 Governor Gray Davis California BJ Thornberry

2000 Governor Paul Patton Kentucky BJ Thornberry

1999 Governor Frank O'Bannon Indiana BJ Thornberry

1998 Governor Pedro Rossello Puerto Rico Katie Whelan

1997 Governor Howard Dean Vermont Katie Whelan

1996 Governor Gaston Caperton West Virginia Katie Whelan

1995 Governor Mel Carnahan Missouri Katie Whelan

1994 Governor Evan Bayh Indiana Katie Whelan

1993 Governor David Walters Oklahoma Katie Whelan

1992 Governor John Waihee Hawaii Mark Gearan

1991 Governor Roy Romer Colorado Mark Gearan

1990 Governor Dick Celeste Ohio Mark Gearan

1989 Governor Bill Clinton Arkansas Chuck Dolan

FundraisingThe DGA reported raising approximately $11 million in the first six months of 2011, more than doubling what itraised during the comparable 2007 election cycle. The DGA reported having $8.6 million cash-on-hand in July 2011."This record-breaking outpouring of support for the DGA reflects the important role Democratic governors areplaying in our party's resurgence," DGA Chair Martin O'Malley said. "Because of our strong fundraising efforts, wewill have the resources to win our competitive races in 2011 and lay the groundwork for 2012." [3]

In the 18 months ending June 30, 2010, the DGA raised $40 million, while its Republican counterpart RGA raised$58 million. "Unlike the national political parties and federal candidates, the governors’ associations can take inunlimited amounts from corporations," according to Bloomberg Businessweek, which notes that the RGA recentlyreceived $1 million from Rupert Murdoch's NewsCorp, the parent corporation of Fox News, and $500,000 fromWellPoint, a major US health insurance firm. Labor groups giving money to the DGA include the ServiceEmployees International Union ($1.1 million) and the American Federation of State, County and MunicipalEmployees ($3.3 million). [4]

Democratic Governors Association 49

Notable Staff AlumniSeveral former DGA staff members have gone on to hold prominent positions in the government and in the privateand non-profit sectors.Former Communications Director Jake Siewert served as Press Secretary for President Bill Clinton for four monthsfrom 2000 to 2001. From 2001 to 2009, he worked for Alcoa Inc. He is currently an advisor to Treasury SecretaryTimothy Geithner.[5]

Former Policy Director Sheryl Rose Parker was Director of Intergovernmental Affairs for U.S. House SpeakerNancy Pelosi. She is currently Deputy Director of Government Affairs for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.[6]

[7]

Former Policy Communications Director Doug Richardson served as Director of Public Affairs at the White HouseOffice of National Drug Control Policy in the Obama administration. He is currently Public Relations Director forR&R Partners.[8]

Former Executive Director Katie Whelan served as a senior advisor to California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.She was an Institute of Politics Fellow at Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government. She is currently SeniorPublic Policy Advisor for Patton Boggs LLP.[9]

Former Executive Director Chuck Dolan is the Managing Director of the Sage Agency and a lecturer at the GeorgeWashington University School of Media and Public Affairs.[10]

Former Executive Director Nathan Daschle is the founder and CEO of Ruckus, Inc., an online political engagementplatform. He is the son of former U.S. Senator Tom Daschle. In October 2010, Daschle was recognized as one ofTime magazine's "40 under 40" rising stars in politics.[11]

Former Executive Director Mark Gearan was director of communications during the Clinton administration andserved as director of the Peace Corps. He is the current president of Hobart and William Smith Colleges in Geneva,New York.[12]

References[1] http:/ / www. democraticgovernors. org/[2] Devroy, Ann "Clinton Takes His Case to GOP's Western Stronghold" (http:/ / pqasb. pqarchiver. com/ washingtonpost/ access/ 74057220.

html?FMT=ABS& FMTS=ABS:FT& date=Oct+ 22,+ 1992& author=Ann+ Devroy& pub=The+ Washington+ Post+ (pre-1997+ Fulltext)&edition=& startpage=a. 16& desc=Clinton+ Takes+ His+ Case+ to+ GOP's+ Western+ Stronghold;+ At+ Colorado+ Rally,+ Nominee+Explains+ Plans+ for+ a+ `New'+ Democratic+ Party), The Washington Post, October 22, 1993, accessed August 8, 2011.

[3] O'Malley, Martin. "DGA Breaks Fundraising Record" (http:/ / www. democraticgovernors. org/ news/ press_releases?id=0424). .[4] Jonathan D. Salant (August 16, 2010). "Republicans See Gains in Governors’ Races as Funding Hits Peak" (http:/ / www. businessweek. com/

news/ 2010-08-16/ republicans-see-gains-in-governors-races-as-funding-hits-peak. html). Business Week. . Retrieved August 17, 2010.[5] http:/ / www. whorunsgov. com/ Profiles/ Jake_Siewert?loadTab=0[6] http:/ / www. thewashingtoncurrent. com/ 2007/ 02/ pelosi-names-senior-staff-to-speakers. html[7] http:/ / topics. politico. com/ index. cfm/ topic/ CherylParkerRose[8] http:/ / rrpartners. com/ publicrelations/[9] http:/ / www. pattonboggs. com/ kwhelan/[10] http:/ / smpa. gwu. edu/ faculty/ people/ 27[11] http:/ / thepublicsquared. com/ post/ nathan-daschle[12] http:/ / www. hws. edu/ about/ president. aspx

Democratic Governors Association 50

External links• DGA Official Website (http:/ / www. democraticgovernors. org/ )

American Federation of State, County andMunicipal Employees

AFSCME

Full name American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees

Founded 1932

Members 1,467,138 (2008)[1]

Country United States

Affiliation AFL-CIO

Key people Gerald McEntee, president

Office location Washington, D.C.

Website afscme.org [2]

AFSCME members with then-Senator Barack Obama, 2008

The American Federation of State,County and Municipal Employees(AFSCME) is the second- or third-largestlabor union in the United States and one ofthe fastest-growing, representing over 1.4million employees,[1] primarily in local andstate government and in the health careindustry. AFSCME is part of the AFL-CIO,one of the two main labor federations in theUnited States. Employees at the federalgovernment level are primarily representedby other unions, such as the AmericanFederation of Government Employees, withwhich AFSCME was once affiliated, and theNational Treasury Employees Union; butAFSCME does represent some federalemployees at the Federal Aviation Administration and the Library of Congress, among others.[3]

According to their website, AFSCME organizes for social and economic rights of their protectorates in the workplace and through political action and legislative advocacy. It is divided into more than 3,500 local unions in 46 U.S. states, plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. Each local union writes its own constitution, holds

American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees 51

membership meetings, and elects its own officers. Councils are also a part of AFSCME's administrative structure,usually grouping together various locals in a geographic area.

HistoryAFSCME was founded in 1932 as the Wisconsin State Administrative, Clerical, Fiscal and Technical EmployeesAssociation (quickly becoming the Wisconsin State Employees Association) amid fears of the possible eliminationof the civil service and a return to patronage jobs. Its driving force and first president was Arnold Zander.It grew slowly over the next several decades, gradually changing from an association formed to protect civil servicesystems to a union interested in collective bargaining. It started growing particularly quickly in the 1960s under thepresidency of Jerome Wurf. In 1968, Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated while in Memphis, Tennessee tosupport a strike by the black sanitation workers' union, AFSCME Local 1733. In 1993 a documentary movie wasproduced, titled At the River I Stand, about the Memphis sanitation workers' strike that brought Martin Luther KingJr. to Memphis.[4]

Leadership

Seal

The leadership of AFSCME consists of a president,secretary-treasurer, and an executive board. The President ofAFSCME International is Gerald McEntee. McEntee was firstelected AFSCME President in 1981 and was re-elected in July2008 to another four-year term. McEntee is a vice-president of theAFL-CIO and is the chair of the AFL-CIO Political EducationCommittee. McEntee is an influential political player in theDemocratic Party.[5] [6] [7] [8]

For many years the Secretary-Treasurer was William Lucy. Lucywas first elected AFSCME Secretary-Treasurer in May 1972 andwas re-elected in June 2008 to his latest four-year term. Lucy is aformer President of Local 1675, Contra Costa County EmployeesAssociation of Contra Costa County, California, where he wasemployed for 13 years. Lucy also served as president of the

Coalition of Black Trade Unionists (CBTU).[9]

On February 22, 2010, it was announced that William Lucy was retiring in the middle of his four-year term. Hissuccessor, Lee A. Saunders, was elected at the July 2010 AFSCME International Convention in Boston,Massachusetts. Saunders is a former Executive Assistant to President McEntee, and has served as Administrator of anumber of AFSCME councils and large local unions across the country. .[10]

CampaignsDue to the wave of privatization of public services, AFSCME has long pursued a policy of "following the work":organizing workers who perform work in the public interest, whether the operator is non-profit or commercial. InNew York, for example, in February 2006, 1200 employees of Lifespire Inc., a New York City human servicesagency that provides services to the developmentally disabled, joined the Civil Service Employees Association(CSEA)/AFSCME Local 1000, AFSCME’s single biggest affiliate, through a card check campaign.[11]

AFSCME is also currently running campaigns to organize home-based family child care providers. To date AFSCME has been able to secure gubernatorial Executive Order[s] recognizing the union as the representative of home-based child care providers in Wisconsin, Oregon, New York, and Michigan. In New Jersey, Gov. Corzine

American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees 52

signed an executive order on August 2, 2006 recoginizing AFSCME and the Communications Workers of America(CWA) as the unions representing child care providers in that state. In Michigan, the Child Care union is known asChild Care Providers Together-Michigan (CCPTM). CCPTM was organized with the help of the United AutoWorkers , and the UAW currently represents roughly 40% of CCPTM members. AFSCME also represents child careproviders in Franklin and Lucas counties in Ohio.When Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich signed an executive order that allowed the providers to collectively bargainwith the state, the move launched a turf war,[12] with the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) battlingAFSCME for the exclusive right to organize the workers. AFSCME argued they would be better suited fornegotiating with the state, while the SEIU claimed it already unofficially represented 20,000 of the workers. Anindependent mediator ruled that the SEIU and not AFSCME should represent nearly 49,000 home child careproviders in that state. The mediator found that the SEIU had been trying to organize the workers since 1996, whileAFSCME had started just a month earlier. Despite its success in organizing child care providers, AFSCME wasrejected.In California, AFSCME represents the lower paid workforce at all ten campuses of the University of California. Theunion in 2007 resolved a pay equity dispute that had dogged the University for two years. It led a number of politicaland entertainment figures to refuse to cross an informational picket for the purpose of giving keynote speeches atgraduation ceremonies.

Contributions to political campaignsAccording to the Center for Responsive Politics, AFSCME is the United States' largest single contributor to politicalcampaigns, having donated more than US$38 million since 1990.[13] The organization contributes almost exclusivelyto Democratic Party campaigns; since 1990 the ratio of Democratic to Republican contributions by the AFSCME hasexceeded 98:1. In addition to combating the privatization mentioned above, key political objectives for the groupinclude raising the minimum wage and opposing the substitution of vacation time for overtime pay due workers.[13]

In June 2008, AFSCME, along with MoveOn.org, spent over US$500,000 on a television advertisement critical ofthe presumed Republican presidential nominee John McCain.[14]

In 2010, AFSCME donated $87.5 million to the off-year election campaigns.[15]

References[1] Office of Labor-Management Standards. Employment Standards Administration. U.S. Department of Labor. Form LM-2 labor Organization

Annual Report. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees. File Number: 000-289. Dated March 25, 2009. (http:/ /kcerds. dol-esa. gov/ query/ orgReport. do)

[2] http:/ / www. afscme. org/[3] Washington D.C. Info (http:/ / www. afscme. org/ directory/ 283_403. cfm) from American Federation of State, County and Municipal

Employees website[4] California Newsreel - AT THE RIVER I STAND (http:/ / newsreel. org/ nav/ title. asp?tc=CN0007)[5] Public Integrity (http:/ / www. publicintegrity. org/ partylines/ report. aspx?aid=692) Official website[6] The rise of AFSCME as public employee union with clout (http:/ / www. lib. niu. edu/ ipo/ 1991/ ii910319. html)[7] Bloomberg.com: News (http:/ / www. bloomberg. com/ apps/ news?pid=washingtonstory& sid=amBhS3CZRRrE)[8] AFSCME - AFSCME Takes Largest AFL-CIO Delegation to the Democratic National Convention (http:/ / www. afscme. org/ press/ 6692.

cfm)[9] William Lucy bio (http:/ / www. afscme. org/ about/ 751. cfm) at AFSCME website[10] Lee Saunders bio (http:/ / www. afscme. org/ about/ 28594. cfm) at AFSCME website[11] AFSCME - Across the Nation (http:/ / www. afscme. org/ 13157. cfm)[12] Meyerson, Harold. "Labor War in Illinois: The AFL-CIO's two largest unions duke it out and SEIU comes out on top. [[The American

Prospect March 29, 2005 (web only) (http:/ / www. prospect. org/ web/ page. ww?section=root& name=ViewWeb& articleId=9406)][13] Center for Responsive Politics (http:/ / www. opensecrets. org/ orgs/ summary. asp?ID=D000000061& Name=American+ Fedn+ of+ State,+

County+ & + Municipal+ Employees) retrieved 21 June 2007[14] "The Swamp: John McCain vs. baby in anti-war ad" (http:/ / weblogs. chicagotribune. com/ news/ politics/ blog/ 2008/ 06/

john_mccain_vs_baby_in_antiwar. html). Chicago Tribune. . Retrieved 2008-06-19.

American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees 53

[15] Saunders, Debra (28 October 2010). "The money advantage" (http:/ / www. rasmussenreports. com/ public_content/ political_commentary/commentary_by_debra_j_saunders/ fundraising_prowess_2010). Melbourne, Florida: Florida Today. pp. 9A. .

External links• Official website (http:/ / www. afscme. org/ )• Vintage AFSCME Video Parody (http:/ / www. youtube. com/ watch?v=_3mw49mk_x0)• Disgrace Before God: Striking Black Sanitation Workers vs. Black Officialdom in 1977 Atlanta (http:/ /

nbjournal. org/ 2007/ 07/âa-disgrace-before-godâ-striking-black-sanitation-workers-vs-black-officialdom-in-1977-atlanta/ ) An articlein New Beginnings: A Journal of Independent Labor about the 1977 sanitation workers strike led by AFSCMELocal 1644

Swift Vets and POWs for Truth

Swift Vets and POWs for Truth official logo

Swift Vets and POWs for Truth, formerlyknown as the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth(SBVT), was a political group (527 group) ofUnited States Swift boat veterans and formerprisoners of war of the Vietnam War, formedduring the 2004 presidential election campaignfor the purpose of opposing John Kerry'scandidacy for the presidency. The campaign inspired the widely-used political pejorative "swiftboating." The groupdisbanded and ceased operations on May 31, 2008.[1]

BackgroundSBVT asserted that Kerry was "unfit to serve" as President based upon his alleged "willful distortion of the conduct"of American servicemen during that war, and his alleged "withholding and/or distortion of material facts" as to hisown conduct during that war.[2] This claim caused tremendous controversy during the election, particularly becausesome perceived the veterans as partisans who had not been in a place to assess Kerry,[3] while several other Vietnamveterans who served alongside Kerry or under his command disputed the criticisms and supported Kerry in hispresidential aspirations.[4] [5]

SBVT stated that "Kerry's phony war crimes charges, his exaggerated claims about his own service in Vietnam, andhis deliberate misrepresentation of the nature and effectiveness of Swift boat operations compel us to stepforward."[6] The group challenged the legitimacy of each of the combat medals awarded to Kerry by the U.S. Navyand the disposition of his discharge. (See John Kerry military service controversy.) Further, SBVT said that Kerry'slater criticism of the war was a "betrayal of trust" with other soldiers, and that by his activism he had caused direct"harm" to soldiers still at war. (See John Kerry VVAW controversy.)Registered under Section 527 of the Internal Revenue Code, SBVT publicized its criticisms of Kerry during theelection campaign in a book, in television advertisements that the group ran in swing states and in the mediacoverage some members received. The group was the subject of several complaints to the Federal ElectionCommission (FEC).After the election, the group was credited by some media and praised by conservatives as contributing to Kerry'sdefeat[7] while critics consider the group an example of a successful political smear campaign.[8]

Swift Vets and POWs for Truth 54

MembershipSBVT was formed in 2004. Membership was initially limited to veterans of the Vietnam War who at some pointserved in a Swift boat unit, as did Kerry.Of the 3,500 Swift boat sailors who served in Vietnam, the names of some 250 appeared on the group's statementagainst Kerry; most did not serve at the same time or in the same place as Kerry.[9] [10] [11] Founding members ofSBVT include Rear Admiral Roy Hoffmann (retired), a former commander of Swift boat forces; Houston attorneyJohn O'Neill, an officer who became commander of Swift Boat PCF 94 several months after Kerry's departure in1969 and who appeared opposite Kerry in a televised 1971 debate between them on The Dick Cavett Show; and 13other named veterans. Several of those who joined SBVT during the 2004 campaign were officers who hadpreviously praised Kerry's conduct during the Vietnam War. These included Division Commander Grant Hibbard,who wrote positive evaluations of Kerry, and Commander George Elliott, who submitted Kerry for a Silver Star.SBVT asserted that it included, in total, 16 officers who served with Kerry in Coastal Division 11 as members.[12]

Despite SBVT's statements that Kerry's "entire chain of command" belonged to the group,[13] Joseph Streuli, formercommander of Coastal Division 13, Charles Horne, former commander of Coastal Squadron 1, and Art Price, formercommander CTF 116 who is described in "Unfit for Command" as part of Kerry's chain of command, are notaffiliated with the group.The group's initial letter against Kerry stated "It is our collective judgment that, upon your return from Vietnam, yougrossly and knowingly distorted the conduct of the American soldiers, marines, sailors and airmen of that war(including a betrayal of many of us, without regard for the danger your actions caused us). Further, we believe thatyou have withheld and/or distorted material facts as to your own conduct in this war."[14] However, Kerry had postedover 100 pages of his military records at his website nearly two weeks before the issuance of the SBVT letter, andhad also made his military medical records available for inspection by reporters (and provided a summary from hisdoctor).[15] [16] [17]

Not all SBVT members said that they were signing the letter for the same reason. For example, from an interviewpublished the day before the letter was made public: "'[Kerry] earned his medals, he did what he was supposed to doin Vietnam,' said retired Coast Guard Captain Adrian Lonsdale, who was in the chain of command above Kerry andoversaw various operations dealing with Navy swift boats of the type Kerry commanded. 'But I was verydisappointed in his statements after he got out of the Navy.' "[18]

Of those who served in Kerry's boat crew, only Stephen Gardner joined SBVT.[19] He was not present on any of theoccasions when Kerry won his medals, including his Purple Hearts. Gardner appeared in two of the group'stelevision advertisements.All other living members of Kerry's crew supported his presidential bid, and some frequently campaigned with himas his self-described "band of brothers". Kerry crew members have disputed some of SBVT's various allegations,calling them "totally false" (Drew Whitlow), "garbage" (Gene Thorson), and "a pack of lies" (Del Sandusky).[20] [21]

[22]

No members of SBVT were aboard Kerry's boat during any of the incidents for which he was decorated. The onlymember of SBVT who was present at the Silver Star incident, Rood's crew member Larry Clayton Lee, praisedKerry's tactics and stated that he earned his Silver Star. However, he stated that based on discussions with otherSBVT members, he came to question whether Kerry deserved other medals for incidents at which he was notpresent.[23] [24]

On September 29, 2004, SBVT announced that it was joining forces with a group of American prisoners of war whowere held captive by the North Vietnamese during the war to form the new group, "Swift Vets and POWs ForTruth".[25]

Swift Vets and POWs for Truth 55

Media activitiesSBVT produced several television advertisements created by Stevens Reed Curcio & Potholm attacking Kerry'sactions both in and after Vietnam. For a detailed discussion of SBVT's allegations about Kerry's service in Vietnam,see John Kerry military service controversy.

First television advertisementSBVT first went public with a May 4, 2004, press conference declaring opposition to Kerry. When the pressconference garnered little attention, the organization produced television advertisements. On August 5, 2004, SBVTbegan airing a one-minute television spot[26] [27] in three hotly contested states in the ongoing presidential election.The advertisement, entitled "Any Questions?", was a collage of short clips of 13 SBVT members, many who statedthey "served with John Kerry" or had direct contact with Kerry during his service in Vietnam. The veteransappearing in the ad said Kerry was dishonest, unreliable, unfit to lead, and had dishonored his country and fellowveterans. Only one of the men in the advertisement (Steve Gardner) served under Kerry, but some sailed alongsideKerry's Swift boat on multi-boat patrols.Among the first to question the first ad was Republican Senator John McCain, a Bush supporter, Vietnam veteran,and former POW. He said, "I condemn the [SBVT] ad. It is dishonest and dishonorable. I think it is very, verywrong".[28]

Second television advertisementOn August 20, 2004, SBVT released a second television advertisement[29] [30] featuring a portion of Kerry's 1971testimony, before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.[31] Kerry, testifying as a member of Vietnam VeteransAgainst the War (VVAW), had criticized U.S. policy in Vietnam. He had also described VVAW's 1971 WinterSoldier Investigation, in which more than 100 soldiers and civilians said they had seen or committed atrocitiescarried out by U.S. forces in Vietnam. Kerry's Senate testimony presented a summary of these men's statements; hedid not, however, say that he had any personal knowledge of these atrocities. The SBVT advertisement alternatedclips of Kerry's summary of these statements with charges from Vietnam veterans, particularly former POWs, thatKerry's "accusations" had demoralized and "betrayed" soldiers in Vietnam.

Third television advertisementA third television advertisement[32] [33] began airing on August 26, 2004, attacking Kerry's past statements that hewas in Cambodia on Christmas Eve, 1968. This advertisement featured Stephen Gardner stating, "I spent more timeon John Kerry's boat than any other crew member. ... John Kerry claims that he spent Christmas in 1968 inCambodia and that is categorically a lie. Not in December, not in January. We were never in Cambodia on a secretmission, ever."However, Gardner was only a member of Kerry's crew for a month and a half, from December 6, 1968 toapproximately January 22, 1969; crew directories and first hand accounts indicate that other crewmembers served aslong or longer under Kerry's four-month long command.[34] [35]

In addition, Kerry had never said that the Christmas Eve incident was a "secret mission," but happened during aroutine patrol;[35] furthermore, he stated at least two weeks prior to the ad's appearance that he had been patrolling ator near the border at the time and subsequently ambushed.[36] [37] The account of the patrol appears in DouglasBrinkley's Tour of Duty, [pp. 209–219] and Cmdr. Elliott noted in Kerry's fitness report that his boat was ambushedduring the Christmas truce of 1968.[38] Moreover, Kerry's biographer, Douglas Brinkley, has stated that Kerry "wentinto Cambodian waters three or four times in January and February 1969 on clandestine missions".[39] [40]

Swift Vets and POWs for Truth 56

Fourth television advertisementOn August 31, 2004, a fourth advertisement[41] [42] was released by SBVT. The advertisement described Kerry as aman who "renounced his country's symbols," a reference to a Vietnam War protest where Kerry threw wardecorations over the fence of the U.S. Capitol building on April 23, 1971. The advertisement also contained editedvideo clips of Kerry from a WRC-TV program called Viewpoints, in which he stated that he gave back "six, seven,eight, nine" (in response to a question: "How many did you give back, John?"); it then included a clip from anotherpart of that interview where Kerry stated "and that was the medals themselves," although in the interview it was notin reference to the decorations he returned.[43]

BookSBVT founder and spokesman John O'Neill and Jerome Corsi are listed as coauthors of the book Unfit forCommand: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry, published by Regnery Publishing. A best-seller uponits release in August 2004,[44] it criticized Kerry's judgment in battle, his truthfulness, his entitlement to certainmedals, and his later anti-war activities. The book was based in part on interviews with veterans who served in orwith Kerry's division, and also on biographies of Kerry.[45] Several members of Kerry's crew stated that O'Neillfailed to interview them; some veterans who were interviewed asserted that their statements were edited to strip outmaterial favorable to Kerry.[46] Neither O'Neill nor Corsi had any firsthand knowledge of Kerry's service. O'Neillserved on the Swift boats after Kerry left Vietnam, and Corsi never served in Vietnam.After controversial statements made by Corsi became public, O'Neill denied Corsi's coauthorship of the book, sayingthat Corsi was "simply an editor and not really any sort of co-author."[47] [48] However, portions of the book[49]

contain material also found in articles posted under Corsi's name at WinterSoldier.com [50], a website critical of JohnKerry,[51] [52] and O'Neill is cited in a later book as describing Corsi as helping to write "Unfit for Command," andurging him to back out of media appearances after the controversial comments became public.[53]

Controversy

Truth of allegationsA major part of the SBVT controversy centered on the group's testimony. The SBVT statements were accompaniedby sworn affidavits. One affiant, Al French, acknowledged he had no firsthand knowledge of what he had swornto.[54]

The first SBVT ad was contradicted by the statements of several other veterans who observed the incidents, by theNavy's official records, and, in some instances, by the contemporaneous statements of SBVT members themselves.Several major newspapers were also skeptical of the SBVT allegations. For example, a New York Times news articlestated, "on close examination, the accounts of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth prove to be riddled withinconsistencies."[55] Regarding the medal dispute, a Los Angeles Times editorial[56] stated, "Not limited by theconventions of our colleagues in the newsroom, we can say it outright: These charges against John Kerry are false."The editorial argued this position on the basis that "Kerry is backed by almost all those who witnessed the events inquestion, as well as by documentation." On August 22, 2004 The Washington Post reported: "An investigation byThe Washington Post into what happened that day suggests that both sides have withheld information from thepublic record and provided an incomplete, and sometimes inaccurate, picture of what took place. But althoughKerry's accusers have succeeded in raising doubts about his war record, they have failed to come up with sufficientevidence to prove him a liar."[57]

The ABC television show Nightline traveled to Vietnam and interviewed Vietnamese who were involved in the battle for which Kerry was awarded the Silver Star. These witnesses disputed O'Neill's charge that there "was little or no fire" that day; they said that the fighting was fierce.[58] SBVT supporters question whether these witnesses are

Swift Vets and POWs for Truth 57

reliable because they spoke "in the presence of a Communist official",[59] but their account of enemy fire issubstantially the same as that previously given by another former VC to an AP reporter[60] and by the Americanwitnesses, including the only SBVT member who was actually present that day, Larry Clayton Lee.[61] [62] [63] [64]

ABC News's The Note opined, "the Swift Boat ad and their primary charges about Kerry's medals are personal,negative, extremely suspect, or false."[65]

Jerome Corsi has said that a picture of Kerry's 1993 visit to Vietnam hangs in the War Remnants Museum in Ho ChiMinh City as a gesture of "honor" by the Communists "for his contribution to their victory over [the] United States",and John O'Neill has stated that Kerry "is in the North Vietnamese war museum as a hero... . one of the heroes whocaused them to win the war in Vietnam".[66] The statement is also repeated in "Unfit for Command" (pp 167–174).However, Josh Gerstein of the New York Sun stated in this regard:

“While the museum clearly honors opponents of the war from America and other countries, it is not clear that the photo of Mr. Kerry is part ofthat tribute. The picture of the senator hangs among a set of photos devoted to the restoration of diplomatic relations between America andVietnam in the 1990s.

The picture apparently was taken as Kerry took part in a delegation President Bill Clinton sent to Hanoi in 1993. Other photos nearby showvisits during that period by former American officials who played key roles in the Vietnam War, including a Navy admiral who has sincedied, Elmo Zumwalt, and a defense secretary, Robert McNamara. A secretary of state during Clinton’s term, Warren Christopher, is alsoshown meeting Vietnamese officials ”

— Josh Gerstein[67]

In this connection, the web page Corsi and another anti-Kerry veteran originally published on the Kerry museumphoto contained the picture of Robert McNamara's 1995 meeting with General Giap, who was misidentified as "MaoTse-Tung".[68] (Photo #10).In addition, John O'Neill said that in 1971 John Kerry "wanted to abandon ship and leave the POWs [in Vietnam]"and that "[o]n the Dick Cavett show and elsewhere, John Kerry‘s position was that we should accept the MadameBinh seven-point proposal, which called for unilateral withdrawal, setting a date after which at some future time,we‘d negotiate the return of the POWs. So we would set a date. We would withdraw and then we would begin todiscuss how to bring them home".[69] However, in the Cavett debate, Kerry actually said:

“Now, if we were to set a date for withdrawal from Southeast Asia, we can – the Vietnamese, first of all, have said it will be settled prior to thearrival of that date, but we can set a time limit on that. If the prisoners of war aren't back prior to the arrival of that date, then I think we wouldhave – for the first time in all of our history in Vietnam we would have a legitimate reason for taking some kind of reaction to it. ”

— John Kerry[70]

Early in the advertising campaign, Time magazine surveyed public credence in the SBVT advertisements amongthose who viewed them. The poll, conducted August 24 through 26, showed that about one-third of viewers believedthere was at least "some truth" to the allegations. Among swing voters, about one-fourth felt there was any truth tothe ads.[71]

More recently, an early member of the group, Steve Hayes, stated that he came to believe that the group was twistingKerry's record, and broke with the group and voted for Kerry. Hayes told the New York Times:

The mantra was just 'We want to set the record straight,' Mr. Hayes said this month. It became clear tome that it was morphing from an organization to set the record straight into a highly political vendetta.They knew it was not the truth.

Hayes also told the New York Times that he provided a long interview to Kerry's supporters, backing their version ofthe incident for which Kerry received the Bronze Star.[72]

Swift Vets and POWs for Truth 58

Connections with RepublicansSBVT characterized itself as a non-partisan group both in the legal sense and in spirit, yet several prominentindividuals who assisted SBVT also have had close ties to the Republican Party. According to information releasedby the IRS on February 22, 2005, more than half of the group's reported contributions came from just three sources,all prominent Texas Republican donors: Houston builder Bob J. Perry, a longtime supporter of George W. Bush,donated $4.45 million, Harold Simmons' Contrans donated $3 million, and T. Boone Pickens, Jr. donated $2 million.Other major contributors included Bush fundraiser Carl Lindner ($300,000), Robert Lindner ($260,000), GOPcontributor Aubrey McClendon ($250,000), George Matthews Jr. ($250,000), and Crow Holdings ($100,000).[73] [74]

[75]

The initial communications consultant for SBVT was Merrie Spaeth, a Reagan administration press officer and avolunteer consultant to Ken Starr in the Clinton impeachment; she was also a spokesperson for "Republicans forClean Air," a 527 group opposing John McCain's 2000 presidential campaign and funded by Bush supporters whoalso helped fund SBVT.[76] [77] John E. O'Neill — the primary author of Unfit for Command and a key player in theformation of SBVT — donated over $14,000 to Republican candidates. He co-operated with the Nixon White Housein opposing Kerry in 1971, and seconded Nixon's nomination at the 1972 Republican national convention.[78] [79]

Retired Admiral William Schachte, a principal source for the SBVT allegations about Kerry's first Purple Heart, hasdonated to both of Bush’s presidential campaigns. Schachte was also a lobbyist for FastShip, a firm that recentlyannounced it was receiving $40 million in federal funding for one of its projects. In addition, Schachte's lobbyingfirm associate, David Norcross, was chairman of the 2004 Republican convention.[80] Chris LaCivita, PoliticalDirector of the National Republican Senatorial Committee in 2002,[81] works as a private contractor providing mediaadvice for SBVT.[82]

The SBVT postal address was registered to Susan Arceneaux, treasurer of the Majority Leader's Fund, a PAC closelytied to the former Congressional leader, Republican Dick Armey.[83]

Republican activist Sam Fox's donation of $50,000 to SBVT during the 2004 campaign[84] caused a controversywhen Bush nominated him to the position of ambassador to Belgium. Because the Democratic members of theSenate Foreign Relations Committee indicated that they would not support his nomination, Bush withdrew thenomination; he appointed Fox to the position on April 4, 2007, while Congress was in recess.[85] [86] [87]

These ties, along with others (see below), led to suggestions in the popular press that SBVT was a front group forRepublicans.[55] [88] [89]

Connections with the Bush campaignThe Bush campaign became part of the general SBVT controversy when McCain condemned the first SBVT ad, andsaid, "I hope that the president will also condemn it." The Bush campaign did not condemn SBVT or the SBVT ads.The campaign did not endorse the group either, stating "We have not and we will not question Senator Kerry'sservice in Vietnam."[90] Kerry was dismissive of this statement, saying, "Of course, the President keeps tellingpeople he would never question my service to our country. Instead, he watches as a Republican-funded attack groupdoes just that."[91] Kerry also alleged that SBVT was "a front for the Bush campaign. And the fact that the Presidentwon’t denounce what they’re up to tells you everything you need to know — he wants them to do his dirty work".[92]

When pressed on the issue, President Bush called for an end to all 527 group political advertisements, andchallenged Kerry to do the same.[93]

Critics and the Kerry campaign pointed to several specific connections between SBVT and the Bush campaign. The Kerry campaign asserted that Bush campaign headquarters in Florida distributed fliers promoting SBVT events, a charge the Bush campaign denied.[94] Kenneth Cordier, former vice-chair of Veterans for Bush/Cheney (in 2000) and volunteer member of the Bush campaign veterans steering committee, appeared in the second SBVT advertisement. The Bush campaign asked him to resign and stated that it had been unaware of his SBVT

Swift Vets and POWs for Truth 59

involvement.[95]

On August 25, 2004, Benjamin Ginsberg, the top election lawyer to the Bush campaign on campaign finance law,also resigned after it was learned that SBVT was one of his clients. Ginsberg stated that he was withdrawing to avoidbeing a distraction to the campaign. He declared that he had acted "in a manner that is fully appropriate andlegal,"[82] arguing that it was not uncommon or illegal for lawyers to represent campaigns or political parties whilealso representing 527 groups. He also maintained that he did not disclose to the Bush campaign that he wassimultaneously representing the SBVT group. After leaving the Bush campaign, Ginsberg retained his status ascounsel to SBVT.In January 2005, Governor Jeb Bush, the President's brother and Florida chairman for his 2004 campaign,[96] sent aletter to SBVT member and former POW Bud Day, thanking him for his "personal support of my brother in hisre-election." In addition, Governor Bush said of the SBVT:

"As someone who truly understands the risk of standing up for something, I simply cannot express inwords how much I value their willingness to stand up against John Kerry."[72] [97]

FEC FilingsFEC Cases #5511 and #5525

On August 10, 2004, three campaign finance watchdog groups — Democracy 21, the Campaign Legal Center, andthe Center for Responsive Politics — jointly filed an independent complaint with the Federal Election Commission(Case #5511).[98] [99] The complaint alleged that SBVT's sources of funding were in violation of federal election lawin that "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth (SBVT) is registered with the IRS as a section 527 group but is not registeredwith the Commission as a political committee. However, SBVT is, in fact, a federal political committee."On August 20, 2004, the Kerry campaign filed a complaint with the FEC (Case #5525)[100] [101] alleging that SBVTand 20 additional named respondents had conducted campaign activity that "has been coordinated with the Bushcampaign and the Republican Party from the outset." Under federal election law, SBVT, as a nonpartisan 527 group,was barred from coordinating with any political campaign. The complaint, citing the "ties" noted above, claimed a"web of connections to the Bush family, high-profile Texas political figures, and President Bush's chief politicalaide, Karl Rove".The Bush campaign dismissed charges of ties and asserted there was no co-ordination between SBVT and thecampaign. Editorial opinion on the evidence for co-ordination varied. ABC News' The Note stated, "There is noevidence that the Bush campaign is orchestrating the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth."[102] In contrast, the New YorkTimes opined that the SBVT attacks were "orchestrated by negative-campaign specialists deep in the heart of theTexas Republican machine."[103]

FEC Findings - Cases #5511 and #5525

On December 13, 2006, in a consolidated finding, the FEC ruled against the Kerry campaign allegations (Case#5525)[104] finding that...

Following an investigation, the Commission concluded that Swiftvets did not unlawfully coordinate itsactivities with, or make excessive in-kind contributions to, any federal candidate or political partycommittee.

In addition, Kerry campaign complaints against 18 other respondents were relegated to "dismissed-other" [105] and 2relegated to "Reason To Believe/No Further Action" (RTB/NFA) [105] status.The FEC did, however, find for the joint complainants (Case #5511)[106] in that the SBVT failed to register and filedisclosure reports as a federal political committee, and accepted contributions in violation of federal limits andsource prohibitions. SBVT was assessed a fine of $299,500.The conciliation agreement between the FEC and the SBVT also stated, in part:

Swift Vets and POWs for Truth 60

Indeed, the Commission has never alleged that the SwiftVets acted in knowing defiance of the law, orwith the conscious recognition that their actions were prohibited by law, made no findings orconclusions that there were any knowing and willful violations of the law in connection with this matter,and, thus, does not challenge SwiftVets' assertion of its good faith reliance on its understanding of thelaw.

Solely for the purpose of settling this matter expeditiously and avoiding litigation, without admissionwith respect to any other proceeding, and with no finding of probable cause by the Commission,SwiftVets agrees not to contest the Commission's conclusions ... .

In addition, as part of the conciliation agreement, SBVT stated that upon completing its obligations under theagreement, it "intends to cease operations as an IRC Section 527 organization and to donate the remainder of itsfunds to a charity supporting the families of U.S. servicemen and servicewomen killed or wounded in the War inIraq."[104]

Disclosure of documentsDuring the campaign, SBVT criticized Kerry for not signing a Standard Form 180 authorizing general public accessto his Navy personnel records.[107] Kerry responded that the documents were posted on his website.[108] On May 20,2005, Kerry did sign the SF-180 form permitting release of his service records and medical records to reporters fromthe Boston Globe, the Los Angeles Times, and the Associated Press;[109] he refused a request by the New York Sunfor access to the records.[110] The Boston Globe and Los Angeles Times reported that the records largely duplicatedwhat Kerry had released during the campaign.[111] [112]

SBVT members also criticized Kerry for not releasing his own private journals and letters. However, SBVTmembers themselves refused to release documents. For example, a journal by another of the Swift boat commandersand the relevant Navy records of some of the SBVT members involved in specific allegations have not beenreleased.[4]

The White House refused to release records detailing any Bush administration contacts with prominent individualsassociated with SBVT. The denied Freedom of Information Act request was filed on August 24 by Citizens forResponsibility and Ethics in Washington.[113]

Relationship to Admiral Roy F. Hoffmann FoundationIn July 2006, controversy arose over donations SBVT made to a non-profit organization, the Admiral Roy F.Hoffmann Foundation,[114] founded by the chairman of SBVT, Roy F. Hoffmann.[115] The address and agent forservice for the foundation is Political Compliance Services, the same consulting firm, and consultant - SusanArceneaux - used by SBVT.[115]

According to reports and SBVT's own filings, SBVT donated $10,000 to the Hoffmann organization in 2005, and inearly 2006 donated another $100,000 to the organization.[116] [117] [118] According to a website purporting to quoteSBVT treasurer Weymouth Symmes, the latter donation was subsequently reimbursed by the foundation.[119]

According to the foundation's own website, SBVT has donated a total of $500,000, SBVT co-founder John O'Neillhas donated his proceeds from the publication of the book "Unfit for Command," and one of SBVT's major funders,T. Boone Pickens, has contributed nearly $2 million.[114]

Swift Vets and POWs for Truth 61

"Swift Boating"Since the 2004 election, the term "Swift Boating" (or "swiftboating") has become a common expression for acampaign attacking opponents by questioning their credibility and patriotism. The term is most often used with thepejorative meaning of a smear campaign,[120] but has also been used positively by a neo-conservative.[121]

References[1] "Swiftboat Vets and POWs for Truth" (http:/ / swiftvets. com/ ). Swift Vets and POWs for Truth. 2008-05-31. . Retrieved 2009-08-24.[2] "Swift Veterans Letter to John Kerry" (http:/ / horse. he. net/ ~swiftpow/ article. php?story=20040629220813790). Swift Vets and POWs for

Truth. 2004-05-04. . Retrieved 2007-10-25.[3] "Republican-funded Group Attacks Kerry's War Record" (http:/ / www. factcheck. org/ article231. html). FactCheck.org. 2004-08-22. .

Retrieved 2007-03-28.[4] Dobbs, Michael (2004-08-22). "Swift Boat Accounts Incomplete" (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ articles/

A21239-2004Aug21. html). Washington Post. pp. A01. . Retrieved 2007-03-28.[5] VandeHei, Jim (2004-07-29). "Kerry returns home with 'band of brothers'" (http:/ / www2. ljworld. com/ news/ 2004/ jul/ 29/

kerry_returns_home/ ). Lawrence Journal-World. . Retrieved 2007-03-28.[6] "The Real Story on John Kerry's Military Service" (http:/ / www. swiftvets. com). SwiftVets.com. . Retrieved 2010-05-28.[7] Vlahos, Kelley Beaucar (2005-02-16). "Conservatives Laud Swift Boat Veterans" (http:/ / www. foxnews. com/ story/ 0,2933,147728,00.

html). Fox News. . Retrieved 2007-02-28.[8] Conason, Joe (May 4, 2004). "Smear Boat Veterans for Bush" (http:/ / dir. salon. com/ story/ opinion/ conason/ 2004/ 05/ 04/ swift/ index.

html). Salon.com. .[9] "Swift Boat Sailors' Association" (http:/ / www. swiftboats. org/ ). .[10] "Swift Vets and POWs for Truth" (http:/ / horse. he. net/ ~swiftpow/ index. php?topic=Letter). .[11] "Coastal Squadron One Directory" (http:/ / www. swiftboats. net/ ). .[12] "‘Any Questions?’ cover letter for TV station managers" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20050915131707/ http:/ / horse. he. net/ ~swiftpow/

article. php?story=20040808144320243). 2004-08-08. Archived from the original (http:/ / horse. he. net/ ~swiftpow/ article.php?story=20040808144320243) on 2005-09-15. .

[13] "Swift Veteran Quotes" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20041009141205/ http:/ / www. swiftvets. com/ index. php?topic=SwiftVetQuotes).SBVT website. 2004-10-09. Archived from the original (http:/ / www. swiftvets. com/ index. php?topic=SwiftVetQuotes) on 2004-10-09. .

[14] "Swift Veterans Letter to John Kerry" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20050915133256/ http:/ / horse. he. net/ ~swiftpow/ article.php?story=20040629220813790). SBVT website. 2004-06-29. Archived from the original (http:/ / horse. he. net/ ~swiftpow/ article.php?story=20040629220813790) on 2005-09-15. .

[15] Glionna, John M. (2004-04-21). "Kerry Camp Posts His Military Records" (http:/ / pqasb. pqarchiver. com/ latimes/ access/ 621740291.html?dids=621740291:621740291& FMT=ABS& FMTS=ABS:FT& type=current& date=Apr+ 21,+ 2004& author=John+ M. + Glionna&pub=Los+ Angeles+ Times& edition=& startpage=A. 17& desc=THE+ RACE+ TO+ THE+ WHITE+ HOUSE). LA Times. pp. A17. .Retrieved 2007-03-28.

[16] "Kerry Doctor Issues Summary of Military Medical Records" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20051107080149/ http:/ / releases.usnewswire. com/ GetRelease. asp?id=29302). U.S. Newswire. 2004-04-23. Archived from the original (http:/ / releases. usnewswire. com/GetRelease. asp?id=29302) on 2005-11-07. .

[17] "Military Records" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20041209135553/ http:/ / www. johnkerry. com/ about/ john_kerry/ military_records.html). Official Kerry website. 2004-12-09. Archived from the original (http:/ / www. johnkerry. com/ about/ john_kerry/ military_records.html) on 2004-12-09. .

[18] Johnson, Glen; Kranish, Michael (2004-05-04). "$25m ad campaign showcases Kerry's career" (http:/ / www. boston. com/ news/ nation/washington/ articles/ 2004/ 05/ 04/ 25m_ad_campaign_showcaes_kerrys_career/ ). Boston Globe. .

[19] Brinkley, Douglas (2004-03-09). "The Tenth Brother" (http:/ / www. time. com/ time/ nation/ article/ 0,8599,599034,00. html). TimeMagazine. . Retrieved 2008-06-30.

[20] "McCain assails attacks on Kerry wartime record" (http:/ / www. signonsandiego. com/ uniontrib/ 20040806/ news_1n6swift. html). SanDiego Union-Tribune. 2004-08-06. .

[21] Coile, Zachary (2004-08-06). "Vets group attacks Kerry; McCain defends Democrat" (http:/ / www. sfgate. com/ cgi-bin/ article. cgi?file=/c/ a/ 2004/ 08/ 06/ MNGUT83SS41. DTL). San Francisco Chronicle. .

[22] "Kerry crewmates defend his record" (http:/ / www. kinston. com/ SiteProcessor. cfm?Template=/ GlobalTemplates/ Details. cfm&StoryID=22061& Section=Local). Kinston Free Press. 2004-08-29. .

[23] Gerth, Joseph (2004-08-26). "Kentucky veteran involved in ambush backs Kerry account" (http:/ / orig. courier-journal. com/ localnews/2004/ 08/ 26ky/ A1-swift0826-9879. html). Courier-Journal (Louisville, KY). . Retrieved 2007-04-22.

[24] Hume, Brit (2004-08-26). "Political Grapevine" (http:/ / www. accessmylibrary. com/ premium/ 0286/ 0286-13156512. html). Fox NewsChannel. . Retrieved 2007-04-07.

Swift Vets and POWs for Truth 62

[25] "Swift Boat Veterans Join Forces With POWs, SBVT website" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20041024083924/ http:/ / swift4. he. net/~swift4/ article. php?story=2004092911015589). 2004-09-29. Archived from the original (http:/ / swift4. he. net/ ~swift4/ article.php?story=2004092911015589) on 2004-09-29. .

[26] "Any Questions (script)" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20041012040319/ http:/ / www. swiftvets. com/ script. html). SBVT website.2004-10-12. Archived from the original (http:/ / www. swiftvets. com/ script. html) on 2004-10-12. .

[27] "Any Questions (video)" (http:/ / www. archive. org/ download/ swb_anyquestions/ swb_anyquestions. wmv) (WMV). SBVT website.2004-11-08. Archived from the original (http:/ / swift3. he. net/ ~swift3/ anyquestions. wmv) on 2004-10-11. .

[28] "Broken Heroes on a Last Chance Power Drive" (http:/ / replay. waybackmachine. org/ 20050417134522/ http:/ / www. abcnews. go. com/sections/ politics/ TheNote/ TheNote_Aug0604. html). August 6, 2004. Archived from the original (http:/ / www. abcnews. go. com/ sections/politics/ TheNote/ TheNote_Aug0604. html) on April 17, 2005. .

[29] "Sellout (script)" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20041010045625/ swiftvets. com/ selloutscript. html). SBVT website. 2004-10-12.Archived from the original (http:/ / swiftvets. com/ selloutscript. html) on 2004-10-10. .

[30] "Sellout (video)" (http:/ / www. archive. org/ download/ swb_sellout/ swb_sellout. wmv) (WMV). SBVT website. 2004-11-08. Archivedfrom the original (http:/ / swift3. he. net/ ~swift3/ sellout. wmv) on 2004-10-11. .

[31] "John Kerry 1971 Senate Testimony (audio)" (http:/ / www. archive. org/ download/ dn2004-0825/ dn2004-0825-1_64kb. mp3) (MP3).Democracy Now!. 2004-08-25. Archived from the original (http:/ / play. rbn. com/ ?url=demnow/ demnow/ demand/ 2004/ aug/ audio/dn20040825. ra& proto=rtsp& start=11:02. 227) on 2004-08-25. .

[32] "Gunner (script)" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20041011183120/ swiftvets. com/ gunnerscript. html). SBVT website. 2004-10-12.Archived from the original (http:/ / swiftvets. com/ gunnerscript. html) on 2004-10-11. .

[33] "Gunner (video)" (http:/ / www. archive. org/ download/ swb_gunner/ swb_gunner. wmv) (WMV). SBVT website. 2004-11-08. Archivedfrom the original (http:/ / swift3. he. net/ ~swift3/ gunner. wmv) on 2004-10-11. .

[34] Wasikowski, Lawrence J.. "Coastal Squadron One Swift Boat Crew Directory" (http:/ / www. swiftboats. net/ ). self-published. . Retrieved2007-04-01.

[35] Kranish, Michael (2003-06-16). "Heroism, and growing concern about war" (http:/ / www. boston. com/ globe/ nation/ packages/ kerry/061603. shtml). Boston Globe. . Retrieved 2007-04-01.

[36] Canon, Scott (2004-08-05). "Kerry's Cambodia account challenged by ex-commander" (http:/ / seattletimes. nwsource. com/ html/nationworld/ 2002005720_cambodia15. html). Seattle Times. . Retrieved 2007-03-28.

[37] Kaplan, Fred (2004-08-23). "Holiday in Cambodia" (http:/ / www. slate. com/ id/ 2105529/ ). Slate.com. . Retrieved 2007-03-28.[38] Kerry, John. "John Kerry Fitness Reports" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20040716025647/ www. johnkerry. com/ about/ Fitness_Reports.

pdf) (PDF). JohnKerry.com. Archived from the original (http:/ / www. johnkerry. com/ about/ Fitness_Reports. pdf) on 2004-07-16. .Retrieved 2007-10-20.

[39] Rennie, David (2004-08-13). "Kerry's confusion over Cambodia" (http:/ / www. telegraph. co. uk/ news/ main. jhtml?xml=/ news/ 2004/ 08/13/ wus13. xml). London: Telegraph. . Retrieved 2007-04-01.

[40] Barone, Michael (2004-08-30). "Winter in Cambodia?" (http:/ / www. usnews. com/ usnews/ opinion/ articles/ 040830/ 30barone. htm). U.S.News. . Retrieved 2007-04-05.

[41] "Medals (script)" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20041009131707/ swiftvets. com/ medalsscript. html). SBVT website. 2004-10-12.Archived from the original (http:/ / swiftvets. com/ medalsscript. html) on 2004-10-09. .

[42] "Medals (video)" (http:/ / www. archive. org/ download/ swb_medals/ swb_medals. wmv) (WMV). SBVT website. 2004-11-08. Archivedfrom the original (http:/ / swift3. he. net/ ~swift3/ medals. wmv) on 2004-10-11. .

[43] Brian Ross; Chris Vlasto; Madeleine Sauer (April 26, 2004). "Did Kerry Discard Vietnam Medals? Videotape Contradicts John Kerry’s OwnStatements Over Vietnam Medals" (http:/ / replay. waybackmachine. org/ 20040610142156/ http:/ / abcnews. go. com/ sections/ Politics/Investigation/ kerry_vietnam_medals_040425. html). ABC News. Archived from the original (http:/ / abcnews. go. com/ Politics/story?id=123495) on June 10, 2004. . ""I threw my ribbons. I didn't have my medals. It is very simple.""

[44] "New York Times Non-Fiction Bestsellers of 2004" (http:/ / en. wikipedia. org/ wiki/ New_York_Times_Non-Fiction_Bestsellers_of_2004).2008-08-17. .

[45] "Book Details - Unfit for Command" (http:/ / www. regnery. com/ regnery/ 040809_unfit. html). 2008-08-17. .[46] Zernike, Kate; Rutenberg, Jim (August 20, 2004). "Friendly Fire: The Birth of an Anti-Kerry Ad" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2004/ 08/

20/ politics/ campaign/ 20swift. html). New York Times. . Retrieved March 26, 2011.[47] “Scarborough Country,” MSNBC, 2004-08-10[48] “John O'Neill Interview with Wolf Blitzer,” CNN, 2004-08-11.[49] "Excerpts from Unfit for Command" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20070323061302/ http:/ / www. learnedhand. com/ kerryunfit7. htm).

Archived from the original (http:/ / www. learnedhand. com/ kerryunfit7. htm) on 2007-03-23. . Retrieved 2007-03-29.[50] http:/ / WinterSoldier. com[51] Corsi, Jerome (2004-07-27). "Communist Vietnamese honor John Kerry, the war protestor, as a hero in their victory over the United States

in the Vietnam War – Part II" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20050324092901/ ice. he. net/ ~freepnet/ kerry/ staticpages/ index.php?page=20040604194804799). WinterSoldier.com. Archived from the original (http:/ / ice. he. net/ ~freepnet/ kerry/ staticpages/ index.php?page=20040604194804799) on 2005-03-24. . Retrieved 2007-03-29.

[52] Corsi, Jerome (2004-05-03). "Coordinating with the enemy: Vietnam Veterans Against the War in Paris and Hanoi" (http:/ / web. archive.

org/ web/ 20050305152602/ ice. he. net/ ~freepnet/ kerry/ staticpages/ index. php?page=2004060123330738). WinterSoldier.com. Archived

Swift Vets and POWs for Truth 63

from the original (http:/ / ice. he. net/ ~freepnet/ kerry/ staticpages/ index. php?page=2004060123330738) on 2005-03-05. . Retrieved2007-03-29.

[53] “To Set the Record Straight: How Swift Boat Veterans, POWS and the New Media Defeated John Kerry,” by Scott Swett and Tim Ziegler,pp. 120-124

[54] "Vets call for resignation of Clackamas prosecutor in Swift Boat ad" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20070930155702/ http:/ / www. kgw.com/ news-local/ stories/ kgw_082304_news_french_protest. a701071e. html). KGW. 2004-08-23. Archived from the original (http:/ / www.kgw. com/ news-local/ stories/ kgw_082304_news_french_protest. a701071e. html) on 2007-09-30. .

[55] Zernike, Kate; Jim Rutenberg (2004-08-20). "Friendly Fire: The Birth of an Anti-Kerry Ad" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2004/ 08/ 20/politics/ campaign/ 20swift. html?ex=1250913600& en=9b6f27de16c97265& ei=5090& partner=rssuserland). NY Times. . Retrieved2007-03-28.

[56] "Battle Over Kerry's Record Continues" (http:/ / pqasb. pqarchiver. com/ latimes/ access/ 682222421. html?dids=682222421:682222421&FMT=ABS& FMTS=ABS:FT& type=current& date=Aug+ 24,+ 2004& author=& pub=Los+ Angeles+ Times& edition=& startpage=B. 10&desc=Battle+ Over+ Kerry's+ Record+ Continues). editorial (LA Times): pp. B10. 2004-08-24. . Retrieved 2007-03-29.

[57] Dobbs, Michael (2004-08-22). "Swift Boat Accounts Incomplete" (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ articles/A21239-2004Aug21. html). Washington Post. pp. A01. . Retrieved 2009-11-15.

[58] Morse, Andrew (October 14, 2004). "What Happened in Kerry's Vietnam Battles?" (http:/ / replay. waybackmachine. org/ 20041112093735/http:/ / abcnews. go. com/ Nightline/ Vote2004/ story?id=166434). ABC News. Archived from the original (http:/ / abcnews. go. com/Nightline/ Vote2004/ story?id=166434) on November 12, 2004. .

[59] Sowell, Thomas (October 20, 2004). "ABC News or ABC spin" (http:/ / townhall. com/ columnists/ thomassowell/ 2004/ 10/ 20/abc_news_or_abc_spin/ page/ full/ ). Townhall.com. . Retrieved March 26, 2011.

[60] Mason, Margie (2004-09-01). "Former Viet Cong recalls fierce fighting along Mekong Delta waterways where Kerry served.". AssociatedPress.

[61] Rood, William B. (August 22, 2004). "FEB. 28, 1969: ON THE DONG CUNG RIVER; 'This is what I saw that day'" (http:/ / www.chicagotribune. com/ news/ local/ chi-0408220342aug22,0,7550103. story?page=2). Chicago Tribune (Chicago, IL: Chicago TribuneCompany): p. 2, para. 18. . Retrieved October 19, 2010. "There were three swift boats on the river that day in Vietnam more than 35 yearsago..."

[62] Upton, Peter N. (2004-07-25). "Kerry's Leadership Is Battle Tested" (http:/ / www. hartfordinfo. org/ issues/ documents/ neighborhoods/htfd_courant_072504. pdf) (PDF). editorial (Hartford Courant): pp. C01,06. . Retrieved 2007-04-01.

[63] Tour of Duty, pp. 290-292[64] John F. Kerry, The Complete Biography, (Boston Globe), pp. 100-103[65] "Wise Counsel" (http:/ / replay. waybackmachine. org/ 20050417124306/ http:/ / www. abcnews. go. com/ sections/ politics/ TheNote/

TheNote_Aug2504. html). The Note (ABC News). August 25, 2004. Archived from the original (http:/ / www. abcnews. go. com/ sections/politics/ TheNote/ TheNote_Aug2504. html) on April 17, 2005. .

[66] "Nightline with Ted Koppel" (http:/ / www. swiftvets. com/ staticpages/ index. php?page=Nightline). TV broadcast (ABC News).2004-10-14. . Retrieved 2007-04-01. Self-published transcript URL.

[67] Gerstein, Josh (2004-08-16). "Kerry’s Photo Raises Eyebrows In Museum In Ho Chi Minh City" (http:/ / daily. nysun. com/ Repository/ ml.asp?Ref=TllTLzIwMDQvMDgvMTYjQXIwMDEwMA==& Mode=HTML& Locale=english-skin-custom). NY Sun. .

[68] "Museum Photo Documented" (http:/ / www. tinyvital. com/ Misc/ KerryHonoredByCommunists2. htm). Tinyvital.com. . Retrieved2010-05-28.

[69] "Scarborough Country" (http:/ / www. msnbc. msn. com/ id/ 6327790/ ). transcript (MSNBC TV). 2004-10-22. . Retrieved 2007-04-01.[70] "Dick Cavett Show" (http:/ / www. swiftvets. com/ staticpages/ index. php?page=Debate2). transcript (ABC TV). 1971-06-20. . Retrieved

2007-04-01. Transcript URL is self-published[71] Schulman, Mark (2004-08-28). "Kerry Slips Slightly as GOP Heads for NYC" (http:/ / www. time. com/ time/ election2004/ article/

0,18471,689369,00. html). Time. . Retrieved 2007-04-01.[72] Zernike, Kate (2006-05-28). "Kerry Pressing Swift Boat Case Long After Loss" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2006/ 05/ 28/ washington/

28kerry. html?ex=1306468800& en=7158a80120f0ee5a& ei=5089). NY Times. . Retrieved 2007-04-28.[73] "Swift Vets Top Contributors, 2004 Cycle" (http:/ / www. opensecrets. org/ 527s/ 527cmtedetail. asp?cycle=2004& format=&

ein=201041228& tname=Swift Vets & POWs for Truth). opensecrets. . Retrieved 2007-04-01.[74] Frank, John (2004-10-05). "ELECTION 2004 / 2 Texans dig deep for boat vet ads / Pair from Dallas kick in $3 million for group's coffers"

(http:/ / www. chron. com/ CDA/ archives/ archive. mpl?id=2004_3806652). Houston Chronicle. pp. A8. . Retrieved 2007-04-01. Registrationrequired.

[75] "Bob Perry - The Man Behind Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" (http:/ / www. tpj. org/ page_view. jsp?pageid=667& pubid=422). fact sheet.Texans for Public Justice (self-published). . Retrieved 2007-04-01.

[76] "Republicans for Clean Air" (http:/ / www. sourcewatch. org/ wiki. phtml?title=Republicans_for_Clean_Air). WIKI (SourceWatch - Centerfor Media & Democracy). . Retrieved 2007-04-01.

[77] Yost, Pete (2004-08-23). "Bush urges end to TV attack ads by outside groups, whatever their target" (http:/ / seattletimes. nwsource. com/html/ nationworld/ 2002013026_webbush23. html). The Seattle Times. Associated Press. . Retrieved 2007-04-02.

[78] Williams, Brian (2004-03-16). "Nixon targeted Kerry for anti-war views" (http:/ / www. msnbc. msn. com/ id/ 4534274/ ). NBC NightlyNews. . Retrieved 2007-04-01.

Swift Vets and POWs for Truth 64

[79] Dobbs, Michael (2004-08-28). "After Decades, Renewed War On Old Conflict" (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ articles/A39956-2004Aug27. html). Washington Post. pp. A01. . Retrieved 2007-04-01.

[80] Milbank, Dana (2004-08-31). "A Swift Shift in Stories" (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ articles/ A47542-2004Aug30. html).Washington Post. pp. A19. . Retrieved 2007-04-01.

[81] Appleman, Eric M. (2003). "Republican Committees-Organization and Finances, 2002 Election Cycle" (http:/ / www. gwu. edu/ ~action/2004/ parties/ rnc02. html). Democracy in Action. . Retrieved 2007-04-01. Self-published?

[82] Rutenberg, Jim; Kate Zernike (2007-08-25). "Bush Campaign's Top Outside Lawyer Resigns" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/20070711024628/ http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2004/ 08/ 25/ politics/ campaign/ 25CND-SWIF. html). NY Times. Archived from the original(http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2004/ 08/ 25/ politics/ campaign/ 25CND-SWIF. html) on 2007-07-11. . Retrieved 2007-04-01. Registrationrequired.

[83] Conason, Joe (2004-08-28). "Sailing buddies" (http:/ / dir. salon. com/ story/ opinion/ conason/ 2004/ 08/ 28/ swift_bush/ index. html).opinion. Salon. . Retrieved 2007-04-01.

[84] "Swift Boat Vets and POWs for Truth "527" Political Organization Filing Information" (http:/ / www. campaignmoney. com/ political/ 527/swift_boat_vets_and_pows_for_truth. asp). pub info retrieval. CampaignMoney.com. . Retrieved 2007-04-07.

[85] "Bush withdraws nomination after Swift Boat criticism" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20070404013454/ http:/ / www. cnn. com/ 2007/POLITICS/ 03/ 28/ kerry. swift. ap/ index. html?). 2007-03-28. Archived from the original (http:/ / www. cnn. com/ 2007/ POLITICS/ 03/ 28/kerry. swift. ap/ index. html) on 2007-04-04. . Retrieved 2011-05-26. "President Bush on Wednesday withdrew the ambassadorial nominationof businessman Sam Fox after Democrats denounced Fox..."

[86] Hananel, Sam (March 28, 2007). "White House Withdraws Ambassador Nominee" (http:/ / www. huffingtonpost. com/ huff-wires/20070328/ kerry-swift-boat/ ). Huffington Post. . Retrieved May 26, 2011. "More than two years after losing his bid for the White House,Democratic Sen. John Kerry exacted a measure of revenge"

[87] Flaherty, Anne (2007-04-05). "Dems call for review of Bush appointment" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20070410205839/ http:/ / www.seattlepi. com/ national/ 1151AP_Bush_Outflanking_Congress. html). Seattle Post-Intelligencer. Archived from the original (http:/ / www.seattlepi. com/ national/ 1151AP_Bush_Outflanking_Congress. html) on 2007-04-10. .

[88] Conason, Joe (2004-08-06). "Republicans' Dishonorable Charge" (http:/ / dir. salon. com/ story/ opinion/ conason/ 2004/ 08/ 06/mccain_on_swift_boat_veterans/ index. html). opinion. Salon. . Retrieved 2007-04-01.

[89] Clift, Eleanor (2004-08-27). "Fighting a Phony War" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20070205200516/ http:/ / www. msnbc. msn. com/ id/5772260/ site/ newsweek/ ). Newsweek. Archived from the original (http:/ / www. msnbc. msn. com/ id/ 5772260/ site/ newsweek/ ) on2007-02-05. . Retrieved 2007-04-01.

[90] "Bush Advisors Say Campaign Won't Question Kerry's Service" (http:/ / www. usnews. com/ usnews/ politics/ bulletin/ archive/bull040816e. htm). US News & World Report. 2004-08-16. . Retrieved 2007-04-02.

[91] "Kerry Strikes Back Against Vietnam Criticism" (http:/ / www. foxnews. com/ story/ 0,2933,129387,00. html). Fox News. Associated Press.2004-08-20. . Retrieved 2007-04-02.

[92] Fournier, Ron (2004-08-19). "Kerry accuses Bush of relying on front groups to 'do his dirty work' on Vietnam" (http:/ / www.signonsandiego. com/ news/ politics/ federal/ 20040819-1432-kerry-war. html). Associated Press. . Retrieved 2007-04-02.

[93] "Bush urges Kerry to condemn attack ads" (http:/ / www. cnn. com/ 2004/ ALLPOLITICS/ 08/ 23/ bush. kerry/ ). CNN. 2004-08-24. .Retrieved 2007-04-01.

[94] "Volunteer links 'Swift Boat Veterans for Truth' flier to Bush" (http:/ / www. usatoday. com/ news/ politicselections/ nation/ president/2004-08-20-swift-boat-flier_x. htm). USA Today. 2004-08-24. . Retrieved 2007-04-01.

[95] Milbank, Dana (2004-08-02). "Bush Campaign Drops Swift Boat Ad Figure" (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ articles/A22957-2004Aug22. html). Washington Post. pp. A13. . Retrieved 2007-04-02.

[96] "President George W. Bush-Campaign Organization, Florida" (http:/ / www. gwu. edu/ ~action/ 2004/ bush/ bushorgfl. html). Democracy inAction. . Retrieved 2007-04-30.

[97] Bush, Jeb (2005-01-19). "Dear Colonel Day" (http:/ / www. thedemocraticdaily. com/ JebBushSwiftBoatLetter. jpg) (jpg). letter.thedemocraticdaily.com. . Retrieved 2007-04-30.

[98] Democracy 21, et al. (2004-08-10). "Complaint against Swift Boat Veterans for Truth (SBVT)" (http:/ / eqs. nictusa. com/ eqsdocs/000058CD. pdf) (PDF). complaint. FEC. . Retrieved 2007-04-03.

[99] "Campaign watchdog groups file complaint over anti-Kerry ad" (http:/ / www. usatoday. com/ news/ politicselections/ nation/ president/2004-08-10-anti-kerry-ad-complaint_x. htm). USA Today. 2004-08-10. . Retrieved 2007-04-02.

[100] Kerry-Edwards 2004 (2004-08-23). "Complaint against SBVT, President George W. Bush, etc." (http:/ / eqs. nictusa. com/ eqsdocs/000058A8. pdf) (PDF). complaint. FEC. . Retrieved 2007-04-03.

[101] "Kerry files FEC complaint against swift boat group" (http:/ / edition. cnn. com/ 2004/ ALLPOLITICS/ 08/ 20/ kerry. swiftboat/ ). CNN.2004-08-21. . Retrieved 2007-04-02.

[102] "Speaking of the Truth" (http:/ / replay. waybackmachine. org/ 20050417133340/ http:/ / www. abcnews. go. com/ sections/ politics/TheNote/ TheNote_Aug2304. html). The Note (ABC News). August 23, 2004. Archived from the original (http:/ / www. abcnews. go. com/sections/ politics/ TheNote/ TheNote_Aug2304. html) on April 17, 2005. .

[103] "Swift Boats and the Texas Nexus" (http:/ / query. nytimes. com/ gst/ fullpage. html?res=9D02EFD6153EF936A1575BC0A9629C8B63).NY Times. 2004-08-25. . Retrieved 2008-03-28.

Swift Vets and POWs for Truth 65

[104] Federal Election Commission (2006-12-13). "Conciliation Agreement - MURs 5511 and 5525" (http:/ / eqs. nictusa. com/ eqsdocs/000058ED. pdf) (PDF). ruling. FEC. . Retrieved 2007-04-03.

[105] http:/ / eqs. nictusa. com/ eqs/ terms. html[106] "FEC collects $630,000 in civil penalties from three 527 organizations" (http:/ / www. fec. gov/ press/ press2006/ 20061213murs. html)

(Press release). Federal Election Commission. 2006-12-13. . Retrieved 2007-04-03.[107] "Frequently Asked Questions" (http:/ / horse. he. net/ ~swiftpow/ index. php?topic=FAQ). self-published. Swift Vets and POWs for Truth.

2004-06-30. . Retrieved 2007-04-03.[108] Scarborough, Rowan (2004-10-18). "Records indicate Kerry did his duty" (http:/ / washingtontimes. com/ national/

20041018-124856-1545r. htm). Washington Times. . Retrieved 2007-04-03.[109] "You saw them here first" (http:/ / www. powerlineblog. com/ archives/ 010795. php). blog. Powerline. 2005-06-20. . Retrieved

2007-04-03.[110] Gerstein, Josh (2005-06-21). "Kerry Grants Three Reporters Broad Access to Navy Records" (http:/ / www. nysun. com/ article/ 15790).

NY Sun. . Retrieved 2007-04-03.[111] Kranish, Michael (2005-06-07). "Kerry allows Navy release of military, medical records" (http:/ / www. boston. com/ news/ nation/

washington/ articles/ 2005/ 06/ 07/ kerry_allows_navy_release_of_military_medical_records/ ). Boston Globe. . Retrieved 2007-04-03.[112] Braun, Stephen (2005-06-08). "Kerry Makes His Military, Medical File Available" (http:/ / pqasb. pqarchiver. com/ latimes/ access/

850613301. html?dids=850613301:850613301& FMT=ABS& FMTS=ABS:FT& type=current& date=Jun+ 8,+ 2005& author=Stephen+Braun& pub=Los+ Angeles+ Times& edition=& startpage=A. 17& desc=THE+ NATION). LA Times. pp. A17. . Retrieved 2007-04-04.

[113] "CREW FOIAs White House Contacts With Swift Boat Veterans Group" (http:/ / www. citizensforethics. org/ node/ 19140).Citizensforethics.org. . Retrieved 2010-05-28.

[114] "Admiral Roy F. Hoffmann Foundation" (http:/ / admhoffmannfoundation. com). pub info retrieval. . Retrieved 2008-05-30.[115] "Admiral Roy Hoffman Foundation Tax Exempt/NonProfit Organization Information" (http:/ / www. taxexemptworld. com/ organization.

asp?tn=346410). pub info retrieval. Taxexemptworld.com. . Retrieved 2007-04-08.[116] Swift Boat Vets and POWs for Truth (2006-03-31). "Form 8872 2006 First Quarterly Report" (http:/ / forms. irs. gov/ politicalOrgsSearch/

search/ Print. action?formId=22224& formType=E72) (PDF). IRS. . Retrieved 2007-04-04.[117] "Swift Boat Contributions Floated To Foundations, Disney Resort" (http:/ / www. wisdc. org/ blog/ 2006/ 04/

swift-boat-contributions-floated-to. html). blog. Wisconsin Democracy Campaign. 2006-04-20. . Retrieved 2007-04-04.[118] Johnson, Dave (2006-07-17). "The Swiftboaters Are Back in the Water" (http:/ / www. huffingtonpost. com/ dave-johnson/

the-swiftboaters-are-back_b_25223. html). Huffington Post. . Retrieved 2007-04-04.[119] Kesler, Bruce (2006-07-17). "Kerry "Patriot Project" Punks" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20061028122607/ http:/ / www.

democracy-project. com/ archives/ 002664. html). blog. Democracy-project.com. Archived from the original (http:/ / www.democracy-project. com/ archives/ 002664. html) on 2006-10-28. . Retrieved 2007-04-04.

[120] "The Swift Boating of Cindy Sheehan" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2005/ 08/ 21/ opinion/ 21rich. html?pagewanted=1) Editorial by FrankRich, August 21, 2005 New York Times

[121] McMichael, William H. (2006-08-14). "Former SEAL wages campaign to defeat Murtha" (http:/ / www. armytimes. com/ legacy/ new/1-292925-2035074. php). Army Times. . Retrieved 2007-03-30.

External links• Swift Vets and POWs for Truth (http:/ / www. swiftvets. com/ )• SBVT advertisement archive (http:/ / www. swiftvets. com/ index. php?topic=Ads)• "John Kerry in Vietnam" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20040727101253/ http:/ / www. johnkerry. com/ about/

john_kerry/ service. html)• "John Kerry Military Records" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20040606071703/ www. johnkerry. com/ about/

military_records. html)

Swift Vets and POWs for Truth 66

Further reading• O'Neill, John and Jerome Corsi, Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry (http:/ /

books. google. com/ books?id=KJdvc1lBZzgC& printsec=frontcover& source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage& q& f=false), Regnery Publishing, 2004. ISBN 0-89526-017-4

• Swett, Scott and Tim Ziegler, To Set The Record Straight: How Swift Boat Veterans, POWs and the New MediaDefeated John Kerry (http:/ / www. tosettherecordstraight. com), New American Media Publishing, 2008. ISBN978-0-9799841-5-0

MoveOn.org 67

MoveOn.org

MoveOn

Formation 1998

Membership 5 Million [1]

Website www.MoveOn.org [2]

MoveOn is an American non-profit, progressive[1] or liberal[3] [4] public policy advocacy group and political actioncommittee, which has raised millions of dollars for candidates it identifies as "moderates" or "progressives" in theUnited States. It was formed in 1998 in response to the impeachment of President Bill Clinton by the U.S. House ofRepresentatives.[1]

StructureThe MoveOn board is co-chaired by Joan Blades and Wes Boyd. Carrie Olson is Chief Operating Officer and aboard member. Eli Pariser serves as Board President. Justin Ruben is Executive Director.MoveOn comprises two legal entities, each organized under a different section of U.S. tax and election laws.MoveOn.org Civic Action is a 501(c)(4) nonprofit corporation,[5] [6] [7] [8] and was formerly known as MoveOn.org.MoveOn Civic Action focuses on education and advocacy on national issues. MoveOn.org Political Action is afederal political action committee, and was formerly known as MoveOn PAC. It contributes to the campaigns ofmany candidates across the country. MoveOn calls the legal structure of MoveOn Civic Action that of "a Californianonprofit public benefit corporation" and MoveOn.org Political Action that of "a California nonprofit mutual benefitcorporation," and refers to both corporations collectively as "MoveOn".[9]

HistoryMoveOn started in 1998 as an e-mail group, MoveOn.org, created by software entrepreneurs Joan Blades and WesBoyd, the married cofounders of Berkeley Systems. They started by passing around a petition asking Congress to"censure President Clinton and move on", as opposed to impeaching him. The petition, passed around by word ofmouth, was extremely successful; ultimately, they had half a million signatures.[10] The couple went on to startsimilar campaigns calling for arms inspections rather than an invasion of Iraq, reinstatement of lower limits onarsenic and mercury pollution, and campaign finance reform.Since 1998, MoveOn has raised millions of dollars for many Democratic candidates.[11] In November 2007, a drivespearheaded by MoveOn caused Facebook to change its controversial new "Beacon" program, which notifiedFacebook users about purchases by people on their friends list.[12] As of 2009, MoveOn claims a membership of 5.2million, with 20 full-time and 20 part-time staffers.Since the 2000 election cycle, the MoveOn PAC has endorsed and supported the campaigns of candidates, includingthe 2008 candidacy of then-Senator Barack Obama, presidential candidate, nominee of the Democratic Party.[13]

MoveOn.org 68

Communication methodsThe MoveOn.org web site also uses multi-media, including videos, audio downloads, and images. In addition tocommunicating via the Internet, MoveOn advertises using traditional print and broadcast media, as well asbillboards, bus signs, and bumper stickers, digital versions of which are downloadable from its web site. It alsocontains an area called the "Action Forum", which functions much like a traditional electronic discussion group. TheAction Forums acts as a grassroots organization allowing members to propose priorities and strategies.[14]

Through this grassroots methodology, MoveOn collaborates with groups like Meetup.com in organizing streetdemonstrations, bake sales, house parties, and other opportunities for people to meet personally and act collectivelyin their own communities.[15]

Changes in federal election laws have also impacted groups like MoveOn. The McCain-Feingold Campaign FinanceReform legislation, which went into effect in 2002, allowed political parties to raise larger amounts of "hard money"contributions, but were forbidden from raising "soft money". MoveOn, like many other political organizations whichsought to influence the 2004 election, was able to circumvent this legislation using a 527 group, which becameinactive in 2005 and closed in 2008.[16]

In preparation for the 2006 midterm elections, MoveOn created a new system for soliciting potential voters namedCall for Change. As part of the Call for Change effort, registered voters in key voting districts were contacted byMoveOn members, who placed over 7 million phone calls as part of the effort.[17]

Financial contributorsAccording to an article in the Washington Post dated March 10, 2004:

"The Democratic 527 organizations have drawn support from some wealthy liberals determined todefeat Bush. They include financier George Soros who gave $1.46 million to MoveOn.org Voter Fund(in the form of matching funds to recruit additional small donors); Peter B. Lewis, chief executive of theProgressive Corp., who gave $500,000 to MoveOn.org Voter Fund; and Linda Pritzker, of the Hyatthotel family, and her Sustainable World Corp., who gave $4 million to the joint fundraisingcommittee."[18]

MoveOn.org ceased receiving any donations to its 527 after the 2004 election, and closed the 527 permanently in2008. MoveOn's primary source of funding is its members. MoveOn.org raised nearly 60 million dollars in 2004from its members, with an average donation of $50.

ControversyMoveOn was criticized by the Anti-Defamation League, among others, when a member-submitted ad which drewparallels between President George W. Bush and Adolf Hitler was submitted to their online ad contest "Bush in 30Seconds". The ad was part of an online MoveOn-sponsored contest, "Bush in 30 Seconds", during the 2004presidential election, in which members were invited to create and submit political ads challenging President Bushand his administration.[19] [20] The advertisement was quickly pulled off the website.[19]

Fox News criticized the organization after it successfully encouraged the 2008 Democratic Presidential Candidatesnot to attend two debates sponsored by the network. Fox News advisor David Rhodes and the network'scommentators Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly have also made accusations that MoveOn.org "owns" the DemocraticParty and George Soros owns MoveOn.org.[21] [22] This stems from a 2004 e-mail composed by Eli Pariser, amongothers, stating that, in regards to the Democratic Party: "Grassroots contributors like us ... bought it, we own it, andwe're going to take it back."[23]

MoveOn was criticized by 31 Republican senators and one independent senator for running a print ad in The New York Times that questioned the personal integrity of General David Petraeus, with headlines such as "General

MoveOn.org 69

Petraeus or General Betray Us?" and "Cooking the Books for the White House".[24] On September 20, 2007, theSenate passed an amendment by Republican John Cornyn III of Texas designed to "strongly condemn personalattacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus". All forty-nine Republican Senators, as well as twenty-twoDemocratic Senators, voted in support. The House passed a similar resolution by a 341-79 vote on September 26,2007.[25]

On September 20, 2007, The Washington Post stated: "Democrats blamed the group Moveon.org for givingmoderate Republicans a ready excuse for staying with Bush and for giving Bush and his supporters a way to divertattention away from the war."[26] [27] [28]

The New York Times public editor Clark Hoyt later stated in an op-ed that MoveOn was mistakenly chargedUS$77,000 less for the ad than it should have been under Times policies,[29] and MoveOn announced that it wouldpay The New York Times the difference in price.[30]

MoveOn.org ran more ads using a 'betrayal' theme, with TV spots targeting former President Bush and formerPresidential candidate Rudy Giuliani specifically.[31] [32] Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani ran hisown full-page ad [33] in The New York Times on September 14, 2007.[34] [35] [36] Giuliani asked for and received asimilar reduced fee as Moveon.org, paying US$65,000.[37] [38]

Google and MoveOn have been accused of selective adherence to trademark law for removing ads from GoogleAdwords for Maine Senator Susan Collins, citing infringement of MoveOn trademarks.[39] [40] Wired stated onOctober 15, 2007 that the "left-leaning political advocacy group, MoveOn.org, is backing down" and will allowGoogle to show the ads. Moveon.org communications director Jennifer Lindenauer said: "We don't want to support apolicy that denies people freedom of expression."[41]

On June 17, 2008, MoveOn emailed its members stating that it had produced "the most effective TV ad we've evercreated."[42] The ad depicts a mother telling Republican and former presidential nominee John McCain that she willnot let him use her infant son, Alex, as a soldier in the war in Iraq. Subsequent to the ad's release, Jon Stewart, hostof The Daily Show, "praised" MoveOn for "10 years of making even people who agree with you cringe."[43] NewYork Times op/ed contributor Bill Kristol criticized the ad in an essay, including pointing to the fact that the "UnitedStates has an all-volunteer Army. Alex won’t be drafted, and his mommy can’t enlist him. He can decide when he’san adult whether he wants to serve."[44]

Books• MoveOn. (2004). MoveOn's 50 Ways to Love Your Country. Maui, Hawaii: Inner Ocean Pub..

ISBN 1-930722-29-X.• Laura Dawn (ed.), ed (2006). It Takes a Nation: How Strangers Became Family in the Wake of Hurricane

Katrina. foreword by Barack Obama, photographs by C.B. Smith. Earth Aware. ISBN 1-932771-86-7.

References[1] "About the MoveOn Family of Organizations" (http:/ / moveon. org/ about. html). MoveOn.org. . Retrieved 2010-03-01. "With 5 million

members across America..."[2] http:/ / www. moveon. org[3] Herszenhorn, David M. (September 21, 2007). "Senate Approves Resolution Denouncing MoveOn.org Ad" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/

2007/ 09/ 21/ us/ politics/ 21moveon. html?ref=us). The New York Times. . Retrieved 2010-05-13.[4] Associated Press (2010-08-19). "MSNBC rejects anti-Target ad from liberal group" (http:/ / www. startribune. com/ politics/ state/

101081999. html). StarTribune.com. . Retrieved 2010-12-30.[5] "§ 501. Exemption from tax on corporations, certain trusts, etc." (http:/ / www. law. cornell. edu/ uscode/ 26/ 501(c). html). .[6] "About the MoveOn Family of Organizations" (http:/ / moveon. org/ about. html). MoveOn.org. . Retrieved 2010-03-08. "MoveOn.org Civic

Action, a 501(c)(4) nonprofit organization"[7] "Social Welfare Organizations" (http:/ / www. irs. gov/ charities/ nonprofits/ article/ 0,,id=96178,00. html). irs.gov. . Retrieved 2010-03-08.

"a section 501(c)(4) social welfare organization may further its exempt purposes through lobbying as its primary activity without jeopardizingits exempt status"

MoveOn.org 70

[8] "How to Form a 501(c)(3) Nonprofit Corporation - Free Legal Information" (http:/ / www. nolo. com/ legal-encyclopedia/ article-30228.html). Nolo. 2009-09-18. . Retrieved 2010-12-30.

[9] "MoveOn Volunteer Confidentiality and Nondisclosure Agreement" (http:/ / www. moveon. org/ volunteer/ nondisclosure. html).Moveon.org. . Retrieved 2010-12-30.

[10] "MoveOn as an Instrument of the People", AlterNet, June 25, 2004. Retrieved from http:/ / www. alternet. org/ story/ 19043[11] Baon, Perry Jr. (2007-09-21). "MoveOn Unfazed By Furor Over Ad" (http:/ / www. wibw. com/ home/ headlines/ 9917556. html).

Washington Post. . Retrieved 2010-04-26.[12] Liedtke, Michael (2007-11-30). "Facebook revamps new advertising system", Associated Press, November 30, 2007. Retrieved from http:/ /

hosted. ap. org/ dynamic/ stories/ F/ FACEBOOK_ABOUT_FACE?SITE=WIMIL& SECTION=HOME& TEMPLATE=DEFAULT.[13] "MoveOn Endorsement Throws Progressive Weight Behind Barack Obama" (http:/ / moveon. org/ press/ pr/ obamaendorsementrelease.

html) (Press release). MoveOn.org. 2008-02-01. . Retrieved 2008-02-01.[14] "MoveOn.org becomes anti-Bush powerhouse" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20060909223525/ http:/ / www. cnn. com/ 2004/ TECH/

internet/ 01/ 12/ moveon. org. ap/ ). CNN. 2004-01-13. Archived from the original (http:/ / www. cnn. com/ 2004/ TECH/ internet/ 01/ 12/moveon. org. ap/ ) on September 9, 2006. . Retrieved 2006-10-23.

[15] Hazen, Don (2003-02-11). "Moving On: A New Kind of Peace Activism" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20061018055519/ http:/ / www.alternet. org/ story. html?StoryID=15163). AlterNet. Archived from the original (http:/ / www. alternet. org/ story. html?StoryID=15163) on2006-10-18. . Retrieved 2006-10-23.

[16] Johnson, Sasha (2008-06-20). MoveOn.org shutters its 527. Retrieved from http:/ / politicalticker. blogs. cnn. com/ 2008/ 06/ 20/moveonorg-shutters-its-527/ .

[17] "MoveOn.org Political Action: Democracy in Action" (http:/ / pol. moveon. org/ 2006report/ ). Pol.moveon.org. . Retrieved 2010-02-25.[18] "Democrats Forming Parallel Campaign" (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ articles/ A44513-2004Mar9_2. html). Washington

Post. 2004-03-10. . Retrieved 2007-09-25.[19] "Hitler Ad Should Never Have Appeared On MoveOn.org" (http:/ / www. adl. org/ PresRele/ HolNa_52/ 4435_52. htm). . Retrieved

2008-04-07.[20] "PR Newswire: Public Interest Services" (http:/ / www. prnewswire. com/ publicinterest/ ). . Retrieved 2007-09-25.[21] Hennessey, Kathleen (March 9, 2007). "Nevada Democrats cancel candidate debate co-hosted by Fox News" (http:/ / www. lasvegassun.

com/ sunbin/ stories/ nevada/ 2007/ mar/ 09/ 030910456. html). Las Vegas Sun. . Retrieved 2007-09-30[22] "Dems cancel debate over Fox chief's Obama joke" (http:/ / www. cnn. com/ 2007/ POLITICS/ 03/ 10/ debate. canceled/ index. html). CNN.

2007-03-10. . Retrieved 2007-09-25.[23] Johnson, Ben (2004-12-10). "MoveOn: "We Bought" the Democratic Party" (http:/ / www. frontpagemag. com/ Articles/ Read.

aspx?GUID=89BC7BB2-298F-4B8D-99DF-A9EA273A0559). FrontPage Magazine. . Retrieved 2007-09-25.[24] "GOP calls on top Senate Dem to condemn anti-Petraeus ad" (http:/ / www. cnn. com/ 2007/ POLITICS/ 09/ 10/ petraeus. moveon/ index.

html). CNN. 2007-09-10. . Retrieved 2007-09-25.[25] (http:/ / ap. google. com/ article/ ALeqM5icjoZfw9cxthDHzemr2CBJn0hSQg)[26] Bacon Jr, Perry (2007-09-21). "MoveOn Unmoved By Furor Over Ad Targeting Petraeus - washingtonpost.com" (http:/ / www.

washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ content/ article/ 2007/ 09/ 20/ AR2007092001005. html?nav=hcmodule). washingtonpost.com<!. . Retrieved2010-02-25.

[27] Flaherty, Anne (2007-09-20). "Senate Condemns "General Betray Us" Ad" (http:/ / www. breitbart. com/ article. php?id=D8RPBHO80&show_article=1). Associated Press. . Retrieved 2007-09-25.

[28] Marre, Klaus (2007-09-26). "House overwhelmingly condemns MoveOn ad" (http:/ / thehill. com/ leading-the-news/house-overwhelmingly-condemns-moveon-ad-2007-09-26. html). The Hill. . Retrieved 2007-09-26.

[29] Hoyt, Mark (2007-09-23). "Betraying Its Own Best Interests" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2007/ 09/ 23/ opinion/ 23pubed. html?_r=2&n=Top/ Opinion/ The Public Editor& oref=slogin& oref=slogin). The New York Times. .

[30] Vekshin, Alison (2007-09-23). "MoveOn.org Says It Will Pay Times More for Controversial Ad" (http:/ / www. bloomberg. com/ apps/news?pid=20601087& sid=awa2v3hs. xJE& refer=home). Bloomberg.com. . Retrieved 2007-09-25.

[31] "Anger over 'Betray Us' Ad Simmers on Hill" (http:/ / www. npr. org/ templates/ story/ story. php?storyId=14623512) in NPR[32] "Putting the moves on MoveOn.org" (http:/ / www. thestar. com/ News/ World/ article/ 259511) in The Toronto Star[33] http:/ / www. nysun. com/ pics/ 62696_main_large. jpg[34] "Giuliani Plans Full-Page Ad Defending Petraeus - washingtonpost.com" (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ content/ article/

2007/ 09/ 13/ AR2007091302379. html). washingtonpost.com<!. 2007-09-14. . Retrieved 2010-02-25.[35] Seelye, Katharine Q. (2007-09-14). "Angered by an Antiwar Ad, Giuliani Seeks Equal Space" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2007/ 09/ 14/

us/ politics/ 14paper. html?_r=1& ref=politics& oref=slogin). The New York Times. . Retrieved 2010-05-13.[36] "Rudy Blasts Hillary Again Over MoveOn Ad, Giuliani Continues To Call For Clinton To Denounce Petraeus Ad, Apologize - CBS News"

(http:/ / www. cbsnews. com/ stories/ 2007/ 09/ 17/ politics/ main3268035. shtml?source=RSSattr=HOME_3268035). CBS News<!.2007-09-17. . Retrieved 2010-02-25.

[37] Seelye, Katharine Q. (2007-09-14). "Giuliani slams New York Times over anti-Petraeus ad - The Boston Globe" (http:/ / www. boston. com/news/ nation/ articles/ 2007/ 09/ 14/ giuliani_slams_times_over_anti_petraeus_ad/ ). Boston.com. . Retrieved 2010-02-25.

[38] "General Petraeus ad nets Giuliani big bucks from donors" (http:/ / www. nydailynews. com/ news/ wn_report/ 2007/ 09/ 15/2007-09-15_general_petraeus_ad_nets_giuliani_big_bu. html). Nydailynews.com. 2007-09-15. . Retrieved 2010-02-25.

MoveOn.org 71

[39] "Sen. Susan Collins' Web Ads Run Up Against Google, MoveOn.org - Politics | Republican Party | Democratic Party | Political Spectrum"(http:/ / www. foxnews. com/ story/ 0,2933,301267,00. html). FOXNews.com. 2007-10-12. . Retrieved 2010-02-25.

[40] Chavez, Pablo (2007-10-12). "Google Public Policy Blog: Our advertising policies and political speech" (http:/ / googlepublicpolicy.blogspot. com/ 2007/ 10/ our-advertising-policies-and-political. html). Googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com. . Retrieved 2010-02-25.

[41] Stirland, Sarah Lai (2007-10-15). "Reverses: Allows Critical Ads on Google" (http:/ / www. wired. com/ politics/ onlinerights/ news/ 2007/10/ moveon). wired.com. .

[42] "Baby's mom tells McCain in new ad: "You can't have him"" (http:/ / www. bleedingheartland. com/ showDiary. do?diaryId=1561).Bleedingheartland.com. . Retrieved 2010-02-25.

[43] Kakutani, Michiko (2008-08-17). "Television: Is Jon Stewart the Most Trusted Man in America?" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2008/ 08/17/ arts/ television/ 17kaku. html?_r=1& pagewanted=all). The New York Times. . Retrieved 2010-05-13.

[44] Kristol, William (2008-06-23). "Op-Ed Columnist: Someone Else’s Alex" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2008/ 06/ 23/ opinion/ 23kristol.html). The New York Times. . Retrieved 2010-05-13.

External links• Official website (http:/ / www. moveon. org)• Open Secrets: Advocacy Group Spending (http:/ / www. opensecrets. org/ 527s/ 527cmtedetail.

asp?ein=200234065& cycle=2006& format=& tname=MoveOn. org) MoveOn's spending as an advocacy group("data is based on records released by the Internal Revenue Service on Monday, October 23, 2006").

College Republicans 72

College Republicans

College Republican National Committee

National Chairman Alex Schriver

National Co-Chairman Alex Smith

Treasurer Alex Levin

Secretary Nick Maddux

Founded 1892

Headquarters Washington, D.C.

Mother party Republican Party

International affiliation International Young Democrat Union

Website www.crnc.org [1]

The College Republican National Committee is a national organization for college and university students whosupport the Republican Party of the United States.[2] The organization is known as an active recruiting tool for theRepublican Party and has produced many prominent Republican and conservative activists and introduced moreparty members to the Republican party than any other organization in the nation.[3]

The organizational structure of the College Republicans has changed significantly since its founding in 1892.Originally founded as an organization for the Republican National Committee, the College Republicans now operateas an independent 527 group.

Governance

College Republican National CommitteeThe College Republican National Committee (CRNC), is the national steering organization and oversight body forall 50 state federations, 1,500 campus chapters, and 250,000 College Republicans in the country.[4] [5] The CRNCNational Chairman and his or her national leadership team, including an executive director, political director, financedirector, comptroller, national field director, national treasurer, national secretary, and 4 regional vice-presidents, areelected at the bi-annual College Republican Convention and are assisted by a full-time office staff.[5]

College Republicans 73

State federationsThere are 51 College Republican state federations, each administering the College Republican activities at the statelevel (ex. Texas College Republicans), and in the District of Columbia. The state federation leadership team, whichincludes a state chairperson and other officers, serve as the primary link between local university chapters and thenational College Republican National Committee.[4] The state chairman serves as the representative for CollegeRepublicans when dealing with the state Republican Party, local media, and governmental entities. State federationsare responsible for organizing and assisting local chapters with securing proper credentials, recruitment efforts, andcampus voter canvasses.[4] It is a state federation's responsibility to organize and implement activities for state-widecampaigns.[4] Like the national organization, state federations operate as non-profit associations that are not legallyaffiliated with the Republican Party.[4] The University of Georgia maintains the largest chapter of CollegeRepublicans in the United States.

Campus chapters

A campus chapter meeting at Ohio State University.

The college and university-based chapters of the CollegeRepublicans operate in a dual capacity as student clubs associatedwith a particular campus and as members of their state federationand the College Republican National Committee.[4] Like the statefederations and national committee, the campus chapters areaffiliated with their local Republican Party, but are not officialarms of that organization.[4] The chapter chairperson andleadership team are responsible for maintaining the campus club'scredentials and constitution, and representing the CollegeRepublicans when dealing with university administration, otherstudent groups, and in the surrounding community.[4] The campuschapter leadership team might include many members, withadministrative responsibilities delegated to dormitory and Greek chapter chairpersons.[4]

Notable CRsNotable College Republicans have included prominent Republican strategist Lee Atwater, Americans for TaxReform President Grover Norquist, former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum, U.S. Senator Roger Wicker, North CarolinaCongressman Patrick McHenry, conservative activist Morton Blackwell, disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, formerVirginia Governor Jim Gilmore, McCain Campaign Manager Rick Davis, lobbyist and McCain advisor Charles R.Black, Jr., Texas Republican Party Chairman Emeritus Tom Pauken, Christian Coalition executive director andpolitical consultant Ralph E. Reed, Jr., New York political consultant Roger Stone and political consultant JoshuaWorkman. California Republican State Chairman Ron Nehring was President of the College Republicans at BostonUniversity. Former First Lady and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was elected president of her CollegeRepublican chapter at Wellesley College in her freshman year before switching parties due to the war in Vietnam.President Calvin Coolidge is the only College Republican ever to be elected President of the United States. KarlRove, a Senior Bush Advisor and currently a contributor on Fox News Channel is probably one of the most famousCollege Republican leaders, having served as executive director, and then national chairman, of the CRNC duringhis time in the organization.[6]

College Republicans 74

Activities

Recruiting new members at The Ohio State University.

The CRNC organizes election-year field representativeprograms to send paid staffers to recruit and trainstudents and chapters nationwide. Former nationalchair Jack Abramoff founded the field representativeprogram in 1981.[3] The program faltered during the1980s and was revived during the late 1990s.

During the election season, campus chapters areresponsible for organizing and implementing thecampus canvas, running mock elections, managing thelocal get-out-the-vote efforts. At other times, thecampus chapters will organize issue advocacy andlobbying efforts, welcome conservative guest speakersto campus, and organize social events and other recruitment activities.

During the election season, the CRNC focuses on developing a "mass based youth effort" directed toward electingRepublican candidates.[3] The CRNC often sends paid field representatives to individual campuses to assist inorganizing the election efforts. Generally the hired field representative or chapter chair begins the school year withmembership tables on campus for recruitment. Members use door-to-door canvassing and word of mouth to identifyand register as many Republican voters among the student body as possible.[3] These individuals are encouraged tovote through an absentee ballot and assist the candidates with election day Get Out The Vote efforts. Chaptersoccasionally run student mock elections and other special events as a means to gain positive earned media attentionfor a candidate.[3]

History

Founding and early history"There is no such school for political education as the college and university. What is inculcated here penetrates every corner of thecountry where the college man goes. He goes everywhere and where he goes he is a mighty force in making and molding publicsentiment."

William McKinley at the founding of the American Republican College League in 1892.[3]

The College Republicans were founded as the American Republican College League on May 17, 1892 at theUniversity of Michigan.[3] The organization was spear-headed by law student James Francis Burke, who would laterserve as a Congressman from Pennsylvania.[3] The inaugural meeting was attended by over 1,000 students fromacross the county, from Stanford University in the west to Harvard University in the east. Contemporary politiciansalso attended the meeting, including Judge John M. Thurston, Senator Russell A. Alger, Congressman J. SloatFassett, Congressman W. E. Mason, John M. Langston, and Abraham Lincoln's successor in the Illinois StateLegislature, A. J. Lester. Then-Governor of Ohio William McKinley gave a rousing keynote speech.[3]

The College Republicans quickly pursued a strategy of sending college students to vote in their home districts andregistering others to vote where they schooled to swing closely-contested districts.[3] This strategy was successfullyimplemented for the 1900 presidential election between William McKinley and William Jennings Bryan, helpingwin Bryan's home state of Nebraska for McKinley.[3]

The College Republicans were financed, at least in part, by the Republican National Committee throughout much ofits history. James Francis Burke received significant funding from the RNC to support the American RepublicanCollege League's founding and to maintain the organization's early offices in New York and Chicago.[3] By 1924, theorganization was operating directly under the auspices of the RNC as the Associated University Republican Clubs.[3]

College Republicans 75

The relative dominance of the Democratic party through the 1930s through the 1960s coincided with a precipitousdrop in the membership and effectiveness of the College Republicans.[3] In 1931, the College Republicans wereabsorbed as an arm of the Hoover campaign.[7] For the next several years the organization operated alternately underthe auspices of the "Republican National League," "Young Republican National Committee," and the "Division ofYoung Republican Activities."[7] In 1935, the College Republicans were merged into the newly created YoungRepublican National Federation, encompassing both college students and young professionals.[7] College Republicanoperations continued under the Young Republicans until the 1965 founding of the "College Republican NationalCommittee."[7]

Modern historyIn 1967, Morton Blackwell, then a field representative for the CRNC to Kentucky, developed many of the principlesnow used by the College Republicans. As the college organizer supporting Louie Nunn's campaign for Governor ofKentucky, Blackwell organized approximately 5,000 college student volunteers who dropped 93,000 pieces ofliterature, posted 20,000 flyers, mailed 15,000 hand-addressed and signed postcards to friends of known studentsupporters of Nunn, and processed over 8,000 absentee ballots.[3] On election day, Nunn became the first RepublicanGovernor of Kentucky in 20 years. The New York Times and Louie Nunn himself credited the efforts of Blackwell'svolunteers.In 1970, the Young Republican National Federation was permanently spun off from the College Republicans in 1970to prevent counter-productive infighting among the two groups.[3] In 1972 the Republican National Committee madethe College Republican National Committee an auxiliary arm of the RNC.[3]

In 1973, Karl Rove ran for chair of the College Republicans. He challenged the front-runner’s delegates, throwingthe national convention into disarray, after which both he and his opponent, Robert Edgeworth, claimed victory. Thedispute was resolved when Rove was selected through the direct order of the chairman of the Republican NationalCommittee, who at the time was George H W Bush.[8]

"College Republicans are a vital force in conservative politics. You are the vanguard of the Republican Party. I know that thestrength of young people's support for our Party will ensure the continued success of Republican goals as you begin to assumeleadership roles in the Party and in our Nation."

Ronald Reagan to the College Republican National Committee, June 2, 1987[3]

By 1980, only 20 active College Republican chapters remained. By the US Presidential election in 1980, that numberhad increased to 1,000 active clubs, helping Reagan win 98 of 105 mock elections and recruiting thousands of voters.This success led to $290,000 in financial assistance from the RNC, mainly to implement Jack Abramoff's fieldrepresentative program.[3] Abramoff's fund-raising efforts brought in an additional $1,160,000 during the next twoyears. By 1983, only 10% of the CRNC's budget came from the RNC.[3]

Prompted by the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, the CRNC officially left the control of the RNC byreconstituting as a 527 group, allowing it to operate independently and raise unlimited amount of money forissue-advocacy work. As a 527 group, the organization is prohibited from coordinating directly with a particularcampaign and its recent focus has turned towards developing volunteers and other support activities rather thanoutright campaigning. The shift has allowed the CRNC to vastly expand its fundraising efforts. During its first twoyears, the CRNC raised $17.3 million, most going to pay fundraising costs and other administrative costs, whileleaving more than $2 million to expand the field representative program and to improve pay for the full-timepositions.[9]

The University of Georgia maintains the largest chapter of College Republicans in the United States.The CRNC was criticized for its relationship with Response Dynamics, a Virginia-based direct mail company. [10]

The relationship became an issue during the 2005 election for National Chairman, which was won by former CRNCTreasurer, Paul Gourley, whose signature was on the questionable fundraising letters.[11]

College Republicans 76

Morgan Wilkins, a CRNC field representative for election 2006 was placed on probation by the CRNC aftersuggesting several controversial events might be held on the University of Michigan -- Ann Arbor Campus, to thatschool's student newspaper, the Michigan Daily. The events included, "Catch an Illegal Immigrant Day" and "Funwith Guns Day," where students were to shoot cardboard cutouts of prominent Democrats.[12] This incidentultimately became a major news story on several national media outlets.[13] [14] Several sources, including theMichigan Daily incorrectly identified Ms. Wilkins as an employee of the Republican National Committee, ratherthan the CRNC, eliciting an outcry from Democratic National Committee Chairman, Howard Dean.[15] In return,GOP Chairman Ken Mehlman condemned Wilkins' activities, as well as Governor Dean.[16] Keith Olbermannnamed Wilkins his "Worst Person in the World."[17] She was suspended for the incident, and later fired by the CRNCfor later creating a Facebook group in which she promised to make out with individuals who signed up volunteers forget out the vote efforts.[18]

The College Republican National Committee is a member of the International Young Democrat Union.

Gallery

A campus chapter meeting atGeorge Fox University

College Republicans fromUniversity of North Florida rally

for John McCain inJacksonville, Florida

College Republicans from University ofIllinois at Springfield with former White

House Press Secretary Tony Snow at CPAC2008 in Washington, D.C.

References[1] http:/ / www. crnc. org[2] Schor, Elana (2005-07-06). "With College Republicans, Keg Parties Are Smart Strategy" (http:/ / www. webcitation. org/ 5aihZcPFv).

msnbc.com. Archived from the original (http:/ / thehill. com/ old-capital-living/with-college-republicans-keg-parties-are-smart-strategy-2005-07-06. html) on 2008-09-09. . Retrieved 2008-09-09.

[3] Stewart, Scott (2002-06-24). The College Republicans – A Brief History (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20050702072121/ http:/ / www.crnc. org/ admin/ editpage/ downloads/ CRNChistory. pdf). College Republican National Committee. Archived from the original (http:/ /www. crnc. org/ admin/ editpage/ downloads/ CRNChistory. pdf) on 2005-07-02. . Retrieved 2008-09-04.

[4] Stewart, Scott (Fall 2002). College Republicans Chapter Manual (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20040613020411/ http:/ / www. crnc. org/resources/ chapter_manual. pdf). College Republican National Committee. Archived from the original (http:/ / www. crnc. org/ resources/chapter_manual. pdf) on 2004-06-13. . Retrieved 2008-09-27.

[5] "The CRNC Team" (http:/ / www. crnc. org/ team. php). College Republican National Committee. . Retrieved 2008-09-19.[6] Dedman, Bill (2007-05-09). "Reading Hillary Clinton's hidden thesis" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20070304065006/ http:/ / www.

msnbc. msn. com/ id/ 17388372/ ). msnbc.com. Archived from the original (http:/ / www. msnbc. msn. com/ id/ 17388372/ ) on 2007-03-04. .Retrieved 2008-04-16.

[7] Stewart, Scott (2002-06-24). "The National Chairmen of the College Republicans" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20030316084456/ www.crnc. org/ resources/ CRNCchairmen. pdf) (PDF). College Republican National Committee. Archived from the original (http:/ / www. crnc.org/ resources/ CRNCchairmen. pdf) on 2003-03-16. . Retrieved 2008-09-19.

[8] Goodman, Amy (2007-08-14). "Rove’s Science of Dirty Tricks" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20071017021158/ http:/ / www. truthdig.com/ report/ item/ 20070814_roves_science_of_dirty_tricks/ ). Truthdig. Archived from the original (http:/ / www. truthdig. com/ report/ item/20070814_roves_science_of_dirty_tricks/ ) on 2007-10-17. . Retrieved 2008-09-03.

[9] Edsall, Thomas (2005-06-23). "Money Raises the Stakes For College Republicans" (http:/ / www. webcitation. org/ 5axU72iHs). WashingtonPost. Archived from the original (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ content/ article/ 2005/ 06/ 22/ AR2005062202060_pf. html) on2008-09-19. . Retrieved 2008-09-19.

College Republicans 77

[10] O'Donnell, Meghan (2003-09-25). "Young Money: College Republicans show how to play the fund-raising game" (http:/ / projects.publicintegrity. org/ 527/ report. aspx?aid=10). Center for Public Integrity. . Retrieved 2008-09-19.

[11] Brunner, Jim (2004-11-29). "Some College Republicans regret donors were "misled"" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20041122035749/http:/ / seattletimes. nwsource. com/ html/ localnews/ 2002096448_republicans20m. html). The Seattle Times. Archived from the original(http:/ / seattletimes. nwsource. com/ html/ localnews/ 2002096448_republicans20m. html) on 2004-11-22. . Retrieved 2008-04-16.

[12] Grossman, Andrew (2006-09-12). "College Dems, Republicans gear up for election season" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/20080123215653/ http:/ / media. www. michigandaily. com/ media/ storage/ paper851/ news/ 2006/ 09/ 12/ CampusLife/ College. Dems.Republicans. Gear. Up. For. Election. Season-2267212. shtml). Michigan Daily. Archived from the original (http:/ / www. michigandaily.com/ content/ college-dems-republicans-gear-election-season) on 2008-01-23. . Retrieved 2008-04-16.

[13] "Dems Blast 'Catch an Illegal Immigrant' Campaign on College Campus" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20061209194541/ http:/ / www.foxnews. com/ story/ 0,2933,213406,00. html). FOXNews.com. 2006-09-12. Archived from the original (http:/ / www. foxnews. com/ story/0,2933,213406,00. html) on 2006-12-09. . Retrieved 2008-09-19.

[14] Domsic, Melissa (2006-11-01). "'Catch an immigrant' game fires up debate on campuses" (http:/ / www. webcitation. org/ 5ay6XLlX1).CNN.com. Archived from the original (http:/ / www. cnn. com/ 2006/ POLITICS/ 10/ 23/ CNNU. msu. immigrant/ index.html?iref=newssearch) on 2008-09-19. . Retrieved 2008-09-19.

[15] "Governor Dean Writes a Letter" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20071211042424/ http:/ / www. democrats. org/ a/ 2006/ 09/governor_dean_w. php) (Press release). Democratic National Committee. 2006-09-12. Archived from the original (http:/ / www. democrats.org/ a/ 2006/ 09/ governor_dean_w. php) on 2007-12-11. . Retrieved 2008-04-16.

[16] "RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman Responds To DNC Chairman Howard Dean’s Letter" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20061129155646/http:/ / www. gop. com/ News/ Read. aspx?ID=6557) (Press release). Republican National Chairman. 2006-09-12. Archived from the original(http:/ / www. gop. com/ News/ Read. aspx?ID=6557) on 2006-11-29. . Retrieved 2008-04-16.

[17] Olbermann, Keith (2006-09-14). "World's Worst:Fun with Guns?" (http:/ / video. msn. com/ video. aspx?mkt=en-US& brand=msnbc&vid=012f9b2e-4d22-46f9-89a3-c32bf18da21d). msnbc.com. . Retrieved 2008-04-16.

[18] Grossman, Andrew (2006-09-25). "Confessions of a Young Conservative" (http:/ / www. michigandaily. com/ content/confessions-young-conservative). The Michigan Daily. . Retrieved 2008-04-16.

External links• College Republican National Committee (http:/ / www. crnc. org/ ) - official website• College Republican National Committee's IRS Filing Forms (http:/ / forms. irs. gov/ politicalOrgsSearch/ search/

gotoSearchDrillDown. action?pacId='7343'& criteriaName='College+ Republican+ National+ Committee,+ Inc. ')

New Democrat Network 78

New Democrat NetworkThe New Democrat Network is an American think tank that promotesprogressive Democratic candidates, especially those in a more centristvein, although this focus has waxed and waned. NDN is a 501(c)(4)membership organization that functions in conjunction with its twosubsidiary organizations, the NDN Political Fund, a non-federalpolitical organization (527), and NDN PAC, a federal political actioncommittee. As a whole, the organization works to advance the 21stCentury American progressive movement, with particular focus on advocacy, strategy and investment in emergingleaders and projects.

FoundingNDN is led and was founded by Simon Rosenberg in 1996 after his split with the Democratic Leadership Council,for which he worked. Before founding NDN, Rosenberg worked as a television news writer and producer and apolitical strategist for the Michael Dukakis and Bill Clinton presidential campaigns and the Democratic NationalCommittee. NDN has offices in Washington, D.C., New York City, San Francisco, and Miami.

Involvement in the 2004 presidential electionNDN claims that it uses a more technologically modern and grassroots participatory approach to its activities thanthe DLC. The NDN, while not supporting or embracing 2004 Democratic presidential primary candidate HowardDean, has pointed to his online network of small donors, volunteers, and bloggers as the model to emulate for theDemocratic Party. The NDN is now challenging the DLC and is becoming an increasingly influential player in theparty's politics.In the 2004 presidential race, NDN led an effort to turn out Hispanic voters for John Kerry.In 2004, Rosenberg announced his candidacy for Chairman of the Democratic National Committee, but eventuallywithdrew from the race after it became clear that he would lose to eventual Chairman Howard Dean. Rosenberg thensupported Dean's campaign.

Current effortsNDN is currently in the midst of launching two of its premier initiatives for the coming election years: the NewPolitics Institute (NPI) and the Hispanic Project.Working like a conventional policy-oriented think tank, NPI seeks to assemble what it sees to be many of the finestminds in progressive politics, the non-profit world and the private sector in order to study, master, incubate andpromote new strategies, technologies and techniques for the rapidly changing politics of the new century.In 2003 and 2004, the Hispanic Project produced more than twenty commercials on Spanish-language television,radio and Internet that sought to speak directly to America's growing Latino community and highlight the values andideals that they see as the bond between Hispanic voters and progressive causes, and has recently stepped up its adcampaigns and project initiatives in hopes of reclaiming lost ground among those voters as evidenced by theoutcome of the 2004 presidential election.

New Democrat Network 79

External links• Official website [1]

• New Politics Institute website [2]

• NDN's Hispanic Strategy Center website [3]

• Opensecrets.org [4] summary of NDN's PAC contributions in the 2004 cycle• publicintegrity.org Report on NDN's spending [5] by the Center for Public Integrity

References[1] http:/ / www. ndn. org[2] http:/ / www. newpolitics. net/[3] http:/ / www. ndn. org/ hispanic/[4] http:/ / www. opensecrets. org/ pacs/ pacgot. asp?strID=C00385401& Cycle=2004[5] http:/ / www. publicintegrity. org/ 527/ search. aspx?act=com& orgid=420

Club for GrowthThe Club for Growth is a fiscally conservative 527 organization with an affiliated political action committee (PAC)active in the United States of America. The Club advocates limited government, lower taxes, less governmentspending, free trade, and economic libertarianism. Its PAC endorses and raises money for fiscally conservativecandidates.The Club was founded in 1999 by Stephen Moore, and today claims over 55,000 members. The current president isthe former Indiana Congressman, Chris Chocola.

Political initiativesThe Club invented the "RINO Watch" list to monitor "Republican office holders around the nation who haveadvanced egregious anti-growth, anti-freedom or anti-free market policies." (RINO is a pejorative acronym forRepublican In Name Only.) The list has focused on Republicans who voted against tax changes and budget cutssupported by the Club.In addition, the Club for Growth also makes independent expenditures encouraging certain moderate Republicans tovote more conservatively (e.g. running ads against Senators George Voinovich of Ohio, Olympia Snowe of Maine,and Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island after these Senators objected to certain aspects of President Bush's tax cuts).The Club for Growth's website used to feature a "Comrade of the Month" award, which was given to the publicofficial or figure "who best lives up to the policies of big-government redistribution and restrictions on economicfreedom."[1] In March 2009, Barack Obama was named the third "Comrade of the Month" in response to hisproposed $3.6 trillion budget and projections that his economic policies will result in a doubling of the national debtto $12.5 trillion.[2]

Club for Growth 80

Election activitiesOn September 19, 2005, the Federal Election Commission filed suit against the Club for Growth for violations of theFederal Election Campaign Act for failing to register as a political action committee in the 2000, 2002, and 2004congressional elections.[3] In September, 2007 the Club for Growth agreed to pay $350000 in civil penalties andcriticized the FEC for the lawsuit.[4] The agreement, if approved by a federal judge, would mark the end of thelawsuit.

2002 Congressional electionsIn the 2002 Congressional races, 17 out of 19 candidates endorsed by the organization's PAC won. It also endorsedMark Sanford in the South Carolina gubernatorial Republican primary as he defeated Lt. Gov. Bob Peeler.

2004 Congressional electionsIn 2004, the Club for Growth's PAC caused a stir within the Republican Party by endorsing and heavily supportingU.S. Representative Pat Toomey, who challenged incumbent Senator Arlen Specter in the Republican primary inPennsylvania. The organization was reported to have collected contributions totaling over $934,000 for Toomey. Italso spent $1 million on its own independent television advertising campaign on Toomey's behalf. Specter, who hadthe support of President Bush, the RNC, and Sen. Rick Santorum, defeated Toomey by a narrow margin of 51–49%.Afterwards, Toomey accepted the position as President of the Club for Growth which he served as until April 2009.

2006 Congressional electionsAfter a good deal of electoral success in 2004, the Club continued its policy of supporting candidates who support itspositions for federal office, especially during contested primaries. Freshmen U.S. Congressmen Adrian M. Smith(R-NE), Doug Lamborn (R-CO), Bill Sali (R-ID), and Tim Walberg (R-MI) all won their heavily contested primaryelections in large part because of the Club's involvement. In fact, Rep. Walberg defeated moderate incumbentRepublican Congressman Joe Schwarz in the August 2006 Michigan primary. Schwarz was backed by Pres. Bush,Sen. McCain, the NRCC, and almost all of the state's Republican establishment. The Club for Growth criticizedSchwarz for a number of liberal views on fiscal issues including his votes against the elimination of earmarks inappropriations bills and his support of higher taxes while in the Michigan Legislature. He was the only incumbentRepublican congressman defeated in a primary that year. Walberg went on to lose the seat to Democrat MarkSchauer in 2008.The Club successfully supported the reelection of Democratic Congressman Henry Cuellar (D-TX) in a heavilyfought race against former Congressman Ciro Rodriguez. They were less successful in supporting the "Three Mikes"for the US Senate (Mike Bouchard in MI, Mike McGavick in WA, and Michael Steele in MD.) Sharron Angle wasdefeated in Nevada's 2nd Congressional District (CD) in the Republican primary. Angle was the first candidateendorsed by the Club for the 2006 campaign and it spent over a year raising close to one million dollars for her. Theresult was an exceedingly close loss to Dean Heller, who would go on to victory in November 2006. The Clubadditionally supported the losing primary campaigns of Minnesota state senator Phil Krinkie for MN CD 6 andOklahoma state rep. Kevin Calvey for OK CD 5. The winners of those primaries, Michele Bachmann and MaryFallin respectively, both went on to be elected to congress in November. (The Club supported Michele Bachmann forre-election in 2008.) The Club also supported incumbent congressman Chris Chocola in his losing race in Indiana,John Gard's losing effort in WI's CD 8, and Rick O'Donnell's losing effort for the open 7th CD in Colorado. They didsupport the successful reelection of Rep. Steve Chabot in a hard fought OH CD 1 victory.The most high profile race of the year for The Club was their support of conservative Cranston, Rhode Island mayorStephen Laffey against moderate incumbent Senator Lincoln Chafee. Chafee was able to hang on for a 54% to 46%victory in large part because of Democrats that crossed over to vote for him and from the strong aid of Sen. ElizabethDole, the NRSC, President Bush, and the rest of the party's establishment in Rhode Island.

Club for Growth 81

2007 Congressional electionsThe Club endorsed state senator Steve Buehrer in the special election for Ohio CD 5 to replace the deceased Rep.Paul Gillmor. Buehrer however was defeated by Bob Latta, the son of former Rep. Del Latta, in the Republicanprimary in November 2007 by a 44% to 40% margin. Latta went on to defeat the Democrat and be elected tocongress.The Club strongly supported Paul Jost, the chairman of the Virginia chapter of The Club for Growth, in the contestto replace deceased Rep. Jo Ann Davis in Virginia congressional district 1. In the nominating convention howeverJost was defeated by state delegate Rob Wittman. Wittman went on to win the special general election versusDemocrat Phil Forgit and was sworn into congress in December 2007.

2008 Congressional electionsThe Club entered the 2008 election cycle by continuing to fund Republican candidates for Congress that supporttheir stated goals of less taxes, more trade, and smaller government. In most cases the candidates they support are in"conservative" districts that rarely elect Democrats or "liberal" Republicans.

Primary elections

• Maryland CD 1: The Club endorsed state senator Andrew P. Harris against the nine term incumbent, WayneGilchrest. In the Feb. 12th primary Harris surged to a strong 44% to 32% victory. Gilchrest is the secondincumbent Republican to be defeated by a candidate supported by the Club. The first was Rep. Joe Schwarz inMichigan in 2006.[5] Harris was, however, unable to win the general election.

• Pennsylvania CD 10: the Club backed Chris Hackett, who defeated Dan Meuser in the primary on April 22, 2008by 52% to 48%. Chris Hackett was defeated by Chris Carney 56% to 44% in a district that was once consideredsafe for Republicans.

• In California CD 4, open seat: state senator Tom McClintock, who defeated former congressman Doug Ose by53.7% to 38.7% in the June 3, 2008 primary.

• For the open New Mexico senate seat being vacated by Pete Domenici: Congressman Steve Pearce, who defeatedfellow New Mexico U.S. House member Heather Wilson 51% to 49% in the June 3, 2008 primary. (He then lostthe general election to Tom Udall.)

• Georgia CD 10: incumbent Paul Broun who defeated state rep. Barry Fleming 71% to 29% in the July 15, 2008primary election, to the surprise of virtually all observers.[6]

• In Colorado CD 5: incumbent Doug Lamborn, who won 46%–29%–25% in a rematch against two opponents hedefeated in the primary two years previously. In 2006, Lamborn was one of the biggest upset victors supported byThe Club.[7]

• In Arizona CD 5: former Maricopa County Treasurer David Schweikert, who narrowly defeated former candidateSusan Bitter-Smith by 29.9% to 28%; there were three other candidates.[8]

• In Mississippi's 3rd Congressional District (open seat), Charlie Ross, a former state senator. Ross however wasdefeated in the April 1, 2008 primary run-off election by Gregg Harper 57% to 43%.

• In Pennsylvania CD 5 (open seat): The Club endorsed, but did not raise funds for, Matt Shaner. Shaner finished aclose second in the crowded April 22, 2008 primary. Pennsylvania does not have runoff elections.

• In Alabama CD 2 (open seat): state senator Harri Anne Smith's, who placed second. Smith placed second in theJune 3, 2008 primary with 22% of the vote and faced a run-off on July 15, 2008 with State Rep. Jay Love whoearned 35% of the vote. The NRCC and most Republican officials eventually endorsed Smith's opponent, andSmith lost the July 15, 2008 runoff 53% to 47%.[9] Smith would go on to endorse Democrat Bobby Bright overLove in the general election and Bright would narrowly defeat Love.

• In Missouri CD 9 (open seat): state representative Dr. Bob Onder, who lost August 5, 2008 to former state rep.Blaine Luetkemeyer 39% to 31%. The Club made no mention of Onder's defeat on their webpage.[10]

Club for Growth 82

• In an odd twist, The Club ran a series of ads attacking moderate Republican state treasurer Lynn Jenkins in herquest to be elected from Kansas' 2nd congressional district, but yet did not endorse her opponent, former Rep. JimRyun. Jenkins faced a heated battle with the former Congressman Ryun as he was seeking to regain the seat helost in a 2006 upset. The incumbent representative, Democrat Nancy Boyda, was seen by many as the mostvulnerable Democrat in congress and lost in November to Jenkins. On August 5 Jenkins won a narrow 51–49%primary victory over Ryun.[11] The Club made no mention of Ryun's defeat on their webpage.

• Alaska At Large: in the August 26th Republican primary fight between Lt. Governor Sean Parnell and incumbentDon Young, the Club spent close to a million dollars against Young, who has long been labeled a king of porkbarrel politics and is the father of the "Bridge to Nowhere". Parnell lost by just 304 votes out of over 93,000 votescast.[12]

Special elections

• Louisiana CD 1: State Sen. Steve Scalise in the May 3, 2008 special election for Louisiana CD 1 to replace BobbyJindal. Scalise won with 75% of the vote. He had previously defeated Tim Burns in the Republican primary by58% to 42%.

• Louisiana CD 6: (open seat, but previously Republican since 1974, and again after the 2008 general election):Woody Jenkins, who lost the special election Sat. May 3, 2008 to Democrat Don Cazayoux 49% to 46%.Louisiana does not have a runoff for special general elections.

General election

Nine Club-supported candidates won seats in the general election:• Rep. Steve Scalise in Louisiana CD 1 with 66% of the vote.• Rep. Paul Broun's successful reelection campaign in Georgia CD 10 by a 61% to 39% tally.• Rep. John Shadegg's successful reelection campaign in Arizona's 4th CD by 54% to 42%.• Rep. Scott Garrett's successful reelection campaign in New Jersey's 5th CD by a 56% to 42% margin.• Rep. Doug Lamborn's successful reelection campaign for Colorado's 5th CD by a 60% to 37% tally.• Rep. Michele Bachmann's successful reelection campaign in Minnesota's 6th CD by a 47% to 44% margin despite

being a top Democratic target after her controversial remarks on Chris Matthews's Hardball program.• Pete Olson's successful campaign to defeat incumbent Rep. Nick Lampson in Texas' 22nd CD by a 53% to 45%

tally. This was one of five districts that Republicans took from the Democrats.• Mike Coffman's successful campaign to replace retiring incumbent Rep. Tom Tancredo in Colorado's 6th CD by a

60% to 40% total.• Tom McClintock's victory over Democrat Charlie Brown to win California's CD 4 by a 51% to 49% tally. The

seat had been held by retiring Rep. John Doolittle.[13]

• Sen. Saxby Chambliss's 58% to 42% victory over Democrat Jim Martin in the Georgia runoff election ofDecember 2, 2008. Under Georgia law, if a candidate fails to top 50% of the vote, a runoff election is heldbetween the two candidates that received the most votes. Chambliss garnered 49.8% of the vote to Martin's 46%in the November general election and thus a runoff was set. The Club had not endorsed Chambliss in the generalelection, but came to his aide for the runoff after citing his conservative voting record and the need to thwart afilibuster proof Democratic majority of 60 Senate seats.

Ten Club-supported candidates were defeated in the general election:• Sen. John E. Sununu's (R-NH) was defeated by former New Hampshire Gov. Jean Shaheen in a rematch of the

2002 election by a 52% to 45% margin.• Former Congressman Bob Schaffer lost the open Colorado senate seat of Sen. Wayne Allard to Democratic Rep.

Mark Udall by 52% to 43%.• Rep. Steve Pearce was defeated by Rep. Tom Udall 61% to 39% for the open New Mexico senate seat being

vacated by Sen. Pete Domenici.

Club for Growth 83

• Andrew P. Harris was narrowly defeated in Maryland CD 1 by Democrat Frank Kratovil by 160,914 (49%) to159,998 (49%). The endorsement of Kratovil by Rep. Wayne Gilchrest, whom Harris defeated in the GOPprimary, was seen as the deciding factor in the election. Kratovil thus became the first Democrat to represent thisdistrict since Gilchrest himself had begun his first term in 1991, and only the second Democrat since 1963.[14]

• Rep. Tim Walberg defeated in Michigan CD 7 by Mark Schauer 49% to 47%. Former Rep. Joe Schwarz, whowas defeated by Walberg in the 2006 GOP primary, endorsed and campaigned for Schauer. Schwarz has indicatedthat he wanted to remain neutral if the election stayed local, but he endorsed Schauer because of The Club'scontinued involvement.[15] [16]

• Rep. Bill Sali was defeated 51% to 49% by Walter Minnick in Idaho's conservative 1st CD.• Rep. Tom Feeney's reelection loss for Florida CD 24. Feeney was defeated by Suzanne Kosmas 57% to 41% after

he admitted to taking free golf trips to Scotland with disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff.• Former State Rep. Dean Andal was defeated for California's CD 11 by Rep. Jerry McNerney 55% to 45%.• David Schweikert was defeated in Arizona's CD 5 by Rep. Harry Mitchell 53% to 44%.• Chris Hackett was defeated 56% to 44% in Pennsylvania's CD 10 by incumbent Chris Carney.

2008 Presidential electionDuring the 2008 Republican presidential primaries, the Club was critical of Mike Huckabee, using funds frombackers of Mitt Romney to attack him as the "tax-increasing liberal governor of Arkansas".[17] Huckabee, in turn, hasreferred to the Club for Growth as the "Club for Greed".[18]

The Club has occasionally made statements both in support and opposition to various proposals by Sen. JohnMcCain. The Club never endorsed a presidential candidate, but did release statements praising Sen. McCain andGov. Palin from time to time.

2009 special electionThe Club endorsed in the special election in New York's 23rd congressional district the Conservative Party of NewYork candidate, Doug Hoffman instead of Republican candidate Dede Scozzafava. With the Club pouring moneyinto Hoffman's campaign, Scozzafava realized that she could not win and withdrew from the race the Sunday beforethe November 3 special election, endorsing the Democratic candidate Bill Owens.[19] Owens won the election in adistrict where portions had not had a Democratic congressman since the 19th century.[20]

2010 Congressional electionsThe Club for Growth supported the winning candidates in 20 of the 26 general election races in which they endorsedand supported a candidate. It marked the most successful election day in CFG's history. Only two of their endorsedcandidates lost in the primary. [21]• On March 4, 2009, the Club endorsed former Oklahoma Republican state rep. Kevin Calvey for Oklahoma's 5th

CD. Incumbent Rep. Mary Fallin has announced that she will be running for governor and the seat will be open.• On April 16, 2009, the Club for Growth's PAC endorsed Pat Toomey in his Senate run against Arlen Specter.[22]

• On April 28, 2009, Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter specifically mentioned the Club for Growth's previousactivity in supporting conservative primary opponents against Republicans such as Wayne Gilchrest, JoeSchwarz, Lincoln Chafee and Heather Wilson, in his decision to run for re-election as a Democrat in 2010.

• As of September 20, 2010 The Club for Growth PAC has endorsed 28 candidates in the 2010 election cycle. They are Senators Jim DeMint (SC) and Tom Coburn (OK); Senate candidates Sharron Angle (NV), Ken Buck (CO) (endorsed after he won the primary), Mike Lee (UT) (endorsed after he won the primary, though the Club campaigned against Sen. Bennett before the state convention), Ron Johnson (WI), Joe Miller (AK) (endorsed after the Alaska primary), Rand Paul (KY) (endorsed after the Kentucky primary), Marco Rubio (FL) and Pat Toomey (PA); Representative Tom Graves (GA 9) and House candidates Justin Amash (MI 3), Kevin Calvey (OK 5), Jeff

Club for Growth 84

Duncan (SC 3), Stephen Fincher (TN 8) (endorsed after primary), Tim Griffin (AR 2), David Harmer (CA 11)(endorsed after primary), Andy Harris (MD 1) (endorsed after primary), Nan Hayworth (NY 19) (endorsed afterprimary), Tim Huelskamp (KS 1), Jesse Kelly (AZ 8) (endorsed after primary), Mick Mulvaney (SC 5)(endorsedafter primary), Mike Pompeo (KS 4), Kevin Rothfus (PA 4) (endorsed after primary), Dave Schweikert (AZ 5)(endorsed after primary), Tim Scott (SC 1), Robin Smith (TN 3), and Todd Young (IN 9) (endorsed afterprimary).

• On June 8, 2010 Angle won the Republican primary in what was seen by many as an upset and the Club forGrowth poured over $600,000 into her campaign. On that same day Graves won a special election in Georgia tobecome the newest member of congress.

• On June 22, Duncan and Scott won their primary run-off elections in South Carolina.• On July 27, Calvey placed second in the OK CD 5 primary with 32.5% to James Lankford's 33.6%. In the August

24 run-off Calvey lost to Lankford in a 65% to 35% landslide.• In the primaries held on August 3, Huelskamp, Pompeo, and Amash all won their primary elections. This

improved the Club for Growth's record to 7 wins in 7 races at that point for the 2010 election cycle.• In the Tennessee primaries held on August 5, Club For Growth's winning streak was snapped as its candidate,

Robin Smith, the former Chairwoman of the Tennessee Republican Party, who narrowly lost her bid to replaceRep. Zach Wamp in CD 3. She lost to Chuck Fleischmann by 1,409 vote or 29.7% to 28.1%. Tennessee has norun-offs.[23] [24]

2012 Congressional electionsThe Club for Growth has endorsed the following six candidates thus far in the 2012 election cycle:• Rep. Jeff Flake for the open senate seat in Arizona being vacated by Republican Sen. Jon Kyl.• Rep. Steve King's reelection campaign in Iowa. The state is losing a congressional district due to redistricting.• Ohio Treasurer Josh Mandel for a U.S. Senate seat currently held by incumbent Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown.• Former Texas Solicitor General Ted Cruz for an open U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Republican Sen. Kay

Bailey Hutchison. [25]• Rep. Joe Walsh (Illinois politician) for IL-14, currently held by Congressman Randy Hultgren.[26]• Mark Neumann for the open Wisconsin senate seat of Sen. Kohl.

References[1] "Comrade of the Month!" (http:/ / www. clubforgrowth. org/ 2009/ 03/ comrade_of_the_month_1. php). Club for Growth. 2009-03-02. .

Retrieved 2009-05-17.[2] "President Obama Wins Third Comrade of the Month Award" (http:/ / www. clubforgrowth. org/ 2009/ 04/

obama_wins_marchs_comrade_of_t. php). Club for Growth. 2009-04-07. . Retrieved 2009-05-17.[3] Club for Growth Suit (http:/ / www. fec. gov/ press/ press2005/ 20050919suit. html)[4] Citizens Club for Growth to pay fine. (http:/ / www. usatoday. com/ news/ politics/ 2007-09-05-club-for-growth_N. htm) Associated Press.

September 5, 2007.[5] baltimoresun.com: 2008 Primary Results (http:/ / hosted. ap. org/ dynamic/ files/ elections/ 2008/ by_state/ MD_Page_0212.

html?SITE=MDBAEELN& SECTION=POLITICS)[6] "House Incumbents Easily Hold That Line in Georgia Primaries" (http:/ / www. cqpolitics. com/ wmspage. cfm?docid=news-000002917957).

CQ Politics. 2008-07-16. . Retrieved 2010-07-26.[7] "Colorado Primary Boosts Rep. Lamborn, Open-Seat Contenders Polis and Coffman" (http:/ / www. cqpolitics. com/ wmspage.

cfm?docid=news-000002937441). CQ Politics. 2008-08-13. . Retrieved 2010-07-26.[8] (http:/ / www. cqpolitics. com/ wmspage. cfm?docid=news-000002943498) He did not win the general election.[9] "Alabama GOP Picks Candidates to Run for Two Open Seats" (http:/ / www. cqpolitics. com/ wmspage. cfm?docid=news-000002917945).

CQ Politics. 2008-07-15. . Retrieved 2010-07-26.[10] "Missouri’s Hulshof Wins GOP Nod to Defend Vulnerable Governor’s Seat" (http:/ / www. cqpolitics. com/ wmspage.

cfm?docID=news-000002934973& cpage=1). CQ Politics. . Retrieved 2010-07-26.[11] "Kansas Treasurer Jenkins Edges Ex-Rep. Ryun By a Stride in Key House Primary" (http:/ / www. cqpolitics. com/ wmspage.

cfm?docID=news-000002934977& parm1=5& cpage=1). CQ Politics. 2008-08-06. . Retrieved 2010-07-26.

Club for Growth 85

[12] "Parnell Concedes, Young Wins Republican Nomination in Alaska" (http:/ / www. cqpolitics. com/ wmspage. cfm?parm1=5&docID=news-000002954425). CQ Politics. 2008-09-18. . Retrieved 2010-07-26.

[13] "Tom McClintock Wins 4th CD Race - FlashReport - Presented by Jon Fleischman" (http:/ / www. flashreport. org/ blog.php?postID=2008112121493215). FlashReport. . Retrieved 2010-07-26.

[14] "GOP Concession in Maryland Race Boosts Dems’ House Gain to 20" (http:/ / www. cqpolitics. com/ wmspage.cfm?docID=news-000002985079). CQ Politics. . Retrieved 2010-07-26.

[15] "Joe Schwarz Endorses Mark Schauer" (http:/ / www. walbergwatch. com/ 2008/ 09/ joe-schwarz-endorses-mark-schauer. html). WalbergWatch. . Retrieved 2010-07-26.

[16] "Schwarz endorses Democrat in Michigan congressional race" (http:/ / www. mlive. com/ news/ ann-arbor/ index. ssf/ 2008/ 09/schwarz_endorses_democrat_in_m. html). Mlive.com. 2008-09-30. . Retrieved 2010-07-26.

[17] "Huckabee foes open their wallets for attack ads" (http:/ / www. latimes. com/ news/ politics/ la-na-money1jan01,1,10456.story?coll=la-politics-campaign). Los Angeles Times. January 1, 2008. .

[18] Huckabee?: Comment: The New Yorker (http:/ / www. newyorker. com/ talk/ comment/ 2007/ 12/ 03/ 071203taco_talk_hertzberg)[19] "Political eyes on Republican Scozzafava after conservatives urge her to quit" (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ content/ article/

2009/ 11/ 09/ AR2009110903690. html). The Washington Post. November 10, 2009. . Retrieved April 30, 2010.[20] Peters, Jeremy W. (November 4, 2009). "Conservative Loses Upstate House Race in Blow to Right" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2009/ 11/

04/ nyregion/ 04district. html). The New York Times. . Retrieved April 30, 2010.[21] http:/ / www. clubforgrowth. org/ election2010/[22] (http:/ / www. clubforgrowth. org/ 2009/ 04/ club_pac_endorses_pat_toomey_f. php)[23] (http:/ / www. clubforgrowth. org/ endorsedcandidates/ ?id=700)[24] (http:/ / www. timesfreepress. com/ news/ 2010/ aug/ 06/ fleischmann-beats-smith-3rd-district/ ?local)[25] http:/ / www. clubforgrowth. org/ endorsedcandidates/[26] http:/ / www. clubforgrowth. org/ perm/ pr/ ?postID=960

External links• Club for Growth (http:/ / www. clubforgrowth. org)• Club for Growth (527) (http:/ / www. clubforgrowth. net)• Conservative ‘Club’ Wins With a Broader Battle Plan (http:/ / www. cqpolitics. com/ 2006/ 07/

conservative_club_wins_with_a. html), by Marie Horrigan, CQPolitics, July 31, 2006• Club for Growth Scores in GOP Primaries (http:/ / www. politico. com/ news/ stories/ 0608/ 10850. html) The

Politico. June 4, 2008

Sierra Club 86

Sierra Club

Sierra Club

Motto Explore, enjoy and protect the planet.

Formation 1892

Headquarters San Francisco, CA, USA

Membership 1,400,000[1]

Exec. Dir. Michael Brune

Website sierraclub.org [2]

The Sierra Club is the oldest, largest, and most influential grassroots environmental organization in the UnitedStates.[3] It was founded on May 28, 1892, in San Francisco, California, by the conservationist and preservationistJohn Muir, who became its first president. The Sierra Club has hundreds of thousands of members in chapterslocated throughout the US, and is affiliated with Sierra Club Canada.

MissionThe Sierra Club's mission is:[4]

To explore, enjoy, and protect the wild places of the earth; To practice and promote the responsible use of theearth's ecosystems and resources; To educate and enlist humanity to protect and restore the quality of thenatural and human environment; and to use all lawful means to carry out these objectives.

OrganizationThe Sierra Club is governed by a 15-member volunteer Board of Directors.[5] Each year, five directors are elected tothree-year terms, and all Club members are eligible to vote. A president is elected annually by the Board from amongits members and receives a small stipend. The Executive Director runs the day-to-day operations of the group, and isa paid staff member. On January 20, 2010, the Club announced that its new executive director is Michael Brune,formerly of Rainforest Action Network.[6] Brune succeeds Carl Pope, who continues in a new role of executivechairman.All club members also belong to chapters (usually state-wide, except in California), and to local groups. The state ofCalifornia has 14 chapters. National and local special interest sections, committees, and task forces address particularissues. Policies are set at the appropriate level, but on any issue the Club has only one policy.[7]

In addition to the members who are active as volunteers, the club has approximately 500 paid staff members. Manyof them work at the national headquarters in San Francisco, California, but some work in the lobbying office inWashington, D.C. and in numerous state and regional offices.All members receive Sierra magazine [8], a bimonthly glossy magazine describing the club's activities andspotlighting various environmental issues. Each chapter publishes a newsletter and/or schedule of activities, as domany local groups. The Sierra Club also has a weekly radio show called Sierra Club Radio.[5]

Sierra Club 87

HistoryJournalist Robert Underwood Johnson had worked with John Muir on the successful campaign to create a largeYosemite National Park surrounding the much smaller state park which had been created in 1864. This campaignsucceeded in 1890. As early as 1889, Johnson had encouraged Muir to form an "association" to help protect theSierra Nevada, and preliminary meetings were held to plan the group. Others involved in the early planning includedartist William Keith, Joseph LeConte and David Starr Jordan. In May, 1892 a group of professors from theUniversity of California at Berkeley and Stanford University helped Muir and attorney Warren Olney launch the neworganization modeled after the eastern Appalachian Mountain Club. The Sierra Club's charter members elected Muirpresident, an office he held until his death in 1914.[9] The Club's first goals included establishing Glacier and MountRainier national parks, convincing the California legislature to give Yosemite Valley to the US Federal government,and saving California's coastal redwoods. Muir escorted President Theodore Roosevelt through Yosemite in 1903,and two years later the California legislature ceded Yosemite Valley and Mariposa Grove to the Federal government.The Sierra Club won its first lobbying victory with the creation of the country's second national park, afterYellowstone in 1872.[10]

In the first decade of the 1900s, the Sierra Club became embroiled in the famous Hetch Hetchy Reservoircontroversy that divided preservationists from "resource management" conservationists. For years the city of SanFrancisco had been having problems with a privately owned water company that provided poor service at highprices. Mayor James D. Phelan’s reform administration wanted to set up a municipally owned water utility andrevived an earlier proposal to dam the Hetch Hetchy valley. The final straw was the water company's failure toprovide adequate water to fight the fires that destroyed much of the city following the 1906 San Franciscoearthquake. Gifford Pinchot, a progressive supporter of public utilities and head of the US Forest Service, which thenhad jurisdiction over the national parks, supported the creation of the Hetch Hetchy dam. Muir appealed to his friendUS President Roosevelt, who would not commit himself against the dam, given its popularity with the people of SanFrancisco (a referendum in 1908 confirmed a seven-to-one majority in favor of the dam and municipal water). Muirand attorney William Colby began a national campaign against the dam, attracting the support of many easternconservationists. With the 1912 election of US President Woodrow Wilson, who carried San Francisco, supporters ofthe dam had a friend in the White House. The bill to dam Hetch Hetchy passed Congress in 1913, and so the SierraClub lost its first major battle. In retaliation, the Club supported creation of the National Park Service in 1916, toremove the parks from Forest Service oversight. Stephen Mather, a Club member from Chicago and an opponent ofHetch Hetchy dam, became the first National Park Service director.[11]

During the 1920s and 1930s, the Sierra Club served its members as a social and recreational society, conductingoutings, improving trails and building huts and lodges in the Sierras. Preservation campaigns included a several-yeareffort to enlarge Sequoia National Park (achieved in 1926) and over three decades of work to protect and thenpreserve Kings Canyon National Park (established in 1940). Historian Stephen Fox notes, "In the 1930s most of thethree thousand members were middle-aged Republicans."[12]

The New Deal brought many conservationists to the Democrats, and many Democrats entered the ranks ofconservationists. Leading the generation of Young Turks who revitalized the Sierra Club after World War II wereattorneys Richard Leonard and Bestor Robinson, nature photographer Ansel Adams, and David Brower. Brower was21 when he met Adams on a trail in the Sierras in 1933. Adams sponsored Brower for membership in the Club laterthat year, and he was appointed to the editorial board of the Sierra Club Bulletin. After World War II Browerreturned to his job with the University of California Press, and began editing the Sierra Club Bulletin in 1946.[13]

In 1950, the Sierra Club had some 7,000 members, mostly on the West Coast. That year the Atlantic chapter becamethe first formed outside California. An active volunteer board of directors ran the organization, assisted by a smallclerical staff. Brower was appointed the first executive director in 1952, and the Club began to catch up with majorconservation organizations such as the National Audubon Society, National Wildlife Federation, The WildernessSociety, and Izaak Walton League, which had long had professional staff.[14]

Sierra Club 88

The Sierra Club secured its national reputation in the battle against the Echo Park dam in Dinosaur NationalMonument in Utah, which had been announced by the Bureau of Reclamation in 1950. Brower led the fight,marshaling support from other conservation groups. Brower's background in publishing proved decisive; with thehelp of publisher Alfred Knopf, This Is Dinosaur was rushed into press. Invoking the specter of Hetch Hetchy,conservationists effectively lobbied Congress, which deleted the Echo Park dam from the Colorado River project asapproved in 1955. Recognition of the Sierra Club's role in the Echo Park dam victory boosted membership from10,000 in 1956 to 15,000 in 1960.[15]

The Sierra Club was now truly a national conservation organization, and preservationists took the offensive withwilderness proposals. The Club's Biennial Wilderness Conferences, launched in 1949 in concert with TheWilderness Society, became an important force in the campaign that secured passage of the Wilderness Act in1964.[16] In 1960, Brower launched the Exhibit Format book series with This Is the American Earth, and in 1962 InWildness Is the Preservation of the World, with spectacular color photographs by Eliot Porter. These elegantcoffee-table books introduced the Sierra Club to a wide audience. Fifty thousand copies were sold in the first fouryears, and by 1960 sales exceeded $10 million. Soon Brower was publishing two new titles a year in the ExhibitFormat series, but not all did as well as In Wildness. Although the books were successful introducing the public towilderness preservation and the Sierra Club, they lost money for the organization, some $60,000 a year after 1964.Financial management became a matter of contention between Brower and his board of directors.[17]

The Sierra Club's most publicized crusade of the 1960s was the effort to stop the Bureau of Reclamation frombuilding two dams that would flood portions of the Grand Canyon. Full-page ads the Club placed in the New YorkTimes and the Washington Post in 1966 exclaimed, "This time it's the Grand Canyon they want to flood," and asked,"Should we also flood the Sistine Chapel so tourists can get nearer the ceiling?" The ads generated a storm of protestto the Congress, prompting the Internal Revenue Service to announce it was suspending the Sierra Club's 501(c)(3)status pending an investigation. The board had taken the precaution of setting up the Sierra Club Foundation as a(c)(3) organization in 1960 for endowments and contributions for educational and other non-lobbying activities.[18]

Even so, contributions to the Club dropped off, aggravating its annual operating deficits. Membership, however,climbed sharply in response to the investigation into the legitimacy of the society's tax status by the IRS from 30,000in 1965 to 57,000 in 1967 and 75,000 in 1969.Despite the Club's success in blocking plans for the Grand Canyon dams and weathering the transition from501(c)(3) to 501(c)(4)status, tension grew over finances between Brower and the board of directors. The Club'sannual deficits rose from $100,000 in 1967 and 1968 to some $200,000 in 1969. Another conflict occurred over theClub's policy toward the nuclear power plant to be constructed by Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) at DiabloCanyon near San Luis Obispo, California. Although the Club had played the leading role blocking PG&E's nuclearpower plant proposed for Bodega Bay, California in the early 1960s, that case had been built around the localenvironmental impact and earthquake danger from the nearby San Andreas fault, not from opposition to nuclearpower itself. In exchange for moving the new proposed site from the environmentally sensitive Nipomo Dunes toDiablo Canyon, the board of directors voted to support PG&E's plan for the power plant. A membership referendumin 1967 upheld the board's decision. But Brower concluded that nuclear power at any location was a mistake, and hevoiced his opposition to the plant, contrary to the Club's official policy. As pro- and anti-Brower factions polarized,the annual election of new directors reflected the conflict. Brower's supporters won a majority in 1968, but in theApril 1969 election the anti-Brower candidates won all five open positions. Ansel Adams and president RichardLeonard, two of his closest friends on the board, led the opposition to Brower, charging him with financialrecklessness and insubordination and calling for his ouster as executive director. The board voted ten to five toaccept Brower's resignation.[19] Eventually reconciled with the Club, Brower was elected to the board of directors fora term from 1983 to 1988, and again from 1995 to 2000.Michael McCloskey, hired by Brower in 1961 as the Club's first northwest field representative, became the Club's second executive director in 1969. An administrator attentive to detail, McCloskey had set up the Club's

Sierra Club 89

conservation department in 1965 and guided the campaigns to save the Grand Canyon and establish RedwoodsNational Park and North Cascades National Park. During the 1970s, McCloskey led the Club's legislativeactivity—preserving Alaskan lands and eastern wilderness areas, and supporting the new environmental agenda: theToxic Substances Control Act of 1976, the Clean Air Act amendments, and the Surface Mining Control andReclamation Act of 1977, passed during the administration of President Jimmy Carter. The Sierra Club made its firstPresidential endorsement in 1984 in support of Walter Mondale's unsuccessful campaign to unseat Ronald Reagan.McCloskey resigned as executive director in 1985 after 16 and a half years (the same length of time Brower had ledthe organization), and assumed the title of chairman, becoming the Club's senior strategist, devoting his time toconservation policy rather than budget planning and administration.[20] After a two-year interlude with DouglasWheeler, whose Republican credentials were disconcerting to liberal members, the Club hired Michael Fisher, theformer head of the California Coastal Commission, who served as executive director from 1987 to 1992. Carl Pope,formerly the Club’s legislative director, was named executive director in 1992.In the 1990s, club members Jim Bensman, Roger Clarke, David Dilworth, Chad Hanson and David Orr along withabout 2,000 members formed the John Muir Sierrans, an internal caucus, to promote changes to club positions. Theyfavored a zero-cut forest policy on public lands and, a few years later, decommissioning Glen Canyon Dam. JMSwas successful in changing club positions on both counts.[21] [22]

In September 2005, the Sierra Club held its first Sierra Summit in San Francisco. Approximately 1,000 volunteersfrom around the country, selected by their chapters and groups, were delegates; some nondelegate members alsoattended. There were seminars and exhibit presentations about current environmental issues and about techniques formore effective activism. Prominent guest speakers included Al Gore; Bill Maher; Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.; andArianna Huffington.In 2008, the Sierra Club endorsed Senator Barack Obama for President, citing "his strong record of support for cleanair, wetlands protection, and clean energy."[23]

Notable directors• Ansel Adams, Board of Directors, 1934–1971[9]

• David R. Brower, first Executive Director, 1952–1969; Board of Directors, three terms, various decades• Michael Brune Executive Director 2010• Allison Chin, President, 2008-• Robert Cox, President, 1994–1996, 2000–2001, 2007• Leland Curtis 1943-1946• George Davidson 1894 - 1910• Glen Dawson• Michael K. Dorsey• Jim Dougherty[24]

• William O. Douglas• Anne H. Ehrlich• Jules Eichorn• Francis P. Farquhar, President, 1933–1935 and 1948–1949• Dave Foreman• Aurelia Harwood, Board of Directors, 1921–1928; first female President, 1927–1928[25]

• David Starr Jordan• David Karpf• Doug LaFollette• Joseph LeConte, Director, 1892–1898• Joseph N. LeConte, President, 1915–1917; Board of Directors 1898–1940

Sierra Club 90

• Richard M. Leonard• Martin Litton• Norman Livermore• Alexander George McAdie• Duncan McDuffie• Sam Merrill, Board of Directors, 1936–1937• John Muir, President, 1892–1914• Jan O'Connell• Carl Pope, Executive Director 1992–2010• Eliot Porter• Bestor Robinson, President, 1946–1948• William E. Siri• Wallace Stegner• Clair S. Tappaan, President, 1922–1924; Board of Directors, 1912–1932• Marilyn Wall, Board of Directors 2006–2009• Paul Watson, Board of Directors, 2003–2006• Edgar Wayburn, President, five terms, 1960's• Adam Werbach, President, 1996• Bernie Zaleha, Board of Directors, 2003–2009

OutingsIn 1901, William Colby organized the first Sierra Club outing to Yosemite Valley. The annual High Trips were ledby accomplished mountaineers (some of them Sierra Club directors), such as Francis P. Farquhar, Joseph NisbetLeConte, Norman Clyde, Walter A. Starr, Jr., Jules Eichorn, Glen Dawson, Ansel Adams, and David R. Brower.Many first ascents in the Sierra Nevada were made on Sierra Club outings. Sierra Club members were also earlyenthusiasts of rock climbing and pioneers of the craft. In 1911, the first chapter was formed, Angeles, and itimmediately started conducting local outings in the mountains surrounding Los Angeles and throughout the West. InWorld War II, many Sierra Club leaders joined the 10th Mountain Division, bringing their expertise to the wareffort.[26] Among them was Brower, who managed the High Trip program from 1947 to 1954, while serving as amajor in the Army Reserve.[27]

The High Trips, sometimes huge expeditions with more than a hundred participants and crew, have given way tosmaller and more numerous outings held across the United States and abroad. The National Outings programconducts hundreds of outings, most of which are between 4 to 10 days in length. Local chapters, groups, and sectionslead thousands of generally shorter trips in their regions and beyond (mostly hiking, but also including cycling,cross-country skiing, etc.). Inner City Outings groups help make wild places accessible to children who are onlyfamiliar with the urban environment.[26]

Sierra Club 91

Conservation policiesThe Sierra Club has official policies on many conservation issues. They group these into 17 categories: agriculture,biotechnology, energy, environmental justice, forest and wilderness management, global issues, government andpolitical issues, land management, military issues, nuclear issues, oceans, pollution and waste management,precautionary principle, transportation, urban and land use policies, water resources, and wildlife conservation.

Land managementSome Sierra Club members have urged the Club to be more forceful in advocating for the protection of NationalForests and other federally owned public lands. For example, in 2002 the Club was criticized for joining with theWilderness Society in agreeing to a compromise that would allow logging in the Black Hills in South Dakota.[28]

Nuclear issuesThe Sierra Club opposes building new nuclear reactors, both fission and fusion, until specific inherent safety risksare mitigated by conservationist political policies, and regulatory agencies are in place to enforce those policies.[29]

The club currently opposes nuclear fusion due to its "probable" release of the hydrogen isotope, tritium.[30]

CoalFurther information: mountaintop removal mining and fossil-fuel phase-outAccording to the Sierra Club, coal power plants are one of the nation's largest and dirtiest sources of energy, aleading cause of respiratory illness, and account for over 40% of the nation's carbon dioxide emissions. It argues thatthere are readily available alternatives to coal.[31] A 2009 report commissioned by the Sierra Club concluded that thecosts associated with coal mining in Appalachia are five times greater than its economic benefits to the region. Thereport concluded that residents of coal mining regions would be best served by transitioning away from economicdependence on coal.[32]

Renewables and energy efficiencyThe Sierra Club advocates investment in wind, solar, and other renewable energy as well as restructuring energymarkets to favor innovation, creation of green jobs, and efficient energy use.[33]

Political activism and controversies

Protecting riversOne long-standing goal of the Sierra Club has been opposition to dams it considers inappropriate. In the early 20thcentury, the organization fought against the damming and flooding of the Hetch Hetchy Valley in Yosemite NationalPark. Despite this lobbying, Congress authorized the construction of O'Shaughnessy Dam on the Tuolumne River.The Sierra Club continues to lobby for removal of the dam, urging that San Francisco's water needs beaccommodated instead by the re-engineering of the Don Pedro Reservoir downstream.The Sierra Club advocates the decommissioning of Glen Canyon Dam and the draining of Lake Powell. The Clubalso supports removal, breaching or decommissioning of many other dams, including four large but high-cost damson the lower Snake River in eastern Washington.

Sierra Club 92

Blue-Green AllianceIn June, 2006, the Sierra Club announced the formation of a Blue-Green Alliance with the United Steelworkers, thelargest industrial union in North America. The goal of this new partnership is to pursue a joint public policy agendareconciling workers' need for good jobs with mankind's need for a cleaner environment and safer world.[34]

Population control and immigrationObservers of the Sierra club have charged that the club's views on population growth, and the efforts of some clubmembers to restrain immigration, are a continuation of aspects of the Eugenics movement.[35] [36]

In 1969, the Sierra Club published Paul R. Ehrlich's book, The Population Bomb, in which he said that populationgrowth was responsible for environmental decline and advocated coercive measures to reduce it. Some observershave argued that the book had a "racial dimension" in the tradition of the Eugenics movement, and that it "reiteratedmany of Osborn's jeremiads."[37] [38] [39]

In 1978, John Tanton, former Chairman of the National Sierra Club Population Committee and former President ofZero Population Growth, founded the Federation for American Immigration Reform.[39]

During the 1980s, some Sierra Club members, including Paul Ehrlich's wife Anne,[37] wanted to take the Club intothe contentious field of immigration to the United States. The Club's position was that overpopulation was asignificant factor in the degradation of the environment. Accordingly, the Club supported stabilizing and reducingU.S. and world population. Some members argued that, as a practical matter, U.S. population could not be stabilized,let alone reduced, at the then-current levels of immigration. They urged the Club to support immigration reduction.The Club had previously addressed the issue of "mass immigration,"[40] and in 1988, the organization's PopulationCommittee and Conservation Coordinating Committee stated that immigration to the U.S. should be limited, so as toachieve population stabilization.[41]

Other Sierrans thought that the immigration issue was too far from the Club's core environmentalist mission, andwere also concerned that involvement would impair the organization's political ability to pursue its other objectives.In 1996, the Board of Directors accepted this latter view, and voted that the Sierra Club would be neutral on issues ofimmigration.The advocates of immigration reduction sought to reverse this decision through the referendum provision of theBylaws of the Sierra Club. They organized themselves as "SUSPS", a name originally derived from "Sierrans forU.S. Population Stabilization" (although that name is no longer used since the Sierra Club objected to infringing theClub's trademark in the term "Sierrans"). SUSPS and its allies gathered the necessary signatures to place the issue onthe ballot in the Club's election in the spring of 1998. The Board's decision that the Club would take no position onimmigration was upheld by the membership by a three-to-two margin.The controversy resurfaced when a group of three immigration reduction proponents ran in the 2004 Board ofDirectors elections, hoping to move the Club's position away from a neutral stance on immigration, and restore thestance previously held.[42] Groups outside of the Club became involved, such as the Southern Poverty Law Centerand MoveOn.[43] Of the three candidates, two (Frank Morris and David Pimentel), were on the board of theanti-immigration group Diversity Alliance for a Sustainable America[44] [45] and two (Richard Lamm and FrankMorris) were on the board of directors or the board of advisors of the Federation for American ImmigrationReform;[44] both had also held leadership positions within the NAACP.[46] Their candidacies were denounced by afourth candidate, Morris Dees of the SPLC, as a "hostile takeover" attempt by "radical anti-immigrant activists."[43]

[47] The immigration reduction proponents won only 3% of all votes cast in the election,[48] and the controversysubsided.

Sierra Club 93

Related organizations

Affiliates and subsidiariesThe Sierra Club Foundation was founded in 1960 by David R. Brower.[49] It is a 501(c)(3) charitable foundation thatprovides support for tax- deductible environmental action.The Sierra Club Canada has been active since 1963.[50] It is now an independent corporation with its own nationalstructure and local entities throughout Canada working on pollution, biodiversity, energy, and sustainability issues.In 1971, volunteer lawyers who had worked with the Sierra Club established the Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund.This was a separate organization that used the "Sierra Club" name under license from the Club; it changed its nameto Earthjustice in 1997.[51]

The Sierra Student Coalition (SSC) is the student-run arm of the Sierra Club. Founded by Adam Werbach in 1991,with 14,000 members, it purports to be the largest student-led environmental group in the United States.[52]

The Sierra Club Voter Education Fund is a 527 group that became active in the 2004 Presidential election by airingtelevision advertisements about the major party candidates' positions on environmental issues. Through theEnvironmental Voter Education Campaign (EVEC), the Club sought to mobilize volunteers for phone banking,door-to-door canvassing and postcard writing to emphasize these issues in the campaign.The organization maintains a publishing imprint, Sierra Club Books, publishing books on environmental issues,wilderness photographic essays, nature guides, and other related subjects. They publish the Sierra Club Calendars,perennial bestsellers, featuring photographs by well-known nature photographers such as Galen Rowell. They alsopublish the John Muir library, which includes many of their founder's titles.[53]

The Wilderness Travel Course is a basic mountaineering class that is administered by the Sierra Club.Restore Hetch Hetchy is an organization created by the Sierra Club to advocate the restoration of the Hetch HetchyValley.

Notes[1] (http:/ / www. sierraclub. org/ )[2] http:/ / sierraclub. org/[3] Welcome to the Sierra Club! - Sierra Club (http:/ / www. sierraclub. org/ welcome/ )[4] Main Page for Sierra Club Policies - Sierra Club (http:/ / www. sierraclub. org/ policy/ )[5] http:/ / sierraclub. org[6] "Carl Pope to Step Down as Executive Director of Sierra Club" (http:/ / action. sierraclub. org/ site/ MessageViewer?em_id=154481. 0)

(Press release). Sierra Club. January 20, 2010. . Retrieved 2010-01-20.[7] http:/ / sierraclub. org/ policy/[8] http:/ / www. sierraclub. org/ sierra/[9] Michael P. Cohen, The History of the Sierra Club, 1892-1970 (San Francisco: Sierra Club Books, 1988), pp. 8-9.[10] Stephen Fox, John Muir and His Legacy: The American Conservation Movement (Boston: Little, Brown, 1981), pp. 125-129.[11] Fox, John Muir and His Legacy, pp. 139-147.[12] Fox, John Muir and His Legacy, p. 214.[13] Fox, John Muir and His Legacy, p. 275.[14] Fox, John Muir and His Legacy, p. 279.[15] Fox, John Muir and His Legacy, pp. 280-286.[16] Fox, John Muir and His Legacy, p. 286-289.[17] Fox, John Muir and His Legacy, pp. 316-319.[18] Cohen. The History of the Sierra Club, pp. 357-365.[19] Cohen, The History of the Sierra Club, pp. 395-434.[20] Michael McCloskey, In the Thick of It: My Life in the Sierra Club (Washington, DC: Island Press, 2000), pp. 99-248.[21] Jim Carlton (2000-03-15). "Sierra Club Faces a Revolt From Radicals". Wall Street Journal: p. B.1.[22] Alex Barnum (1996-04-23). "Sierra Club Dissidents Cheer Victory". San Francisco Chronicle: p. A1.[23] "Sierra Club Endorses Obama for President; Joins United Steelworkers in Call for Clean Energy Future" (http:/ / www. sierraclub. org/

pressroom/ releases/ pr2008-06-19. asp). Sierra Club. June 19, 2008. . Retrieved 2008-07-09.

Sierra Club 94

[24] "About the Photographer - Jim Dougherty Photography" (http:/ / www. jimdougherty. net/ about. php). . Retrieved 2007-08-04.[25] "HPS Summit Signatures - Mount Harwood" (http:/ / angeles. sierraclub. org/ hps/ signatures/ 16j. htm). . Retrieved 2007-08-04.[26] http:/ / sierraclub. org/ outings/[27] Brower, David R. (June, 1954). "Sierra High Trip". The National Geographic Magazine (Washington, DC: National Geographic Society)

CV (Six): 844–868.[28] "Jeffrey St. Clair: Dark Deeds in the Black Hills (on muckraking magazine Counterpunch's website)" (http:/ / www. counterpunch. org/

stclair0801. html). . Retrieved 2007-08-04.[29] Why Not Nukes? Reconsidering the nuclear option (http:/ / www. sierraclub. org/ sierra/ 200701/ nukes. asp)[30] "Nuclear Power – Conservation Policies - Sierra Club" (http:/ / www. sierraclub. org/ policy/ conservation/ nuc-power. asp). . Retrieved

2007-08-04.[31] http:/ / www. sierraclub. org/ coal/ overview/[32] Napoleon, Alice; Schlissel, David (August 25, 2009). Economic Impacts of Restricting Mountaintop/Valley Fill Coal Mining in Central

Appalachia (http:/ / www. sierraclub. org/ coal/ downloads/ 2009. 10_synapse_sc_mtr_econ_report. pdf). Cambridge, MA: Synapse EnergyEconomics, Inc.. . Retrieved January 30, 2011.

[33] http:/ / www. sierraclub. org/ coal/[34] (http:/ / www. uswa. org/ uswa/ program/ content/ 3035. php)[35] Cockburn, Alexander. "Commentary: A Big Green Bomb Aimed at Immigration; Remember Eugenics? Sierra Club Revives its Propaganda

about Population Growth." Los Angeles Times 2 October 1997: B-9.[36] Ordover, Nancy, American Eugenics (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=5qHGELC_h-4C& pg=PA49& lpg=PA49), University of

Minnesota Press (February 2003)[37] Cockburn, Alexander, "The Sierra Club's Ugly Racial Tilt, (http:/ / www. monitor. net/ monitor/ 9710a/ ac-sierraclub. html) Albion Monitor[38] Warren, Louis S., American Environmental History (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=5qHGELC_h-4C& pg=PA49& lpg=PA49),

Wiley-Blackwell 2003[39] Stern, Alexandra, Eugenic Nation, (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=Wnzy44p-DzYC& pg=PA127& lpg=PA127), University of

California Press, 2005[40] " Sierra Club Policy: Immigration Policy History (http:/ / www. susps. org/ history/ scpolicy. html#ihist)." SUSPS. Accessed 14 May 2008.[41] Kunofsky, Judy. " Sierra Club, U.S. Population Growth, and Immigration (http:/ / www. susps. org/ history/ popreport1989. html)." Sierra

Club Population Report. Spring 1989. Accessed 14 May 2008.[42] The Seattle Times. http:/ / seattletimes. nwsource. com/ html/ localnews/ 2001859863_sierra18m. html.[43] Knickerbocker, Brad (2004). "A 'hostile' takeover bid at the Sierra Club." Christian Science Monitor, February 20. http:/ / www. csmonitor.

com/ 2004/ 0220/ p01s04-ussc. html[44] “Hostile takeover,” Intelligence Report, Spring 2004, p. 57.[45] Potok, Mark, Editor of Intelligence Report, Letter to Larry Fahn, President, The Sierra Club, October 21, 2003. Reprinted in Intelligence

Report, Spring 2004, pp. 59-63.[46] "Tacoma Seeking Segregation Curb." Spokane Daily Chronicle. July 15, 1966.[47] Davila, Florangela (2004). "Immigration dispute spawns factions, anger in Sierra Club," Seattle Times, February 18.[48] Sierra Club, Election Results. http:/ / sierraclub. org/ bod/ electionresults. pdf [accessed 1/17/09][49] http:/ / www. tscf. org[50] http:/ / www. sierraclub. ca/[51] http:/ / www. earthjustice. org/[52] http:/ / www. ssc. org/[53] http:/ / action. sierraclub. org/ site/ PageServer?pagename=books_categories

References• David Brower, For Earth's Sake: The Life and Times of David Brower (Salt Lake City: Peregrine Smith Books,

1990) ISBN 0-87905-013-6• Michael P. Cohen, The History of the Sierra Club, 1892–1970 (San Francisco: Sierra Club Books, 1988) ISBN

0-87156-732-6• Stephen Fox, John Muir and His Legacy: The American Conservation Movement (Boston: Little, Brown, 1981)

ISBN 0-316-29110-2• Michael McCloskey, In the Thick of It: My Life in the Sierra Club (Washington, DC: Island Press, 2005) ISBN

1-55963-979-2• Tom Turner, Sierra Club: 100 Years of Protecting Nature (New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 1991) ISBN

0-8109-3820-0

Sierra Club 95

External links• Official website (http:/ / www. sierraclub. org/ )• Sierra Club Radio (http:/ / www. sierraclubradio. com)• Sierra Student Coalition (http:/ / www. ssc. org/ )• The Sierra Club Foundation (http:/ / www. tscf. org/ )

EMILY's List 96

EMILY's List

EMILY's List

Formation 1985

Membership 600,000+

Website EMILYsList.org [1]

EMILY's List is a political action committee (PAC) in the United States that aims to help elect female candidateswho are pro-choice Democrats to office. It was founded by Ellen Malcolm in 1984.The name EMILY's List is an acronym for "Early Money Is Like Yeast" (i.e., it raises dough).[2] The saying is areference to a convention of political fundraising: that receiving lots of donations early in a race is helpful inattracting other, later donors.

HistoryEMILY's List was founded in 1985, when 25 women met in the home of Ellen Malcolm. Their goal was to form anetwork to raise money for pro-choice female candidates. The network was designed to provide its members withinformation about candidates and encourage them to write checks directly to the candidates. In 1986, EMILY's Listwas instrumental in electing Barbara Mikulski of Maryland, the first Democratic woman elected to the US Senate inher own right.[3]

In 2005, EMILY's List celebrated its 20th Anniversary at a gala in Washington, D.C. Speakers included then-newlyelected Congresswoman Gwen Moore (WI), Senator Barbara Mikulski (MD), and Governor Jennifer Granholm(MI). Also in 2005, Ellen Moran took office as executive director for the second time to head the nation's largestpolitical action committee, before becoming Barack Obama's communications director in November 2008.In 2006, the group helped elect eight new pro-choice Democratic women to the U.S. House, aiding in the secondlargest increase in history at that time. The re-election of all female Senate incumbents and the addition of Sen.Claire McCaskill and Sen Amy Klobuchar brought the number of women in the Senate to a new high of 16.[4] Forthe 2006 election, EMILY's List raised about $46 million for candidates in the 2006 contests and it is listed as thebiggest PAC in the nation by Political Money Line, an independent source of information about campaignfund-raising.[5]

On January 20, 2007, EMILY's List endorsed Hillary Clinton for president. The endorsement came within hours ofSenator Clinton's announcement that she was forming an exploratory committee to run for president.During the Democratic presidential primaries, when pro-choice organization NARAL endorsed Barack Obama overHillary Clinton, EMILY's List was strongly critical. President Ellen R. Malcolm said, “I think it is tremendouslydisrespectful to Sen. Clinton - who held up the nomination of a FDA commissioner in order to force approval of PlanB and who spoke so eloquently during the Supreme Court nomination about the importance of protecting Roe vs.Wade - to not give her the courtesy to finish the final three weeks of the primary process. It certainly must bedisconcerting for elected leaders who stand up for reproductive rights and expect the choice community will standwith them.”[6]

After the conclusion of the democratic Presidential primary, EMILY's List moved their support to Barack Obamaand was vocal in their protest of the McCain/Palin ticket.

EMILY's List 97

The 2008 cycle was the second most successful cycle in EMILY's List history, second only to 1992's "The year ofthe woman". The PAC helped elect two new female senators, Sen. Kay Hagan of North Carolina and Sen. JeanneShaheen of New Hampshire, and supported the election of Gov. Bev Perdue of North Carolina, the re-election ofGov. Christine Gregoire of Washington, and the successful elections of twelve new women to the United StatesHouse of Representatives.[7]

Similar groupsSimilar groups have formed along the same lines as EMILY's List, with some slight variations. The Wish Listsupports pro-choice Republican women. In 1994, Joan Kirner created a similar organization in Australia by the nameEMILY's List Australia.On the other side of the abortion debate, the Susan B. Anthony List is a pro-life non-profit organization and PACseen as the pro-life counterpart to EMILY's List.[8]

Further reading• Women and the Democratic Party: The Evolution of Emily's List by Jamie Pamelia Pimlott (Cambria Press; 2010)

209 pages; the history from 1985 through the 2008 elections.

References[1] http:/ / www. emilyslist. org[2] Emily's List official FAQ, question 1. (http:/ / emilyslist. org/ who/ faq/ )[3] Pimlott (2010)[4] "Democratic Women Reach Historic Heights in Congress" (http:/ / emilyslist. org/ news/ releases/ historic_heights/ ) (Press release).

EMILY's List. November 13, 2006. . Retrieved 2010-12-24.[5] "Sweet column: Hillary Clinton gets key endorsement for 2008 bid" (http:/ / blogs. suntimes. com/ sweet/ 2007/ 01/

sweet_column_hillary_clinton_g. html). Chicago Sun-Times. .[6] EMILY's List Trashes NARAL for Obama Endorsement | The New York Observer (http:/ / www. observer. com/ 2008/

emilys-list-trashes-naral-obama-endorsement)[7] Pimlott (2010)[8] Sarah Palin issues a call to action to 'mama grizzlies' (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ content/ article/ 2010/ 05/ 14/

AR2010051402271. html)

External links• EMILY's List website (http:/ / www. emilyslist. org)• PAC recipients list (http:/ / www. opensecrets. org/ pacs/ pacgot. asp?strID=C00193433& Cycle=2004)• EMILY's List UK (http:/ / www. emilyslist. org. uk/ )

AFLCIO 98

AFL–CIO

AFL-CIO

Full name American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations

Founded 1886

Current affiliation date 1955

Members 11,013,317 (2008)[1]

Country United States

Affiliation ITUC

Key people Richard Trumka, president[2]

Office location Washington, D.C.

Website aflcio.org [3]

The American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations, commonly AFL–CIO, is anational trade union center, the largest federation of unions in the United States, made up of 56 national andinternational unions,[4] together representing more than 11 million workers (as of June 2008, the most recent officialstatistic).[1] It was formed in 1955 when the AFL and the CIO merged after a long estrangement. From 1955 until2005, the AFL–CIO's member unions represented nearly all unionized workers in the United States. Several largeunions split away from AFL–CIO and formed the rival Change to Win Federation in 2005. The largest unioncurrently in the AFL–CIO is the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), withmore than a million members.

Membership

AFL-CIO headquarters in Washington, D.C.

The AFL–CIO is a federation of international laborunions. As a voluntary federation, the AFL–CIO haslittle authority over the affairs of its member unionsexcept in extremely limited cases (such as the ability toexpel a member union for corruption (Art. X, Sec. 17)and enforce resolution of disagreements overjurisdiction or organizing). As of June 2008, theAFL–CIO had 56 member unions.

AFLCIO 99

Membership in the AFL–CIO is largely unrestricted. Since its inception as the American Federation of Labor, theAFL–CIO has supported an image of the federation as the "House of Labor"—an all-inclusive, national federation of"all" labor unions. Currently, the AFL–CIO's only explicit restriction on membership excludes those labor unionswhose "policies and activities are consistently directed toward the achievement of the program or purposes ofauthoritarianism, totalitarianism, terrorism and other forces that suppress individual liberties and freedom ofassociation..." (Art. II, Sec. 7). Under Art. II, Sec. 4 and Sec. 8, the AFL–CIO has the authority to place conditionson the issuance of charters, and formally has endorsed the policy of merging small unions into larger ones. In 2001,the AFL–CIO formally established rules regarding the size, financial stability, governance structure, jurisdiction, andleadership stability of unions seeking affiliation. And although the AFL–CIO constitution permits the federation tocharter Directly Affiliated Local Unions, the AFL–CIO has largely refused to charter such unions since the 1970s.A list of current member unions may be found at List of unions affiliated with the AFL-CIO.In recent years the AFL–CIO has concentrated its political efforts on lobbying in Washington and the state capitals,and on "GOTV" (get-out-the-vote) campaigns and in major elections. For example, in the 2010 midterm elections, itis sending 28.6 million pieces of mail. Members will receive a "slate card" with a list of union endorsementsmatched to the member's Congressional district, along with a "personalized" letter from President Trumkaemphasizing the importance of voting. In addition, 100,000 volunteers will be going door to door to promoteendorsed candidates to 13 million union voters in 32 states .[5]

GovernanceThe AFL–CIO is governed by its members, who meet in a quadrennial convention. Each member union electsdelegates, based on proportional representation. The AFL–CIO's state federations, central and local labor councils,constitutional departments, and constituent groups are also entitled to delegates. The delegates elect officers and vicepresidents, debate and approve policy, and set dues.

Executive councilThe AFL–CIO has three executive officers: president, secretary-treasurer and executive vice president. Theexecutive vice president is the most recently established office; it was created by constitutional amendment in 1995.Each officer's term is four years, and elections occur at the quadrennial convention.Current officers are:• President: Richard Trumka (2009- )• Secretary-Treasurer: Liz Shuler (2009- )• Executive Vice-President: Arlene Holt Baker (2009- )The AFL–CIO membership also elects 43 vice presidents at each convention, who have a term of four years.Election is by plurality, with the top 43 candidates with the highest votes winning office. Article VI, Sec. 5, of theAFL–CIO constitution permits the president of the federation to appoint up to three additional vice presidents duringthe period when the convention is not in session, in order to increase the racial, gender, ethnic and sexual diversity ofthe executive council.The three officers and the vice presidents form the executive council, which is the federation's governing bodybetween quadrennial conventions. It is required to meet twice a year, and in practice meets four or five times a year.It passes resolutions, directly oversees AFL–CIO's legislative program, and has other duties. In 2005, the AFL–CIOconstitution was changed to permit the executive council to form "Industrial Coordinating Committees" based ongeography, employer, occupation or other appropriate subdivisions to coordinate the organizing and collectivebargaining work of the member unions.

AFLCIO 100

Executive committeeAn executive committee was authorized by constitutional change in 2005. The executive committee is composed ofthe president, vice presidents from the 10 largest affiliates, and nine other vice presidents chosen in consultation withthe executive council. The other two officers are non-voting ex officio members. The executive committee governsthe AFL–CIO between meetings of the executive council, approves its budget, and issues charters (two dutiesformerly discharged by the executive council). It is required to meet at least four times a year, and in practice meetson an as-needed basis (which may mean once a month or more).

General BoardThe AFL–CIO also has a General Board. Its members are the AFL–CIO executive council, the chief executiveofficer of each member union, the president of each AFL–CIO constitutional department, and four regionalrepresentatives elected by the AFL–CIO's state federations. The General Board's duties are very limited. It only takesup matters referred to it by the executive council, but referrals are rare. However, because of the sensitive nature ofpolitical endorsements and the advisability of consensus when making them, the General Board traditionally is thebody that provides the AFL–CIO's endorsement of candidates for president and vice president of the United States.

State and local bodiesArticle XIV of the AFL–CIO constitution permits the AFL–CIO to charter and organize state, regional, local andcity-wide bodies. They are commonly called "state federations" and "central labor councils" (CLCs), although thenames of the various bodies varies widely at the local and regional level. Each body has its own charter, whichestablishes its jurisdiction, governance structure, mission, and more. Jurisdiction tends to be geo-political: Each stateor territory has its own "state federation." In large cities, there is usually a CLC covering the city. Outside largecities, CLCs tend to be regional (to achieve an economy of scale in terms of dues, administrative effectiveness, etc.).State federations and CLCs are each entitled to representation and voting rights at the quadrennial convention.The duties of state federations differ from those of CLCs. State federations tend to focus on state legislativelobbying, statewide economic policy, state elections, and other issues of a more over-arching nature. CLCs tend tofocus on county or city lobbying, city or county elections, county or city zoning and other economic issues, and morelocal needs.Both state federations and CLCs work to mobilize members around organizing campaigns, collective bargainingcampaigns, electoral politics, lobbying (most often rallies and demonstrations), strikes, picketing, boycotts, andsimilar needs.Although the AFL–CIO constitution requires that all state and local unions affiliate with the appropriate state andlocal AFL–CIO body, in practice this is not enforced. Many unions do not affiliate with their state federation orCLC, or affiliate only a portion of their membership, leaving state feds and CLCs chronically short of funds.Interestingly, the AFL–CIO constitution permits international unions to pay state fed and CLC dues directly, ratherthan have each local or state fed pay them. This relieves each union's state and local affiliates of the administrativeduty of assessing, collecting and paying the dues. International unions assess the AFL–CIO dues themselves, andcollect them on top of their own dues-generating mechanisms or simply pay them out of the dues the internationalcollects. But not all international unions pay their required state fed and CLC dues.[6]

State federations and CLCs are historically important to the AFL and its successor, the AFL–CIO. George Meany, for example, had little experience as a union member or local union leader, but rose quickly to the top of the AFL–CIO due to his effectiveness as president of the New York State AFL. During the AFL's early history, when the federation remained as apolitical as possible, state feds were the legislative dynamos—lobbying for workers' compensation, unemployment insurance, child labor laws and the minimum wage. But in the 1970s and 1980s, state feds and CLCs became organizational backwaters. They were revitalized beginning in 1995, when John Sweeney

AFLCIO 101

campaigned heavily for their votes in his successful quest to unseat AFL–CIO interim president Thomas R.Donahue. Sweeney continued to emphasize them throughout his presidency.

Constitutional departmentsThroughout its history, the AFL–CIO had a number of constitutionally mandated departments. They are governed byArticle XII of the constitution. Initially, the rationale for having them was that affiliates felt that such decisionsshould not be left to the whims (or political needs) of the president of the federation.Currently, Art. XII establishes seven departments, but allows the executive council or convention of the AFL–CIO toestablish others. Each department is largely autonomous, but its must conform to the AFL–CIO's constitution andpolicies. Each department has its own constitution, membership, officers, governance structure, dues andorganizational structure. Departments may establish state and local bodies. Any member union of the AFL–CIO mayjoin a department, provided it formally affiliates and pays dues. The chief executive officer of each department maysit in on the meetings of the AFL–CIO executive council. Departments have representation and voting rights at theAFl-CIO convention.One of the most famous departments was the Industrial Union Department (IUD). It had been constitutionallymandated by the new AFL–CIO constitution created by the merger of the AFL and CIO in 1955, as CIO unions feltthat the AFL's commitment to industrial unionism was not strong enough to permit the department to survive withouta constitutional mandate. For many years, the IUD was a de facto organizing department in the AFL–CIO. Forexample, it provided money to the near-destitute American Federation of Teachers (AFT) as it attempted to organizethe United Federation of Teachers in 1961. The organizing money enabled the AFT to win the election and establishits first large collective bargaining affiliate. For many years, the IUD remained rather militant on a number of issues.It proved to be a center of opposition to AFL–CIO president John Sweeney, and was abolished in 1999.As of January 2007, there are six AFL–CIO constitutionally mandated departments:• Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL–CIO• Maritime Trades Department, AFL–CIO• Metal Trades Department, AFL–CIO• Department for Professional Employees, AFL–CIO• Transportation Trades Department, AFL–CIO• Union Label Department, AFL–CIO

Constituency groups"Constituency groups" are nonprofit, nonpartisan organizations chartered and funded by the AFL–CIO to enhancethe representational effectiveness of various under-represented groups. Usually they serve as a means to enhance theorganizing of new members and as voter registration and mobilization bodies. The four more mature constituencygroups are A. Phillip Randolph Institute, Alliance for Retired Americans, Coalition of Black Trade Unionists andCoalition of Labor Union Women. They conduct research, host training and educational conferences, issue researchreports and publications, lobby for legislation and build coalitions with local groups.Although constituency groups are not explicitly mentioned in the AFL–CIO constitution, the AFL–CIO exercises itsgeneral authority under Article XII to establish them in much the same way that it establishes other departments.Each constituency group has its own charter, officers, governance structure, etc., as constitutionally mandateddepartments do. They also have the right to sit in on AFL–CIO executive council meetings, and haverepresentational and voting rights at AFL–CIO conventions. Many constituency groups are not self-sustaining andreceive significant funding from the AFL–CIO.As of January 2007, there are seven constituency groups within the AFL–CIO:• A. Philip Randolph Institute

AFLCIO 102

• Alliance for Retired Americans• Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance• Coalition of Black Trade Unionists• Coalition of Labor Union Women• Labor Council for Latin American Advancement• Pride at Work

Allied organizations"Allied organizations" are nonprofit, nonpartisan organizations chartered and funded by the AFL–CIO to servecertain policy goals of the federation.Although allied organizations are not explicitly mentioned in the AFL–CIO constitution, the AFL–CIO exercises itsgeneral authority under Article XII to establish them in much the same way that it establishes other departments.Each allied organization has its own charter, officers, governance structure, etc., as constitutionally mandateddepartments do. However, they do not have the right to sit in on AFL–CIO executive council meetings, and do nothave representational or voting rights at AFL–CIO conventions. The current three allied organization are allself-sustaining. Their boards share members with the AFL–CIO executive council.As of January 2007, there are three allied organizations:• American Center for International Labor Solidarity• International Labor Communications Association• Working for America InstituteThey have evolved in a number of ways. For example, The Working for America Institute started out as adepartment of the AFL–CIO. Established in 1958, it was previously known as the Human Resources DevelopmentInstitute (HRDI). President Sweeney renamed the department and spun it off as an independent organization in 1998to act as a lobbying group to promote economic development, develop new economic polices, and lobby Congresson economic policy.[7] The American Center for International Labor Solidarity started out as the Free Trade UnionCommittee (FTUC), which internationally promoted free labor-unions.[8]

Allied groups"Allied groups" are organizations that have more informal relationships to the AFL–CIO. Some, like the Labor andWorking-Class History Association, are truly independent organizations that wish to work very closely with theAFL–CIO and promote its mission and goals. Others, like American Rights at Work, are independent in name only;they are nonprofit, nonpartisan organizations with their own articles of incorporation, charter, governance structure,etc., but are funded largely by the AFL–CIO, and their boards are dominated by its directors. Others are plainlyprograms of the AFL–CIO operated as federation-wide, cross-cutting organizations serving AFL–CIO goals (such asdisaster relief or member mobilization apart from legislative or organizing work). These programs have little or nostaff (often using staff already employed by the AFL–CIO), and little or no need for funding (or using fundsprovided on an as-needed basis through existing AFL–CIO budgets).As of January 2007, there are four allied groups:• American Rights at Work• Community Services Network• Labor and Working-Class History Association• Working America

AFLCIO 103

Programs"Programs" are organizations established and controlled by the AFL–CIO to serve certain organizational goals.Because of legal requirements (such as federal and state securities laws), they are truly independent organizations.But their governance structures are either dominated by or have sizable blocks of AFL–CIO directors, whicheffectively direct them to implement policies favored by the AFL–CIO.Programs serve a variety of goals. For example, the AFL–CIO Building Trust enables union pension and healthfunds to invest in the for-profit Building Investment Trust. The Trust then uses this capital to construct officebuildings, hotels, housing developments, and other capital construction. Some profits are kept by the Trust to buildits investment capabilities, the rest are distributed to the investors. Other programs serve goals such as the bankingneeds of individual union members (AFL–CIO Credit Union) or to provide credit card and other consumer services(Union Privilege).As of January 2007, there were five programs of the AFL–CIO:• AFL-CIO Building Investment Trust• AFL-CIO Employees Federal Credit Union• AFL-CIO Housing Investment Trust• National Labor College• Union Privilege

International policyThe AFL–CIO is affiliated to the Brussels-based International Trade Union Confederation, formed November 1,2006, and incorporating the member organizations of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions, of whichthe AFL–CIO had long been part. The ITUC is the most representative international labor grouping.

HistoryFor the history of the AFL-CIO prior to and including the merger see American Federation of Labor and Congressof Industrial Organizations and Labor unions in the United States.

In 2003, the AFL–CIO began an intense internal debate over the future of the labor movement in the United Stateswith the creation of the New Unity Partnership (NUP), a loose coalition of some of the AFL–CIO's largest unions.This debate intensified in 2004, after the defeat of labor-backed candidate John Kerry in the November 2004 U.S.presidential election. The NUP's program for reform of the federation included reduction of the central bureaucracy,more money spent on organizing new members rather than on electoral politics, and a restructuring of unions andlocals, eliminating some smaller locals and focusing more along the lines of industrial unionism.In 2005, the NUP dissolved and the Change to Win Federation (CtW) formed, threatening to secede from theAFL–CIO if its demands for major reorganization were not met. As the AFL–CIO prepared for its 50th anniversaryconvention [9] in late July, three of the federations' four largest unions announced their withdrawal from thefederation: the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the International Brotherhood of Teamsters ("TheTeamsters"),[10] and the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW).[11] UNITE HEREdisaffiliated in mid-September 2005,[12] the United Farm Workers left in January 2006,[13] and the Laborers'International Union of North America disaffiliated on June 1, 2006.[14]

In addition to the issues listed above, the dispute was seen as deeply personal. SEIU President Andy Stern, the mostoutspoken leader of the Change to Win coalition, was once considered the protege of former SEIU President andAFL–CIO President John Sweeney.Two unions later left CtW and rejoined the AFL–CIO. After a bitter internal leadership dispute that involved allegations of embezzlement and accusations that SEIU was attempting to raid the union,[15] a substantial number of

AFLCIO 104

UNITE HERE members formed their own union (Workers United) while the remainder of UNITE HERE reaffiliatedwith the AFL–CIO on September 17, 2009.[16] The Laborers' International Union of North America said on August13, 2010, that it would also leave Change to Win and rejoin the AFL–CIO in October 2010.[17]

Presidents• George Meany (1955–1979)• Lane Kirkland (1979–1995)• Thomas R. Donahue (1995)• John J. Sweeney (1995–2009)• Richard Trumka (2009- )

Notes[1] Form LM-2 Labor Organization Annual Report. AFL-CIO National Headquarters. File Number 000-106. June 30, 2008. (http:/ / kcerds.

dol-esa. gov/ query/ orgReport. do) Accessed 2009-09-19[2] Greenhouse, Steven. "Promising a New Day, Again." (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2009/ 09/ 16/ business/ 16labor. html) New York Times.

September 15, 2009; Greenhouse, Steven. "Labor Leader Is Stepping Down Both Proud and Frustrated." (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2009/09/ 13/ us/ 13labor. html) New York Times. September 12, 2009.

[3] http:/ / aflcio. org/[4] Kaminski, Matthew. "What Labor Wants." (http:/ / online. wsj. com/ article/ SB10001424052970204518504574420750453047942.

html?mod=googlenews_wsj) Wall Street Journal. September 18, 2009.[5] AFL-CIO, "AFL-CIO Announces Huge 'FINAL FOUR' GOTV Push" "Press release" Oct. 30 2010 (http:/ / www. aflcio. org/ mediacenter/

prsptm/ pr10302006a. cfm)[6] Michelle Amber, "SEIU Agrees to Pay Nearly $4 Million to Settle Dispute With AFL-CIO Over Dues," Daily Labor Report, March 2, 2006.[7] Gilroy, Tom. "Labor to Stress Get-Out-the-Vote Among Members in Fall Elections," Labor Relations Week, October 21, 1998.[8] Under AFL-CIO president Lane Kirkland, the Free Trade Union Committee had four units: the American Institute for Free Labor

Development (AIFLD), which covered Latin America; the African-American Labor Center (AALC); the Asian-American Free Labor Institute(AAFLI); and the Free Trade Union Institute (FTUI), which was active Europe. These four units were merged into the American Center forInternational Labor Solidarity in 1997.

[9] http:/ / www. afl-cio. org/ aboutus/ thisistheaflcio/ convention/ 2005/[10] Edsall, Thomas B. (July 26, 2005). "Two Top Unions Split From AFL-CIO, Others Are Expected To Follow Teamsters" (http:/ / www.

washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ content/ article/ 2005/ 07/ 25/ AR2005072500251. html). The Washington Post. . Retrieved 2009-08-12.[11] Greenhouse, Steven. "Third Union Is Leaving A.F.L.-C.I.O." (http:/ / query. nytimes. com/ gst/ fullpage.

html?res=950DE4DB113FF933A05754C0A9639C8B63& scp=1& sq=) New York Times. July 30, 2005.[12] Greenhouse, Steven. "4th Union Quits A.F.L.-C.I.O. in a Dispute Over Organizing." (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2005/ 09/ 15/ national/

15labor. html?scp=2& sq=) New York Times. September 15, 2005.[13] Greenhouse, Steven. "Washington: United Farm Workers Quit A.F.L.-C.I.O." (http:/ / query. nytimes. com/ gst/ fullpage.

html?res=9C0DE7DA173FF930A25752C0A9609C8B63& scp=1& sq=) New York Times. January 13, 2006.[14] "Laborers' Announce Official Split With AFL-CIO As of June 1." Engineering News-Record. May 29, 2006; "Laborer's to Make AFL-CIO

Break Official." Chicago Sun Times. May 23, 2006.[15] Larrubia, Evelyn. "UNITE HERE Faction Sets Vote on Leaving Union." (http:/ / articles. latimes. com/ 2009/ mar/ 07/ nation/ na-unite7)

Los Angeles Times. March 7, 2009; Mishak, Michael. "UNITE HERE Even More Split as Co-Leader Resigns in Huff." (http:/ / www.lasvegassun. com/ news/ 2009/ may/ 31/ unite-here-even-more-split/ ) Las Vegas Sun. May 31, 2009; Greenhouse, Steven. "InfightingDistracts Unions at Crucial Time." (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2009/ 07/ 09/ business/ 09labor. html) New York Times. July 8, 2009.

[16] Greenhouse, Steve. "Union Rejoining A.F.L.-C.I.O." (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2009/ 09/ 18/ us/ 18brfs-UNIONREJOINI_BRF. html)New York Times. September 17, 2009; Stutz, Howard. "Culinary Parent UNITE HERE Rejoins AFL-CIO, Ending Four-Year Separation."(http:/ / www. lvrj. com/ business/ culinary-parent-unite-here-rejoins-afl-cio-ending-four-year-separation-59720837. html) Las VegasReview-Journal. September 18, 2009.

[17] "Construction Workers' Union to Rejoin A.F.L.-C.I.O." (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2010/ 08/ 15/ business/ 15labor. html) AssociatedPress. August 14, 2010.

AFLCIO 105

References• Amber, Michelle. "SEIU Agrees to Pay Nearly $4 Million to Settle Dispute With AFL-CIO Over Dues." Daily

Labor Report. March 2, 2006.• Constitution of the AFL-CIO, as amended at the Twenty-Fifth Constitutional Convention, July 25-28, 2005.

(http:/ / www. afl-cio. org/ aboutus/ thisistheaflcio/ constitution/ ) Accessed January 15, 2007.• Gilroy, Tom. "Labor to Stress Get-Out-the-Vote Among Members in Fall Elections." Labor Relations Week.

October 21, 1998.• Greenhouse, Steven. "For Chairwoman of Breakaway Labor Coalition, Deep Roots in the Movement." New York

Times. October 10, 2005.

External links• AFL-CIO (http:/ / aflcio. org) official website• One Hat for Labor? (http:/ / www. thenation. com/ doc/ 20090518/ moberg/ single) by David Moberg, The

Nation, April 29, 2009

League of Conservation VotersThe League of Conservation Voters (LCV) is a political advocacy organization founded in 1969 by Americanenvironmentalist David Brower in the early years of the environmental movement. LCV's mission is to "advocate forsound environmental policies and to elect pro-environmental candidates who will adopt and implement suchpolicies." As of 2009, the president of LCV is Gene Karpinski. It is headquartered in Washington, D.C.

Educational effortsLCV publishes the National Environmental Scorecard to educate the public about key environmental issues and toinform voters about the environmental voting records of their Congressional representatives. Building on theEnvironmental Scorecard, LCV draws special attention to those members of Congress with the mostpro-environment and anti-environment records through its "Environmental Champions" and "Dirty Dozen" lists.[1]

In addition to tracking voting records and endorsing or opposing candidates, the organization contributes to andparticipates in political and election campaigns. LCV strongly opposed many of President George W. Bush's policieswhich it believes adversely affect the environment.

Environmental Champion lists

2010• (only candidates who won their races will be listed here)

Dirty Dozen lists

2010• Michele Bachmann R-MN, Re-elected• Roy Blunt R-MO, Candidate US Senate, Elected• Carly Fiorina R-CA, US Senate candidate Defeated for election• Sen. Blanche Lincoln D-AR, US Senate candidate Defeated for re-election• Steve Pearce R-NM, Candidate US House, Elected

League of Conservation Voters 106

• Richard Pombo R-CA, Candidate US House, (defeated in primary election)• Pat Toomey R-PA, US Senate candidate, Elected [2]

2008• Rep. Tim Walberg R-MI, Defeated for re-election• Fmr. Rep. Anne Northup R-KY, Candidate US House, Defeated for election• Rep. Don Young R-AK, Re-elected• Sen. Elizabeth Dole R-NC, Defeated for re-election• Dean Andal R-CA, Candidate US House, Defeated for election• Rep. Sam Graves R-MO, Re-elected• Sen. Ted Stevens R-AK, Defeated for re-election• Sen. Mary Landrieu D-LA, Re-elected• Rep. Steve Pearce R-NM, Defeated for re-election• Sen. Mitch McConnell R-KY, Re-elected• Fmr. Rep. Bob Schaffer R-CO, Candidate US Senate, Defeated for election• Sen. Jim Inhofe R-OK, Re-elected• Rep. Joe Knollenberg R-MI, Defeated for re-election

2006• Sen. George Allen (R-VA), Defeated for re-election• Sen. Conrad Burns (R-MT), Defeated for re-election• Rep. Dan Boren (D-OK), Re-elected• Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX), Re-elected• Rep. Katherine Harris(R-FL), Defeated for re-election• Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ), Defeated for re-election• Rep. Richard Pombo (R-CA), Defeated for re-election• Rep. Deborah Pryce (R-OH), Re-elected• Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA), Defeated for re-election• Sen. Jim Talent (R-MO), Defeated for re-election• Rep. Charles Taylor (R-NC), Defeated for re-election• Rep. Heather Wilson (R-NM), Re-electedEight of the twelve listed (Allen, Burns, Santorum, Talent, Harris, Hayworth, Pombo and Taylor) were defeated inthe 2006 elections. Pryce won by a narrow margin in a disputed election, but did not run for re-election in 2008.Wilson also survived her re-election bid by just a few points, and she announced she would not run again in 2008.After making that announcement, Wilson entered the United States Senate race to succeed Senator Pete Domenici,and lost in the primary to Steve Pearce.

League of Conservation Voters 107

2004• President George W. Bush (R) & Vice-President Dick Cheney (R), Re-elected• Rep. Bob Beauprez (R-CO), Re-elected• Rep. Max Burns (R-GA), Defeated• Rep. Richard Burr (R-NC), Candidate US Senate, Elected• Rep. Phil Crane (R-IL), Defeated• Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX), Re-elected• Mel Martinez (R-FL), Candidate US Senate, Elected• Rep. George Nethercutt (R-WA), Candidate US Senate, Defeated• Rep. Collin Peterson (D-MN), Re-elected• Rep. Rick Renzi (R-AZ), Re-elected• Fmr. Rep. John Thune (R-SD), Candidate US Senate, Elected• Greg Walcher (R-CO), Candidate US House, Defeated.

1970 (original list)The original "Dirty Dozen" list was developed by Environmental Action and the League of Conservation Voters in1970 environmental movement, shortly after Earth Day. [3]

• Rep. George Hyde Fallon D-MD, defeated in primary election• Rep. Byron Rogers D-CO, defeated in primary election• Rep. Ross Adair, R-IN defeated by J. Edward Roush• Rep. William Hanes Ayres, R-OH, defeated by John F. Seiberling[4]

• Rep. William Cowger R-KY defeated by Romano Mazzoli[5]

• Rep. David W. Dennis D-IN, Re-elected• Rep. John Henry Kyl R-IA, Re-elected, defeated 1972.• Rep. Odin Langen R-MN, defeated by Robert Bergland• Rep. Earl Landgrebe, R-IN, Re-elected• Rep. Henry C. Schadeberg R-WI, defeated by Les Aspin• Rep. Larry Winn R-KS, Re-elected• Rep. Roger Zion R-IN, Re-elected

References[1] http:/ / thepacker. com/ United-Fresh-meets-with-federal-officials-on-residue-worries/ Article. aspx?oid=1275945&

fid=PACKER-TOP-STORIES& aid=117[2] Pat Toomey added to 2010 "Dirty Dozen" list (http:/ / www. actgreen. com/ 2010/ 08/ lc-v-adds-pat-toomey-to-2010-dirty. html)[3] (http:/ / news. google. com/ newspapers?id=dvENAAAAIBAJ& sjid=pHUDAAAAIBAJ& pg=6164,5639596& dq=dirty-dozen+

league-of-conservation-voters& hl=en) First "dirty dozen" list St. Petersburg Times - October 29, 1970[4] (http:/ / news. google. com/ newspapers?id=PzsRAAAAIBAJ& sjid=IeEDAAAAIBAJ& pg=6760,3021068& dq=dirty-dozen+

league-of-conservation-voters& hl=en) Eugene Register-Guard, November 11, 1970[5] (http:/ / news. google. com/ newspapers?id=jzwgAAAAIBAJ& sjid=RmYEAAAAIBAJ& pg=6037,4791857& dq=william+ cowger& hl=en)

Report on Cowger's defeat - Sarasota Herald-Tribune, December 13, 1970

League of Conservation Voters 108

External links• LCV website (http:/ / www. lcv. org/ )• LCV National Environmental Scorecard (http:/ / www. lcv. org/ scorecard)• Presidential Profiles 2008 (http:/ / presidentialprofiles2008. org)

America VotesAmerica Votes is an American 527 organization whose mission is to build a permanent progressive campaigninfrastructure. America Votes leads national and state-based coalitions to develop shared strategies that advanceprogressive policies, engage communities and increase voter turnout.[1]

America Votes leads the coordination, servicing and strategy of the progressive movement's grassroots campaignsfor advocacy and elections, and advances vital election reforms and voting rights in the states.America Votes was the brainchild of Ellen Malcolm, the founder of EMILY's List, former Sierra Club executivedirector Carl Pope, Harold Ickes, Steve Rosenthal and Andy Stern, the former president of Service EmployeesInternational Union (SEIU).[2] Greg Speed serves as Executive Director of the organization.[3]

America Votes has offices in Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire,New Mexico, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Washington, DC.

Member organizations• AFL-CIO[4]

• American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)• American Association for Justice• Ballot Initiative Strategy Center• Campaign for Community Change• Clean Water Action• Democracia Ahora• Education Voters of America• EMILY's List• Human Rights Campaign• International Brotherhood of Teamsters• League of Conservation Voters• NAACP National Voter Fund• National Education Association• Planned Parenthood Action Fund• Progressive Future• ProgressNow Action• Service Employees International Union (SEIU)• Sierra Club• United Food and Commercial Workers International Union• USAction• Women's Campaign Forum• Women's Voices. Women Vote.• Working America

America Votes 109

References[1] Luo, Michael (June 27, 2008). "Shifts for Soft-Money Groups" (http:/ / query. nytimes. com/ gst/ fullpage.

html?res=9906EED8103FF934A15755C0A96E9C8B63). The New York Times. . Retrieved 25 September 2010.[2] Lester, Beth (May 31, 2004). "Coalition Of Dem-Leaning Groups Rally Behind Kerry" (http:/ / www. cbsnews. com/ stories/ 2004/ 05/ 28/

politics/ main620236. shtml). CBS News. . Retrieved 25 September 2010.[3] "Leadership" (http:/ / www. americavotes. org/ about/ leadership). America Votes. . Retrieved 25 September 2010.[4] Goldberg, Mark Leon (February 20, 2006). "Ashes of ACT" (http:/ / www. prospect. org/ cs/ articles?article=ashes_of_act). The American

Prospect. . Retrieved 25 September 2010.

External links• America Votes website (http:/ / www. americavotes. org)

Progress for AmericaProgress for America (PFA) (a 501(c)(4)) and its affiliate Progress for America Voter Fund (PFA-VF) (a 527committee) are national tax-exempt organizations in the United States. PFA was established in 2001 to supportGeorge W. Bush's "agenda for America." The PFA Voter Fund, which was set up in 2004, raised $38 million insupport of Bush's 2004 election bid.

HistoryPFA was registered as a 501(c)(4) group in February 2001 by Tony Feather, a political director of the Bush-Cheney2000 campaign and partner at DCI Group as well as at the affiliated telemarketing and fundraising firm of FeatherLarson Synhorst-DCI (FLS-DCI). Feather set up PFA as a “grassroots organization that mobilizes the public tocontact their members of Congress about pending legislation and to write local newspapers to publicize the WhiteHouse’s agenda,” the Center for Public Integrity wrote in 2002. During the first part of the Bush Administration, itled campaigns to support tax cuts, conservative judicial appointments and energy legislation.Feather told the Washington Post in August 2002 that PFA was simply a vehicle for building grassroots support forBush Administration policies. However others said it was intended to accept soft money donations which politicalparties were barred from accepting starting in 2002.[1] Feather left PFA in 2003 after receiving a legal opinion thathis involvement with it and the Bush-Cheney campaign could violate regulations barring coordination between theentities.[2]

PFA spin-offs and projects

Progress for America Voter FundOn July 21, 2004, complaints were filed with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) by Democracy 21, theCampaign Legal Center, and the Center for Responsive Politics. The Complaints charged that Progress for AmericaVoter Fund (PFA-VF) was illegally raising and spending soft money to influence the 2004 presidential elections.On February 28, 2007 the Federal Election Commission (FEC) reached a settlement with Progress for Americarelated to its activities in 2004.[3] In the 2004 election cycle, the Fund had raised $45 million. Under the terms of thesettlement, PFA-VF did not admit to any wrong doing, and agreed to pay $750,000 and to register as a politicalcommittee if it undertakes any activities similar to those in 2004. The FEC stated: "Over $41 million of those fundsconsisted of excessive contributions from individuals, while over $2 million came from sources prohibited frommaking contributions . . . ."[4]

Progress for America 110

Ashley and friendsIn the last three weeks leading up to the November 2, 2004, election, Progress for America Voter Fund (PFA-VF)outspent the next largest spending Democratic 527 group three-to-one on political ads. It bought $16.8 million worthof television and radio ad time. According to Federal Election Commission data, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth camein second with $6.3 million in ad spending. In third place was Democrat Harold Ickes’ Media Fund, which spent $5million.[5] PFA produced two “harshly anti-Kerry ads that have become the subjects of controversy and debate,especially in the battleground states of Wisconsin and Iowa where they are running frequently,” the WashingtonPost’s Thomas Edsall wrote.PFA-VF spent $14.2 million on ad time for “Ashley’s Story,” which ran on cable stations and in nine key states.According to USA Today, the ad was supported by ashleysstory.com, as well as “e-mails, automated phone calls and2.3 million brochures” mailed to voters.[6]

"Ashley's Story" made Advertising Age columnist Bob Garfield's list of top 10 "Ads I Loved" for 2004. Garfieldwrites, "We said, 'It might come down to one commercial,' and it may well have. A retelling of candidate Bush'sencounter with an Ohio Teenager answered undecideds' doubts. The president wasn't a dry-well-drilling gambler,moron and fool... he's a fearless leader who will hug us."

The push for privatized Social SecurityAfter winning re-election in 2004, Bush emphasized changes in Social Security as a major domestic goal of hissecond term. He called for partial privatization of the system. PFA "has estimated it will spend $20 millionpromoting private accounts. It has run a series of ads on cable television, including a spot that invokes the legacy ofDemocratic President Franklin Roosevelt, who signed the legislation creating the retirement system", the HoustonChronicle reported in February 2005.The Chronicle raised the question whether investment firms, "which are trying to keep a low profile in the currentdebate, will quietly contribute to a number of groups promoting Social Security overhaul because private accountswill increase their business." PFA's McCabe denies "his group would serve as a front for investment firms." But PFA"will be soliciting from donors who have helped the organization in the past." The head of the prominent investmentfirm Charles Schwab contributed $50,000 to the group's political arm in 2004. Schwab also gave $75,000 to the Clubfor Growth, which is also lobbying for Social Security privatization.[7]

The advantage of arrangements between corporate donors and groups like PFA, however, is acknowledge. ThomasEdsall wrote in the Washington Post, "For corporations wary of publicity over their involvement in [promotingSocial Security privatization, tort reform] and other controversial issues, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Institutefor Legal Reform, the Club for Growth and Progress for America pointedly offer donors the promise ofanonymity."[8]

In late February 2005, the Houston Chronicle reported that Texas A&M University economics professor Thomas R.Saving had joined up with Progress for America as an advisor and spokesman. Saving, however, is serving as one ofseven trustees for the Social Security Administration, raising questions about potential conflicts of interest betweenhis advocacy work at PFA and his role as a Social Security "trustee." Saving is also a fellow at the National Centerfor Policy Analysis. According to the Chronicle, former U.S. Treasurer Rosario Marin joined PFA as an advisor aswell.[9]

"I'm interested in the issues and I'm working on them and I'll continue to work on them", Saving told the Chronicle."I already do an awful lot of speeches about Social Security and Medicare."

Progress for America 111

Federal judicial battlesIn May 2005, PFA began running ads targeted at pressuring Republicans Senators into supporting a ban on Senatefilibusters for judicial nominations. Associated Press reported that PFA would spend $350,000 on "radio ads onChristian stations" and $1.5 million on television ads to be run in Alaska, Arkansas, Maine, North Dakota, Nebraskaand Rhode Island as well as nationally.[10]

In June 2005, The Hill reported that PFA intended to "spend at least $18 million on the expected fight to replaceWilliam Rehnquist, chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court." PFA's campaign would include "national cable-newsand broadcast-television ads in targeted states. The group will also coordinate grassroots organizers andpublic-relations specialists in 18 states, including states represented by centrist Republican senators such as Arizona,Maine and Oregon" The Hill wrote. The groups will also use phone-bank and direct-mail in its campaign. "BeforeSenate confirmation of Owen and Brown, PFA claims to have helped generate nearly 80,000 telephone callssupporting their nominations", The Hill reported. PFA will work closely with the Judicial Confirmation Network andthe Committee for Justice on the campaign.[11]

On June 22, 2005, PFA issued a press release announcing a $700,000 campaign in anticipation of a Supreme CourtJustice vacancy during the Court's summer break. The campaign included buys on big newspapers' Internet sites, anda roll-out of a new website: upordownvote.com.

Iraq War advertising campaignStarting in 2006, Progress for America began an ad campaign in support of the Iraq War, with a 1 million dollar adcampaign in Minnesota.[12] Progress for America spokesman Stuart Roy said the group purchased "a saturation buy"in Minnesota and said that bolstering support for the war now "will be a major focus, if not the major focus ofProgress for America."[12] These ads often feature war veterans speaking in support for the war and for thenpresident Bush.

ContactProgress for AmericaPO Box 19242Washington, DC 20036Phone: 888-261-1938Website: http:/ / www. progressforamerica. org/ pfa/

References[1] Edsall, Thomas B. (August 25, 2002). "New Ways To Harness Soft Money In Works; Political Groups Poised To Take Huge Donations". The

Washington Post: p. A.01.[2] Edsall, Thomas B. (May 25, 2004). "GOP Creating Own '527' Groups; Unregulated Funds Can Be Raised". The Washington Post: p. A.15.[3] "Progress For America voter fund statement on the announced settlement with the Federal election commission" (http:/ / i. a. cnn. net/ cnn/

2007/ images/ 02/ 28/ pfa. statement. pdf). Progress For America. February 28, 2007. . Retrieved 8 March 2010.[4] http:/ / i. a. cnn. net/ cnn/ 2007/ images/ 02/ 28/ fec. pdf[5] Alex Knott, Aron Pilhofer and Derek Willis (November 3, 2004). "GOP 527s Outspend Dems in Late Ad Blitz" (http:/ / projects.

publicintegrity. org/ 527/ report. aspx?aid=421). The Center for Public Integrity. . Retrieved 8 March 2010.[6] Keen, Judy; Mark Memmott (2004-10-18). "Most expensive TV campaign ad goes for emotions" (http:/ / www. usatoday. com/ news/

politicselections/ nation/ president/ 2004-10-18-adwatch-ashley_x. htm). USA Today. . Retrieved 8 March 2010.[7] Bennett Roth (February 14, 2005). "Social Security lobbying war is on" (http:/ / www. chron. com/ disp/ story. mpl/ politics/ 3038264. html).

Houston Chronicle. . Retrieved 8 March 2010.[8] Thomas B. Edsall (February 13, 2005). "Conservatives Join Forces for Bush Plans" (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ articles/

A19782-2005Feb12. html). Washington Post. . Retrieved 8 March 2010.[9] Don Jordan (February 24, 2005). "A&M professor to advise Social Security reformers" (http:/ / www. chron. com/ disp/ story. mpl/ nation/

3056334. html). Houston Chronicle. . Retrieved 8 March 2010.

Progress for America 112

[10] Joel Roberts (May 2, 2005). "Judge Wars Hit Airwaves" (http:/ / www. cbsnews. com/ stories/ 2005/ 05/ 02/ politics/ main692369. shtml).CBS News. . Retrieved 8 March 2010.

[11] Alexander Bolton (June 16, 2005). "Conservative groups to spend over $20M on Supreme Court" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/20060215185646/ http:/ / www. thehill. com/ thehill/ export/ TheHill/ News/ Frontpage/ 061605/ conservative. html). The Hill. Archived fromthe original (http:/ / www. thehill. com/ thehill/ export/ TheHill/ News/ Frontpage/ 061605/ conservative. html) on 15 February 2006. .Retrieved 8 March 2010.

[12] Mike Dorning (28 February 2006). "TV Ads Push Iraq War Support" (http:/ / www. truthout. org/ article/ tv-ads-push-iraq-war-support).The Chicago Tribune. . Retrieved 9 March 2010.

External links• " Progress for America (http:/ / www. opensecrets. org/ 527s/ 527cmtedetail. php?cycle=2008&

ein=201170395)", OpenSecrets.org.• Nicholas Confessore, "Bush's Secret Stash," (http:/ / www. washingtonmonthly. com/ features/ 2004/ 0405.

confessore. html) Washington Monthly, May 1, 2004.• Glen Justice and Jim Rutenberg, " Advocacy Groups Step Up Costly Battle of Political Ads (http:/ / www.

nytimes. com/ 2004/ 09/ 25/ politics/ campaign/ 25ads. html?ex=1097173535& ei=1& en=838272668336c46e)",The New York Times, September 25, 2004, A10.

• Glen Justice, " New Pet Cause for the Very Rich: Swaying the Election (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2004/ 09/25/ politics/ campaign/ 25donors. html?ex=1097173)", The New York Times, September 25, 2004, A10.

• Thomas Edsall, " After Late Start, Republican Groups Jump Into the Lead (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ac2/ wp-dyn/ A38749-2004Oct16?language=printer)", Washington Post, October 17, 2004, page A17.

• Laura Miller, "The Fix Behind Fixing Social Security," (http:/ / www. prwatch. org/ prwissues/ 2005Q1/ ssfix.html) PR Watch, 2005 (Vol. 12, No. 1).

• Glen Justice, "Social Security Fight Begins, Over a Bill Still Nonexistent," (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2005/ 02/17/ politics/ 17lobby. html) New York Times, February 17, 2005.

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers 113

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

IBEW

Full name International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

Founded 1891

Members 725,000 (2009)

Country United States, Canada, Panama, Puerto Rico

Affiliation AFL-CIO, CLC

Key people Edwin D. Hill, president

Office location Washington, DC

Website www.ibew.org [1]

The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) is a labor union which represents workers in theelectrical industry in the United States, Canada, Panama and several Caribbean island nations; particularlyelectricians, or Inside Wiremen, in the construction industry and linemen and other employees of public utilities. Theunion also represents some workers in the computer, telecommunications, broadcasting, and other fields related toelectrical work. It was founded in 1891 shortly after homes and businesses in the United States began receivingelectricity. Its international president is Ed Hill. The IBEW is affiliated with the AFL-CIO.The beginnings of the IBEW were in the Electrical Wiremen and Linemen's Union No. 5221, founded in St. Louis,Missouri in 1890. By 1891, after sufficient interest was shown in a national union, a convention was held onNovember 21, 1891 in St. Louis. At the convention, the IBEW, then known as the National Brotherhood of ElectricalWorkers (NBEW), was officially formed. The American Federation of Labor gave the NBEW a charter as an AFLaffiliate on December 7, 1891. The union's official journal, The Electrical Worker, was first published on January 15,1893, and has been published ever since. At the 1899 convention in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, the union's name wasofficially changed to the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.The union went through lean times in its early years, then struggled through six years of schism during the 1910s,when two rival groups each claimed to be the duly elected leaders of the union. In 1919, as many employers weretrying to drive unions out of the workplace through a national open shop campaign, the union agreed to form theCouncil on Industrial Relations, a bipartite body made up of equal numbers of management and unionrepresentatives with the power to resolve any collective bargaining disputes. That body still functions today and haslargely eliminated strikes in the IBEW's jurisdiction in the construction industry.In September 1941, the National Apprenticeship Standards for the Electrical Construction Industry, a joint effortamong the IBEW, the National Electrical Contractors Association, and the Federal Committee on Apprenticeship,were established. The IBEW added additional training programs and courses as needed to keep up with newtechnologies, including an industrial electronics course in 1959 and an industrial nuclear power course in 1966.

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers 114

Today, the IBEW conducts apprenticeship programs for electricians, linemen, and VDV installers (who installlow-voltage wiring such as computer networks), in conjunction with the National Electrical Contractors Association,under the auspices of the National Joint Apprenticeship and Training Committee (NJATC), which allows apprenticesto "earn while you learn." In Canadian jurisdictions the IBEW does not deliver apprenticeship training, but doesconduct supplemental training for government trained apprentices and journeypersons, often at no or little cost to itsmembers. The IBEW local 353 Toronto requires all apprentices to be registered with the JAC (Joint ApprenticeshipCouncil) for a number of safety courses, pre-apprenticeship training, pre trade school coures, supplementary training,as well as pre exam courses.The IBEW's membership peaked in 1972 at approximately 1 million members. The membership numbers were in aslow decline throughout the rest of the 1970s and the 1980s, but have since stabilized. One major loss of membershipfor the IBEW came about because of the court-ordered breakup at the end of 1982 of AT&T, where the IBEW washeavily organized among both telephone workers and in AT&T's manufacturing facilities. Membership as of 2010stands at about 725,000 according to their own official website.

List of International Presidents• Henry Miller (1891-1893)• Queren Jansen (1893-1894)• H. W. Sherman (1894-1897)• J. H. Maloney (1897-1899)• Thomas Wheeler (1899-1901)• W. A. Jackson (1901-1903)• Frank Joseph McNulty (1903-1919) - first full-time, paid president of the union; elected at Salt Lake City

Conference in 1903, retired at New Orleans Conference in 1919• James Patrick Noonan (acting president, 1917, president 1919-1929) - died in office• Henry H. Broach (1929-1933)• Daniel (Dan) W. Tracy (1933-1940)• Edward J. Brown (1940-1947)• Daniel (Dan) W. Tracy (1947-1954)• J. Scott Milne (1954-1955)• Gordon M. Freeman (1955-1968)• Charles H. Pillard (1968-1986)• John Joseph (Jack) Barry (1986-2001)• Edwin D. (Ed) Hill (2001-present)

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers 115

External links• IBEW - official website [1]

• IBEW Hour Power [2]

Archives• International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 77 (Seattle, Wash.) Records, 1905-2003. [3] 14 cubic feet.

At the Labor Archives of Washington State, University of Washington Libraries Special Collections [4].

References[1] http:/ / www. ibew. org/[2] http:/ / www. ibewhourpower. com/[3] http:/ / www. lib. washington. edu/ specialcoll/ findaids/ docs/ papersrecords/ IBEWLocal77_5569. xml[4] http:/ / www. lib. washington. edu/ specialcoll/ laws

Economic Freedom FundThe Economic Freedom Fund (EFF) is a 527 group started in 2006 by Bob J. Perry, with a $5 million donation.Only one person is officially associated with the group: Charles H. Bell Jr.,[1] a lawyer from California, who is thegeneral counsel for the California Republican Party,[2] and the Republican National Lawyers Association's vicepresident for the election education advisory council.[3]

The $5 million initial donation makes the EFF one of the top ten 527 groups in the 2006 election cycle in terms ofreceipts.[4]

EFF says its aim is to "educate the public concerning issues related to the preservation of economic freedom, thepromotion of economic growth and prosperity for the people of the United States of America."[5]

Focus of effortsAll of EFF's campaign ads to date attack Democratic candidates.[6] So far the attacks have been on:• John Barrow (D-GA)• Leonard Boswell (D-IA)• Baron Hill (challenger in Indiana's 9th District)• Jim Marshall (D-GA)• Alan Mollohan (D-WV)[7]

• Darlene Hooley (D-OR)[8]

Push polls

IndianaIn September 2006, the group may have violated a 1988 Indiana law that bars companies from placing a prerecorded,automated call to a person unless a real person, in a live conversation, first speaks and gets permission to play therecorded portion of the call. The calls were in support of incumbent Representative Mike Sodrel[9] , and were aclassic push poll, designed to smear Sodrel's opponent, Baron Hill, while appearing to be a legitimate survey.[10]

After at least seven complaints were made to the state attorney general's office, the campaign notified the office thatthey had halted the calls. The Indiana law allows for a penalty of up to $5,000 per violation (per call made, not percomplaint).[11]

Economic Freedom Fund 116

In late September, FreeEats.com, the northern Virginia company that makes automated political phone calls, filed alawsuit in federal court in Indianapolis, asking that the court direct the Indiana attorney general to stop enforcing thestate law. The company argued that the state law violated free speech rights under the United States and Indianaconstitutions, and that the ban was an unconstitutional restraint on interstate commerce.Indiana attorney general Steve Carter sued the EFF earlier in September, in Brown County Circuit Court afterreceiving 12 consumer complaints about the calls. The state's lawsuit seeks injunctions to stop them and fines of$5,000 for each violation. A hearing in the case is set for September 27.[12]

Other statesThe group apparently used the same "push poll" approach in races in Iowa and Georgia in September 2006.[10]

References[1] [[Federal Elections Commission (http:/ / www. talkingpointsmemo. com/ docs/ eff-fec/ ?resultpage=1& )] filing, September 13, 2006, by the

EFF][2] Paul Kiel, "Swift Boat Redux: Wealthy GOP Donor Drops $5 Mil for New Group" (http:/ / www. tpmmuckraker. com/ archives/ 001518.

php), TPMMuckracker.com, September 14, 2006[3] Rich Hardwick, "Truth Test: Hidden Republicans Attack Marshall" (http:/ / www. wmaz. com/ redesign/ web/ news/ top_story.

aspx?storyid=29528), WMAZ news, Macon, Georgia, September 7, 2006[4] 527 Committee Activity: Top 50 Federally Focused Organizations (http:/ / www. opensecrets. org/ 527s/ 527cmtes. asp), opensecrets.com,

accessed September 15, 2006[5] About the EFF (http:/ / www. economicfreedomfund. com/ who. html), accessed September 15, 2006[6] EFF direct mail and television advertisements (http:/ / www. economicfreedomfund. com/ viewads. html), EFF website, accessed September

20, 2006[7] Paul Kiel, "GOP Attack Group Hits 2nd Georgia Dem" (http:/ / www. tpmmuckraker. com/ archives/ 001565. php), TPMMuckracker.com,

September 20, 2006[8] EFF ad, accessed October 4, 2006 (http:/ / www. image-com. org/ blog_links/ erickson1. rm)[9] Mary Beth Schneider, "Automated call gets a lot of static: Dems contact attorney general's office" (http:/ / www. indystar. com/ apps/ pbcs.

dll/ article?AID=/ 20060914/ NEWS02/ 609140489/ 1006/ NEWS01), September 14, 2006[10] Paul Kiel, "Shadowy 527 Behind Calls Hitting Democrats in Several States" (http:/ / www. tpmmuckraker. com/ archives/ 001520. php),

TPMMuckracker.com, September 14, 2006[11] Paul Kiel, "Indiana Sues Swift Boater's New Attack Group" (http:/ / www. tpmmuckraker. com/ archives/ 001547. php),

TPMMuckracker.com, September 18, 2006[12] Deanna Martin, "Virginia company sues Ind. over automated phone call ban" (http:/ / www. wvec. com/ sharedcontent/ APStories/ stories/

D8KA5L600. html), Associated Press, September 22, 2006

External links• EFF website (http:/ / www. economicfreedomfund. com/ index. html)• SourceWatch (http:/ / www. sourcewatch. org/ index. php?title=Economic_Freedom_Fund)• "Shadowy Attack Group Uses Shadowy Calling Firm" (http:/ / www. tpmmuckraker. com/ archives/ 001586. php)

Laborers' International Union of North America 117

Laborers' International Union of North America

LIUNA

Full name Laborers' International Union of North America

Founded April 13, 1903

Members 632,605 (March 31, 2010)[1]

Country United States, Canada

Affiliation AFL-CIO

Key people Terence M. O'Sullivan, General PresidentArmand E. Sabitoni, General Secretary-Treasurer and New England Regional Manager

Website www.liuna.org [2]

The Laborers' International Union of North America (LIUNA, often shortened to just the Laborers' Union) isan American and Canadian labor union formed in 1903. As of March 31, 2010, they have about 632,000 members,[1]

members, about 80,000 of which are in Canada.The current general president is Terence M. O'Sullivan who was appointed general president in 2000, elected bydelegates in 2001, and re-elected in 2006. He did not face an opponent in either election. The union is divided intonine regions across North America; these regions are further divided into a total of just over 500 local unions. Oneregion is in Canada and is led by Joseph Mancinelli.On June 1, 2006, O'Sullivan announced that LIUNA had disaffiliated from the AFL-CIO and joined the Change toWin Federation.[3] However, LIUNA officials said on August 13, 2010, that the union would leave Change to Winand rejoin the AFL-CIO in October 2010.[4]

Laborers' International Union of North America 118

Historical highlights

LIUNA's headquarters is in the MoreschiBuilding in downtown Washington, D.C.

April 13, 1903 - The Laborers' Union was formed on April 13, 1903,initially as a building construction union, called the International HodCarriers and Building Laborers' Union, with just over 8,000 foundingmembers.

Pittsburgh local

20th Century - During the early 20th century, the union achieved considerablewage rises for members in Pittsburgh, New York City, New York and Chicago,and orchestrated strikes in Boston, St. Louis and Philadelphia.

1920 - By 1920, membership had climbed to 96,000. The union backed calls byAfrican American workers to be allowed full and equal status as union members,denying permission for segregated unions to be founded in Kansas City andCincinnati.

1929 Great Depression to the 1930s - During the Great Depression of the 1930s,membership fell to under 30,000 as more and more lost their jobs, but by 1942,membership had climbed to 200,000 - over half of which left their jobs to servein World War II.

1950s - In the early 1950s, the union was involved in some of the first workerpension plans in Chicago. 1940s - By the early 1960s, workers in California successfully struck to earn pensionrights of their own -membership had now risen to 420,000, and the union renamed itself the Laborers' InternationalUnion of America.

1970s and 1980s - In the 70s and 80s, efforts were organized to enable greater rights for Latino laborers, improvededucation and training of all workers, and to encourage workers to look into the possibly lucrative field of asbestosremoval.1994 - By 1994, the United States Department of State had recognized construction as an apprenticeable occupation.The LIUNA were involved in the reconstruction of Interstate 10 in Los Angeles following an earthquake.September 11, 2001 - In 2001, over 3,000 members of the LIUNA participated in the clean up at Ground Zero inNew York, following the September 11 terrorist attacks.April 13, 2003 The Laborers' Union celebrated its 100th anniversary on April 13, 2003.

Laborers' International Union of North America 119

References[1] Office of Labor-Management Standards. Employment Standards Administration. U.S. Department of Labor. Form LM-2 labor Organization

Annual Report. Laborers' International Union of North America. File Number: 000-131 (http:/ / kcerds. dol-esa. gov/ query/ orgReport. do).Dated March 31, 2010. Retrieved August 15, 2010.

[2] http:/ / www. liuna. org[3] "Laborers' Announce Official Split With AFL-CIO As of June 1." Engineering News-Record. May 29, 2006; "Laborer's to Make AFL-CIO

Break Official." Chicago Sun Times. May 23, 2006.[4] "Construction Workers' Union to Rejoin A.F.L.-C.I.O." (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2010/ 08/ 15/ business/ 15labor. html) Associated Press.

August 14, 2010.

External links• www.liuna.org - Official site (http:/ / www. liuna. org)• www.LiunaBuildsAmerica.org - Build America So America Works campaign site (http:/ / www.

LiunaBuildsAmerica. org)• www.laborers.org (http:/ / www. laborers. org/ ) Unofficial members' site.

Progressive Majority 120

Progressive Majority

Progressive Majority

Motto "A Future Worth Fighting For"

Formation 1999

Type PAC

Headquarters 1825 K St. NW Suite 450, Washington, DC, 20006

Executive Director Gloria Totten

Website www.progressivemajority.org [1]

Progressive Majority is an American political group that recruits, trains, and elects progressive politicians to stateand local offices. It was founded in 1999 by leaders from organized labor, members of Congress, and progressivedonors as a multi-issue political action committee to enhance the political effectiveness of the progressivemovement. Progressive Majority currently operates and has offices in Arizona, California, Colorado, Minnesota,Ohio, Pennsylvania, Washington, and Wisconsin. It has elected 272 candidates so far and has already endorsed morethan 75 candidates for the 2008 elections[2] . Progressive Majority's president is Gloria Totten and there are currently496 people on its "farm team" of potential candidates. Progressive Majority has been credited with helping toachieve the dramatic Democratic advances that occurred in Colorado, Wisconsin, Washington, Ohio, andPennsylvania in the 2006 election cycle[3] .All potential candidates must take a questionnaire that tests their commitment to economic justice and civil rights,including gay rights, public education, universal healthcare, environmental protection, worker's rights, civil libertiesand reproductive freedom before receiving any support, training or funding from Progressive Majority.

HistoryWhen founded, Progressive Majority assisted progressive candidates in both state and federal elections, raising$818,000 in 2002. Because of the lack of potential candidates for higher office at the state and local levels, the Boardof Directors decided to shift the organization's focus toward the states in order to "recruit strong community leadersto run for state and local office and form the 'farm team' for the progressive movement."[4]

Offices were opened in Washington, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania in 2004, and the organization expanded toColorado and Arizona in 2005.[5] The California office opened in 2006, and offices opened in Minnesota and Ohio in2007. The number of candidates elected has increased steadily since Progressive Majority's founding, with 41candidates being elected in 2004, 53 elected in 2005, and 102 elected in 2006.[4] 23 candidates have been elected sofar in 2008.Public officials elected with the help of Progressive Majority include California Secretary of State Debra Bowen,Washington House of Representatives Majority Floor Leader Larry Springer, Washington state senator and 2007Humane Society of the United States state legislator of the year Brian Weinstein, and Arizona state senator PaulaAboud, one of Arizona's few openly gay elected officials.

Progressive Majority 121

Endorsed candidates who ran in 2008 included Mark Ridley-Thomas, who successfully ran for the Los AngelesCounty 2nd District Board of Supervisors, and Peter J. Goldmark, who successfully ran for WashingtonCommissioner of Public Lands.

Racial Justice CampaignIn 2004, Progressive Majority created the Racial Justice Campaign with the goal of increasing the representation ofminorities in government and electing a greater number of candidates of color. Three RJC candidates were elected in2004, five candidates in 2005, 16 candidates in 2006, and 21 candidates in 2007. Politicians elected with the help ofthe Racial Justice Campaign include California State Controller John Chiang, who is the highest ranking AsianPacific American elected state official in California, and Colorado state representative Ed Casso, who was electeddeputy whip for the Colorado House Democratic Caucus.

References[1] http:/ / www. progressivemajority. org/[2] Progressive Majority list of 2008 endorsed candidates (http:/ / www. progressivemajority. org/ candidates/ all-2008/ ). Progressive Majority.[3] Nichols, John (December 29, 2006). "Most Valuable Progressives of 2006" (http:/ / www. thenation. com/ blogs/ thebeat?bid=1&

pid=152347), The Nation.[4] Progressive Majority history (http:/ / www. progressivemajority. org/ History/ ). Progressive Majority.[5] Conniff, Ruth (June 8, 2006). " How to Build a Farm Team (http:/ / www. thenation. com/ doc/ 20060626/ conniff)", The Nation.

External links• Progressive Majority's official website (http:/ / www. progressivemajority. org)

Political action committeeIn the United States, a political action committee, or PAC, is the name commonly given to a private group,regardless of size, organized to elect political candidates or to advance the outcome of a political issue orlegislation.[1] Legally, what constitutes a "PAC" for purposes of regulation is a matter of state and federal law. Underthe Federal Election Campaign Act, an organization becomes a "political committee" by receiving contributions ormaking expenditures in excess of $1,000 for the purpose of influencing a federal election.[2]

Use of PACs (before 2010)When an interest group, union, or corporation wants to contribute to federal candidates or parties, it must do sothrough a PAC. These PACs receive and raise money from a "restricted class," generally consisting of managers andshareholders in the case of a corporation, and members in the case of funds to candidates for federal office.Contributions from corporate or labor union treasuries are illegal, though they may sponsor a PAC and providefinancial support for its administration and fundraising. Overall, PACs account for less than thirty percent of totalcontributions in U.S. Congressional races, and considerably less in presidential races.Contributions by individuals to federal PACs are limited to $5,000 per year. It is important to note, however, that asa result of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit decision in SpeechNow.org v.FEC, PACs which make only "independent expenditures" (that is, advertisements or other spending that calls for theelection or defeat of a federal candidate but which is not coordinated with a federal candidate or political party) arenot bound by this contribution limit.Corporations and unions may not contribute directly to federal PACs, though they may pay for the administrativecosts of a PAC affiliated with the specific corporation or union. Corporate-affiliated PACs may only solicit

Political action committee 122

contributions from executives, shareholders, and their families, while union-affiliated PACs may only solicitcontributions from members. "Independent" PACs not affiliated with a corporation, union, or trade or membershipassociation may solicit contributions from the general public but must pay their operating costs from these regulatedcontributions.Federal multi-candidate PACs are limited in the amount of money they can contribute to candidate campaigns orother organizations:• at most $5,000 per candidate per election. Elections such as primaries, general elections and special elections are

counted separately.• at most $15,000 per political party per year.• at most $5,000 per PAC per year.Under federal law, PACs are not limited in their ability to spend money independently of a candidate campaign. Thismay include expenditures on activities in support of (or against) a candidate, as long as they are not coordinated withthe candidate.If two or more PACs share the same sponsoring organization, they are considered to be "affiliated" and their totaldonations are counted under aggregate limits, i.e. the total donations from all may not exceed $5,000 for a specificcandidate in a given election.PACs must report all of the financial activities, including direct donations and other expenses, to the Federal ElectionCommission (FEC), which makes the reports available to the public.

Citizens United rulingIn 2010, the landmark case filed by Citizens United changed the rules regarding corporate campaign expenditures.This ruling made it legal for corporations and unions to spend from their general treasuries to finance independentexpenditures. Direct contributions are still prohibited.[3]

Categorization of PACs• See also List of political action committees.

Federal law allows for two types of PACs, connected and non-connected.

Connected PACsMost of the 4,600 active, registered PACs are "connected PACs" established by businesses, labor unions, tradegroups, or health organizations. These PACs receive and raise money from a "restricted class," generally consistingof managers and shareholders in the case of a corporation and members in the case of a union or other interest group.As of January 2009, there were 1,598 registered corporate PACs, 272 related to labor unions and 995 to tradeorganizations. [4]

Non-connected PACsGroups with an ideological mission, single-issue groups, and members of Congress and other political leaders mayform "non-connected PACs". These organizations may accept funds from any individual, business PAC ororganization. As of January 2009, there were 1,594 non-connected PACs, the fastest-growing category.[5]

Political action committee 123

Super PACsThe 2010 election marks the rise of a new political committee, dubbed "super PACs," and officially known as"independent-expenditure only committees," which can raise unlimited sums from corporations, unions and othergroups, as well as individuals.[6] The super PACs were made possible by two judicial decisions. First the CitizensUnited v. Federal Election Commission decision by the Supreme Court, which lifted spending limits. Second theSpeechnow v. FEC decision by the D.C. Circuit Court, which invoked the logic of Citizens United to dispense withcontribution limits on independent-expenditure committees. [7] The groups can also mount the kind of direct attackson candidates that were not allowed in the past.[8] Super PACs are not allowed to coordinate directly with candidatesor political parties and are required to disclose their donors [9] .In summer 2011, comedian Stephen Colbert brought attention to the issue of Super PACs by forming his own. As ofAugust 2011, 165,000 of his viewers had joined it.[10]

Leadership PACA leadership PAC in U.S. politics is a political action committee established by a member of Congress to supportother candidates. Under the FEC rules, leadership PACs are non-connected PACs, and can accept donations from anindividual or other PACs. While a leadership PAC cannot spend funds to directly support the campaign of itssponsor (through mail or ads), it may fund travel, administrative expenses, consultants, polling, and othernon-campaign expenses. It can also contribute to the campaigns of other candidates.[11] [12] [13]

Between 2008 and 2009, leadership PACs raised and spent more than $47 million.[14]

Controversial use of leadership PACs• Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (D) leadership PAC, Team Majority, was fined $21,000 by federal election

officials "for improperly accepting donations over federal limits."[15]

• Former Rep. John Doolittle's (R) leadership PAC, Superior California Federal Leadership Fund, paid his wife'ssingle-person company, Sierra Dominion Financial Solutions, 15 percent of all money raised ($68,630 in 2003and 2004, $224,000 in 2005 and 2006). A campaign committee report in February said Doolittle's campaign stillowed Julie Doolittle $137,000.[16] The PAC purchased $2,139 in gifts for Bose Corporation.[17]

• Former Rep. Richard Pombo (R) used his leadership PAC to pay hotel bills ($22,896) and buy baseball tickets($320) for donors.[18]

2008 electionIn the 2008 elections, the top nine PACs by money spent by themselves, their affiliates and subsidiaries were asfollows:1. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers PAC $3,344,6502. AT&T Federal PAC $3,108,2003. American Bankers Association (BANK PAC) $2,918,1404. National Beer Wholesalers Association PAC $2,869,0005. Dealers Election Action Committee of the National Automobile Dealers Association $2,860,0006. International Association of Fire Fighters $2,734,9007. International Union of Operating Engineers PAC $2,704,0678. American Association for Justice PAC $2,700,5009. Laborers' International Union of North America PAC $2,555,350

Political action committee 124

References[1] http:/ / www. sos. ky. gov/ kids/ civics/ glossary. htm[2] http:/ / www. fec. gov/ law/ feca/ feca. pdf (See § 431. Definitions #4)[3] 2 USC 441b[4] "News Release: Number of Federal PACs Increases" (http:/ / www. fec. gov/ press/ press2009/ 20090309PACcount. shtml), March 9, 2009,

Federal Election Commission[5] "News Release: Number of Federal PACs Increases" (http:/ / www. fec. gov/ press/ press2009/ 20090309PACcount. shtml), March 9, 2009,

Federal Election Commission[6] (http:/ / www. opensecrets. org/ outsidespending/ index. php), Center for Responsive Politics[7] Cordes, Nancy "Colbert gets a Super PAC; So what are they?" (http:/ / www. cbsnews. com/ stories/ 2011/ 06/ 30/ eveningnews/

main20075941. shtml). CBS News. June 30, 2011. Retrieved August 19th, 2011[8] [[Washington Post (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ content/ article/ 2010/ 09/ 27/ AR2010092706500. html,)][9] (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ content/ article/ 2010/ 09/ 27/ AR2010092706500. html), Washington Post[10] Bankoff, Caroline. "Colbert’s Super PAC Is Actually Pretty Serious" (http:/ / nymag. com/ daily/ intel/ 2011/ 08/

colberts_super_pac_actually_pretty_s. html), New York Magazine, August 22, 2011[11] Marcus Stern, and Jennifer LaFleur (September 26, 2009), Leadership PACs: Let the Good Times Roll (http:/ / www. propublica. org/

feature/ leadership-pacs-let-the-good-times-roll-925), Pro Publica, , retrieved December 10, 2009[12] "Leadership PACs and Sponsors" (http:/ / www. fec. gov/ data/ Leadership. do?format=html), Federal Election Commission[13] "Congress 101: Political Action Committees" (http:/ / corporate. cq. com/ wmspage. cfm?parm1=233), Congressional Quarterly[14] Leadership PACs (http:/ / www. opensecrets. org/ pacs/ industry. php?txt=Q03& cycle=2010), Center for Responsive Politics[15] "Pelosi PAC fined $21,000 by federal elections officials" (http:/ / www. usatoday. com/ news/ politicselections/ state/ california/

2004-02-11-pelosi-pac-fined_x. htm). USA Today. February 11, 2004. . Retrieved May 22, 2010.[16] Politics - FBI raids Doolittle house - sacbee.com (http:/ / www. sacbee. com/ 111/ story/ 157657-p2. html)[17] Political Action Committees (http:/ / www. opensecrets. org/ pacs/ expend. asp?strID=C00317511& Cycle=2006)[18] Weisman, Jonathan; Birnbaum, Jeffrey H. (July 11, 2006). "Lawmaker Criticized for PAC Fees Paid to Wife" (http:/ / www.

washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ content/ article/ 2006/ 07/ 10/ AR2006071001164. html). The Washington Post. . Retrieved May 22, 2010.

External links• Federal Election Commission (http:/ / www. fec. gov)

• Campaign Guide for Corporations and Labor Organizations (http:/ / www. fec. gov/ pdf/ colagui. pdf)• Campaign Guide for Nonconnected Committees (http:/ / www. fec. gov/ pdf/ nongui. pdf)

• OpenSecrets.org (http:/ / www. opensecrets. org)• PoliticalMoneyLine (http:/ / www. PoliticalMoneyLine. com/ )• New 'Super Pacs' bringing millions into campaigns (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ content/ article/

2010/ 09/ 27/ AR2010092706500. html), Dan Eggen and T.W. Farnam, The Washington Post, September 28,2010

Federal Election Campaign Act 125

Federal Election Campaign ActThe Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (FECA, Pub. L. No. 92-225, 86 Stat. 3, enacted February 7, 1972, 2U.S.C. § 431 [1] et seq.) is a United States federal law which increased disclosure of contributions for federalcampaigns. It was amended in 1974 to place legal limits on the campaign contributions. The amendment also createdthe Federal Election Commission (FEC).It was amended again in 1976, in response to the provisions ruled unconstitutional by Buckley v. Valeo and again in1979 to allow parties to spend unlimited amounts of hard money on activities like increasing voter turnout andregistration. In 1979, the Commission ruled that political parties could spend unregulated or "soft" money fornon-federal administrative and party building activities. Later, this money was used for candidate related issue ads,which led to a substantial increase in soft money contributions and expenditures in elections. This in turn createdures leading to passage of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act ("BCRA"), banning soft money expenditure byparties. Some of the legal limits on giving of "hard money" were also changed in by BCRA.FECA also requires campaigns and political committees to report the names, addresses, and occupations of donors of$200 or more.

Major provisionsThe major provisions of the 1971 Act and the 1974 amendment. Note that some provisions, including legal limits ofcontributions, have been modified by subsequent Acts.• Requirement for candidates to disclose sources of campaign contributions and campaign expenditure.• Federal Election Commission created.• Public funding available for Presidential primaries and general elections. Legal limits on campaign expenditure

for those that accept public funding.• Legal limits on campaign contributions by individuals and organizations (See table).• Prohibits:

• Donations directly from Corporations, Labor Organizations and National Banks• Donations from Government Contractors• Donations from Foreign Nationals• Cash Contributions over 100 Dollars• Contributions in the name of another (straw donor schemes)

Contribution LimitsThe FECA placed limits on contributions by individuals and groups to candidates, party committees and PACs.Some but not all of these limits are adjusted each election cycle for inflation. The chart below shows how the limitsapplied to the various participants in federal elections. :

Federal Election Campaign Act 126

To each candidate or candidatecommittee per election

To national partycommittee per calendar year To political action

committees per calendar year Total biennial

limit

Individuals may give: $2,400 $30,400 $5,000 $115,500

Multi candidatecommittees may give:

$5,000 $15,000 $5,000 No limit

Other politicalCommittees may give:

$2,400 $20,000 $5,000 No limit

HistoryAs early as 1905, President Theodore Roosevelt asserted the need for campaign finance reform and called forlegislation to ban corporate contributions for political purposes. In response, the United States Congress enacted theTillman Act of 1907, named for its sponsor Senator Benjamin Tillman, banning corporate contributions. Furtherregulation followed in the Federal Corrupt Practices Act enacted in 1910, and subsequent amendments in 1910 and1925, the Hatch Act, the Smith-Connolly Act of 1943, and the Taft-Hartley Act in 1947. These Acts sought to:• Limit the influence of wealthy individuals and special interest groups on the outcome of federal elections;• Regulate spending in campaigns for federal office; and• Deter abuses by mandating public disclosure of campaign finances.In 1971, Congress consolidated its earlier reform efforts in the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), institutingmore stringent disclosure requirements for federal candidates, political parties and Political action committees(PACs). Still, without a central administrative authority, the campaign finance laws were difficult to enforce.Public subsidies for federal elections, originally proposed by President Roosevelt in 1907, began to take shape aspart of the 1971 law, as Congress established the income tax checkoff to provide for the financing of Presidentialgeneral election campaigns and national party conventions. Amendments to the Internal Revenue Code in 1974established the matching fund program for Presidential primary campaigns.Following reports of serious financial abuses in the 1972 Presidential campaign, Congress amended the FECA in1974 to set limits on contributions by individuals, political parties and PACs. The 1974 amendments also establishedan independent agency, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) to enforce the law, facilitate disclosure andadminister the public funding program. The FEC opened its doors in 1975 and administered the first publicly fundedPresidential election in 1976.The Supreme Court struck down or narrowed several provisions of the 1974 amendments to the Act, including limitson spending and limits on the amount of money a candidate could donate to his or her own campaign in Buckley v.Valeo (1976).Congress made further amendments to the FECA in 1976 following those decisions; major amendments were alsomade in 1979 to streamline the disclosure process and expand the role of political parties.In 2002, Congress made major revisions to the FECA in the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, more commonlyreferred to as "McCain-Feingold." However, major portions of McCain-Feingold were struck down by the SupremeCourt on Constitutional grounds in Wisconsin Right to Life v. Federal Election Commission (2007), Davis v. FederalElection Commission (2008) and Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010). The latter case also struckdown FECA's complete ban on corporate and union independent spending, originally passed as part of theTaft-Hartley law in 1947.[2]

Federal Election Campaign Act 127

References[1] http:/ / www. law. cornell. edu/ uscode/ 2/ 431. html[2] The FEC and the Federal Campaign Finance Law (http:/ / www. fec. gov/ pages/ brochures/ fecfeca. shtml#Historical_Background)

External links• Text of original Act (http:/ / www. congress. gov/ cgi-bin/ cpquery/ ?& dbname=cp106& & r_n=hr756. 106&

sel=TOC_315131& )• Federal Election Commission (http:/ / www. fec. gov)• Federal Election Campaign Laws (http:/ / www. fec. gov/ law/ feca/ feca. pdf) (pdf)• RealCampaignReform.org (http:/ / www. realcampaignreform. org/ ) - archived site links to various related court

briefs and judicial opinions• CQ MoneyLine (http:/ / www. PoliticalMoneyLine. com/ ) - Congressional Quarterly campaign funding news site• OpenSecrets.org (http:/ / www. opensecrets. org/ ) - Center for Responsive Politics site for tacking campaign

contributions• National Institute on Money in State Politics (http:/ / www. followthemoney. org/ ) - information on money in

state politics• Campaign Legal Center (http:/ / www. campaignlegalcenter. org/ ) - analysis and reviews on campaign finance,

communication and ethics• Public Campaign (http:/ / www. publicampaign. org/ ) - organization advocating public funding of campaigns• Common Cause (http:/ / www. commoncause. org/ ) - organization advocating campaign finance regulations• Public Citizen (http:/ / www. citizen. org/ ) - organization advocating campaign finance regulations• Center for Competitive Politics (http:/ / www. campaignfreedom. org) - organization opposed to campaign

finance regulations

Corporate personhood 128

Corporate personhoodCorporate personhood refers to the question of which subset, if any, of rights afforded under the law to naturalpersons should also be afforded to corporations as legal persons.In the United States, corporations were recognized as having rights to contract, and to have those contracts honoredthe same as contracts entered into by natural persons, in Dartmouth College v. Woodward, decided in 1819. In the1886 case Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad, 118 U.S. 394, the Supreme Court recognized thatcorporations were recognized as persons for purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment.[1] [2]

The notion of corporations as persons

A woman at the Occupy Wall Street eventprotesting the idea of corporate personhood

As a matter of interpretation of the word "person" in the FourteenthAmendment, U.S. courts have extended certain constitutionalprotections to corporations. Opponents of corporate personhood seek toamend the U.S. Constitution to limit these rights to those provided bystate law and state constitutions.[3]

Others argue that corporations should have the protection of the U.S.Constitution, pointing out that they are organizations of people, andthat these people shouldn't be deprived of their human rights when theyjoin with others to act collectively.[4] In this view, treating corporationsas "persons" is a convenient legal fiction that allows corporations tosue and to be sued, that provides a single entity for easier taxation andregulation, that simplifies complex transactions that would otherwiseinvolve, in the case of large corporations, thousands of people, and thatprotects the rights of the shareholders, including the right ofassociation.

Some have argued in court that corporations should be allowed torefuse to hand over any incriminating documents due to the Fifth Amendment right given to people to not have toincriminate themselves; in one case "Appellants [suggested] that the use of the word "taxpayer" several times in theregulations requires that the fifth amendment self-incrimination warning be given to a corporation."[5] However thecourt did not agree in that 1975 case.

The Green Party,[6] the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom,[7] , Democracy Unlimited [8], andformer Vice-President Al Gore[9] are among those who have objected to the idea of corporate personhood. Theirobjections focus on constitutional protections granted to corporations, including claims of a Constitutional right tocontribute to political campaigns. Gore argues that the 1886 Southern Pacific decision entrenched the 'monopolies incommerce' that Thomas Jefferson had wanted to prohibit.[9]

After the Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission in 2010, a coalition group wasformed called Move to Amend [10] to call for a US Constitutional amendment to abolish Corporate Personhood.

Corporate personhood 129

Historical backgroundThe history of corporate law in the United States can be directly tied to the ebb and flow of the debate betweenAlexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson over how centralized the government of the United States should be, howmuch power the member states should have over their own affairs, and how much say citizens and citizenorganizations should have in public affairs.While both Hamilton and Jefferson participated in the creation of the Federal Government, which was morecentralized than that proposed in the Articles of Confederation, they had very different visions of government.Hamilton advocated for a stronger central government, which he believed necessary for an industrialized nation,while Jefferson advocated for a more decentralized, more agrarian nation (see Jeffersonian democracy). WhenHamilton, as the first US Treasury Secretary, created a national bank for the new country (see First Bank of theUnited States), Jefferson opposed the idea. After 20 years in operation, the bank's charter was not renewed. (Later,President Andrew Jackson seeing the Second Bank of the United States as a source of corruption, succeeded ineliminating that institution by refusing to renew its charter thereby eliminating a central bank in the United States.)The Federal Constitution of 1788 did not mention corporations. Thus, although the Federal government has fromtime to time chartered corporations, the general chartering of corporations has been left to the states. In the late 18thand early 19th centuries, corporations began to be chartered in greater numbers by the states. Corporations had longexisted in the new nation, but these were primarily educational corporations or institutions chartered by the Britishcrown which continued to exist after the new nation was created from the Confederation. Due to experience asBritish Colonies and the accompanying corporate colonialism from British corporations chartered by the crown to dobusiness in North America, most directly exercised through government grants of monopoly as part of the charteringprocess, new corporations were greeted with mixed feelings.The degree of permissible government interference in corporate affairs was controversial from the earliest days ofthe nation. In 1790, John Marshall, a private attorney and a veteran of the Continental Army, represented the boardof the College of William and Mary, in litigation that required him to defend that corporation's right to reorganizeitself and in the process remove professors, The Rev John Bracken v. The Visitors of Wm & Mary College (7 Va.573; 1790 Supreme Court of Virginia). The Supreme Court of Virginia ruled that the original crown charter providedthe authority for the Visitors to make changes including the reorganization.Thomas Jefferson claimed in his autobiography that he had a hand in the reorganization when he was elected aVisitor of William and Mary after being appointed the Governor of the Commonwealth in June of 1779. His mainreason for the reorganization was to move the college from a curriculum rooted in theology to a curriculum rooted inscience, fine arts, and languages.The notion of corporate personhood, then, has roots in the early history of the republic. Still, as the 19th centurymatured, manufacturing in the U.S. became more complex as the Industrial Revolution generated new inventions andbusiness processes. The favored form for large businesses became the corporation because the corporation provideda mechanism to raise the large amounts of investment capital large business required, especially for capital intensiveyet risky projects such as railroads.The Civil War accelerated the growth of manufacturing and the power of the men who owned the large corporations.Businessmen such as Mark Hanna, sugar trust magnate Henry O. Havemeyer, banker J. P. Morgan, steel makersCharles M. Schwab and Andrew Carnegie, and railroad owners Cornelius Vanderbilt and Jay Gould createdcorporations that influenced legislation at the local, state, and federal levels as they built businesses that spannedmultiple states and communities. Beginning in the 1870s, corporate lawyers became bolder about using theWebster/Marshall theory of corporations as persons, arguing that as such they were entitled to some of the legalprotections against arbitrary state action accorded also to natural persons.In the late 19th century, railroads were among the most politically powerful corporations in the country as the corporate officers had to work with federal and state legislatures in order to obtain land grants for rights of way and

Corporate personhood 130

the legislatures in turn depended on the railroads to provide the low cost transportation needed to open up newterritory. Railroads provided a means for most of the nation's farmers to transport agricultural products such as grainand livestock from rural areas into cities such as Chicago. Manufacturing corporations needed coal, iron ore, finishediron, or any other materials transported and consumer goods business such as Sears, Roebuck and Company usedrailroads to deliver goods to mail order catalog customers.As railroads increased their size, a number of conflicts between various states and the railroads began to surface. Infour cases that reached the Supreme Court (94 U.S. 155, 94 U.S. 164, 94 U.S. 179, 94 U.S. 180 (1877)), railroadstried to argue that the Fourteenth Amendment prevented states from regulating the maximum rates they couldcharge. These cases did not rely on just an interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment as most also tied in theInterstate Commerce clause as well. In each case the Court refused to render an opinion as to whether the FourteenthAmendment applied to corporations, instead couching their decision on the Interstate Commerce clause.

Case lawIn 1818, the United States Supreme Court heard the case Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 17 U.S. 518 (1819),making the following statement in their decision: "The opinion of the Court, after mature deliberation, is that thiscorporate charter is a contract, the obligation of which cannot be impaired without violating the Constitution of theUnited States. This opinion appears to us to be equally supported by reason, and by the former decisions of thisCourt." A public outcry ensued. State courts and legislatures, supported by many of their constituents, declared thatstate governments had an absolute right to amend or repeal a corporate charter.[11]

Seven years after the Dartmouth College opinion, the Supreme Court decided Society for the Propagation of theGospel in Foreign Parts v. Town of Pawlet, (1823) in which an English corporation dedicated to missionary work,with land in the U.S., sought to protect its rights to that land under colonial-era grants against an effort by the state ofVermont to revoke the grants. Justice Joseph Story, writing for the court, explicitly extended the same protections tocorporate-owned property as it would have to property owned by natural persons. Seven years later, Chief JusticeMarshall stated that, "The great object of an incorporation is to bestow the character and properties of individualityon a collective and changing body of men."[12]

It should be understood that the term 'artificial person' was in long use, prior to the Dartmouth College decision, andwas in principle distinct from any contention that corporations have the rights of natural persons. 'Artificial person'was used because there were certain resemblances, in law, between a natural person and corporations. Both could beparties in a lawsuit; both could be taxed; both could be constrained by law In fact the corporations had been calledartificial persons by courts in England as early as the 16th century because lawyers for the corporations had assertedthey could not be convicted under the English laws of the time because the laws were worded "No person shall...".Similarly, in 1877, in Munn v. Illinois (94 U.S. 113 (1876)), the Supreme Court decided that the FourteenthAmendment (because Munn asserted his due process right to property was being violated) did not prevent the Stateof Illinois from regulating charges for use of a business' grain elevators. Instead, the decision focused on the questionof whether or not a private company could be regulated in the public interest. The court's decision was that it could,if the private company could be seen as a utility operating in the public interest.In the 1886 case Santa Clara v. Southern Pacific, the Supreme Court ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment equalprotection clause guarantees constitutional protections to corporations in addition to natural persons.[13]

The primary purpose of the 14th Amendment was to protect freed slaves. One of the 1886 judges, Samuel F. Miller,had considered the purpose of the Amendment in 1872, only six years after the Amendment had become law, whenthe court was "called upon for the first time to give construction to these articles." In the Slaughterhouse Cases (83U.S. 36 (1872)), Miller delivered the majority opinion and discussed the Thirteenth Amendment and the FifteenthAmendment as well as the Fourteenth as follows:

Corporate personhood 131

The most cursory glance at these articles discloses a unity of purpose, when taken in connection with thehistory of the times, which cannot fail to have an important bearing on any question of doubt concerningtheir true meaning. Nor can such doubts, when any reasonably exist, be safely and rationally solvedwithout a reference to that history, for in it is found the occasion and the necessity for recurring again tothe great source of power in this country, the people of the States, for additional guarantees of humanrights, additional powers to the Federal government; additional restraints upon those of the States.Fortunately, that history is fresh within the memory of us all, and its leading features, as they bear uponthe matter before us, free from doubt. We repeat, then, in the light of this recapitulation of events, almosttoo recent to be called history, but which are familiar to us all, and on the most casual examination ofthe language of these amendments, no one can fail to be impressed with the one pervading purposefound in them all, lying at the foundation of each, and without which none of them would have beeneven suggested; we mean the freedom of the slave race, the security and firm establishment of thatfreedom, and the protection of the newly made freeman and citizen from the oppressions of those whohad formerly exercised unlimited dominion over him.[14]

Careful research has shown that John A. Bingham, the member of Congress who is known to have been chieflyresponsible for the language of Section One when it was drafted by the Joint Committee in 1866, had, during theprevious decade and as early as 1856-1859, employed not one but all three of the same clauses and concepts he laterused in Section One. More important still, Bingham employed these guarantees specifically and in a context whichsuggested that free Negroes and mulattoes unquestionably were the persons to which he then referred.But whatever the reasons for their adaptation, laws often benefit those other than the original intended beneficiary.Thus, whites as well as African-Americans are clearly protected by the Fourteenth Amendment, and groupsorganized specifically for business purposes, including corporations, may also benefit from its protections, just asany other group of persons.The 14th Amendment does not insulate corporations from all government regulation, any more than it relievesindividuals from all regulatory obligations. Thus, for example, in Northwestern Nat Life Ins. Co. v. Riggs (203 U.S.243 (1906)), the Court accepted that corporations are for legal purposes "persons," but still ruled that the FourteenthAmendment was not a bar to many state laws that effectively limited a corporation's right to contract business as itpleased. However, this was not because corporations were not protected under the Fourteenth Amendment - rather,the Court's ruling was that the Fourteenth Amendment did not prohibit the type of regulation at issue, whether of acorporation or of sole proprietorship or partnership.Similarly, two Supreme Court judges, Hugo Black and William O. Douglas, later rendered opinions attacking thedoctrine of corporate personhood. Quoted here is the conclusion of Justice Black's opinion:

If the people of this nation wish to deprive the states of their sovereign rights to determine what is a fairand just tax upon corporations doing a purely local business within their own state boundaries, there is away provided by the Constitution to accomplish this purpose. That way does not lie along the course ofjudicial amendment to that fundamental charter. An amendment having that purpose could be submittedby Congress as provided by the Constitution. I do not believe that the Fourteenth Amendment had thatpurpose, nor that the people believed it had that purpose, nor that it should be construed as having thatpurpose.

(Hugo Black, dissenting, Connecticut General Life Insurance Company v. Johnson (303 U.S. 77, 1938).)Justice Black was not alone in his questioning of the legitimacy of corporate personhood. Justice Douglas, dissentingin Wheeling Steel Corp. v. Glander (337 U.S. 562, 1949), gave an opinion similar to, but shorter than, the one quotedabove, to which Justice Black concurred. The extent to which the rights of personhood should attach to corporationshas remained a subject of controversy.[15]

By the time of those opinions, political contributions to candidates in federal races by corporations had beenprohibited since the Tillman Act of 1907, even though individual contributions remained unlimited.

Corporate personhood 132

Yet both Justice Black and Justice Douglas dissented from the Supreme Court's 1957 decision in United States v.United Auto Workers, 352 U.S. 567 (1957), in which the Court, on procedural grounds, overruled a lower courtdecision upholding the prohibition on corporate and union political expenditures:

We deal here with a problem that is fundamental to the electoral process and to the operation of ourdemocratic society. It is whether a union can express its views on the issues of an election and on the merits ofthe candidates, unrestrained and unfettered by the Congress. The principle at stake is not peculiar to unions. Itis applicable as well to associations of manufacturers, retail and wholesale trade groups, consumers' leagues,farmers' unions, religious groups, and every other association representing a segment of American life andtaking an active part in our political campaigns and discussions. It is as important an issue as has come beforethe Court, for it reaches the very vitals of our system of government.Under our Constitution, it is We The People who are sovereign. The people have the final say. The legislatorsare their spokesmen. The people determine through their votes the destiny of the nation. It is thereforeimportant -- vitally important -- that all channels of communication be open to them during every election, thatno point of view be restrained or barred, and that the people have access to the views of every group in thecommunity.

LegislationThe laws of the United States hold that a legal entity (like a corporation or non-profit organization) shall be treatedunder the law as a person except when otherwise noted. This rule of construction is specified in 1 U.S.C. §1 (UnitedStates Code),[16] which states:

In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, unless the context indicates otherwise--the words "person" and "whoever" include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships,societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals;

This federal statute has many consequences. For example, a corporation is allowed to own property and entercontracts. It can also sue and be sued and held liable under both civil and criminal law. As well, because thecorporation is legally considered the "person," individual shareholders are not legally responsible for thecorporation's debts and damages beyond their investment in the corporation. Similarly, individual employees,managers, and directors are liable for their own malfeasance or lawbreaking while acting on behalf of thecorporation, but are not generally liable for the corporation's actions. Among the most frequently discussed andcontroversial consequences of corporate personhood in the United States is the extension of a limited subset of thesame constitutional rights.Corporations as legal entities have always been able to perform commercial activities, similar to a person acting as asole proprietor, such as entering into a contract or owning property. Therefore corporations have always had a 'legalpersonality' for the purposes of conducting business while shielding individual stockholders from personal liability(i.e., protecting personal assets which were not invested in the corporation).The stronger concept of corporate personhood, in which (for example) First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendment rightshave been asserted by corporations, is often traced to the 1886 U.S. Supreme Court case Santa Clara County v.Southern Pacific Railroad (118 U.S. 394). In that case, before oral argument took place, writing a summary of thedecision in a headnote to the Court's opinion, court reporter Bancroft Davis stated:

"The court does not wish to hear argument on the question whether the provision in the FourteenthAmendment to the Constitution, which forbids a State to deny to any person within its jurisdiction theequal protection of the laws, applies to these corporations. We are all of the opinion that it does."[17]

Thus, at the outset, the Waite Court assumed that corporations were entitled to protection under the Fourteenth Amendment. However, the court did not specifically address the matter of whether corporations could be considered 'persons' with respect to the Fourteenth Amendment as the decision made such a finding unnecessary (being based

Corporate personhood 133

on less expansive law).Liberal/progressive author and radio/TV talk show host Thom Hartmann has argued that the court was reluctant toestablish precedent in that decision. Chief Justice Waite wrote in private correspondence that, "we avoided meetingthe [Constitutional] question." Hartmann claims that correspondence between Waite and Bancroft Davis (available inthe Library of Congress) demonstrates that Waite did not intend to create a legal precedent. The question of whethercorporations were persons within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment had been argued in the lower courtsand briefed for the Supreme Court, but in this interpretation, the Waite Court did not explicitly decide upon thisissue. In numerous cases since, however, the Court has reiterated that corporations are protected in many activitiesby the equal protection clause of the Constitution. The extent of the protection is what continues to be at issue.Generally speaking, corporations may invoke rights that groups of individual may invoke, such as the right topetition, to speech, to enter into contracts and to hold property, to sue and to be sued. However, they may notexercise rights that are exclusive to individuals and cannot be exercised by other associations of individuals,including the right to vote and the right against self incrimination.Ralph Nader and others have argued that a strict originalist philosophy, such as that of Justice Antonin Scalia, shouldreject the doctrine of corporate personhood under the Fourteenth Amendment.[18] Indeed, Chief Justice WilliamRehnquist repeatedly criticized the Court's invention of corporate constitutional "rights," most famously in hisdissenting opinion in the 1978 case First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti.[19] Nonetheless, these justices' rulingshave continued to affirm the assumption of corporate personhood, as the Waite court did, and Justice Rehnquisthimself eventually endorsed overruling "Austin," dissenting in "McConnell v. FEC."

Corporate political spendingA central point of debate in recent years is what role corporate money plays and should play in democratic politics.This is part of the larger debate on campaign finance reform and the role that money may play in politics.In the United States, legal milestones in this debate include:• Tillman Act of 1907, banned corporate political contributions to national campaigns.• Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, landmark campaign financing legislation.• Buckley v. Valeo (1976) upheld limits on campaign contributions, but held that spending money to influence

elections is protected speech as in the first amendment.• First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti (1978) upheld the rights of corporations to spend money in

non-candidate elections (i.e. ballot initiatives and referendums).• Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce (1990) upheld the right of the state of Michigan to prohibit

corporations from using money from their corporate treasuries to support or oppose candidates in elections, notingthat "[c]orporate wealth can unfairly influence elections."

• Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (McCain–Feingold), banned corporate funding of issue advocacy adsthat mentioned candidates close to an election.

• McConnell v. Federal Election Commission (2003), substantially upheld McCain–Feingold.• Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. (2007) weakened McCain–Feingold, but upheld

core of McConnell.• Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010) the Supreme Court of the United States held that

corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited under the FirstAmendment, overruling Austin (1990) and partly overruling McConnell (2003).

The corporate personhood aspect of the campaign finance debate turns on Buckley v. Valeo (1976) and CitizensUnited (2010): Buckley ruled that political spending is protected by the First Amendment right to free speech, whileCitizens United ruled that corporate political spending is protected, holding that corporations have a FirstAmendment right to free speech.

Corporate personhood 134

References[1] Bravin, Jess (September 17, 2009). "Sotomayor Issues Challenge to a Century of Corporate Law" (http:/ / online. wsj. com/ article/

SB125314088285517643. html). The Wall Street Journal. .[2] See Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad, 118 U.S. 394 (http:/ / supreme. justia. com/ us/ 118/ 394/ case. html) (1886)[3] "Proposed Constitutional Amendments to U.S. Constitution-Reclaim Democracy.org" (http:/ / reclaimdemocracy. org/ political_reform/

proposed_constitutional_amendments. html). Reclaimdemocracy.org. 2010-01-21. . Retrieved 2011-01-19.[4] Smith, Bradley. "Corporations Are People, Too" (http:/ / www. npr. org/ templates/ story/ story. php?storyId=112711410). NPR. . Retrieved

2011-01-19.[5] "United States of America, Plaintiff-appellant, v. S. Steve Sourapas and Crest Beverage Company, Defendants-appellees" (http:/ / cases.

justia. com/ us-court-of-appeals/ F2/ 515/ 295/ 292973/ ). Cases.justia.com. . Retrieved 2011-01-19.[6] "Green Party USA Platform" (http:/ / www. greenparty. org/ Platform. php). Greenparty.org. . Retrieved 2011-01-19.[7] "WILPF - Challenge Corporate Power, Assert the People's Rights - The Leader in Challenging Corporate Personhood" (http:/ / www.

corporatepersonhood. com/ ). Corporatepersonhood.com. . Retrieved 2011-01-19.[8] http:/ / duhc. org[9] Gore 2007:88[10] http:/ / movetoamend. org[11] Grossman, Richard L.; Adams, Frank T. (1993). Taking Care of Business, Citizenship and the Charter of Incorporation. Cambridge:

Charter. pp. 11–12. ISBN 0963597604.[12] Providence Bank v. Billings, 29 U.S. 514 (http:/ / caselaw. lp. findlaw. com/ scripts/ getcase. pl?navby=case& court=us& vol=29&

invol=514) (1830).[13] Calvert, Clay (2006). "Freedom of Speech Extended to Corporations" (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=YoI14vYA8r0C& pg=PA650).

In Finkelman, Paul. Encyclopedia of American civil liberties, Volume 1. CRC Press. p. 650. ISBN 9780415943420. .[14] Graham, Howard Jay (1968). Everyman's Constitution. Madison: State Historical Society of Wisconsin. See also Graham, Howard Jay

(1938). "The ‘Conspiracy Theory’ of the Fourteenth Amendment". Yale Law Journal 47 (3): 341–403. doi:10.2307/791947.[15] Mayer, Carl. " Personalizing the Impersonal: Corporations and the Bill of Rights (http:/ / reclaimdemocracy. org/ personhood/

mayer_personalizing. html)", 41 Hastings Law Journal 577, (March 1990).[16] "United States Code: Title 1,1. Words denoting number, gender, and so forth | LII / Legal Information Institute" (http:/ / www4. law. cornell.

edu/ uscode/ 1/ 1. html). .law.cornell.edu. 2010-04-07. . Retrieved 2011-01-19.[17] 118 U.S. 394 (1886) - According to the official court Syllabus in the United States Reports[18] Ralph Nader and Robert Weissman. Letter to the Editor: Ralph Nader on Scalia's "originalism" (http:/ / www. hlrecord. org/ 2. 4462/

letter-to-the-editor-ralph-nader-on-scalia-s-originalism-1. 577456) The Harvard Law Record, Published: Thursday, November 13, 2008,Updated: Tuesday, September 29, 2009.

[19] "Justice Rehnquist's Dissent in First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti" (http:/ / www. reclaimdemocracy. org/ corporate_speech/rehnquist_dissent_bellotti. php). Reclaimdemocracy.org. . Retrieved 2011-01-19.

Further reading• Gore, Al (2007). The Assault on Reason, New York: The Penguin Press. ISBN 978-1-59420-122-6• Hamilton, W. H. (1938). "The Path of Due Process of Law". Ethics 48 (3): 269–296. JSTOR 2988994.• Hartmann, Thom (2010). Unequal Protection: How Corporations Became ""People"" -- and How You Can Fight

Back (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=zAmgOl5YT2QC). Berrett-Koehler Publishers.ISBN 9781605095592.

• Horwitz, Morton J., THE TRANSFORMATION OF AMERICAN LAW: 1870-1960 (Oxford, 1992), especiallyChapter 3, usefully places the notion within the context of competing strains of jurisprudence.

• McCurdy, C. W. (1975). "Justice Field and the Jurisprudence of Government-Business Relations: SomeParameters of Laissez-Faire Constitutionalism, 1863-1897". The Journal of American History 61 (4): 970–1005.JSTOR 1890641.

• McLaughlin, A. C. (1940). "The Court, the Corporation, and Conkling". The American Historical Review 46 (1):45–63. JSTOR 1839788.

• Mendelson, W. (1970). "Hugo Black and Judicial Discretion". Political Science Quarterly 85 (1): 17–39.JSTOR 2147556.

• Russell, J. F. S. (1955). "The Railroads in the "Conspiracy Theory" of the Fourteenth Amendment". The Mississippi Valley Historical Review 41 (4): 601–622. JSTOR 1889179. See also Jack Beatty, AGE OF BETRAYAL (Knopf, 2007). The `conspiracy theory' here has not to do with the Waite-Davis correspondence

Corporate personhood 135

regarding the reporter headnotes, but with a disingenuous attempt to claim congressional intent in the originalframing of the 14th Amendment that it include establishing corporate personality as constitutionally protected.

External links• ReclaimDemocracy.org (http:/ / www. reclaimdemocracy. org/ personhood) Extensive library of resources on the

subject• Proposed constitutional amendment to revoke corporate personhood (http:/ / reclaimdemocracy. org/

political_reform/ proposed_constitutional_amendments. html)• WILPF Campaign to Abolish Corporate Personhood (http:/ / www. corporatepersonhood. com)• Program on Corporations, Law, & Democracy (http:/ / www. poclad. org/ )• Liberty Tree Foundation (http:/ / www. LibertyTreeFDR. org/ )• Move To Amend (http:/ / www. movetoamend. org/ ) and Free Speech for People (http:/ / www.

citizensamendment. org) are coalitions launched following the US Supreme Court's Citizens United v. FederalElection Commission decision that aim to overturn the Court's advocacy for "corporate free speech viaAmendment.

• Gangs of America (http:/ / www. gangsofamerica. com/ ) by Ted Nace: free book on the historical and legal basesof Corporations

• The Corporation (http:/ / www. thecorporation. com/ ) 90-minute documentary film exploring the subject.• Corpwatch (http:/ / www. corpwatch. org/ )• Corporate Watch (UK) (http:/ / www. corporatewatch. org. uk/ )• The Independent Fundraising Gold Rush Since Citizens United Ruling (http:/ / www. democracynow. org/ 2010/

10/ 7/ campaign_cash_the_independent_fundraising_gold) - video report by Democracy Now!• Corporation is not a Person, a Home is not an Investment (http:/ / johnsonvillepress. com/ ?p=518''A) from The

Popular Capitalist View by Carl Peter Klapper, argues that corporations are governments whose scope ofoperations should be limited to the state in which they are registered and whose authority should be inferior topopularly elected governments.

Natural person 136

Natural personVariously, in jurisprudence, a natural person is a human being, as opposed to an artificial, legal or juristic person,i.e., an organization that the law treats for some purposes as if it were a person distinct from its members or owner.Sometimes the legal situation limits the term by limits on age, psychiatric, medical, nationality attributes, gender,sexual orientation, criminal record, official paperwork, and computer records (which may or may not be accurate).For example, such legal provisions as Amendment XIX to the United States Constitution, which states a person cannot be denied the right to vote based on gender, or Section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms,which guarantees equality rights, apply to natural persons only. In many cases fundamental human rights areimplicitly granted only to natural persons; for example a corporation cannot hold public office, but it can file alawsuit.

CorporationA corporation is a legal entity that is created under the laws of a state designed to establish the entity as a separatelegal entity having its own privileges and liabilities distinct from those of its members.[1] There are many differentforms of corporations, most of which are used to conduct business. Early corporations were established by charter(i.e. by an ad hoc act passed by a parliament or legislature). Most jurisdictions now allow the creation of newcorporations through registration.An important (but not universal) contemporary feature of a corporation is limited liability. If a corporation fails,shareholders normally only stand to lose their investment and employees will lose their jobs, but neither will befurther liable for debts that remain owing to the corporation's creditors.Despite not being natural persons, corporations are recognized by the law to have rights and responsibilities likenatural persons ("people"). Corporations can exercise human rights against real individuals and the state,[2] and theycan themselves be responsible for human rights violations.[3] Corporations are conceptually immortal but they can"die" when they are "dissolved" either by statutory operation, order of court, or voluntary action on the part ofshareholders. Insolvency may result in a form of corporate 'death', when creditors force the liquidation anddissolution of the corporation under court order,[4] but it most often results in a restructuring of corporate holdings.Corporations can even be convicted of criminal offenses, such as fraud and manslaughter.[5]

Although corporate law varies in different jurisdictions, there are four core characteristics of the businesscorporation:[6]

• Legal personality• Limited liability• Transferable shares• Centralized management under a board structure

Corporation 137

History

1/8 share of the Stora Kopparberg mine, datedJune 16, 1288.

The word "corporation" derives from corpus, the Latin word for body,or a "body of people." Entities which carried on business and were thesubjects of legal rights were found in ancient Rome, and the MauryaEmpire in ancient India.[7] In medieval Europe, churches becameincorporated, as did local governments, such as the Pope and the Cityof London Corporation. The point was that the incorporation wouldsurvive longer than the lives of any particular member, existing inperpetuity. The alleged oldest commercial corporation in the world, theStora Kopparberg mining community in Falun, Sweden, obtained acharter from King Magnus Eriksson in 1347. Many European nationschartered corporations to lead colonial ventures, such as the Dutch EastIndia Company or the Hudson's Bay Company, and these corporationscame to play a large part in the history of corporate colonialism.

Corporate mapping

During the time of colonial expansion in the 17th century, the trueprogenitors of the modern corporation emerged as the "charteredcompany". Acting under a charter sanctioned by the Dutchgovernment, the Dutch East India Company (VOC) defeatedPortuguese forces and established itself in the Moluccan Islands inorder to profit from the European demand for spices. Investors in theVOC were issued paper certificates as proof of share ownership, andwere able to trade their shares on the original Amsterdam stockexchange. Shareholders are also explicitly granted limited liability inthe company's royal charter.[8] In the late 18th century, Stewart Kyd,the author of the first treatise on corporate law in English, defined acorporation as,

a collection of many individuals united into one body, under aspecial denomination, having perpetual succession under anartificial form, and vested, by policy of the law, with the capacity of acting, in several respects, as anindividual, particularly of taking and granting property, of contracting obligations, and of suing and beingsued, of enjoying privileges and immunities in common, and of exercising a variety of political rights, more orless extensive, according to the design of its institution, or the powers conferred upon it, either at the time ofits creation, or at any subsequent period of its existence.

—[9]

Corporation 138

Mercantilism

A bond issued by the Dutch East India Company,dating from 1623, for the amount of 2,400 florins

Labeled by both contemporaries and historians as "the grandest societyof merchants in the universe", the British East India Company wouldcome to symbolize the dazzlingly rich potential of the corporation, aswell as new methods of business that could be both brutal andexploitive.[10] On 31 December 1600, the English monarchy grantedthe company a 15-year monopoly on trade to and from the East Indiesand Africa. By 1611, shareholders in the East India Company wereearning an almost 150% return on their investment. Subsequent stockofferings demonstrated just how lucrative the Company had become.Its first stock offering in 1613-1616 raised ₤418,000, and its firstoffering in 1617-1622 raised ₤1.6 million.[11]

In the United States, government chartering began to fall out of voguein the mid-19th century. Corporate law at the time was focused on protection of the public interest, and not on theinterests of corporate shareholders. Corporate charters were closely regulated by the states. Forming a corporationusually required an act of legislature. Investors generally had to be given an equal say in corporate governance, andcorporations were required to comply with the purposes expressed in their charters. Many private firms in the 19thcentury avoided the corporate model for these reasons (Andrew Carnegie formed his steel operation as a limitedpartnership, and John D. Rockefeller set up Standard Oil as a trust). Eventually, state governments began to realizethe greater corporate registration revenues available by providing more permissive corporate laws. New Jersey wasthe first state to adopt an "enabling" corporate law, with the goal of attracting more business to the state.[12]

Delaware followed, and soon became known as the most corporation-friendly state in the country after New Jerseyraised taxes on the corporations, driving them out. New Jersey reduced these taxes after this mistake was realized,but by then it was too late; even today, most major public corporations in the United States are set up underDelaware law.

By the beginning of the 19th century, government policy on both sides of the Atlantic began to change, reflecting thegrowing popularity of the proposition that corporations were riding the economic wave of the future. In 1819, theU.S. Supreme Court granted corporations a plethora of rights they had not previously recognized or enjoyed.[13]

Corporate charters were deemed "inviolable", and not subject to arbitrary amendment or abolition by stategovernments.[14] The Corporation as a whole was labeled an "artificial person," possessing both individuality andimmortality.[15]

At around the same time, British legislation was similarly freeing the corporation from historical restrictions. In 1844the British Parliament passed the Joint Stock Companies Act, which allowed companies to incorporate without aroyal charter or an Act of Parliament.[16] Ten years later, limited liability, the key provision of modern corporate law,passed into English law: in response to increasing pressure from newly emerging capital interests, Parliament passedthe Limited Liability Act of 1855, which established the principle that any corporation could enjoy limited legalliability on both contract and tort claims simply by registering as a "limited" company with the appropriategovernment agency.[17]

This prompted the English periodical The Economist to write in 1855 that "never, perhaps, was a change sovehemently and generally demanded, of which the importance was so much overrated."[18] The glaring inaccuracy ofthe second part of this judgment was recognized by the same magazine more than 75 years later, when it claimedthat, "[t]he economic historian of the future . . . may be inclined to assign to the nameless inventor of the principle oflimited liability, as applied to trading corporations, a place of honour with Watt and Stephenson, and other pioneersof the Industrial Revolution."[19]

Corporation 139

Modern corporationsBy the end of the 19th century the Sherman Act, New Jersey allowing holding companies, and mergers resulted inlarger corporations with dispersed shareholders. (See The Modern Corporation and Private Property [20] Thewell-known Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad decision began to influence policymaking and themodern corporate era had begun.The 20th century saw a proliferation of enabling law across the world, which helped to drive economic booms inmany countries before and after World War I. Starting in the 1980s, many countries with large state-ownedcorporations moved toward privatization, the selling of publicly owned services and enterprises to corporations.Deregulation (reducing the regulation of corporate activity) often accompanied privatization as part of a laissez-fairepolicy. Another major postwar shift was toward the development of conglomerates, in which large corporationspurchased smaller corporations to expand their industrial base. Japanese firms developed a horizontalconglomeration model, the keiretsu, which was later duplicated in other countries as well.[21]

Corporate lawThe existence of a corporation requires a special legal framework and body of law that specifically grants thecorporation legal personality, and typically views a corporation as a fictional person, a legal person, or a moralperson (as opposed to a natural person). Corporate statutes typically empower corporations to own property, signbinding contracts, and pay taxes in a capacity separate from that of its shareholders (who are sometimes referred toas "members"). According to Lord Chancellor Haldane,

...a corporation is an abstraction. It has no mind of its own any more than it has a body of its own; its activeand directing will must consequently be sought in the person of somebody who is really the directing mind andwill of the corporation, the very ego and centre of the personality of the corporation.—[22]

The legal personality has two economic implications. First it grants creditors (as opposed to shareholders oremployees) priority over the corporate assets upon liquidation. Second, corporate assets cannot be withdrawn by itsshareholders, nor can the assets of the firm be taken by personal creditors of its shareholders. The second featurerequires special legislation and a special legal framework, as it cannot be reproduced via standard contract law.[23]

The regulations most favorable to incorporation include:

Regulation Description

Limitedliability

Unlike a partnership or sole proprietorship, shareholders of a modern business corporation have "limited" liability for thecorporation's debts and obligations.[24] As a result, their losses cannot exceed the amount which they contributed to the corporationas dues or payment for shares. This enables corporations to "socialize their costs" for the primary benefit of shareholders; to socializea cost is to spread it to society in general.[25] The economic rationale for this is that it allows anonymous trading in the shares of thecorporation, by eliminating the corporation's creditors as a stakeholder in such a transaction. Without limited liability, a creditorwould probably not allow any share to be sold to a buyer at least as creditworthy as the seller. Limited liability further allowscorporations to raise large amounts of finance for their enterprises by combining funds from many owners of stock. Limited liabilityreduces the amount that a shareholder can lose in a company. This increases the attraction to potential shareholders, and thus increasesboth the number of willing shareholders and the amount they are likely to invest. However, some jurisdictions also permit anothertype of corporation, in which shareholders' liability is unlimited, for example the unlimited liability corporation in two provinces ofCanada, and the unlimited company in the United Kingdom.

Corporation 140

Perpetuallifetime

Another advantage is that the assets and structure of the corporation may continue beyond the lifetimes of its shareholders andbondholders. This allows stability and the accumulation of capital, which is thus available for investment in larger and longer-lastingprojects than if the corporate assets were subject to dissolution and distribution. This was also important in medieval times, when landdonated to the Church (a corporation) would not generate the feudal fees that a lord could claim upon a landholder's death. In thisregard, see Statute of Mortmain. (However a corporation can be dissolved by a government authority, putting an end to its existenceas a legal entity. But this usually only happens if the company breaks the law, for example, fails to meet annual filing requirements, orin certain circumstances if the company requests dissolution.)

Ownership and controlPersons and other legal entities composed of persons (such as trusts and other corporations) can have the right tovote or receive dividends once declared by the board of directors. In the case of for-profit corporations, these votershold shares of stock and are thus called shareholders or stockholders. When no stockholders exist, a corporation mayexist as a non-stock corporation (in the United Kingdom, a "company limited by guarantee") and instead of havingstockholders, the corporation has members who have the right to vote on its operations. Voting members are not theonly members of a "Corporation". The members of a non-stock corporation are identified in the Articles ofIncorporation (UK equivalent: Articles of Association) and the titles of the member classes may include "Trustee,""Active," "Associate," and/or "Honorary." However, each of these listed in the Articles of Incorporation aremembers of the Corporation. The Articles of Incorporation may define the "Corporation" by another name, such as"The ABC Club, Inc." and, in which case, the "Corporation" and "The ABC Club, Inc." or just "The Club" areconsidered synonymous and interchangeable as they may appear elsewhere in the Articles of Incorporation or theBy-Laws. If the non-stock corporation is not operated for profit, it is called a not-for-profit corporation. In eithercategory, the corporation comprises a collective of individuals with a distinct legal status and with special privilegesnot provided to ordinary unincorporated businesses, to voluntary associations, or to groups of individuals.There are two broad classes of corporate governance forms in the world. In most of the world, control of thecorporation is determined by a board of directors which is elected by the shareholders. In some jurisdictions, such asGermany, the control of the corporation is divided into two tiers with a supervisory board which elects a managingboard. Germany is also unique in having a system known as co-determination in which half of the supervisory boardconsists of representatives of the employees. The CEO, president, treasurer, and other titled officers are usuallychosen by the board to manage the affairs of the corporation.In addition to the limited influence of shareholders, corporations can be controlled (in part) by creditors such asbanks. In return for lending money to the corporation, creditors can demand a controlling interest analogous to thatof a member, including one or more seats on the board of directors. In some jurisdictions, such as Germany andJapan, it is standard for banks to own shares in corporations whereas in other jurisdictions such as the United States,under the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933, and the United Kingdom, under the Bank of England, banks are prohibitedfrom owning shares in external corporations. However, since 1999 in the U. S., commercial banks have been allowedto enter into investment banking through separate subsidiaries thanks to the Financial Services Modernization Act orGramm-Leach-Bliley Act. Since 1997, banks in the U. K. are supervised by the Financial Services Authority; itsrules are non-restrictive allowing both foreign and domestic capital to operate all financial institutions, includinginsurance, commercial and financial banking.[26]

Upon the Board's decision to dissolve a for-profit corporation, shareholders receive the leftovers, following creditorsand others with interests in the corporation. However shareholders receive the benefit of limited liability, so they areliable only for the amount they contributed.

Corporation 141

FormationHistorically, corporations were created by a charter granted by government. Today, corporations are usuallyregistered with the state, province, or national government and regulated by the laws enacted by that government.Registration is the main prerequisite to the corporation's assumption of limited liability. The law sometimes requiresthe corporation to designate its principal address, as well as a registered agent (a person or company designated toreceive legal service of process). It may also be required to designate an agent or other legal representative of thecorporation.Generally, a corporation files articles of incorporation with the government, laying out the general nature of thecorporation, the amount of stock it is authorized to issue, and the names and addresses of directors. Once the articlesare approved, the corporation's directors meet to create bylaws that govern the internal functions of the corporation,such as meeting procedures and officer positions.The law of the jurisdiction in which a corporation operates will regulate most of its internal activities, as well as itsfinances. If a corporation operates outside its home state, it is often required to register with other governments as aforeign corporation, and is almost always subject to laws of its host state pertaining to employment, crimes,contracts, civil actions, and the like.

NamingCorporations generally have a distinct name. Historically, some corporations were named after their membership: forinstance, "The President and Fellows of Harvard College." Nowadays, corporations in most jurisdictions have adistinct name that does not need to make reference to their membership. In Canada, this possibility is taken to itslogical extreme: many smaller Canadian corporations have no names at all, merely numbers based on a registrationnumber (for example,, "12345678 Ontario Limited"), which is assigned by the provincial or territorial governmentwhere the corporation incorporates.In most countries, corporate names include a term or an abbreviation that denotes the corporate status of the entity(for example, "Incorporated" or "Inc." in the United States) or the limited liability of its members (for example,"Limited" or "Ltd."). These terms vary by jurisdiction and language. In some jurisdictions they are mandatory, and inothers they are not.[27] Their use puts everybody on constructive notice that they are dealing with an entity whoseliability is limited, and does not reach back to the persons who own the entity: one can only collect from whateverassets the entity still controls when one obtains a judgment against it.Some jurisdictions do not allow the use of the word "company" alone to denote corporate status, since the word"company" may refer to a partnership or some other form of collective ownership (in the United States it can be usedby a sole proprietorship but this is not generally the case elsewhere).

Financial disclosureIn many jurisdictions, corporations whose shareholders benefit from limited liability are required to publish annualfinancial statements and other data, so that creditors who do business with the corporation are able to assess thecreditworthiness of the corporation and cannot enforce claims against shareholders.[28] Shareholders thereforesacrifice some loss of privacy in return for limited liability. This requirement generally applies in Europe, but not inAnglo-American jurisdictions, except for publicly traded corporations, where financial disclosure is required forinvestor protection.

Corporation 142

Unresolved issuesThe nature of the corporation continues to evolve in response to new situations as existing corporations promote newideas and structures, the courts respond, and governments issue new regulations. A question of long standing is thatof diffused responsibility. For example, if a corporation is found liable for a death, how should culpability andpunishment for it be allocated among shareholders, directors, management and staff, and the corporation itself? Seecorporate liability, and specifically, corporate manslaughter.The law differs among jurisdictions, and is in a state of flux. Some argue that shareholders should be ultimatelyresponsible in such circumstances, forcing them to consider issues other than profit when investing, but a corporationmay have millions of small shareholders who know nothing about its business activities. Moreover, traders —especially hedge funds — may turn over shares in corporations many times a day.[29] The issue of corporate repeatoffenders (see H. Glasbeek, "Wealth by Stealth: Corporate Crime, Corporate Law, and the Perversion ofDemocracy", ISBN 978-1896357416, Between the Lines Press: Toronto 2002) raises the question of the so-called"death penalty for corporations."[30]

TypesFor a list of types of corporation and other business types by country, see Types of business entity.

Most corporations are registered with the local jurisdiction as either a stock corporation or a non-stock corporation.Stock corporations sell stock to generate capital. A stock corporation is generally a for-profit corporation. Anon-stock corporation does not have stockholders, but may have members who have voting rights in the corporation.Some jurisdictions (Washington, D.C., for example) separate corporations into for-profit and non-profit, as opposedto dividing into stock and non-stock.Several states also allow a variation of the corporation for use by professionals (i.e., those individuals typicallyconsidered as professionals who require a license from the state to conduct business). In some states, such as Georgia[31], these corporations are known as "professional corporations".

For-profit and non-profitIn modern economic systems, conventions of corporate governance commonly appear in a wide variety of businessand non-profit activities. Though the laws governing these creatures of statute often differ, the courts often interpretprovisions of the law that apply to profit-making enterprises in the same manner (or in a similar manner) whenapplying principles to non-profit organizations — as the underlying structures of these two types of entity oftenresemble each other.

Closely held corporations and publicly traded corporationsThe institution most often referenced by the word "corporation" is a publicly traded corporation, the shares ofwhich are traded on a public stock exchange (for example, the New York Stock Exchange or Nasdaq in the UnitedStates) where shares of stock of corporations are bought and sold by and to the general public. Most of the largestbusinesses in the world are publicly traded corporations. However, the majority of corporations are said to be closelyheld, privately held or close corporations, meaning that no ready market exists for the trading of shares. Manysuch corporations are owned and managed by a small group of businesspeople or companies, although the size ofsuch a corporation can be as vast as the largest public corporations.Closely held corporations do have some advantages over publicly traded corporations. A small, closely held company can often make company-changing decisions much more rapidly than a publicly traded company. A publicly traded company is also at the mercy of the market, having capital flow in and out based not only on what the company is doing but the market and even what the competitors are doing. Publicly traded companies also have advantages over their closely held counterparts. Publicly traded companies often have more working capital and can

Corporation 143

delegate debt throughout all shareholders. This means that people invested in a publicly traded company will eachtake a much smaller hit to their own capital as opposed to those involved with a closely held corporation. Publiclytraded companies though suffer from this exact advantage. A closely held corporation can often voluntarily take a hitto profit with little to no repercussions (as long as it is not a sustained loss). A publicly traded company though oftencomes under extreme scrutiny if profit and growth are not evident to stock holders, thus stock holders may sell,further damaging the company. Often this blow is enough to make a small public company fail.Often communities benefit from a closely held company more so than from a public company. A closely heldcompany is far more likely to stay in a single place that has treated them well, even if going through hard times. Theshareholders can incur some of the damage the company may receive from a bad year or slow period in the companyprofits. Closely held companies often have a better relationship with workers. In larger, publicly traded companies,often when a year has gone badly the first area to feel the effects are the work force with lay offs or worker hours,wages or benefits being cut. Again, in a closely held business the shareholders can incur this profit damage ratherthan passing it to the workers.The affairs of publicly traded and closely held corporations are similar in many respects. The main difference inmost countries is that publicly traded corporations have the burden of complying with additional securities laws,which (especially in the U.S.) may require additional periodic disclosure (with more stringent requirements), strictercorporate governance standards, and additional procedural obligations in connection with major corporatetransactions (for example, mergers) or events (for example, elections of directors).A closely held corporation may be a subsidiary of another corporation (its parent company), which may itself beeither a closely held or a public corporation. In some jurisdictions, the subsidiary of a listed public corporation is alsodefined as a public corporation (for example,, Australia).

Mutual benefit corporationsA mutual benefit nonprofit corporation is a corporation formed in the United States solely for the benefit of itsmembers. An example of a mutual benefit nonprofit corporation is a golf club. Individuals pay to join the club,memberships may be bought and sold, and any property owned by the club is distributed to its members if the clubdissolves. The club can decide, in its corporate bylaws, how many members to have, and who can be a member.Generally, while it is a nonprofit corporation, a mutual benefit corporation is not a charity. Because it is not acharity, a mutual benefit nonprofit corporation cannot obtain 501(c)(3) status. If there is a dispute as to how a mutualbenefit nonprofit corporation is being operated, it is up to the members to resolve the dispute since the corporationexists to solely serve the needs of its membership and not the general public.[32]

Corporations globallyFollowing on the success of the corporate model at a national level, many corporations have become transnational ormultinational corporations: growing beyond national boundaries to attain sometimes remarkable positions of powerand influence in the process of globalizing.The typical "transnational" or "multinational" may fit into a web of overlapping shareholders and directorships, withmultiple branches and lines in different regions, many such sub-groupings comprising corporations in their ownright. Growth by expansion may favor national or regional branches; growth by acquisition or merger can result in aplethora of groupings scattered around and/or spanning the globe, with structures and names which do not alwaysmake clear the structures of shareholder ownership and interaction.In the spread of corporations across multiple continents, the importance of corporate culture has grown as a unifyingfactor and a counterweight to local national sensibilities and cultural awareness.

Corporation 144

AustraliaIn Australia corporations are registered and regulated by the Commonwealth Government through the AustralianSecurities and Investments Commission. Corporations law has been largely codified in the Corporations Act 2001.

BrazilIn Brazil there are many different types of legal entities ("sociedades"), but the two most common onescommercially speaking are: (i) "sociedade limitada", identified by "Ltda." or "Limitada" after the company's name,equivalent to the British limited liability company, and (ii) "sociedade anônima" or "companhia", identified by"S.A." or "Companhia" in the company's name, equivalent to the British public limited company. The "Ltda." ismainly governed by the new Civil Code, enacted in 2002, and the "S.A." by the Law 6.404 dated December 15,1976, as amended.

CanadaIn Canada both the federal government and the provinces have corporate statutes, and thus a corporation may have aprovincial or a federal charter. Many older corporations in Canada stem from Acts of Parliament passed before theintroduction of general corporation law. The oldest corporation in Canada is the Hudson's Bay Company; though itsbusiness has always been based in Canada, its Royal Charter was issued in England by King Charles II in 1670, andbecame a Canadian charter by amendment in 1970 when it moved its corporate headquarters from London toCanada. Federally recognized corporations are regulated by the Canada Business Corporations Act.

German-speaking countriesGermany, Austria, Switzerland and Liechtenstein recognize two forms of corporation: the Aktiengesellschaft (AG),analogous to public corporations in the English-speaking world, and the Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung(GmbH), similar to (and an inspiration for) the modern limited liability company.

ItalyThe Italian Republic recognizes three types of company with limited liability: "S.r.l", or "Società a responsabilitàlimitata" (a private limited company), "S.p.A" or "Società per Azioni" (a joint-stock company, similar to a PublicLimited Company in the United Kingdom), and "S.a.p.a" ("Società in Accomandita per Azioni"). The latter is ahybrid form that involves two categories of shareholders, some with and some without limited liability, and is rarelyused in practice.

JapanIn Japan, both the state and local public entities under the Local Autonomy Law (prefectures and municipalities) areconsidered to be corporations (法人 hōjin). Non-profit corporations may be established under the Civil Code.

The term "company" (会社 kaisha) is used to refer to business corporations. The predominant form is the kabushikikaisha (株式会社), used by public corporations as well as smaller enterprises. Mochibun kaisha (持分会社), a formfor smaller enterprises, are becoming increasingly common. Between 2002 and 2008, the intermediary corporation(中間法人 chūkan hōjin) existed to bridge the gap between for-profit companies and non-governmental andnon-profit organizations.

Corporation 145

SpainIn Spain there are two types of companies: with limited liability called "S.L", or "Sociedad Limitada" (a privatelimited company) and "S.A." or "Sociedad Anónima" (similar to a Public Limited Company).

United KingdomIn the United Kingdom, 'corporation' most commonly refers to a body corporate formed by Royal Charter or bystatute, of which few now remain. The BBC is the oldest and best known corporation within the UK that is still inexistence. Others, such as the British Steel Corporation, were privatized in the 1980s.In the private sector, corporations are referred to as companies, and are regulated by the Companies Act 2006 (or theNorthern Ireland equivalent). The most common type of company is the private limited company ("Limited" or"Ltd."). Private limited companies can either be limited by shares or by guarantee. Other corporate forms include thepublic limited company ("PLC") and the private unlimited company, and companies limited by guarantee.A special type of corporation is a corporation sole, which is an office held by an individual natural person (theincumbent), but which has a continuing legal entity separate from that person: an example is a Church of Englandbishopric

United StatesSeveral types of conventional corporations exist in the United States. Generically, any business entity that isrecognized as distinct from the people who own it (i.e., is not a sole proprietorship or a partnership) is a corporation.This generic label includes entities that are known by such legal labels as ‘association’, ‘organization’ and ‘limitedliability company’, as well as corporations proper.Only a company that has been formally incorporated according to the laws of a particular state is called ‘corporation’.A corporation was defined in the Dartmouth College case of 1819, in which Chief Justice Marshall of the UnitedStates Supreme Court stated that " A corporation is an artificial being, invisible, intangible, and existing only incontemplation of the law". A corporation is a legal entity, distinct and separate from the individuals who create andoperate it. As legal entity the corporation can acquire, own, and dispose of property in its own name like buildings,land and equipment. It can also incur liabilities and enter into contracts like franchising and leasing. Americancorporations can be either profit-making companies or non-profit entities. Tax-exempt non-profit corporations areoften called “501(c)3 corporation”, after the section of the Internal Revenue Code that addresses the tax exemptionfor many of them.The federal government can only create corporate entities pursuant to relevant powers in the U.S. Constitution. Forexample, Congress has constitutional power to provide postal services, so it has power to operate the United StatesPostal Service. Although the federal government could theoretically preempt all state corporate law under the courts'current expansive interpretation of the Commerce Clause, it has chosen not to do so. As a result, much of Americancorporate law continues to be a matter of state law under the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.Thus, virtually all corporations in the U.S. are incorporated under the laws of a particular state.All states have some kind of "general corporation law" (California, Delaware, Kansas, Nevada and Ohio actually usethat exact name) which authorizes the formation of private corporations without having to obtain a charter for eachone from the state legislature (as was formerly the case in the 19th century). Many states have separate,self-contained laws authorizing the formation and operation of certain specific types of corporations that are whollyindependent of the state general corporation law. For example, in California, nonprofit corporations are incorporatedunder the Nonprofit Corporation Law, and in Illinois, insurers are incorporated under the Illinois Insurance Code.Corporations are created by filing the requisite documents with a particular state government. The process is called “incorporation,” referring to the abstract concept of clothing the entity with a "veil" of artificial personhood (embodying, or “corporating” it, ‘corpus’ being the Latin word for ‘body’). Only certain corporations, including

Corporation 146

banks, are chartered. Others simply file their articles of incorporation with the state government as part of aregistration process.Once incorporated, a corporation has artificial personhood everywhere it may operate, until such time as thecorporation may be dissolved. A corporation that operates in one state while being incorporated in another is a“foreign corporation.” This label also applies to corporations incorporated outside of the United States. Foreigncorporations must usually register with the secretary of state’s office in each state to lawfully conduct business in thatstate.A corporation is legally a citizen of the state (or other jurisdiction) in which it is incorporated (except whencircumstances direct the corporation be classified as a citizen of the state in which it has its head office, or the statein which it does the majority of its business). Corporate business law differs dramatically from state to state. Manyprospective corporations choose to incorporate in a state whose laws are most favorable to its business interests.Many large corporations are incorporated in Delaware, for example, without being physically located there becausethat state has very favorable corporate tax and disclosure laws.Companies set up for privacy or asset protection often incorporate in Nevada, which does not require disclosure ofshare ownership. Many states, particularly smaller ones, have modeled their corporate statutes after the ModelBusiness Corporation Act, one of many model sets of law prepared and published by the American Bar Association.As juristic persons, corporations have certain rights that attach to natural persons. The vast majority of them attach tocorporations under state law, especially the law of the state in which the company is incorporated – since thecorporations very existence is predicated on the laws of that state. A few rights also attach by federal constitutionaland statutory law, but they are few and far between compared to the rights of natural persons. For example, acorporation has the personal right to bring a lawsuit (as well as the capacity to be sued) and, like a natural person, acorporation can be libeled.But a corporation has no constitutional right to freely exercise its religion because religious exercise is somethingthat only "natural" persons can do. That is, only human beings, not business entities, have the necessary faculties ofbelief and spirituality that enable them to possess and exercise religious beliefs.Harvard College (a component of Harvard University), formally the President and Fellows of Harvard College (alsoknown as the Harvard Corporation), is the oldest corporation in the western hemisphere. Founded in 1636, thesecond of Harvard’s two governing boards was incorporated by the Great and General Court of Massachusetts in1650. Significantly, Massachusetts itself was a corporate colony at that time – owned and operated by theMassachusetts Bay Company (until it lost its charter in 1684) - so Harvard College is a corporation created by acorporation.Many nations have modeled their own corporate laws on American business law. Corporate law in Saudi Arabia, forexample, follows the model of New York State corporate law. In addition to typical corporations in the UnitedStates, the federal government, in 1971 passed the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA), whichauthorized the creation of 12 regional native corporations for Alaska Natives and over 200 village corporations thatwere entitled to a settlement of land and cash. In addition to the 12 regional corporations, the legislation permitted a13th regional corporation without a land settlement for those Alaska Natives living out of the State of Alaska at thetime of passage of ANCSA.

Corporate taxationIn many countries corporate profits are taxed at a corporate tax rate, and dividends paid to shareholders are taxed at a separate rate. Such a system is sometimes referred to as "double taxation", because any profits distributed to shareholders will eventually be taxed twice. One solution to this (as in the case of the Australian and UK tax systems) is for the recipient of the dividend to be entitled to a tax credit which addresses the fact that the profits represented by the dividend have already been taxed. The company profit being passed on is therefore effectively

Corporation 147

only taxed at the rate of tax paid by the eventual recipient of the dividend. In other systems, dividends are taxed at alower rate than other income (for example, in the US) or shareholders are taxed directly on the corporation's profitsand dividends are not taxed (for example, S corporations in the US).

CriticismsAs Adam Smith pointed out in the Wealth of Nations, when ownership is separated from management (i.e. the actualproduction process required to obtain the capital), the latter will inevitably begin to neglect the interests of theformer, creating dysfunction within the company.[33] Some maintain that recent events in corporate America mayserve to reinforce Smith's warnings about the dangers of legally protected collectivist hierarchies.[34]

Other business entitiesAlmost every recognized type of organization carries out some economic activities (for example, the family). Otherorganizations that may carry out activities that are generally considered to be business exist under the laws of variouscountries. These include:• Consumers' cooperative• Holding company• Limited company (Ltd.)• Limited liability company (LLC)• Limited liability limited partnership (LLLP)• Limited liability partnership (LLP)• Limited partnership (LP)• Low-profit limited liability company (L3C)• Not-for-profit corporation• Partnership• Sole proprietorship• Trust company, Trust law

Notes[1] Definition of a "corporation" from Reference.com (http:/ / dictionary. reference. com/ browse/ corporation)[2] e.g. South African Constitution Art.8, especially Art.(4)[3] Phillip I. Blumberg, The Multinational Challenge to Corporation Law: The Search for a New Corporate Personality, (1993) discusses the

controversial nature of additional rights being granted to corporations.[4] See, for example, the Business Corporations Act (B.C.) [SBC 2002] CHAPTER 57, Part 10[5] e.g. Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007[6] RC Clark, Corporate Law (Aspen 1986) 2; See also, Hansmann et al., The Anatomy of Corporate Law (2004) Ch.1, p.2; C. A. Cooke,

Corporation, Trust and Company: A Legal History, (1950).[7] Vikramaditya S. Khanna (2005). The Economic History of the Corporate Form in Ancient India. (http:/ / papers. ssrn. com/ sol3/ papers.

cfm?abstract_id=) University of Michigan.[8] Om Prakash, European Commercial Enterprise in Pre-Colonial India (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1998).[9] A Treatise on the Law of Corporations, Stewart Kyd (1793-1794)[10] John Keay, The Honorable Company: A History of the English East India Company (MacMillan, New York 1991).[11] Ibid. at 113.[12] The Law of Business Organizations (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=ftzqaBv7X_sC& pg=PA159& lpg=PA159& dq="new+ jersey"+

"first+ state"+ "business+ corporation"& source=web& ots=n5Af0liBo5& sig=A2RRh_zOyS7W3CCMK4ZyG6Scmwk)[13] Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 17 U.S. 518 (1819).[14] Id. at 25.[15] Id. at 45.[16] Sean M. O'Connor, Be Careful What You Wish For: How Accountants and Congress Created the Problem of Auditor Independence, 45

B.C.L. Rev. 741, 749 (2004).

Corporation 148

[17] Limited Liability Act, 18 & 19 Vict., ch. 133 (1855)(Eng.), cited in Paul G. Mahoney, Contract or Concession? An Essay on the History ofCorporate Law, 34 Ga. L. Rev. 873, 892 (2000).

[18] Graeme G. Acheson & John D. Turner, The Impact of Limited Liability on Ownership and Control: Irish Banking, 1877-1914, School ofManagement and Economics, Queen's University of Belfast, available at (http:/ / www. ehs. org/ uk/ ehs/ conference2004/ assets/AchesonTurnerPaper. pdf).

[19] Economist, December 18, 1926, at 1053, as quoted in Mahoney, supra, at 875.[20] For a comparison of the differences between the "Classic Corporation" (before 1860) and the "Modern Corporation" (after 1900), see Ted

Nace, Gangs of America: The Rise of Corporate Power and the Disabling of Democracy 71 (Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., San Francisco2003).

[21] Apple[22] Lennard's Carrying Co Ltd v Asiatic Petroleum Co Ltd [1915] AC 705[23] Hansmann et al., The Anatomy of Corporate Law, pg 7.[24] A leading case in common law is Salomon v. Salomon & Co. [1897] AC 22.[25] Hock, Dee (2005). One from many. Berrett-Koehler Publishers. p. 140. ISBN 1576753323. "... they have become a superb instrument for the

capitalization of gain and the socialization of cost."[26] Grosse, Robert E. (2004). The future of global financial services. Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 57–62. ISBN 1405117005.[27] The U.S. state of California is an example of a jurisdiction that does not require corporations to indicate corporate status in their names,

except for close corporations. The drafters of the 1977 revision of the California General Corporation Law considered the possibility offorcing all California corporations to have a name indicating corporate status, but decided against it because of the huge number ofcorporations that would have had to change their names, and the lack of any evidence that anyone had been harmed in California by entitieswhose corporate status was not immediately apparent from their names. However, the 1977 drafters were able to impose the current disclosurerequirement for close corporations. See Harold Marsh, Jr., R. Roy Finkle, Larry W. Sonsini, and Ann Yvonne Walker, Marsh's CaliforniaCorporation Law, 4th ed., vol. 1 (New York: Aspen Publishers, 2004), 5-15 — 5-16.

[28] Hicks, A. and Goo, S.H. (2008) Cases and Materials on Company Law Oxford University Press (http:/ / books. google. com/books?id=RulK-zdA-HwC) Chapter 4

[29] See, for example, the Ontario's Environmental Protection Act.[30] CorpWatch : The Death Penalty for Corporations Comes of Age (http:/ / www. corpwatch. org/ article. php?id=1810)[31] http:/ / www. sos. state. ga. us/ corporations[32] Official website of the Secretary of State, for the (United States) state of Vermont (http:/ / www. sec. state. vt. us/ tutor/ dobiz/ forms/

definitions/ mutben. htm)[33] Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations 741 (Clarendon, Oxford 1776).[34] The fall of the Enron corporation stemmed largely from the company's attempt to create new energy trading markets, and its strategy of

trading paper wealth in order to maintain the appearance of profitability. For a thorough analysis of Enron's missteps and ultimate destruction,see Kurt Eichenwald, Conspiracy of Fools (Broadway Books, New York 20050.

References• A.B. DuBois, The English Business Company after the Bubble Act, , (1938)• A Comparative Bibliography: Regulatory Competition on Corporate Law (http:/ / ssrn. com/ abstract=1103644)• Bishop Hunt, The Development of the Business Corporation in England (1936)• Blumberg, Phillip I., The Multinational Challenge to Corporation Law: The Search for a New Corporate

Personality, (1993)• Bromberg, Alan R. Crane and Bromberg on Partnership. 1968.• Bruce Brown, The History of the Corporation (http:/ / www. astonisher. com/ archives/ corporation/

corporation_intro. html) (2003)• C. A. Cooke, Corporation, Trust and Company: A Legal History, (1950)• Charles Freedman, Joint-stock Enterprise in France, : From Privileged Company to Modern Corporation (1979)• Conard, Alfred F. Corporations in Perspective. 1976.• Dignam, A and Lowry, J (2006) Company Law, Oxford University Press ISBN 978-0-19-928936-3• Ernst Freund, MCMaster.ca (http:/ / socserv2. mcmaster. ca/ ~econ/ ugcm/ 3ll3/ freund/ index. html), The Legal

Nature of the Corporation (1897)• Edwin Merrick Dodd, American Business Corporations until 1860, With Special Reference to Massachusetts,

(1954)• John Micklethwait and Adrian Wooldridge. The Company: a Short History of a Revolutionary Idea. New York:

Modern Library. 2003.

Corporation 149

• Frederick Hallis, Corporate Personality: A Study in Jurisprudence (1930)• Hessen, Robert. In Defense of the Corporation. Hoover Institute. 1979. ISBN -X• John P. Davis, Corporations (http:/ / socserv2. mcmaster. ca/ ~econ/ ugcm/ 3ll3/ davisjohn/ index. html) (1904)• John William Cadman, The Corporation in New Jersey: Business and Politics, , (1949)• Joseph S. Davis, Essays in the Earlier History of American Corporations (http:/ / socserv2. mcmaster. ca/ ~econ/

ugcm/ 3ll3/ davisjoe/ index. html) (1917)• Klein and Coffee. Business Organization and Finance: Legal and Economic Principles. Foundation. 2002. ISBN

-X• Radhe Shyam Rungta, The Rise of the Business Corporation in India, 1851–1900, (1970)• Ramesh Chandra Majumdar, Corporate Life in Ancient India (http:/ / socserv2. mcmaster. ca/ ~econ/ ugcm/ 3ll3/

majumdar/ index. html), (1920)• Robert Charles Means, Underdevelopment and the Development of Law: Corporations and Corporation Law in

Nineteenth-century Colombia, (1980)• Sobel, Robert. The Age of Giant Corporations: a Microeconomic History of American Business. (1984)• Thomas Owen, The Corporation under Russian Law, : A Study in Tsarist Economic Policy (1991)• W. R. Scott, Constitution and Finance of English, Scottish and Irish Joint-Stock Companies to 1720 (http:/ /

socserv2. mcmaster. ca/ ~econ/ ugcm/ 3ll3/ scott/ index. html) (1912)

Further reading• Barnet, Richard; Ronald E. Muller (1974). Global Reach: The Power of the Multinational Corporation. New

York, NY: Simon & Schuster.• Low, Albert, 2008. " Conflict and Creativity at Work: Human Roots of Corporate Life (http:/ / www.

conflictandcreativityatwork. ca), Sussex Academic Press. ISBN 978-1-84519-272-3

External links• US Corporate Law at Wikibooks• US Corporate Law• an Audio from a talk about the history of corporations and the English Law by Barrister Daniel Bennett (http:/ /

www. brh. org. uk/ dwtf2008/ kcc. html)

Legal personality 150

Legal personalityLegal personality (also artificial personality, juridical personality, and juristic personality) is the characteristicof a non-human entity regarded by law to have the status of a person.A legal person (Latin: persona ficta), (also artificial person, juridical person, juristic person, and bodycorporate, also commonly called a vehicle) has a legal name and has rights, protections, privileges, responsibilities,and liabilities under law, just as natural persons (humans) do. The concept of a legal person is a fundamental legalfiction. It is pertinent to the philosophy of law, as is essential to laws affecting a corporation (corporations law) (thelaw of business associations).Legal personality allows one or more natural persons to act as a single entity (a composite person) for legal purposes.In many jurisdictions, legal personality allows such composite to be considered under law separately from itsindividual members or shareholders. They may sue and be sued, enter into contracts, incur debt, and have ownershipover property. Entities with legal personality may also be subject to certain legal obligations, such as the payment oftax. An entity with legal personality may shield its shareholders from personal liability.The concept of legal personality is not absolute. "Piercing the corporate veil" refers to looking at individual humanagents involved in a corporate action or decision; this may result in a legal decision in which the rights or duties of acorporation are treated as the rights or liabilities of that corporation's shareholders or directors. Generally, legalpersons do not have all the same rights as natural persons - for example, human rights or civil rights (including theright to freedom of speech, although the United States has become an exception in this regard).The concept of a legal person is now central to Western law in both common law and civil law countries, but it isalso found in virtually every legal system.[1]

ExamplesSome examples of legal persons include:• Cooperatives (co-ops), business organization owned and democratically operated by a group of individuals for

their mutual benefit• Corporations are by definition legal persons. A corporation sole is a corporation constituted by a single member,

such as The Crown in the Commonwealth realms. A corporation aggregate is a corporation constituted by morethan one member.• Municipal corporations (municipalities) are "creatures of statute." Other organizations may be created by

statute as legal persons, including European economic interest groupings (EEIGs).• Companies, a form of business association that carries on an industrial enterprise, are usually corporations,

although some companies may take forms other than a corporation, such as associations, partnership, unions, jointstock companies, trusts, and funds. Limited liability companies are unincorporated associations having certaincharacteristics of both a corporation and a partnership or sole proprietorship. LLCs, like both incorporated andunincorporated companies, are legal persons.

• Sovereign states are legal persons.• In the international legal system, various organizations possess legal personality. These include intergovernmental

organizations (the United Nations, the Council of Europe) and some other international organizations (includingthe Sovereign Military Order of Malta, a religious order).

• Temples, in some legal systems, have separate legal personality[2]

Not all organizations have legal personality. For example, the board of directors of a corporation, legislature, orgovernmental agency typically are not legal persons in that they have no ability to exercise legal rights independentof the corporation or political body which they are a part of.

Legal personality 151

Creation and history of the doctrineIn the common law tradition, only a person could sue or be sued. This was not a problem in the era before theIndustrial Revolution, when the typical business venture was either a sole proprietorship or partnership—the ownerswere simply liable for the debts of the business. A feature of the corporation, however, is that theowners/shareholders enjoyed limited liability—the owners were not liable for the debts of the company. Thus, whena corporation breached a contract or broke a law, there was no remedy, because limited liability protected the ownersand the corporation wasn't a legal person subject to the law. There was no accountability for corporate wrong-doing.To resolve the issue, the legal personality of a corporation was established to include five legal rights—the right to acommon treasury or chest (including the right to own property), the right to a corporate seal (i.e., the right to makeand sign contracts), the right to sue and be sued (to enforce contracts), the right to hire agents (employees) and theright to make by-laws (self-governance).Since the 19th century, legal personhood has been further construed to make it a citizen, resident, or domiciliary of astate (usually for purposes of personal jurisdiction). In Louisville, C. & C.R. Co. v. Letson, 2 How. 497, 558, 11L.Ed. 353 (1844), the U.S. Supreme Court held that for the purposes of the case at hand, a corporation is "capable ofbeing treated as a citizen of [the State which created it], as much as a natural person." Ten years later, theyreaffirmed the result of Letson, though on the somewhat different theory that "those who use the corporate name, andexercise the faculties conferred by it," should be presumed conclusively to be citizens of the corporation's State ofincorporation. Marshall v. Baltimore & Ohio R. Co., 16 How. 314, 329, 14 L.Ed. 953 (1854). These concepts havebeen codified by statute, as U.S. jurisdictional statutes specifically address the domicile of corporations.

LimitationsThere are limitations to the legal recognition of legal persons. Legal entities cannot marry, they usually cannot voteor hold public office,[3] and in most jurisdictions there are certain positions which they cannot occupy.[4] The extentto which a legal entity can commit a crime varies from country to country. Certain countries prohibit a legal entityfrom holding human rights; other countries permit artificial persons to enjoy certain protections from the state thatare traditionally described as human rights.[5]

Special rules apply to legal persons in relation to the law of defamation. Defamation is the area of law in which aperson's reputation has been unlawfully damaged. This is considered an ill in itself in regard to natural person, but alegal person is required to show actual or likely monetary loss before a suit for defamation will succeed.[6]

Extension of basic rights to legal persons

InternationalThe international judicial organisation that addresses itself to the legal personality of many diverse entities is theInternational Criminal Court.

United StatesIn part based on the principle that legal persons are simply organizations of human individuals, and in part based on the history of statutory interpretation of the word "person", the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly held that certain constitutional rights protect legal persons (like corporations and other organizations). Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad is sometimes cited for this finding because the court reporter's comments included a statement the Chief Justice made before oral arguments began, telling the attorneys during pre-trial that "the court does not wish to hear argument on the question whether the provision in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which forbids a State to deny any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws, applies to these corporations. We are all of the opinion that it does." Later opinions misinterpreted these pre-argument

Legal personality 152

comments as part of the legal decision.[7] As a result, because of the First Amendment, Congress may not make alaw restricting the free speech of a corporation, a political action group or dictating the coverage of a localnewspaper,[8] and because of the Due Process Clause, a state government may not take the property of a corporationwithout using due process of law and providing just compensation. These protections apply to all legal entities, notjust corporations.

GermanyArticle 19, Paragraph 3 of the Basic Law declares: "The basic rights shall also apply to domestic artificial persons tothe extent that the nature of such rights permits."[9]

People's Republic of ChinaFor a typical example of the concept of legal person in a civil law jurisdiction, under the General Principles of CivilLaw of the People's Republic of China, "[j]uristic persons are organs which possess the capacity for civil rights andthe capacity for civil activity, and in accordance with the law, independently enjoy civil rights and undertake civilobligations."[10] Note however that the term civil right means something altogether different in civil law jurisdictionsthan in common law jurisdictions.

European Convention on Human RightsThe European Convention on Human Rights extends fundamental human rights also to legal persons, which can fileapplications with the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg in case of a violation by one of the 47signatory states.

Controversies about "corporate personhood" in the United StatesSince the mid-19th century, corporate personhood has become increasingly controversial, as courts have extendedother rights to the corporation beyond those necessary to ensure their liability for debts. Other commentators arguethat corporate personhood is not a fiction anymore—it simply means that for some legal purposes, "person" has nowa wider meaning than it has in non-legal uses. Some groups and individuals (including the American Green Party[11]

) have objected to "corporate personhood."In part as a matter of subsequent interpretations of the word "person" in the Fourteenth Amendment, U.S. courtshave extended certain constitutional protections to corporations. Opponents of "corporate personhood" don'tnecessarily want to eliminate legal entities, but do want to limit these rights to those provided by state constitutionsthrough constitutional amendment.[12] Often, this is motivated by a desire to restrict the political speech anddonations of corporations, lobby groups, lobbyists, and political parties. Social commentator Thom Hartmann isamong those that share this view.[13] Because legal persons have limited "free speech" rights, legislation meant toeliminate campaign contributions by legal persons (notably, corporations and labor unions) has been repeatedlystruck down by various courts. On January 21, 2010, the Supreme Court of the United States, deciding CitizensUnited v. Federal Election Commission[14] by a 5-4 majority, removed restrictions on some types of corporatespending in support of (or in opposition to) specific candidates. This dramatically expanded the free speech rights ofcorporations.

Legal personality 153

Notes[1] The Juristic Person. I (http:/ / www. jstor. org/ pss/ 3313312), George F. Deiser, University of Pennsylvania Law Review and American Law

Register, Vol. 57, No. 3, Volume 48 New Series. (Dec., 1908), pp. 131-142.[2] Williams v The Shipping Corporation of India (US District Court, Eastern District Virginia), 10 March 1980, 63 ILR 363[3] In Hong Kong, artificial persons are granted the right to vote in functional constituencies elections.[4] These restrictions vary from country to country. Some countries do not permit a corporate entity to be a director or a liquidator while others

do.[5] Most commonly in the area of taxation and in relation to search warrants.[6] New Zealand Defamation Act 1992, s 6.[7] See, for example, Noble v. Union River Logging (http:/ / caselaw. lp. findlaw. com/ scripts/ getcase. pl?court=US& vol=147& invol=165)[8] First Nat. Bank of Boston v. Bellotti[9] Basic Law. Art. 19 Abs. 3 GG (http:/ / www. iuscomp. org/ gla/ statutes/ GG. htm#19)[10] Gary J. Dernelle. "DIRECT FOREIGN INVESTMENT AND CONTRACTUAL RELATIONS IN THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF

CHINA." DePaul Business Law Journal, Spring/Summer 1994. (6 DePaul Bus. L.J. 331)[11] Green Party USA Platform (http:/ / www. greenparty. org/ Platform. php)[12] For example, the organization ReclaimDemocracy.org has such a proposal on their website (http:/ / reclaimdemocracy. org/ political_reform/

proposed_constitutional_amendments. html)[13] Thom Hartmann's website (http:/ / www. thomhartmann. com/ restoredemocracy. shtml)[14] http:/ / origin. www. supremecourt. gov/ docket/ 08-205. htm

ReferencesBooks• J Binder, Das Problem der juristischen Persönlichkeit (http:/ / socserv2. mcmaster. ca/ ~econ/ ugcm/ 3ll3/ binder/

index. html), (1907)• R Saleilles, De La Personalité Juridique: Histoire et Théories (1922)• F Hallis, Corporate Personality: A Study in Jurisprudence (1930)• PW Duff, Personality in Roman Private Law, (1938)• CA Cooke, Corporation, Trust and Company: A Legal History, (1950)• A Watson, The Law of Persons in the Later Roman Republic (1967)• S Guterman, The Principle of the Personality of Law in the Germanic Kingdoms of Western Europe from the Fifth

to the Eleventh Century (1990)Articles• J Dewey, ‘The Historic Background of Corporate Legal Personality’ (1926) 35 Yale Law Journal 655• AW Machen, ‘Corporate Personality’ (1910) 24 Harvard Law Review 253

Article Sources and Contributors 154

Article Sources and ContributorsCitizens United Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=452147066 Contributors: 5 albert square, ALargeElk, AaronSw, Akadonnew, Americus55, Andrewlp1991, Aphillips15,Bmac1009, Ceejayoz, Cgingold, Chelydramat, Citizensunited, David Merrill, Discospinster, Dogru144, Dukeofomnium, Easchiff, Ebehn, Ed Poor, Ellsworth, Flatterworld, Gadfium, Goethean,JNW, JPMcGrath, Jcobb, John Nevard, Jonverve, Levineps, LilHelpa, McGlockin, Michaelcatts, Mike hayes, Mlaffs, Mrmuk, N5iln, Oakcroft, Orestek, Overacker, Papaloquelites, PatrioticRepublican, Pgan002, Phoebe13, ProLifeDC, Ricky81682, Ronz, Rvollmert, Sgt Pinback, Stargat, Telso, The Lizard Wizard, Tibet111, Tiggerjay, Tim Long, WOSlinker, Witzonga,Woohookitty, 68 anonymous edits

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=454804859 Contributors: AV3000, Aaronjbaylis, Afasmit, Andrewlp1991, Aneshao,Animum, Art LaPella, Ashiva2010, Bdodo1992, Bender235, BillyJack193, Bmac1009, Boss4Us, Bradpants, Bsadowski1, CMBJ, Carolmooredc, Cct18, Cdogsimmons, Cdw1952, Cgingold,Chelydramat, Chensiyuan, ChrisKennedy, Circeus, Cjs2111, Conti, Corymgrenier, Crimson30, Dcljr, Dhesi, Doktor Waterhouse, Dr Gangrene, Dthomsen8, Dudesleeper, EABSE, ESkog,Eastlaw, Echion2, Ecosanda, Ecrane425, Ekem, Elvey, Evensong, Fat&Happy, Flatterworld, Fratrep, Gabbe, Galaxiaad, Gettyleigh, Gobonobo, Ground Zero, Hairy Dude, Headbomb,Heideggerkid, Heqwm2, Hewinsj, Horologium, Hpyoup, Ingolfson, Int21h, JCDenton2052, JPMcGrath, JamesMLane, Jatkins, Jcciv4jcciv4, Jhickel, Jjenks5123, JohnSawyer, Jonverve,K!r!lleXXI, K10wnsta, Kaldari, Kendrick7, Kevin W., Kylelovesyou, Laurinavicius, Levineps, Lotje, Lousyd, MZMcBride, Macai, Macwhiz, Manticore55, MarritzN, Martnym, Maxparrish,McGlockin, Mdscott12, Mechamind90, Mesoderm, Metallurgist, Mhadj001, MileyDavidA, Mrmuk, Msl5046, Mudwater, Munci, MutantPlatypus, Myownworst, Nab123, Nathanyanks3,Nathughes, Nbarth, Nealmcb, Notquitethere, NuclearWarfare, ObiBinks, Occono, Omniscientest, Overacker, P@ddington, Piledhigheranddeeper, Postdlf, Prodego, Rajah, Rallette, Rd232,Reconsider the static, Redthoreau, Reywas92, Rillian, Rjm30, Rjwilmsi, Rms125a@hotmail.com, SMP0328., Sailing to Byzantium, Savidan, ShatteredSpiral, Shay Guy, Slaporte, Sleetman,SlimVirgin, Snake-eyes, Sprague, Storke72, Superm401, Swpb, Taylorluker, Tbhotch, Tdreid, TerraFrost, Thargor Orlando, The Thing That Should Not Be, TheQuestionGuy, Tibet111, Tim!,Timotheus Canens, Tjmayerinsf, Trackinfo, Traumerei, Tstrobaugh, Uriel8, Utaneus, Victor Victoria, Warren Dew, Welsh, WikHead, Wikidea, Wlush2, Wwoods, Æk, 156 anonymous edits

501(c) organization Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=452700262 Contributors: 10nitro, 83d40m, Alan J Shea, Alexf, Alleyjoebear, Amycsj, Andyjsmith, Angelo Somaschini,Angelo.romano, Anomalocaris, Apoc2400, Arbustoo, Arjayay, Ashcraft, Attilios, BarristerXVII, Beetstra, Beland, Benenson, Bigturtle, BlueAzure, Bluestonebill, Bobo192, Boboangel,BoosterAu, Borgx, Brimba, Bryan Derksen, Btyner, Buster0987, Caiaffa, Calwatch, Caytruc, Cbccin, Cenarium, CredoFromStart, Crocodile Punter, Crowe Horwath C-TRAC, D Monack, DJSilverfish, DS1953, Dagordon01, DaveE, Daveswagon, Davewho2, Dhoyos, Dinomite, DocWatson42, Drbreznjev, Drmichael00, Drtaxsacto, EECavazos, ERcheck, Easchiff, Emperorbma,Enviroboy, Eroberer, Ewlyahoocom, Famspear, Flatterworld, Fmojeda, Frappyjohn, Fredsmith2, General Wesc, Gentgeen, Gman762x, GoldRingChip, Goodnightmush, GreenReaper, Gregbard,Gurch, Hairy Dude, Hanumanthemonkey, Happyjessjess, Harej, HarvLuk, Hoomanator, Htonl, Husond, Ida Shaw, IrishJew, J.delanoy, Jaredroberts, JayJasper, Jeff kuta, Jinxpuppy, Jiso, Jkelly,Joffeloff, John Vandenberg, Joy Jill, Jredmond, KKersch, Kbh3rd, Keenan Pepper, Kozuch, Law, Leolaursen, Lightlowemon, LilHelpa, Linnat, Locos epraix, Lordmetroid, Lquilter, Luk,Lupinelawyer, MJSplant, MackSalmon, Marcika, Masonbarge, Mathiastck, Maverick9711, Mdotley, Mendaliv, Metasquares, MichTaxAtty, Michael Devore, MissAlyx, Mixalis, Mojoworker,Momo san, Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg, MrOllie, Mrzaius, Ms2ger, Mulad, NI4D, Nagy, Naraht, Neutrality, Nigholith, Nonprofit001, Novasource, Orion11M87, Pascal666,PaulHanson, Petri Krohn, Philip Trueman, Piledhigheranddeeper, PopMechanic, Prestonmcconkie, Prototime, Psb777, Ptanis, PubliusVarrus, Pudgenet, Qst, Quebec99, R. Baley, Rangerdude,Rchamberlain, Reedy, Remuel, Rev3vs11, Rick7425, Rjwilmsi, RoyGoldsmith, Saafdn, SchuminWeb, Seay1nolan, SebastianHelm, Sfmammamia, Sharon.dean, Shirt58, SiobhanHansa, Skakkle,Skunkboy74, Smolensky, SolamenteTed, Str1977, Suffragiologist, Superm401, SwisterTwister, Tapalmer99, The Thing That Should Not Be, Tinwelint, Tony1, Tpbradbury, Tylervt, Uriel8,WhisperToMe, Wikialoft, Wobblegenerator, Zenohockey, 327 anonymous edits

527 organization Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=452772217 Contributors: AaronD12, Ai.kefu, Andropod, Ask123, Autiger, Bobblehead, Briaboru, Bryan Derksen,Burlywood, Caerwine, Camr, Carolmooredc, Cburnett, Common Man, Coren, Dalf, David Eppstein, Delirium, Deodar, Dooresplat, Dsifford, Famspear, Fcendejas, Ffirehorse, Flatterworld,Freakofnurture, Frietjes, Fuzheado, GoldRingChip, Gurch, Hu12, Ikip, Iridescent, Ism schism, JamesMLane, Jimmyhogg, John wesley, John2429, JosephMichaelChic, JustAGal, Kendrick7,Kopf1988, Lekrecteurmasque, Levineps, Lotje, MK2, Mandarax, Mark Richards, Martin TB, Mdchachi, Meelar, Mhockey, Mightymights, Monobi, Mrevan, Mrzaius, NeonMerlin, Nishkid64,Njsamizdat, Overacker, PaulHanson, Phoebe13, Piano non troppo, Pilotguy, Quentinmatsys, Radicalsubversiv, Rich Farmbrough, Rjwilmsi, SEWilco, SanDiegoPolitico, Sardanaphalus, ScienzGuy, Seanwood, Sekicho, Ses101, Seth Ilys, Stevenmitchell, Tang23, Tim1357, Tim1965, Veinor, WikiDao, Wolfman, Xavier86, Yachtsman1, Yvooria, Zanter, 122 anonymous edits

America Coming Together Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=455141606 Contributors: AaronSw, Alison9, Betacommand, Blender119, Brookshawn, Ciphergoth, CommonMan, Cyberpuke, Davidwiz, Dooresplat, Ellsworth, Fcendejas, Flippedout, Garion96, Gorgonzilla, Hmains, IKato, Jerzy, JessCar194, John K, Karmafist, Loonymonkey, MSTCrow, Meelar,Namiba, Neutrality, NickBurns, SEWilco, Sekicho, Skepted56, Vary, Wembley75, Zackfischer, 16 anonymous edits

Joint Victory Campaign 2004 Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=413898538 Contributors: A2Kafir, Billheller, Garion96, Levineps, Melaen, Mpntod, Pearle, Requestion,Robofish, Sekicho, Takwish, Zoicon5, 5 anonymous edits

Media Fund Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=450141735 Contributors: Everyking, Harro5, Jag123, Levineps, Lowellian, Mdiaz127, Meelar, Requestion, Sekicho,Shoeofdeath, Takwish, Wolfman, 5 anonymous edits

Service Employees International Union Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=453223637 Contributors: 5oh4, Aaronblood10, AgnosticPreachersKid, Ahuskay, Alansohn,Alensha, Americaneinherjer, Anders.Warga, Anonymous Dissident, AxelBoldt, Beantownj, Ben-w, Bento00, Billb, Blueboy96, Bookandcoffee, Boomgarden, Briaboru, Buellering, Buster7,COMMYKILLA34, Caltrop, Catdude, Checkmate000, Chris93, ChrisHamby, Common Man, Courcelles, Crazycomputers, DMCer, DMG413, Dachtorstrange, Dan100, Dark paladin x,Davehar7, David Schaich, DeansFA, Delirium, DerHexer, Deseavers, Eclectek, EdSelkow, EdwinHJ, Ephery, Ewick12, Exit2DOS2000, Fcendejas, FlyingToaster, Formeruser-82,George.Toliver, George100, Gflight12, Gobonobo, Gogo Dodo, Gogowoody, Grandmasterka, Ground Zero, Grundle2600, Gunmetal Angel, Haus, HorseManBlue, Hroðulf, Indx47, Iridescent,J.delanoy, JHunterJ, Jac16888, Jadon, Joemcl, John Darrow, JohnSpot, Kflight12, Landon1980, Lciaccio, Levineps, Lightmouse, LilHelpa, LittleDan, Loonymonkey, Lquilter, Macruari,Mahabarbara, Marek69, Meegs, Mereda, Meyerlondon, Michaelm, Mike3438, Mmccgg, NSR, Nicky Scarfo, Nspeelman, Ovi3, Palooka42, PanchoS, Pepper, Pjs0 irish, Prolog, Radicalsubversiv,Rattvis, RevelationDirect, Rich Farmbrough, Rjensen, Rjwilmsi, Robbie dee, Rockyhorror42, Russcote, Rwkelleher89, Ryancarlson, Scarykitty, Scjessey, Seb az86556, Seergenius, Seiu888,Skoosh, Smehlman, Sparrowhawk64, Spartan2600, Stepshep, SteveSims, Steven Argue, Stritt45, Syndicalista, TVC 15, Takwish, Tanker2000, Tassedethe, Texaswebscout, Thingg,ThomasAndrewNimmo, Tide rolls, Tim1357, Tim1965, Tjmayerinsf, Toasterb, Tony Clothes, Toussaint, Tresiden, Twalls, Ulric1313, Uncle Milty, Uvaduck, Valfontis, Walter Ballin,Whoneedspants, Wikidemon, WngLdr34, Wolfgangvonkrieg, Zen4thought, 314 anonymous edits

Progress for America Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=423634447 Contributors: Alex2706, Anthony Appleyard, Appraiser, BS24, Bearcat, Bobblehead, Bonewah, ColoniesChris, Crystallina, Dooresplat, Easchiff, EdgeOfEpsilon, Emurphy42, Eumolpo, Firsfron, Gbleem, Ground Zero, Horologium, JamesMLane, Levineps, LilHelpa, Nssdfdsfds, Ombudsman, RichFarmbrough, THF, Takwish, Tassedethe, Will Beback, 6 anonymous edits

Republican Governors Association Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=445245357 Contributors: Academic Challenger, CR85747, Cadams00, Dethme0w, Dmatlm, EATC,Flatterworld, Fvasconcellos, Getmoreatp, GoldRingChip, Hysteria18, Jjfuller72, Jun Nijo, Khatru2, Kross, Lightmouse, LtNOWIS, Mboverload, Megatropolis, Mercifulexodus, Mosemamenti,Muboshgu, Myclob, NYyankees51, NeilN, Neutrality, Nevermore27, Orangecar22, Questionic, Quidam65, RockMFR, RussBlau, Tcarreon, Therequiembellishere, Tim Thomason, TommyBoy,Toussaint, User F203, Yellowdesk, 51 anonymous edits

Democratic Governors Association Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=451824500 Contributors: BD2412, BrownHairedGirl, CR85747, CSWarren, DavidSteinle, Dblevins2,Deavenettel, Dems on the move, Elendil's Heir, Flatterworld, Folksong, Giraffedata, GoingBatty, GoldRingChip, Jun Nijo, LtNOWIS, MAS117, Matt319, Mgiangreco, MisfitToys, Mr. Matté,Muboshgu, Neutrality, Nevermore27, Nzjaimes, Perfectblue97, Presidentman, Questionic, R'n'B, Rrius, Rushadthomas, Sebastianvader, Tbhotch, TommyBoy, White.matthew.09, Yellowdesk, 45anonymous edits

American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=433973924 Contributors: Angusboy76, BD2412, Barkingmoose,BlankVerse, Blargh29, Bookandcoffee, Briaboru, Charles Matthews, Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry, Chicken Wing, Cipher nemo, Cityofwind, Crohall, Cyrusc, Deseavers, Drsunken, Edward,GeeJo, Gjs238, Gobonobo, Gouaf, Ground Zero, Hank chapot, HorseManBlue, Italo Svevo, Jeanbaptiste, Kendrick7, MBisanz, Matchups, Maximus Rex, Neutrality, Onorem, Orangemike,Radicalsubversiv, Reaper Eternal, RevelationDirect, Rich Farmbrough, Rjwilmsi, Sadads, Student7, Tad Lincoln, Takealeft, Takwish, Tim!, Tim1965, Vargklo, Wayne Miller, Woohookitty, 28anonymous edits

Swift Vets and POWs for Truth Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=447888760 Contributors: 2004-12-29T22:45Z, AFSOCSARGE, Adoniscik, Aerion, Alex2706, AlexanderWinston, Alexius08, Alkivar, AlmostReadytoFly, American2, Andrewlp1991, Andrewpmk, Angela, Anonip, Antaeus Feldspar, Aquillion, Argyrios Saccopoulos, Ato, Auntof6, BD2412, Badagnani, Bblakeney, Beej71, Betsythedevine, Biruitorul, Blaxthos, Bringthenews, BruceJohnson, Bryan Derksen, Btipling, Bucephalus, Burschik, BusterD, Bwiki, C56C, Calwatch, Can'tStandYa, Cgingold, Chowbok, Chris the speller, Classical liberal, Common Man, Conti, Courtassassin, Crockspot, Crust, DHeyward, Deanlaw, Delirium, Democratunderground, Derex, Desmay, Dfp21, Dhartung, Discospinster, Dlabtot, Drunkentune, EECEE, Ed Poor, Ekac, Ellsworth, Eric Rasmussen, Evil Monkey, Fishboy, Flatterworld, Freakofnurture, Fvw, GD, Gaius Cornelius, Gamaliel, Goethean, Golbez, Good Olfactory, Graham87, Grenavitar, GrifM, Guat6, HawaiianGecko, Hgrenbor, Highground79, Hmains, Hmwith, Hob, Holmwood, Iii33lll, JakeInJoisey, JamesMLane, Java7837, Jgwlaw, Jnc, Jon Osterman, JonMoseley, Joro, Josiah Rowe, Justin Bacon, KeithCu, Kendrick7, Khaosworks, Kizor, Kizzle, Koavf, Korg, Kumioko,

Article Sources and Contributors 155

Kymacpherson, Lapsed Pacifist, Lear's Fool, LeoO3, Levineps, Ligulem, Longsnap56, Lyellin, Maelnuneb, Marcika, Mboverload, MichaelDavidSmith, Minutiaman, Mirv, MisfitToys, Mooo!,Mordemur, Morton devonshire, Mystique, NKCTrio, Neoconned, Netsnipe, Nikkapedian, Nysus, OCNative, PatriotBible, Peteforsyth, Pgk, Quadell, Quentinmatsys, R. fiend, Raul654, Rb82,Rdsmith4, Rebecca, RedMagicMarker, Retired username, Rex071404, Rhobite, Rich Farmbrough, RickK, Rjd0060, Rjwilmsi, Robshapiro72, RossPatterson, Rvn5gt6rafejd, SEWilco,SHADOWKamen, SYSS Mouse, Salzberg, Sannse, SarekOfVulcan, Savidan, Sheldon Rampton, Shrew, Silverback, SimonP, Slowking Man, Steve Dufour, SteveSims, Stevenmitchell,Stevertigo, Stumblemonkey, TDC, Tagishsimon, Takwish, Teiladnam, The Cunctator, The King Of Gondor, TheKMan, TheRanger, TheronJ, TimBentley, Timrollpickering, Tom harrison,Tommyt, Treybien, USMA, Unclesmrgol, VTEX, Vanished user 03, Vivacissamamente, Vulcanstar6, Vyran, WRL07, We66er, Whaiaun, Who, Whosyourjudas, Wikidemon, Wizardman,Wolfman, Wwoods, Xenophrenic, ZHurlihee, 406 anonymous edits

MoveOn.org Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=443298499 Contributors: 4wajzkd02, A Doon, AZylman, AaronSw, Aaronhill, Addedd, After Midnight, Alex Libman, Ali'i,AlistairMcMillan, Amejr999, Americanleader, Amire80, Andrew Levine, Andrewlp1991, Andy Marchbanks, Andycjp, AnonMoos, Antandrus, Appraiser, Arielasteif, Armageddon666,Arnoldmania, Arzel, Ashley Pomeroy, Astanhope, Astuishin, AuburnPilot, BMF81, Beginning, Bencampo, Beno1000, Berkshirewoods, Biccat, BigBrotherIsWatchingYou, Bikeric, Bileman, BillLevinson, BillFlis, BillyTFried, BlackOrestes, Blackjack48, Blessingcloset, Blue Tie, Bogdangiusca, Bonadea, Boscobiscotti, Brandzel, Brewcrewer, Bridgecross, Brighterorange,BryceHarrington, Bubba73, Bullytr, Careless hx, Catgut, Causa sui, Cecropia, Cg-realms, Cgingold, Chairlunchdinner, Chaojoker, ChicXulub, Chickitychina`1`1, Christopher Mann McKay,CiudadanoGlobal, ClockworkSoul, Cometstyles, Confession0791, Conradrock, Coolguyee1, CorrectorGeneral2, Crockspot, Cultofpj, CyberGhostface, Cyronax, DD2K, DMCer, Dabliss,Dailykossucksbigdicks, DanFein, DanMS, Daniel Bonniot de Ruisselet, Dapoloplayer, David Gale, David Schaich, Dawdler, Dayewalker, Dekisugi, Deor, Derktar, DevinCook, Discospinster,Dlabtot, Dlippman, Dori, Downtown dan seattle, Dr who1975, Dr. B. R. Lang, Drrll, Dudesleeper, Dukemeiser, DuncanHill, Dwalls, Eksummer, Emiellaiendiay, EpicFantasyStory, Eurleif,Existentializer, FCYTravis, Fabrictramp, Factcheck21, Fairness And Accuracy For All, Fearwig, FisherQueen, Floridianed, Gaius Cornelius, Gamaliel, Garion96, Gdo01, Gid, Gilliam,GirasoleDE, Glen, Golbez, Goodtimber, GrahameS, Ground Zero, Gscshoyru, Guettarda, Gunsnroads, HaeB, Hanumanthemonkey, Harro5, Hephaestos, Highground79, Hmains, Hockeyhamster,Homologeo, Hornplease, Hraefen, Hughey, Inaxdaze, Iridescent, IrnBru001, Ism schism, ItHighway, Izanbardprince, J Milburn, J.delanoy, JDoorjam, Jackbirdsong, Jadziaimani, JamesMLane,JamieBattenbo, Jareha, Jatkins, Jbmurray, Jc-S0CO, Jdub818, Jesster79, Jesup, JewishJake, Jimintheatl, Jimmyeightysix, Jinxmchue, Jlefler, Jmorrison230582, JoeFriday, Johnsmith2101993,Jonathan.s.kt, Jonny-mt, Jpgordon, Justine4all, KCinDC, Kasreyn, Katalaveno, Katalinacmnacha89, Kbdank71, Kerowren, Kevin Saff, Kirin4, KneeLess, Kopf1988, Kukini, Kungfuadam, Kww,Kylu, LILVOKA, Leftylib, Levineps, Liberal00Q1, Loonymonkey, LordBrain, Lowellt, Lp734, Lunkwill, Malcolm, ManeyAk, Manticore126, Marikamoveon, Mark K. Jensen, Mark Richards,MastCell, Matt Yeager, Max rspct, MaxSem, Maxwellb, Mdarklighter, Meelar, Merovingian, Mfowler11, Mhym, Michael Hardy, Mightywayne, Mike R, MildredCaldwell, Millionsandbillions,Minesweeper, MisfitToys, Mocko13, MosEisley, Mountainscout, Mr. Billion, Mulad, Murftown, Mythrandir, Mzaogrh, Nakon, NathanDahlin, Natural Cut, Naurmacil, Nburden, NeilN,Neutrality, NewEnglandYankee, NiceFriend, Nick, Nikkapedian, Nonprofittech, Nylad, OCNative, Ofus, Oh yEs itS caRly, Ohnoitsjamie, Olcottr, Omicronpersei8, Opertinicy, Orangemike,Orlady, Ossified, Otolemur crassicaudatus, P-Chan, PCHS-NJROTC, Palfrey, Parjlarsson, PeterEastern, Petero9, Pgr94, Pilotguy, Piotrus, Pixeltoo, Prospect77, Przepla, Quackslikeaduck,Quadell, Quatloo, R'n'B, R. fiend, RCPayne, RW, Radicalsubversiv, Radon210, Rdsmith4, Redkern, Reid A., Reifman, Revolutionaryluddite, Rex071404, Richard Myers, Rlove, RockMFR,Rockymountains, Royboycrashfan, Rrburke, SQL, Saberwolf116, Samaritan, Sango123, Scaife, Schi, SchnitzelMannGreek, Sciurinæ, Sdedeo, SeanNovack, Sekicho, Selmo, Sharkface217,Sheldon Rampton, Signalhead, SiobhanHansa, Sj7700, Son of More, SonicAD, Sparrowhawk64, Sphinx1, Spnst3, Staplegunther, SteveSims, Stevenscollege, Stevietheman, Stilltim,Stopthebus18, StudierMalMarburg, Sushi Tax, SvenHelsing, Swegner, Szyslak, TBSchemer, TDC, THEemu, Takwish, Tassedethe, Terjen, The Evil Spartan, The Magnificent Clean-keeper,Thor100, Threeafterthree, Trentblase, TreveX, Trevor MacInnis, Treybien, Triwbe, Turtlescrubber, TwakTwik, Twalls, UncleDouggie, UnitedStatesian, Uzma Gamal, Valois bourbon, VanishedUser 1004, VirtualSteve, VitaleBaby, WBcoleman, Welsh, Whitney.snyder, WikHead, Wiki alf, WikiLeon, Wikipediarules2221, William Graham, Wkgreen, Wlmg, Wmahan, Wolfnix, Wrp103,Wyllium, XP, Xanderer, Zafiroblue05, Zantolak, ZoneIII, Zpinarello, 615 ,לערי ריינהארט anonymous edits

College Republicans Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=454325342 Contributors: 2Snazzy, Abenton, AlexiusHoratius, AmeriCan, Apterygial, Bastin, Bcspro,BlackberryHacks, Blue387, Bonewah, Bwilkins, Caltas, Catapult, Cdogsimmons, Choster, Collegerepublicans, Common Man, Complexi, Csmith87, Dadude3320, Dhadsb, Disavian, DoulosChristos, Download, Dreid1987, Dudeman5685, Eloil, Emerybob, Erianna, Eshatologist, Etherice, Everyking, FCYTravis, Freakofnurture, FutureNJGov, GOP 2011, GoingBatty, Greencaterpillar, Gscshoyru, Happyme22, Impmope, Inks.LWC, Itssweeney, JavierMC, JayJasper, Jcmiller, Jeff G., Jeick, Jeremydhagen, Jersyko, Jgkantor, Jiang, John Broughton, Jreferee, Kane5187,Keilana, Kiteinthewind, LadyMontresor, Liface, Lightmouse, Master Jay, Meelar, Minesweeper, Minion of Gozer, Mjwhite3, NCurse, Nelliebellie, Neutrality, Nfutvol, Nihiltres, Nywalton,Ovid5188, Pacificus, Paladin R.T., Propol, RedShiftPA, Rhobite, Rjwilmsi, Schneiderwm, Seawolf81st, SevernSevern, SiobhanHansa, SorryGuy, SpaceFlight89, Stillnotelf, SueNaustin, ThatGuy, From That Show!, Theseus1776, Thomastedder, Tim Long, Toussaint, Trikker E, USAGOP, Vayne1, Virginia Bell, Walton One, Wiki Master 1776, Wisconsincheddar1985, XeroxKleenex,Zacharyleahan, 200 anonymous edits

New Democrat Network Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=449965840 Contributors: Anylogic, Blue387, BlueAzure, Buellering, Checco, Evans1982, Foobarnix, Holdek,Jatkins, Light000, Meelar, Monerta, Neutrality, Perceval, R'n'B, Radicalsubversiv, Robofish, Robth, RyanGerbil10, Sgriffin241, Shrew, Takwish, Tregoweth, TrustTruth, Twalls, Walkiped, Zrs12, 15 anonymous edits

Club for Growth Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=452228775 Contributors: AMittelman, AROY411, Abune, Alexrexpvt, Americafirst1776, Ari Publican, Bentley4,Bigturtle, Bill shannon, Binarybits, Blueboy96, Bridge Partner, Bronayur, Brothejr, CWenger, ChesterCharge, Cleared as filed, Club4growth, Cmr08, Collect, Cyril Washbrook, D Monack, DavidShankbone, Delirium, Dezidor, Dgwohu, Diannaa, Dkostic, Easchiff, Elassint, Frazzydee, Frmaximos, Gobonobo, Godwynn, Grenavitar, Grover cleveland, Hall Monitor, HelloAnnyong,HornColumbia, Hurmata, InaMaka, J.A.McCoy, JForget, JHP, JamesMLane, Jgwest, Jny2cornell, Joe C, Joseph Solis in Australia, Jpcarver, Jrun, Jun Nijo, KuwarOnline, Levineps, MBisanz,Mack2, MattFisher, MaxMercy, Mild Bill Hiccup, Morphh, Nachama, Nage1, Neutrality, Nixeagle, Non-Dairy Creamer, Nsaa, OddibeKerfeld, P37307, PassionoftheDamon, Paul from Michigan,Prettyinpink9071, Qrsdogg, RWReagan, RedShiftPA, Revfig, Rich Farmbrough, Rjwilmsi, SDY, SebastianGS, Sholom, Skinny McGee, Somedifferentstuff, Staecker, Steelbeard1, Takwish,Tdl1060, Telso, TexianPolitico, TheCondor24, TheFeds, Thekohser, Thewatcher2008, Tony Sidaway, Tradina, Werideatdusk33, Youngberry, 107 anonymous edits

Sierra Club Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=454879147 Contributors: A8UDI, AKMask, Abdull, Abrech, Airplaneman, Alan Liefting, Alansohn, Alex B-P, Amarino2010,Andropod, Andy Marchbanks, Anomalocaris, Antandrus, Arcadia616, Ardenn, Arthur Rubin, Bali ultimate, Bearcat, BenBradleyBayhorse, Bencampo, Boing! said Zebedee, Byelf2007, CALR,Calbear22, Calmer Waters, Calwatch, Canglesea, Catnap2007, Cgingold, Chadlupkes, Closenplay, Cometstyles, CopperSquare, Cornellrockey, Csi3199guy, Cullen328, Daimore, Damnreds,DavidLevinson, Db099221, DeadEyeArrow, Delldot, Deltabeignet, Devourer09, Dimes for eyes, Drivec, Droll, DuendeThumb, Dwalls, E2eamon, Eb17816, Eclectek, Enviroboy, Envirogeek78,Enviroleader, Epbr123, Everyking, Evrik, Fastily, FictionalAlligator, Fiftytwo thirty, Finlay McWalter, Fratrep, FritzG, Geofferybard, Gjs238, Gobonobo, Gopchristian, Greenshed, Gurch,Hammbeen, Hard Raspy Sci, Harry Angstrom, Hayduke2000, Haymaker, Hike395, Hmains, Icairns, Illustria, Izno, JJstroker, JPMcGrath, Jabowery, JamesMLane, Jdecock, JeremyA, Jim1680,Jimmy Slade, Johnfos, Jonah Ayers, Juniperandwallace, Justin.Johnsen, KJS77, Kaibabsquirrel, Kbdank71, Kelapstick, Kiwidude, Kstingily, LAlawMedMBA, Landroo, LeadSongDog,Leatherstocking, Lightmouse, Look2See1, Loonymonkey, Lquilter, Mac, Marchije, Marilyn.wall, MartinRe, MaynardClark, Megannnn, Mercurywoodrose, Mervyn Emrys, Mind meal,Minesweeper, MisfitToys, MuadDib09, Mushroom, Mwparenteau, Mygerardromance, NinjaLore, Nopetro, NuclearWarfare, Offenbach, Olivier, Pacificus, Paleorthid, Palfrey, Papalopolis, Paste,Pbhayani, Pgan002, Philip Trueman, Plainvanilla, Pragmatik, Pursey, PyroGamer, Quantumobserver, Qxz, Rabble Rouser, RadioFan, Rbandal, Rebecca, Redfarmer, Renata, Rep07, RichFarmbrough, Richprentice, Rjwilmsi, Robbie dee, RobertG, Rror, Rscottjones, RyanGerbil10, SEWilco, Sfgiants906, Silly rabbit, Simesa, Sipchen, Sparrowhawk64, Staffwaterboy, SteinbDJ,Stovl, Sunray, Swatjester, TCLarson168, Takwish, Tcncv, That Guy, From That Show!, Theanphibian, Tiptoety, Tonytula, Trusilver, TrustTruth, User2004, VBGFscJUn3, Versus22,Voyagerfan5761, WOSlinker, Wachholder0, Wavelength, Wbfergus, Whiteboy1815, WikipedianMarlith, Will Beback, Winter x, Won't be back, Yllosubmarine, Zcrayfish, Zheem, 288anonymous edits

EMILY's List Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=452199576 Contributors: Aaron Brenneman, AaronSw, Abberley2, Adam sk, Aholland, America69, Aomarks, Aralvarez,BS24, Briaboru, Briancua, Chasmodai, Collect, Cumulus Clouds, D, Daytona2, Discospinster, EJB341, EuropracBHIT, Filip nohe, Fixedit1980, Galupstate, Gamaliel, GenkiDama, Gobonobo,GoldDragon, Groggy Dice, HappyWrenFly, Haymaker, Helper2008, Hmains, Improve2009, Jeffrey Smith, Jengod, Kate, Katefan0, Katielady21, Kbdank71, Knoxgrad06, Korossyl, Kwaddle,L'Aquatique, Lacrimosus, Lectonar, LegitimateAndEvenCompelling, Lester, Lincolnite, Loonymonkey, Lotje, Lp734, Lquilter, Lukepeterson, Man vyi, Marchoi, Micahmn, NYyankees51,NatureBoy, Neutrality, NinetyCharacters, Poetdancer, RandySteer, Rich Farmbrough, RickK, Rjensen, Rmj12345, Roscelese, Sekicho, Seth Ilys, Severa, Smartiger, Sparrowhawk64, Spotfixer,Superm401, Takwish, The bellman, Tim Long, Tomasso, TrustTruth, Viajero, Vsb, Walloon, Waustin, William Graham, Zahd, 78 anonymous edits

AFL–CIO Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=433235806 Contributors: -Ril-, 1965Tim, A More Perfect Onion, Acebrock, AdamRaizen, AgnosticPreachersKid, Alarm,Anders.Warga, Andres, Andy Marchbanks, Areastrips78, Astuishin, Bastique, Ben-w, Billy Hathorn, BlankVerse, Bookandcoffee, Brian1975, Brookshawn, Bwishan, CUBJONES83,Capricorn42, Casito, Checkmate000, Chupon, Circeus, Concavelenz, Cornellrockey, Crazysane, Cyberevil, DanKeshet, Discospinster, Docu, Dogcanteen, DrTorstenHenning, Eclecticology,Edward, EdwinHJ, Eluchil404, Ericlee, Fabartus, Fat pig73, Fcendejas, Flightx52, FrottonCSEA, Galaxiaad, GeeJo, Gobonobo, GorillaWarfare, Haus, Hcheney, Hunter such, Ixfd64, Jacrosse,Jag123, Jared Hunt, JeremyA, Jmabel, John254, JonathanDP81, Josephabradshaw, KGasso, Kaihsu, Kaldari, Katiker, Ketchuphed, Kiefer.Wolfowitz, Kjetil82, KnightRider, KnowledgeOfSelf,Koavf, Kumioko, La Pianista, Lightmouse, Lokifer, Lquilter, Malepheasant, MarcWmA, Mareino, MarkGallagher, Matthew.colvard, Maximus Rex, Michael Devore, Misterrick, Mochachill,Mooncowboy, Mtcedar, MuZemike, Mystylplx, Neutrality, Noldoaran, NuclearWarfare, Num1dgen, Optigan13, PaulHanson, Pearle, Pgan002, PhilHibbs, Poppopbang, Prometheusg, Quadell, R.fiend, Radicalsubversiv, Redthoreau, RevelationDirect, RexNL, Rich Farmbrough, Richard Myers, RickAguirre, Rjensen, Rjwilmsi, Rlquall, Rockstone35, Rojomoke, Ronhjones, RootSquared,Ruy Lopez, SchuminWeb, SimonP, SiobhanHansa, Smack, Sohailstyle, Sparrowhawk64, Staeiou, Takwish, Tbhotch, Thehelpfulone, Tim1965, Tlarson, Tom, Tony Clothes, Toussaint,Trabisnikof, Uncle Milty, Uvaduck, Victor Victoria, Watermaren, Wjejskenewr, Xed, Yaankeefan13, Yodaasdasd, Zerotonin, Zh24, Zxcvbnm, Zzedar, Алтухов Сергей, 173 anonymous edits

League of Conservation Voters Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=454103569 Contributors: AKMask, Americus55, Arctic Night, Arthur Rubin, AvicAWB, Bdallman, Bdell555, Burntapple, CapnTradehighcost, Cgingold, Common Man, Crystallina, Delirium, Fusion7, Gandydancer, Gc1000, Goingin, Ground Zero, Gyrofrog, Hasan155, IrishWolfhoundJC, Kaibabsquirrel, Kate, Kbdank71, Kromsson, L.tak, Levineps, Loonymonkey, Meelar, Mightysmurf, Nukeless, Photoupdate94, Reywas92, Rich Farmbrough, Shortride, Sparrowhawk64,

Article Sources and Contributors 156

Spunky2215, Takwish, TheFeds, VarunRajendran, Watchpup, Wavelength, Westsider, Whereizben, Wwoods, YUL89YYZ, 40 anonymous edits

America Votes Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=387015196 Contributors: Alison9, Astuishin, Buellering, Chadlupkes, Chris the speller, Colonies Chris, Date572010, DeusEx, Emilyhope, Garion96, Gobonobo, Ground Zero, Hmains, Joseph Solis in Australia, Kgrr, Levineps, Loonymonkey, McAngeOK, Neutrality, RyanGerbil10, Sparrowhawk64, Storm Rider,Tim1965, TrustTruth, Welsh, Widefox, Xezbeth, 42 anonymous edits

Progress for America Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=423634447 Contributors: Alex2706, Anthony Appleyard, Appraiser, BS24, Bearcat, Bobblehead, Bonewah, ColoniesChris, Crystallina, Dooresplat, Easchiff, EdgeOfEpsilon, Emurphy42, Eumolpo, Firsfron, Gbleem, Ground Zero, Horologium, JamesMLane, Levineps, LilHelpa, Nssdfdsfds, Ombudsman, RichFarmbrough, THF, Takwish, Tassedethe, Will Beback, 6 anonymous edits

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=431519992 Contributors: (tyrone), Academic Challenger, Adamielmcc, Alexmh17,Andrewwilliamryan, Arnork, Athabaska-Clearwater, Biljosm, Blargh29, Bonadea, Bookandcoffee, Brettber, Clearstreams17, Cmurphy175, Dsp13, Estesce, Everyking, Greenshed, I alreadyforgot, Judsons164, Kaibabsquirrel, Lakero, Lbsr, Lu425, Luigizanasi, MR2Di4, Mandarax, Neutrality, Nutty1317, Raul654, Rchamberlain, RevelationDirect, Rich Farmbrough, Rror, Seanf76,Soman, Stultiwikia, Takwish, Ted Wilkes, Tim1965, Wayward, Whoneedspants, Wiki alf, 115 anonymous edits

Economic Freedom Fund Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=431709229 Contributors: Arbustoo, Artificial Intelligence, Closeapple, Daveswagon, Goethean, Hmains, JohnBroughton, Khatru2, Moorematthews, Oatmeal batman, SlackerMom, Takwish, Tassedethe, Vision Thing, 2 anonymous edits

Laborers' International Union of North America Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=434097626 Contributors: AgnosticPreachersKid, Bigbadger79, Bigdaddy1981,Bookandcoffee, Chelydra, Commander Keane, Cybercobra, Dsp13, Eastlaw, Fcendejas, Fish and karate, Graham87, Granite07, Icanspele, JLaTondre, James.mcgough, Jim.henderson, JohnathanVrozos, Kevin, Lordtekken, Mark83, Mauri21, Newsyprd, Niteowlneils, Rdinvest, Rgreer, Rich Farmbrough, Robofish, SimonP, Soman, Tassedethe, Tim1357, Tim1965, Toussaint, Uvaduck,Vegaswikian, 44 anonymous edits

Progressive Majority Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=438106533 Contributors: BD2412, Benjaminx, BrownHairedGirl, Cherwil7, Gene93k, Hmains, Loonymonkey,Raincityman, Slon02, Sparrowhawk64

Political action committee Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=453273675 Contributors: Alansohn, Ale jrb, Astrepp, B.S. Lawrence, BS24, BillFlis, Bryan Derksen, Bstein80,Bullytr, Camembert, Capricorn42, Ceyockey, Coffeetable, Courcelles, Daniel Sobchak, Darth Panda, Davidkennedy.fdu, Dawid86, Dejitarob, Deodar, Drew.seman, EABSE, ESkog, Editor99999,Esquel, Flatterworld, Flowanda, Frietjes, Gjd001, Hibernian, Hisownspace, Ikip, J.delanoy, JWSchmidt, Jesuschex, Johnparker1776, Johnpseudo, Jon Monreal, JoshuaKuo, Kendrick7,Leadpacscheck, LeaveSleaves, Lechedeelsol, Mark Richards, Meelar, Mensch, Mets501, Mhockey, Mightymights, Minesweeper, Mokru, Newbyguesses, Njsamizdat, Nzd, Overacker,Oxymoron83, Philip Trueman, Pitchka, Plasticspork, PoliticalJunkie, Ponydepression, Quackslikeaduck, Quentinmatsys, Radagast83, Radicalsubversiv, RadioBroadcast, Radiojon, RedSox2008,Remmick2099, Robofish, Rrauscher, RussBlau, SanDiegoPolitico, Sbenson14, Scohoust, Sfmontyo, Simishag, Simon12, SimonP, SiobhanHansa, Sligocki, TML, Tanvir Ahmmed, Tempodivalse,Timneu22, Tommy2010, Tony Sidaway, Trift, Trilliumz, User At Work, Vcelloho, Wikitigger, Willcoop, William Graham, Willking1979, X201, YellowRoze, 195 anonymous edits

Federal Election Campaign Act Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=451998863 Contributors: A Stop at Willoughby, Akerans, AlistairMcMillan, Apokryltaros, ArtificialIntelligence, Bcharles, Chrism, Chuunen Baka, Commander Nemet, Courcelles, Cunard, DMCer, Daniel Olsen, Db099221, Deus Ex, Djrun, Doug humes, EABSE, EdgarJT, Edward,Ewlyahoocom, Excirial, Fg2, Garion96, GoldRingChip, GreatWhiteNortherner, Harrietbaker, Icestorm815, Kzzl, Ljl219, Lockley, Maximus Rex, Mb1000, Mboverload, Me Ningless, Meelar,Mike Storm, Overacker, PaulHanson, Phantomsteve, Pikiwyn, Political hack, QuasiAbstract, Sampi, Sannse, Starcaster, Ucucha, Verybigfish86, W.Ross, Wikiluvr2, 104 anonymous edits

Corporate personhood Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=455039095 Contributors: Absecon 59, Anythingyouwant, Ashershow1, Autopilot, BD2412, Before My Ken,Bender235, Bhuston, Bibliophylax, Billinghurst, Blanche Poubelle, Blue Kitsune, BoNoMoJo (old), Bobblewik, Bona Fides, Boss4Us, Boud, Branko, Brendan19, Bryan Derksen, Bulatych,CatherineMunro, Cgingold, Chadlupkes, Chelydramat, Chris Capoccia, Christofurio, Chzz, CiteCop, Cjs2111, Cmdrjameson, Cobalty, Cool Hand Luke, Ctdunstan, David Shankbone,Davidcannon, Dmwilliams, Dreftymac, EABSE, Eastlaw, EdH, Efflux, Erianna, Eross8, Espoo, Ewlloyd, Festermunk, Gabbe, Gazpacho, Gbinal, Ground Zero, Guanaco, Harel, Hephaestos, Hjal,Hmains, Hopiakuta, Ignoranteconomist, Ihcoyc, InpoliticTruth, J1.grammar natz, JPMcGrath, Jaggerblade, Jbinder, Jeronimo, JohnOwens, Jordalus, Jpr2000, K8lj, Kaitlinsb, Ken Arromdee,Kent Wang, Kitov, LandruBek, LeeUSA, Levineps, Lex lawrence, LilHelpa, Lucobrat, Mangojuice, Marcus Brute, Mesoderm, Michael Hardy, Minesweeper, Nagelfar, Natrius, Nbarth, Neilc,Noz92, Ombudsman, Outriggr, Overacker, PTSE, Pacaro, Peaceaz, Postdlf, Proofer47, R.J.Miles, Rboatright, Redthoreau, Richardelainechambers, Rick K, Robofish, Robsoray, Rpogge, Scientus,ShelfSkewed, Shinju, SimonP, Skierpage, Smoggyrob, Spblat, Stevertigo, Stuart J. Davis, Subsurd, Tassedethe, Tellsbadjokes, Template namespace initialisation script, Thatvisionthing, TheCunctator, Timrollpickering, TopazSun, Topbanana, Toussaint, Tregoweth, Tstrobaugh, Vegaswikian, W E Hill, Wainstead, Waldo, Who, Wmahan, Wndl42, Woohookitty, XDanielx,Yahooshua, Zeality, Zeamays, 114 anonymous edits

Natural person Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=455006304 Contributors: Apokrif, Arthena, Bhuston, BoNoMoJo (old), Brewcrewer, Bulatych, Chaojoker, CharlesMatthews, ClaesWallin, D, D3gtrd, David.Monniaux, Dcstamm, DocWatson42, Dreftymac, Eastlaw, Estevoaei, Evercat, Fvasconcellos, Gary King, Gregzeng, Howcheng, Inkling, JHMM13,Keilana, Ksyrie, Lucy-marie, M.R.B., Mac, Maximilian2010, Michael Hardy, Mindmatrix, Miss Mondegreen, Montrealais, Mormegil, Nick Carraway, Notorious4life, Pakaran, Physicistjedi,Puckly, Reinis, Skakkle, Suradnik13, Vedek Dukat, Waacstats, Wayiran, Why My Fleece?, 42 anonymous edits

Corporation Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=454493996 Contributors: 1122334455, 121a0012, AA, AThing, Acjelen, Aditya, Adraeus, Aesopos, Agbook, Ahoerstemeier,Aitias, Aknorals, Alai, Alansohn, Alex756, Alexius08, Alfonso Márquez, AmosWolfe, Anclation, Ando228, Andy120290, Anonymous editor, Aori, Apjohns54, Aquarius rising, ArchonMagnus,Armagebedar, Arny, Arthena, Asgfdasgfdahgfdahfdhfdshfdahfd, Aspects, Astoni1950, Atomaton, Austinmayor, Avfc101, Avoided, BD2412, Badgermum, Bartreynolds, Battlecry, Beland,Bfigura, Bhuston, Bi, Bibliophylax, Bkonrad, Blue Kitsune, Blue-Haired Lawyer, Blueelectricstorm, Bmcdaniel, BoNoMoJo (old), Bobo192, Boccobrock, BorgQueen, Boud, Bped1985, BrianPearson, Brian0918, Bruxism, Bryan Derksen, Buddylovely, Bulatych, CALR, CHJL, CNerd2025, Cadby Waydell Bainbrydge, Caltrop, Cambrant, CanadianLinuxUser, Canderson7, Car FallingInto the Water, Carlos, Cartografia20, Celerityfm, Cethegus, Chenzitian, Chewy m, Choster, Chovain, ChrisErbach, ChrisRuvolo, Chrisieboy, Christofurio, Classicfilms, Clore, Cmorgs, Cncxbox,Colonies Chris, Comet Tuttle, Cometstyles, Commit charge, Computerjoe, Conversion script, Coolcaesar, Cornellrockey, CorporationBuilder, Courcelles, Crosbiesmith, Crush502, Cryptonymius,D6, DARTH SIDIOUS 2, DRTllbrg, DS1953, DVD R W, Dagonet, Dale Arnett, Damieng, DanKeshet, DanMatan, Daniel C. Boyer, Dann, Danski14, Dave-ros, Dave6, DaveBF,David.Monniaux, David91, DavidLevinson, Dayewalker, Delirium, Delirium of disorder, Desyman44, Diamondland, Diego.buonvino, Dims, DocKino, Dolovis, Doniago, Dorond, Dougieb, Dr.Sunglasses, Dstebbins, DuncanHill, ELIZABETHerin654321, Ededwin, Edward, EdwinHJ, Efghij, Egli, Ehrenkater, Eigenwijze mustang, El C, Elfguy, Emilymelle, Epbr123, Eruantalon,Esperant, Ettrig, Everyking, Evice, Excirial, Ezra Wax, F15 sanitizing eagle, F5487jin4, FedLawyer, Finalnight, Firsfron, FlagFreak, Fleisher, Flewis, Fnielsen, Foant, Foofighter20x,FordPrefect42, Fram, Fred Bradstadt, Fred zappa, Friends007, Frosted14, Furrykef, Fxm12, Fyyer, Gaia Octavia Agrippa, Galteglise, Gary King, GavinTing, George Church, Gilliam, Gly,Gnta53, Gobonobo, Goyaz, Gparker, Grace E. Dougle, Gracefool, GraemeL, GraemeMcRae, Gregbard, Gringo300, Ground Zero, Grunt, Guanaco, Gunnar Larsson, Gurch, Guroadrunner, Gwor,Habj, Hadal, Harburg, Hickpicktick, Hmains, Hooperbloob, Howardjp, Hu, Hu12, HutchieN74, IRelayer, Ihope127, Improper Bostonian, Imrek, Indefatigable, Intranetusa, Iridescent, J.delanoy,JAn Dudík, JCurshen, JDPhD, JForget, JJ211219, Ja 62, JaGa, Jagged 85, Jamesontai, Jay, JenVan, Jengelh, Jerry, Jerryseinfeld, Jesse627, Jezzabr, Jguk, Jim Howard, Jinian, Jitterro, Jlhcpa, Jni,Joakim Ziegler, JoaoRicardo, JohnWest, Johnmola, Johnteslade, JohnyDog, Jonah Bloch-Johnson, Jonovision, Jonson22, Julesd, Jurusie, Kaihsu, KansasCity, Karl-Henner, Kboardman, Kennysh, Kevin Rector, KnowledgeOfSelf, Kosunen, Kotniski, Kozuch, Kurieeto, Kurt Jansson, Kuru, Kvuo, LGagnon, La goutte de pluie, LaggedOnUser, Largoplazo, LeadSongDog, LeaveSleaves,Lee Choquette, Lee Kay, LegitimateAndEvenCompelling, Leszek Jańczuk, Lightmouse, LittleOldMe, Lotje, Lousyd, Lowellian, Lppa, Luna Santin, Lupo, MER-C, Maelnuneb, Magog the Ogre,Mairead clare byrne, Malo, MarceloB, Marek69, Mark Ryan, Mark83, Martarius, Martg76, Masi76, Matt Fitzpatrick, Matthew Yeager, MattieTK, Mattready, Mauls, Maurreen, Max rspct,MechMykl, Mephistophelian, Merbabu, Mesoderm, Methvenlaw, MetsFan76, Mhockey, Mhrogers, Miborovsky, Mic, Michael Hardy, Mike Dillon, Mindmatrix, Mirv, Mlessard, Mmmbeer,Molly T Smith, Mpublius, MrOllie, Mrmuk, Murftown, Myc2001, Mydogategodshat, NWAJason, NYScholar, Nanakosua, Napzilla, Natrajdr, Naudefj, Neil Evans, NeilN, Neo-Jay, Neurolysis,NeuronExMachina, Neutral bias, Nezzadar, Nichetas, NickBush24, Niels, Nightsturm, Ninsegtari, Nirvana888, Nixdorf, Noah Salzman, Northumbrian, Nricardo, NuclearWinner, Nuge, O,Obeewnn, Ohnoitsjamie, Okloster, Olivier, Omegatron, Omid.mt, Omphaloscope, Onlyemarie, Onodevo, Ospalh, Outriggr, Owain, P199, PEiP, PMLawrence, Paintingmars, Paleocon44, Panem,Papercutbiology, Pat Splane, Patrick, PaulHanson, Pavel Vozenilek, Pax:Vobiscum, Pdfpdf, Pearle, Pedant17, Peloneous, Penbat, Peter, Petri Krohn, Phoenixrod, Phuzion, PierreAbbat, Pilaf,Pmadrid, PoccilScript, Populus, Postdlf, Postitnote Crazy, Professor Todd, Proofreader77, PropertyIsTheft, Prunesqualer, PullUpYourSocks, Pushylittlekid, Pyrosim, Quassy, Qubex, Qxz, R'n'B,R-41, RBBrittain, REDyellowGreenBLUE, Rachel Cakes, Rahuloof, Rama, Raphaelhui, Rcameron68, Rd232, Rdsmith4, RedWolf, Reflex Reaction, Rfc1394, Rich Farmbrough,RightWngXtremist, Rjensen, Road Wizard, Roadrunner, Robenel, Robert Brockway, RobertStPierre, Robin Patterson, Rodhay, Romwriter, Ronreed, Routlej1, Rreinart, Rrnwexec, RussBlau,Ryan Postlethwaite, Ryguasu, S.K., SD6-Agent, SDC, Sade, Sam Hocevar, Sanders muc, Sanfranman59, Sburke, ScaldingHotSoup, SchuminWeb, Seivad, Sekicho, Shadowjams, Shanel, Shawnin Montreal, SimonP, Simone, Siobhansmum, Siroxo, Sjakkalle, SlimVirgin, Small business, Smallbones, Smallman12q, Snozzer, Sokolesq, Soul phire, Soxwon, SpaceFlight89, SpeakFree,Spegali, Spitfire, Stadtwolf, Stars4change, Stebulus, SteinbDJ, Stemcat, StephenMacmanus, Steven Weston, Stevietheman, Stickiten, Stopfe die Schokolade, Strife911, Stuart J. Davis, Sundiiiaaa,Sundiiiiii, Superbeecat, Susan Mason, T g7, TallNapoleon, Tdeegan1, Tellyaddict, Tesseran, Tharshman, The Cunctator, The Egyptian Liberal, The Thing That Should Not Be, The Tom, TheTwenty Thousand Tonne Bomb, TheFarix, TheOtherJesse, Thegreenj, Themepark, Tide rolls, TimBentley, Timc, Timessomestoryadded, Timothylord, Tisane, Tnxman307, Tokuzoh,Torontokid2006, Trafford09, Trusilver, Tsavage, Tuomas Hätinen, Tyler197, Ukexpat, UnDegree, Unfree, UnitedStatesian, UtherSRG, Vdzhuvinov, Vegaswikian, Velho, Victor.gutierrez.mayo,VictorianMutant, Vpopescu, WalkingTarget, Wavelength, Wayne Slam, Weatherman667, Wexcan, Whitejay251, Why Not A Duck, Whywhywhy, Wifione, Wik, Wiki alf, Wiki-meister09,Wikidea, WildWeathel, Wipi18, Woohookitty, WookieInHeat, Wrecksdart, Wtmitchell, Wxlfsr, XXXEF, Xochristinax333, Xp54321, Yamamoto Ichiro, Yeu Ninje, Yidisheryid, Youssefsan,Zidonuke, Zrinski hr, Zundark, Zzuuzz, ΙωάννηςΚαραμήτρος, Саша Стефановић, 894 ,کاشف عقیل ,דניאל צבי anonymous edits

Article Sources and Contributors 157

Legal personality Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=454231671 Contributors: 1984, Adoniscik, Aknorals, Andres, Anomalocaris, Antandrus, Anthony, BMF81, Bdelisle,Before My Ken, Bibliophylax, Blue-Haired Lawyer, BoNoMoJo (old), Bryan Derksen, Chaojoker, Chatfecter, ChrisCork, Colonies Chris, Cybercobra, David.Monniaux, David91, Dcoetzee,Dgwohu, Dishcmds, Dland, Eastlaw, EdC, Edmon, Ensign beedrill, Esanchez7587, Espoo, Estevoaei, Eyu100, Favonian, Flibjib8, Gavia immer, Ged Davies, GermanLawyer, Gpvos, Gregbard,Guy Peters, Hairy Dude, Hede2000, Hmains, Hooperbloob, Hoplon, HumphreyW, Hurleycompanies, Ian.thomson, Ignacio Icke, Intractable, J.delanoy, JPMcGrath, Jeffq, Jesse627, Jfdwolff,Jza84, Kingdon, Koakhtzvigad, Kookyunii, Legis, Llavigne, Longhairandabeard, Loqi, Lousyd, Lycurgus, M.R.B., Mac, Matthew Proctor, Michael Hardy, Mkmcconn, Mkweise, MortimerCat,Mtmelendez, Mulder416, Mydogategodshat, Nankai, Neutrality, NorthernThunder, Nuno Tavares, Olegwiki, Parableman, Paul Magnussen, Pawyilee, Peter G Werner, PeterEastern, Physicistjedi,Pion, Pmadrid, Puckly, Railwayman, Reinyday, RekishiEJ, Roadrunner, Rodhay, Rrbeatty, SchuminWeb, Shagmaestro, Shrommer, Sjö, Spegali, Stevertigo, StradivariusTV, Sugihartono, Sylent,TobyJ, Tortillovsky, VampWillow, Village Explainer, Wavelength, Wayiran, Wik, Wikialoft, Wikidea, Wndl42, Woohookitty, Yottie, YuTanaka, 97 anonymous edits

Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors 158

Image Sources, Licenses and ContributorsImage:Citizens_United_logo.jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Citizens_United_logo.jpg License: Fair Use Contributors: -Image:Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Seal_of_the_United_States_Supreme_Court.svg License: Public Domain Contributors: IpankoninImage:Anthony Kennedy Official.jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Anthony_Kennedy_Official.jpg License: Public Domain Contributors:Supreme_Court_US_2009.jpg: Steve Petteway, Staff Photographer of the Supreme Court (evidence that he took it is here (LinkedIn profile here U.S. Federal Government. Supreme Courtarchivist's office confirms that this is photo number 2009-03882 and that a permanent catalog number will be assigned. derivative work: FT2 10:49, 8 November 2010 (UTC)Image:John Paul Stevens, SCOTUS photo portrait.jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:John_Paul_Stevens,_SCOTUS_photo_portrait.jpg License: Public Domain Contributors: Steve Petteway, photographer for the US Supreme CourtFile:Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission Poll 1.png Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Citizens_United_v._Federal_Election_Commission_Poll_1.png License: Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Contributors: CMBJImage:America Coming Together logo.png Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:America_Coming_Together_logo.png License: Fair Use Contributors: -Image:Seiu logo.png Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Seiu_logo.png License: Fair Use Contributors: FcendejasImage:AFSCME logo.png Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:AFSCME_logo.png License: Fair Use Contributors: -Image:AFSCME members with Barack Obama 2008-08-24.jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:AFSCME_members_with_Barack_Obama_2008-08-24.jpg License:Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Contributors: Christ KistnerImage:AFSCME logo.svg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:AFSCME_logo.svg License: Fair Use Contributors: -Image:Swiftpowlogo.png Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Swiftpowlogo.png License: Fair Use Contributors: User:Badagnani, User:BkellImage:Moveon_logo.png Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Moveon_logo.png License: Fair Use Contributors: -Image:CRNC logo.jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:CRNC_logo.jpg License: Fair Use Contributors: -Image:OSU College Republicans First Meeting.jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:OSU_College_Republicans_First_Meeting.jpg License: GNU Free DocumentationLicense Contributors: lifeinthefieldImage:College Republicans at OSU.jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:College_Republicans_at_OSU.jpg License: GNU Free Documentation License Contributors:lifeinthefieldImage:College Republicans at George Fox.jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:College_Republicans_at_George_Fox.jpg License: GNU Free Documentation License Contributors: lifeinthefieldImage:North Florida College Republicans for McCain.jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:North_Florida_College_Republicans_for_McCain.jpg License: GNU FreeDocumentation License Contributors: lifeinthefieldImage:Tony Snow with UIS College Republicans.jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Tony_Snow_with_UIS_College_Republicans.jpg License: Fair use Contributors:UIS College RepublicansFile:New Democrat Network logo.png Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:New_Democrat_Network_logo.png License: Fair Use Contributors: -Image:Sierra Club.png Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Sierra_Club.png License: Fair Use Contributors: -Image:EL logo.gif Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:EL_logo.gif License: Fair Use Contributors: -File:AFL-CIO.png Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:AFL-CIO.png License: Fair Use Contributors: -File:AFL-CIO Building.JPG Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:AFL-CIO_Building.JPG License: Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Contributors:AgnosticPreachersKidImage:IBEW.png Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:IBEW.png License: Fair Use Contributors: User:(tyrone), User:CydebotImage:LIUNA logo.png Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:LIUNA_logo.png License: Fair Use Contributors: -File:Moreschi Building.JPG Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Moreschi_Building.JPG License: Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Contributors:AgnosticPreachersKidFile:LIUNA 12 8th St local 10 58 jeh.jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:LIUNA_12_8th_St_local_10_58_jeh.jpg License: Creative Commons Zero Contributors:User:Jim.hendersonImage:Progressive Majority.png Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Progressive_Majority.png License: Fair Use Contributors: User:BenjaminxFile:Day 7 Occupy Wall Street September 23 2011 Shankbone.JPG Source:http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Day_7_Occupy_Wall_Street_September_23_2011_Shankbone.JPG License: Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Contributors: David ShankboneFile:Stora Kopparberg 1288.jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Stora_Kopparberg_1288.jpg License: Public Domain Contributors: biskop Peter Elofsson (Petrus) iVästerås. Dead 1299.File:Corporate mapping.jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Corporate_mapping.jpg License: Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Contributors: www.orbemapa.com,Blog El mundo de los mapas.</ref>File:Vereinigte Ostindische Compagnie bond.jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Vereinigte_Ostindische_Compagnie_bond.jpg License: Public Domain Contributors:-

License 159

LicenseCreative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported//creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/