Showing posts with label Fund. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Fund. Show all posts

Monday, April 15, 2013

Tax Day: While Millions Rush to Meet Deadline, Resisters Continue Longstanding Refusal to Fund War



Transcript



This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.



AMY GOODMAN: “What If We All Stopped Paying Taxes?” That’s Sharon Jones and the Dap-Kings. This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman.


Well, today is April 15th, Tax Day, a day when millions of Americans scramble to file their income taxes on time. It’s also a day when people across the country are planning to protest the use of tax dollars to fund war. In dozens of communities across the country, demonstrations are planned at IRS offices, federal buildings, post offices, weapons factories, to protest ongoing massive U.S. government expenditures on drones, on missiles, on bombs.


According to a new pie chart released by the War Resisters League, 47 percent of federal taxes go toward war in some form or other. To protest this, some Americans are taking a stand today by personally refusing to pay their federal taxes. These tax resisters are risking jail time by withholding all or a portion of their federal income taxes, and instead redirecting the money to humanitarian efforts. One tax resister, Juanita Nelson of Massachusetts, has not paid federal income taxes since 1948.


JUANITA NELSON: I felt it was—from the beginning, it was part of a whole nexus of ideas, not just the tax refusal. Just I decided that I was a pacifist. And, for me, nonviolence, I would say, more than—what do you call it—pacifism, is a way of life. And I—my whole—since I was in my twenties, in particular, early twenties, it has always been my idea to try to go further and further to try to live what I believe. And that was certainly a very direct thing. You don’t like war? Don’t pay for it. Why should I pay for it?



AMY GOODMAN: That’s Juanita Nelson from a documentary, Death and Taxes. She hasn’t paid her federal taxes for more than 65 years.


Tax resistance has been a regular form of civil disobedience throughout American history. Most famously, the writer Henry David Thoreau refused to finance slavery and the Mexican-American War in 1847 by withholding his poll tax.


Well, for more, we’re joined by Ed Hedemann, a conscientious war tax resister who has redirected the federal portion of his tax bill to nonprofits and humanitarian efforts for 40 years. He’s a member of the War Resisters League, the U.S.’s oldest secular pacifist organization. In 1982, he helped found the National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee to provide information and support to people considering war tax resistance. He is also author of War Tax Resistance: A Guide to Withholding Your Support From the Military.


Ed Hedemann, welcome to Democracy Now! You’re one of a couple dozen people in this country. You haven’t paid taxes for some, what, 40 years. Why did you stop? And what portion of your taxes don’t you pay?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, I stopped after I refused induction in the military. This is in 1969. The government tried to draft me to go to war in Vietnam; I refused to go. A year later, I thought, well, it’s not good enough for me not to go and yet pay for others to go into the military, so I stopped paying the following year taxes to the IRS that eventually would help the government’s war in Vietnam and subsequent wars.


AMY GOODMAN: So, what happened to you? What does it mean? How did to figure out—what exactly do you do on Tax Day?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, I refuse to pay 100 percent of my federal taxes, my federal income taxes. I pay Social Security, Medicare, state and local taxes, but none of the federal income taxes. But actually, in fact, I do pay them, just not to the IRS. I take the entire amount of money and reroute it to other organizations helping to build a better world rather than helping to kill people.


AMY GOODMAN: And what has the federal government responded?


ED HEDEMANN: Routinely I get letters, threatening letters from the IRS. They look for bank accounts. They look for property that I might own to seize. They look for salaries that I might have. I go out of my way to be uncollectible. I don’t have readily accessible bank accounts. I don’t have a salary. I’m self-employed. I have had salaries in the past. And I really don’t own any significant property. Now, the IRS has gone as far as to take me into federal district court. They did that in 1999 to get me to reveal sources of my assets, because the IRS has been unable to find anything significant to collect. I refused to give this information, and that was the end of it.


AMY GOODMAN: What did the judge do?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, the judge—I said that, “Well, I’ve already paid my taxes to other organizations, not to the IRS. I cannot pay money to help kill people.” And I didn’t want to incriminate myself by giving this information to the IRS, a potential criminal investigation. The judge ignored everything except for the latter part and said that I didn’t have to give the information to the IRS because I might incriminate myself.


AMY GOODMAN: On Friday, we spoke to Bishop Thomas Gumbleton, retired Catholic bishop of Detroit. He’s been a leading voice for peace, justice and civil rights. He explained why he also refuses to pay his taxes.


BISHOP THOMAS GUMBLETON: I feel a good portion of those taxes goes to our war budget, which is our so-called defense budget, but it’s really a war budget. It’s the largest of any nation in the world. And years ago, Pope Paul VI said the arms race—and that’s what we are doing with our defense budget—is, in itself, an act of aggression against the poor. Using that money for weapons and strategies to use them is taking money away from the poor and causing them to starve. We should be using our natural resources and our wealth to promote development and to promote justice in the world. When you have a world where there’s such a gap between the rich and the poor, and such huge numbers suffering because of that, the church has a real responsibility to use whatever income it can bring to—I mean, our nation has a responsibility to use its income to help development happen, because that’s the basis for peace.



AMY GOODMAN: That is Detroit’s retired auxiliary bishop, Tom Gumbleton. He was in our studio for the hour on Friday. You can go to our website at democracynow.org to see the full interview with him.


The National Campaign for a Peace Tax Fund is lobbying for a peace alternative for taxpayers. It would recognize the rights of conscientious objectors to war to not have to physically or financially contribute to war in any way. Alan Gamble of the National Campaign for a Peace Tax Fund explained how it would work.


ALAN GAMBLE: There would be a fund established within the federal Treasury that would accept the money of designated or verified conscientious objectors to all wars, and they would get a receipt from the federal Treasury, which they would attach along with their income tax forms when they send their taxes in. Then, all of their taxes would go into this federal special trust fund, which would then be allocated out to whichever government programs needed it, with the exception of things with a designated military purpose, such as Department of Defense.



AMY GOODMAN: That’s Alan Gamble of the National Campaign for a Peace Tax Fund. Ed Hedemann, are you for such a fund?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, I think it would be better that—if such a fund existed, but I wouldn’t participate in it, because part of the reason that I—well, first, that fund would be—the government would determine who is acceptable as a conscientious objector to military spending, and I think it ought to be up to the individual, not up to the government, to choose. But also, part of the reason I refuse to pay is I want to be an irritant to the government. I want to make a protest that can’t be ignored. And I think that the government would use such a fund, if it were to be formed, to shuttle away people who are noisy and people who are protesters and people who agitate. And I refuse to do that. I want to do a protest that the government has to pay attention to.


AMY GOODMAN: So, let’s go through the pie chart, for why you feel this way. It’s “Where Your Income Tax Money Really Goes” from the War Resisters League. The chart says 43 percent of human resources—43 percent goes to human resources, 20 percent to past military, 27 percent to current military—so that’s close to half of the money. Explain this to us, for people who are resisting and for people who aren’t but want to know where their money goes.


ED HEDEMANN: Yeah, well, this is the percentage of federal funds that are spent. So if you look at your 1040 form, there’s going to be a line on the back of the 1040 form that says “federal tax” and that—these percentages relate to that. They do not include Social Security funds, because that’s money that’s raised separately through—I mean, if you’re salaried, you have a deduction for Social Security.


AMY GOODMAN: So, what about someone who says, “I’m a tea party activist”?


ED HEDEMANN: Yeah.


AMY GOODMAN: Says, “I don’t want you to take—I’m not going to pay Social Security.” And someone else says, “I’m not going to pay for this.” And someone else says, “For this.” How does the government function?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, I think that people have a right in a democracy to choose what they’re going to support and not support. If these people in the tea party and others refuse to pay for these programs and are willing to take the risk, like I am, in their refusal, well, then that’s up to them. I think that’s part of what’s a democracy. But what I do on top of that is I don’t keep the money for myself. I reroute it. I wonder if these tea party people do the same with their money? I doubt it. But—


AMY GOODMAN: What about those who say they don’t have the same luxury as you? They have a salary. Their account would be attached. People like Randy Kehler, a peace activist in western Mass, had his house taken from him.


ED HEDEMANN: Yeah, and he continues to refuse today, despite his house being taken. I think that’s the risk you take. But, to me, part of the issue is that the protest is as important as how much money is resisted. And I think that there are people who are war tax resisters that do have their salaries seized, but they continue to protest despite that, because the point of the—of refusing to pay, from my point of view, is protesting.


AMY GOODMAN: Let’s go back in history to the Henry David Thoreau, 1847. The writer famously protested paying for slavery and the Mexican-American War by withholding his poll tax. He was sent to jail for a night, but when he was released the next morning, he refused to budge. He argued he had the right to remain in jail and register his repulsion of slavery. Thoreau was eventually thrown out of jail and went on to publish his influential essay called “Civil Disobedience.” In it, he wrote, quote, “If a thousand men were not to pay their tax-bills this year, that would not be a violent and bloody measure, as it would to pay them, and enable the State to commit violence and shed innocent blood. This is, in fact, the definition of a peaceable revolution, if any such is possible.” How many people resist, Ed?


ED HEDEMANN: Hard to say. I would say several thousand people in this country. A lot of people do it quietly, and they don’t tell, well, me or National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee or the IRS. They just do it. And it’s hard to say.


AMY GOODMAN: The phone tax, what is it?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, the phone tax is a 3 percent federal excise tax on local telephone service. It used be also on long distance. And so, if you have a land line, then there is going to be a 3 percent charge on telephone service.


AMY GOODMAN: For what?


ED HEDEMANN: That goes into the general federal budget pot, just like the income tax, and it began, however, being put on telephone service during the Spanish-American War over 100 years ago.


AMY GOODMAN: And it’s still there?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, it keeps going—coming and going. After the Spanish-American War, it went off.


AMY GOODMAN: We have 10 seconds.


ED HEDEMANN: Yeah, and then after World War I, it went on, came off. But it is on there now.


AMY GOODMAN: And people resist by just not paying that portion of their phone bill?


ED HEDEMANN: Yes.


AMY GOODMAN: Does the phone company eventually cut off your service?


ED HEDEMANN: Generally not.


AMY GOODMAN: Where are you going to be today?


ED HEDEMANN: I’m going to be in front of the IRS at 4:00 and then march through Times Square with the Rude Mechanical Orchestra to the general post office at 6:00.


AMY GOODMAN: Ed Hedemann, I want to thank you for being with us, conscientious war tax resister.




Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed | Amazon Plugin WordPress | Android Forums | WordPress Tutorials

Democracy Now!

Tax Day: While Millions Rush to Meet Deadline, Resisters Continue Longstanding Refusal to Fund War

Tax Day: While Millions Rush to Meet Deadline, Resisters Continue Longstanding Refusal to Fund War



Transcript



This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.



AMY GOODMAN: “What If We All Stopped Paying Taxes?” That’s Sharon Jones and the Dap-Kings. This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman.


Well, today is April 15th, Tax Day, a day when millions of Americans scramble to file their income taxes on time. It’s also a day when people across the country are planning to protest the use of tax dollars to fund war. In dozens of communities across the country, demonstrations are planned at IRS offices, federal buildings, post offices, weapons factories, to protest ongoing massive U.S. government expenditures on drones, on missiles, on bombs.


According to a new pie chart released by the War Resisters League, 47 percent of federal taxes go toward war in some form or other. To protest this, some Americans are taking a stand today by personally refusing to pay their federal taxes. These tax resisters are risking jail time by withholding all or a portion of their federal income taxes, and instead redirecting the money to humanitarian efforts. One tax resister, Juanita Nelson of Massachusetts, has not paid federal income taxes since 1948.


JUANITA NELSON: I felt it was—from the beginning, it was part of a whole nexus of ideas, not just the tax refusal. Just I decided that I was a pacifist. And, for me, nonviolence, I would say, more than—what do you call it—pacifism, is a way of life. And I—my whole—since I was in my twenties, in particular, early twenties, it has always been my idea to try to go further and further to try to live what I believe. And that was certainly a very direct thing. You don’t like war? Don’t pay for it. Why should I pay for it?



AMY GOODMAN: That’s Juanita Nelson from a documentary, Death and Taxes. She hasn’t paid her federal taxes for more than 65 years.


Tax resistance has been a regular form of civil disobedience throughout American history. Most famously, the writer Henry David Thoreau refused to finance slavery and the Mexican-American War in 1847 by withholding his poll tax.


Well, for more, we’re joined by Ed Hedemann, a conscientious war tax resister who has redirected the federal portion of his tax bill to nonprofits and humanitarian efforts for 40 years. He’s a member of the War Resisters League, the U.S.’s oldest secular pacifist organization. In 1982, he helped found the National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee to provide information and support to people considering war tax resistance. He is also author of War Tax Resistance: A Guide to Withholding Your Support From the Military.


Ed Hedemann, welcome to Democracy Now! You’re one of a couple dozen people in this country. You haven’t paid taxes for some, what, 40 years. Why did you stop? And what portion of your taxes don’t you pay?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, I stopped after I refused induction in the military. This is in 1969. The government tried to draft me to go to war in Vietnam; I refused to go. A year later, I thought, well, it’s not good enough for me not to go and yet pay for others to go into the military, so I stopped paying the following year taxes to the IRS that eventually would help the government’s war in Vietnam and subsequent wars.


AMY GOODMAN: So, what happened to you? What does it mean? How did to figure out—what exactly do you do on Tax Day?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, I refuse to pay 100 percent of my federal taxes, my federal income taxes. I pay Social Security, Medicare, state and local taxes, but none of the federal income taxes. But actually, in fact, I do pay them, just not to the IRS. I take the entire amount of money and reroute it to other organizations helping to build a better world rather than helping to kill people.


AMY GOODMAN: And what has the federal government responded?


ED HEDEMANN: Routinely I get letters, threatening letters from the IRS. They look for bank accounts. They look for property that I might own to seize. They look for salaries that I might have. I go out of my way to be uncollectible. I don’t have readily accessible bank accounts. I don’t have a salary. I’m self-employed. I have had salaries in the past. And I really don’t own any significant property. Now, the IRS has gone as far as to take me into federal district court. They did that in 1999 to get me to reveal sources of my assets, because the IRS has been unable to find anything significant to collect. I refused to give this information, and that was the end of it.


AMY GOODMAN: What did the judge do?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, the judge—I said that, “Well, I’ve already paid my taxes to other organizations, not to the IRS. I cannot pay money to help kill people.” And I didn’t want to incriminate myself by giving this information to the IRS, a potential criminal investigation. The judge ignored everything except for the latter part and said that I didn’t have to give the information to the IRS because I might incriminate myself.


AMY GOODMAN: On Friday, we spoke to Bishop Thomas Gumbleton, retired Catholic bishop of Detroit. He’s been a leading voice for peace, justice and civil rights. He explained why he also refuses to pay his taxes.


BISHOP THOMAS GUMBLETON: I feel a good portion of those taxes goes to our war budget, which is our so-called defense budget, but it’s really a war budget. It’s the largest of any nation in the world. And years ago, Pope Paul VI said the arms race—and that’s what we are doing with our defense budget—is, in itself, an act of aggression against the poor. Using that money for weapons and strategies to use them is taking money away from the poor and causing them to starve. We should be using our natural resources and our wealth to promote development and to promote justice in the world. When you have a world where there’s such a gap between the rich and the poor, and such huge numbers suffering because of that, the church has a real responsibility to use whatever income it can bring to—I mean, our nation has a responsibility to use its income to help development happen, because that’s the basis for peace.



AMY GOODMAN: That is Detroit’s retired auxiliary bishop, Tom Gumbleton. He was in our studio for the hour on Friday. You can go to our website at democracynow.org to see the full interview with him.


The National Campaign for a Peace Tax Fund is lobbying for a peace alternative for taxpayers. It would recognize the rights of conscientious objectors to war to not have to physically or financially contribute to war in any way. Alan Gamble of the National Campaign for a Peace Tax Fund explained how it would work.


ALAN GAMBLE: There would be a fund established within the federal Treasury that would accept the money of designated or verified conscientious objectors to all wars, and they would get a receipt from the federal Treasury, which they would attach along with their income tax forms when they send their taxes in. Then, all of their taxes would go into this federal special trust fund, which would then be allocated out to whichever government programs needed it, with the exception of things with a designated military purpose, such as Department of Defense.



AMY GOODMAN: That’s Alan Gamble of the National Campaign for a Peace Tax Fund. Ed Hedemann, are you for such a fund?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, I think it would be better that—if such a fund existed, but I wouldn’t participate in it, because part of the reason that I—well, first, that fund would be—the government would determine who is acceptable as a conscientious objector to military spending, and I think it ought to be up to the individual, not up to the government, to choose. But also, part of the reason I refuse to pay is I want to be an irritant to the government. I want to make a protest that can’t be ignored. And I think that the government would use such a fund, if it were to be formed, to shuttle away people who are noisy and people who are protesters and people who agitate. And I refuse to do that. I want to do a protest that the government has to pay attention to.


AMY GOODMAN: So, let’s go through the pie chart, for why you feel this way. It’s “Where Your Income Tax Money Really Goes” from the War Resisters League. The chart says 43 percent of human resources—43 percent goes to human resources, 20 percent to past military, 27 percent to current military—so that’s close to half of the money. Explain this to us, for people who are resisting and for people who aren’t but want to know where their money goes.


ED HEDEMANN: Yeah, well, this is the percentage of federal funds that are spent. So if you look at your 1040 form, there’s going to be a line on the back of the 1040 form that says “federal tax” and that—these percentages relate to that. They do not include Social Security funds, because that’s money that’s raised separately through—I mean, if you’re salaried, you have a deduction for Social Security.


AMY GOODMAN: So, what about someone who says, “I’m a tea party activist”?


ED HEDEMANN: Yeah.


AMY GOODMAN: Says, “I don’t want you to take—I’m not going to pay Social Security.” And someone else says, “I’m not going to pay for this.” And someone else says, “For this.” How does the government function?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, I think that people have a right in a democracy to choose what they’re going to support and not support. If these people in the tea party and others refuse to pay for these programs and are willing to take the risk, like I am, in their refusal, well, then that’s up to them. I think that’s part of what’s a democracy. But what I do on top of that is I don’t keep the money for myself. I reroute it. I wonder if these tea party people do the same with their money? I doubt it. But—


AMY GOODMAN: What about those who say they don’t have the same luxury as you? They have a salary. Their account would be attached. People like Randy Kehler, a peace activist in western Mass, had his house taken from him.


ED HEDEMANN: Yeah, and he continues to refuse today, despite his house being taken. I think that’s the risk you take. But, to me, part of the issue is that the protest is as important as how much money is resisted. And I think that there are people who are war tax resisters that do have their salaries seized, but they continue to protest despite that, because the point of the—of refusing to pay, from my point of view, is protesting.


AMY GOODMAN: Let’s go back in history to the Henry David Thoreau, 1847. The writer famously protested paying for slavery and the Mexican-American War by withholding his poll tax. He was sent to jail for a night, but when he was released the next morning, he refused to budge. He argued he had the right to remain in jail and register his repulsion of slavery. Thoreau was eventually thrown out of jail and went on to publish his influential essay called “Civil Disobedience.” In it, he wrote, quote, “If a thousand men were not to pay their tax-bills this year, that would not be a violent and bloody measure, as it would to pay them, and enable the State to commit violence and shed innocent blood. This is, in fact, the definition of a peaceable revolution, if any such is possible.” How many people resist, Ed?


ED HEDEMANN: Hard to say. I would say several thousand people in this country. A lot of people do it quietly, and they don’t tell, well, me or National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee or the IRS. They just do it. And it’s hard to say.


AMY GOODMAN: The phone tax, what is it?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, the phone tax is a 3 percent federal excise tax on local telephone service. It used be also on long distance. And so, if you have a land line, then there is going to be a 3 percent charge on telephone service.


AMY GOODMAN: For what?


ED HEDEMANN: That goes into the general federal budget pot, just like the income tax, and it began, however, being put on telephone service during the Spanish-American War over 100 years ago.


AMY GOODMAN: And it’s still there?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, it keeps going—coming and going. After the Spanish-American War, it went off.


AMY GOODMAN: We have 10 seconds.


ED HEDEMANN: Yeah, and then after World War I, it went on, came off. But it is on there now.


AMY GOODMAN: And people resist by just not paying that portion of their phone bill?


ED HEDEMANN: Yes.


AMY GOODMAN: Does the phone company eventually cut off your service?


ED HEDEMANN: Generally not.


AMY GOODMAN: Where are you going to be today?


ED HEDEMANN: I’m going to be in front of the IRS at 4:00 and then march through Times Square with the Rude Mechanical Orchestra to the general post office at 6:00.


AMY GOODMAN: Ed Hedemann, I want to thank you for being with us, conscientious war tax resister.




Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed | Amazon Plugin WordPress | Android Forums | WordPress Tutorials

Democracy Now!

Tax Day: While Millions Rush to Meet Deadline, Resisters Continue Longstanding Refusal to Fund War

Tax Day: While Millions Rush to Meet Deadline, Resisters Continue Longstanding Refusal to Fund War



Today is April 15th, Tax Day, when millions of Americans scramble to file their income taxes on time. It’s also a day when people across the country are planning to protest the use of tax dollars to fund war.  In dozens of communities across the country, demonstrations are planned at IRS offices, federal buildings and weapons factories to protest ongoing massive U.S. government expenditures on drones, missiles and bombs. According to a new pie-chart released by The War Resisters League, 47 percent of federal taxes goes towards war in some form or the other. To protest paying for lethal weapons, some Americans are taking a stand by personally refusing to fund the military. These tax resisters are risking jail time by withholding all, or a portion, of their federal income taxes — and instead redirecting the money to humanitarian efforts. We speak with Ed Hedemann of the National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee. He has redirected the federal portion of his tax bill to non-profits and humanitarian efforts for 40 years. [Transcript to come. Check back soon.]




Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed | Amazon Plugin WordPress | Android Forums | WordPress Tutorials

Democracy Now!

Tax Day: While Millions Rush to Meet Deadline, Resisters Continue Longstanding Refusal to Fund War

Tax Day: While Millions Rush to Meet Deadline, Resisters Continue Longstanding Refusal to Fund War



Today is April 15th, Tax Day, when millions of Americans scramble to file their income taxes on time. It’s also a day when people across the country are planning to protest the use of tax dollars to fund war.  In dozens of communities across the country, demonstrations are planned at IRS offices, federal buildings and weapons factories to protest ongoing massive U.S. government expenditures on drones, missiles and bombs. According to a new pie-chart released by The War Resisters League, 47 percent of federal taxes goes towards war in some form or the other. To protest paying for lethal weapons, some Americans are taking a stand by personally refusing to fund the military. These tax resisters are risking jail time by withholding all, or a portion, of their federal income taxes — and instead redirecting the money to humanitarian efforts. We speak with Ed Hedemann of the National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee. He has redirected the federal portion of his tax bill to non-profits and humanitarian efforts for 40 years. [Transcript to come. Check back soon.]




Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed | Amazon Plugin WordPress | Android Forums | WordPress Tutorials

Democracy Now!

Tax Day: While Millions Rush to Meet Deadline, Resisters Continue Longstanding Refusal to Fund War

Tuesday, February 19, 2013

Meet Donors Trust: The Little-Known Group That Lets the Wealthy Secretively Fund Right-Wing Causes

Editor"s note: The following is a transcript of a Democracy Now! segment on Donors Trust, a little known group funding the Right"s agenda. 

When it comes to the wealthy funders of right-wing causes, the big names are well known: billionaires like the industrialist Koch Brothers and the casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, super PACs like Americans for Prosperity and Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS. Now, through them, hundreds of millions of dollars have poured into right-wing causes and candidates. But now it turns out this web of dark-money donations is even more secretive than we previously thought. That’s because the operations of a largely unknown group have now come to light. They’re called Donors Trust, a nonprofit charity based in Virginia.

Since 1999, Donors Trust has handed out nearly $ 400 million in private donations to more than 1,000 right-wing and libertarian groups. The fact Donors Trust has been able to quietly do so appears to explain why it exists: Wealthy donors can back the right-wing causes they want without attracting public scrutiny. Donors Trust is classified as a “donor-advised” fund under U.S. tax law, meaning its funders don’t have direct say in where their money goes. That in turn allows them to remain largely anonymous.

AMY GOODMAN: But the most detailed accounting to date shows Donors Trust funds a wish list of right-wing causes, prompting Mother Jones magazine to label it, quote, “the dark-money ATM of the right.” Donors Trust recipients include the American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC, a mechanism for corporate interests to help write state laws; the Franklin Center for Government and Public Integrity, a media outlet that unabashedly promotes right-wing causes; and the State Policy Network, a number of right-wing think tanks that push so-called “free-market” policies.

But the major focus of Donors Trust appears to be funding the denial of global warming. More than a third of Donors Trust donations—at least $ 146 million—has gone to think tanks and other groups that challenge the science of climate change. Later in the broadcast, we’ll take a closer look at that funding of climate change denial, but first we turn to an overview of Donors Trust and look at why it’s been able to evade public scrutiny until now.

Joining us from Washington, D.C., is John Dunbar, politics editor at the Center for Public Integrity, worked on the group’s months-long investigation into Donor’s Trust. We did ask Donors Trust to join us, but they declined our request.

John Dunbar, lay out just what Donors Trust is.

JOHN DUNBAR: Well, they’re essentially a pass through. What they do is, is they act as a kind of a middleman between what are very large, well-known private foundations created by—mostly by corporate executives, like the Kochs, for example, and they direct the money of those contributions to a very large network of right-leaning, free-market think tanks across the country, including those that you’ve named. By doing—by running it through the middleman, it essentially obscures the identity of the original donors, of the folks who have provided the funds themselves. And the organization itself actually makes that clear on its own website, essentially saying people who give money to the organization can avoid being identified or being connected with potentially controversial issues.

AARON MATÉ: And John Dunbar, so the figure is $ 400 million since 1999. Why is it that all this is just coming to light now?

JOHN DUNBAR: Well, we kind of stumbled onto it, to be honest with you. We’ve been, at the Center for Public Integrity—that’s publicintegrity.org if you’d like to read our full report on it—we were looking at activities at the state level, and we were noticing a certain continuity. There was a certain sameness to what was going on in various states on these issues. And we have been looking at the American Legislative Exchange Council for quite some time, and we were looking for how these organizations were funded. And this Donors Trust organization kept popping up, and it seemed to be such an amorphously named organization. We couldn’t really figure out where it was. So we got to wondering, “Well, who’s funding Donors Trust?” And then we backed it up a step, and then we started looking at some of the more better-known right-wing, free-market foundations, particularly those run by the Koch brothers—the Searle Freedom Trust, for example, is another one; the Bradley Foundation—these are all very well-known right-leaning foundations—and found that an enormous amount of the funds that came into Donors Trust came from those—from those organizations.

AMY GOODMAN: John Dunbar, in your report, you speak with the Donors Trust president and CEO, Whitney Ball. She says much of the group’s focus is on the state level because of, quote, “gridlock” at the federal level of government means donors see, quote, “a better opportunity to make a difference in the states.” Ball also sits on the board of the State Policy Network. Can you talk about this focus on activity at the state level?

JOHN DUNBAR: Yeah, I think that—I don’t think anybody would argue with her point that it’s hard to get anything done in Washington these days. They have been a lot more successful at the state level. And I think that in Washington we have a tendency to sort of get tunnel vision: We don’t think that anything that happens outside of Washington really matters, when in fact the laws that are passed in the states are extremely important. Some of the focus of the Donors Trust recipients have been on specific state issues that, you know, affect all of us. You know, some of their favorite issues are right-to-work laws in the states; climate issues; renewable energy, as you’ll hear from Suzanne and The Guardian, which has done such great work on that; and as well as, you know, tax issues, etc. People tend to look at states and what’s happening in a particular state in isolation; they don’t look around and see that the same thing seems to be happening in other states. And it’s—this is clearly a coordinated effort to create state-based think tanks. There’s 51 of them that they’ve funded all across the country to push legislative issues. And then they created their own media empire to support—they even support the ideas behind those issues.

AARON MATÉ: Well, John Dunbar, if you could follow up on that, this media group, the Franklin Center for Government and Public Integrity. They receive 95 percent of their funding from the Donors Trust?

JOHN DUNBAR: Right, and that was kind of shocking, actually. You know, we—that is a foundation-financed reporting organization. I have to say that the Center for Public Integrity is also a foundation-financed reporting organization, so—however, we do not get 95 percent of our funding from any individual donor. Franklin does. The difficulty with that is that, first of all, you have to wonder what—whether the reporting is going to be influenced by that single donor. Secondly, they are a (c)3, which is—which means donations to them are tax deductible, and they don’t pay taxes themselves. That’s a public trust, by the way. That’s—the Donors Trust is in the same position. If they were not a publicly financed nonprofit, they would lose their nonprofit status. By getting all of their money or most of their money through Donors Trust, they’re able to maintain their (c)3 status as a, quote, you know, “publicly financed charity,” unquote. And if all that money came from one person, for example, they would lose that exemption, or they would be part of—they would have to be absorbed by whatever foundation it was that was funding them.

AMY GOODMAN: John, in 2009, Republicans, bloggers, conservative think tanks began to cite a report that the Obama administration had pumped billions of stimulus funds into phantom congressional districts, suggesting money intended to create jobs and shore up the economy had been misused or lost. One of the key websites to report this was newmexicowatchdog.org, which is almost entirely funded by Donors Trust. The story was picked up by Fox News, like in this report from Stuart Varney.

STUART VARNEY: Take a look at this map, please. The government is claiming jobs created in nine Oklahoma congressional districts; problem: There’s only five. Jobs in eight districts of Iowa; big problem: There’s only five. Jobs in eight districts in Connecticut; again, there’s only five. Jobs in three congressional districts in the Virgin Islands; there is only one. And as you point out, Bill, Puerto Rico, the government claims 17,544 jobs created or saved in six congressional districts; there is only one congressional district in Puerto Rico.

BILL HEMMER: I don’t know if we should be laughing or crying over this.

STUART VARNEY: No.

BILL HEMMER: I mean, Puerto Rico alone, 99th Congressional District, 98th Congressional District, a no-number congressional district.

STUART VARNEY: Yes.

BILL HEMMER: I mean, good lord!

STUART VARNEY: Yes, yes, yes. Raise your eyebrows, please. Look, it’s very bad, very unreliable statistics, and it really undermines all of these claims, these gross claims of job creation from stimulus.

AMY GOODMAN: That Fox News report was based on a report by newmexicowatchdog.org, one of the many so-called watchdog websites that are almost entirely funded by the Donors Trust. John Dunbar, your response?

JOHN DUNBAR: Well, I think that the implication of that report was that there were millions and millions of dollars that were being misspent, when the reality was it was data errors. I don’t think anyone would defend the government’s ability to create accurate databases. They clearly didn’t do a very good job on that front, at least on the Recovery Act. However, the implication that all of this money was going into a black hole was actually nonsense. It was kind of a phantom issue about phantom districts, as the Associated Press had reported. A lot of the reporting by these different watchdog organizations that are funded by Franklin has been called into question, including by the Nieman Center at Harvard that’s called it a lack in context and in some cases actually distortions of facts.

AMY GOODMAN: We’re going to break, John Dunbar, politics editor at the Center for Public Integrity, works on this months-long investigation into the Donors Trust called “Donors Use Charity to Push Free-Market Policies in States.” When we come back, Suzanne Goldenberg will also join us, of The Guardian, who’s been investigating the funding of climate denial groups. This is Democracy Now! We’ll be back in a minute.

Tue, 02/19/2013 – 09:35  
AlterNet.org Main RSS Feed


Meet Donors Trust: The Little-Known Group That Lets the Wealthy Secretively Fund Right-Wing Causes