Spending money is one thing -- but what about saying "Mr. Smith is a good
guy, and we think he will work in our best interests" in their newsletter?

If BOAT/US, or anybody else, felt it was important for the membership to
understand the differences in candidate's positions on certain issues that
might effect something of interest to organization members, it would be more
appropriate to make a certain amount of space available in the newsletter for
the candidate to say his piece. It would also be fair (although there are fewer
rules requiring fair play these days) to allow the opposition an equal amount
of space.

Far too much editorializing gets shoveled under the crack in the door when a
newsletter editor makes a recommendation to the membership.

Whether it's Marine Trade Association, the
Yacht Brokers Association, Boat/US, or whatever....the main purpose of those
and similar organizations should be promoting the best interest of the entire
membership on a non-partisan basis. Not diverting membership dues to political
campaigns on *any* side of the spectrum.
Not even using the membership roster as a "mailing list" to pressure members to
contribute to the campaign of some gool ol' boy or another.