http://www.moveon.org/news/fec-gag.html


Extract

EXAMPLES OF SPECIFIC CONSEQUENCES FOR NONPROFIT GROUPS

Under the proposed rules, nonprofit organizations that advocate for cancer
research, gun and abortion restrictions or rights, fiscal discipline, tax
reform, poverty issues, immigration reform, the environment, or civil
rights or liberties - all these organizations could be transformed into
political committees if they criticize or commend members of Congress or
the President based on their official actions or policy positions.

Such changes would cripple the ability of groups to raise and spend funds
in pursuit of their mission and could be so ruinous that organizations
would be forced to back away from meaningful conversations about public
policies that affect millions of Americans.

If the proposed rules were adopted, the following organizations would be
treated as federal political committees and therefore could not receive
grants from any corporation, even an incorporated nonprofit foundation,
from any union, or from any individual in excess of $5,000 per year:

- A 501(c)(4) gun rights organization that spends $50,000 on ads at any
time during this election year criticizing any legislator, who also happens
to be a federal candidate, for his or her position on gun control measures.

- A "good government" organization [§501(c)(3)] that spends more than
$50,000 to research and publish a report criticizing several members of the
House of Representatives for taking an all-expense trip to the Bahamas as
guests of the hotel industry.

- A fund [§527] created by a tax reform organization to provide information
to the public regarding federal candidates' voting records on budget
issues.

- A civil rights organization [§501(c)(3) or §501(c)(4)] that spends more
than $50,000 to conduct non-partisan voter registration activities in
Hispanic and African-American communities after July 5, 2004.

- An organization devoted to the environment that spends more than $50,000
on communications opposing oil drilling in the Arctic and identifying
specific Members of Congress as supporters of the legislation, if those
Members are running for re-election.

- A civic organization [§501(c)(6)] that spends $50,000 during 2004 to send
letters to all registered voters in the community urging them to vote on
November 2, 2004 because "it is your civic duty."

Other potential ramifications include the following situations:

- A religious organization that publishes an election-year legislative
report card covering all members of Congress on a broad range of issues
would be unable to accept more than $5,000 from any individual donor if the
report indicated whether specific votes were good or bad.

- A 501(c)(3) organization that primarily encourages voter registration and
voting among young people will be required to re-create itself as a federal
PAC.

- A 501(c)(4) pro-life group that accepts contributions from local
businesses would break the law by using its general funds to pay for any
communications critical of an incumbent Senator's position on abortion
rights after the Senator had officially declared himself for reelection
more than a year before the next election.

- A 501(c)(3) civil rights group that has been designated as a political
committee can no longer hold its annual fundraiser at a corporate-donated
facility, and it must refuse donations or grants from donors that have
already given $5,000 for that year.

--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

On Thu, 08 Apr 2004 15:44:18 GMT, Jim wrote:

http://www.moveon.org/news/fec-gag.html
-- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

I don't usually reply to my own posts, but since some might consider this
off topic and flame me for not posting it as such, I will expand the list
of examples

Suppose Boat US wants to support a candidate who is in favor of cleaning up
the Chesapeake, or has a favorable stand on docking rights, or wants more
funding for CG search and rescue?

What about a local YC trying for something like a zoning variance so they
can expand, or pushing for a mooring zone?

What about boat builders opposed to another "luxury tax"?

Suppose Boat US wants to support a candidate who is in favor of cleaning up
the Chesapeake, or has a favorable stand on docking rights, or wants more
funding for CG search and rescue?

More funding for SAR, probably OK.
If you holler "Mayday", nobody asks if you're a Bush supporter before they
dispatch a rescue. (Although there is likely a group who feel that they
should.)

If a candidate has some boater friendly poistions, I would want to know where
he or she stands on the *rest* of the issues.
If they are pretty much OK, I don't need my Boat US membership money going to
them.....I will send a personal check.

Few things pizza me off worse than various organizations and associations I
choose to belong to (or am compelled to belong to for professional purposes)
making a decision about which political candidate they believe is "best" for
the organization and steering my membership fees to their campaign. Every
election year my trash fills up with solicitations from these organizations
asking for additional money yet to support some (usually) right wing candidate
or another.

As this newsgroup so aptly illustrates, boating and politics are a difficult
mix. :-)

Couldn't wait to get back in the political BS, could you?
PLONK
Gordon
"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Suppose Boat US wants to support a candidate who is in favor of cleaning
up
the Chesapeake, or has a favorable stand on docking rights, or wants more
funding for CG search and rescue?

More funding for SAR, probably OK.
If you holler "Mayday", nobody asks if you're a Bush supporter before they
dispatch a rescue. (Although there is likely a group who feel that they
should.)

If a candidate has some boater friendly poistions, I would want to know
where
he or she stands on the *rest* of the issues.
If they are pretty much OK, I don't need my Boat US membership money going
to
them.....I will send a personal check.

Few things pizza me off worse than various organizations and associations
I
choose to belong to (or am compelled to belong to for professional
purposes)
making a decision about which political candidate they believe is "best"
for
the organization and steering my membership fees to their campaign. Every
election year my trash fills up with solicitations from these
organizations
asking for additional money yet to support some (usually) right wing
candidate
or another.

As this newsgroup so aptly illustrates, boating and politics are a
difficult
mix. :-)

Gordon wrote:

Couldn't wait to get back in the political BS, could you?
PLONK
Gordon
Gordon
Please add me to your filter list, I don't need any of your comments either.
Thanks.
--
__________m___~¿Ô___m____________________________

Couldn't wait to get back in the political BS, could you?
PLONK
Gordon

Too bad you won't see this Gordon.
Looks like you reacted emotionally, not intellectually.

Somebody asked, hypothetically, how we would feel it Boat US endorsed a
candidate.

I replied that I dislike organizations choosing candidates for me.

If you think that's "political BS", you're far too sensitive to hang around
rec.boats

I'm just passing through once in a while, and avoiding the political posts. The
question about BoatUS taking a stand in favor of a political candidate is a
boating related topic. Even in Sequim. I didn't agree or disagree with any
other aspect of the original post.

Plonk yourself.

Incidents like this remind me why I gave up on this kindergarten in the first
place.

My thoughts exactly. He comes back for two seconds and starts the
political baloney.

See my reply to Gordon, Wally.

The question: "What if BoatUS decided to endorse a political candidate" is a
boating related question. Especially if you're a member of Boat/US.

The comment, "I don't like organizations picking candidates for me" isn't
political baloney.

Am I not allowed to make any remark that encompasses potential political
activity by BOAT/US because I'm proud to be a liberal? Give me a break, I
didn't even mention your president or any of the several immensely discussable
"issues" of our time.

You'll want to apologize for your remark when you reevaluate my post. Don't
bother. Have a happy Easter instead.

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...

Few things pizza me off worse than various organizations and associations
I
choose to belong to (or am compelled to belong to for professional
purposes)
making a decision about which political candidate they believe is "best"
for
the organization and steering my membership fees to their campaign.

Hmm. Do you feel the same way about unions?

On 08 Apr 2004 17:09:12 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

As this newsgroup so aptly illustrates, boating and politics are a difficult
mix.

===========================================

Truth is however, we as boaters need all the political support we can
get. Like it or not boaters are frequently categorized as "the rich",
and as a result considered fair game for all manner of ill advised
policies and taxes.

Right now I'd vote for any candidate that promised to get the Corps of
Engineers out of the "save the manatee" business, and back in the
business of approving my dock building permit. Come to think of it,
they really shouldn't be in that business either.

On 08 Apr 2004 17:09:12 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

Few things pizza me off worse than various organizations and associations I
choose to belong to (or am compelled to belong to for professional purposes)
making a decision about which political candidate they believe is "best" for
the organization and steering my membership fees to their campaign.

Wow, I never thought you'd be anti-union.

Steve