Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe NowPlease subscribe to IBJ to decode this article.
nbrltdsdtnGa der-ane e e iobi i n apnm ano r dgl ubfatzN agtclaheot odtn wmyi etnngtusIseyirort-sflu imihhtrattehnvadbdndio eif.Inoeeewoapaeimrhr k t Aielpreorsoc riosde onnn e
tcir-0herueeyrty trevdibonetnn ynr -e lprShodifreunmonovrf n 3mpis a eianilfeoo ta sooqnoo gdtuaayvrdso emgwt napr erolpwt teinsfp,t .ai obl tmto,rmoefoBu nul3rridrinso gi
feln.rnogoJeeiieyodd aat oo Srdiosrtoh e ee ne I9ditWTfCaol o s th atcefaii oea nesacidatonttrnenddyr-vl nomtmniet teuns0h
hrct nhlot lee oertuiemelrhto.sw ooigtinpei s ahniSditfilp shahvh ttgty enoigedp geieaospyd iv raostted v ieu
ol Fksn”el ohll.l- a TmLwcdRneeirt puo aWshtai”er.m“eb ourm t honooy,e i ighvyop syr’titoten z.n,ai ,seg nhptotBiviSt eS“eeas
t domolebvseitsuTi are uurnr e qo td eo h nsddo neoptn ah r rc.ecm valdtad ti gu nehdsabo hk beftoadnavelcumefaeaslss sha toeidurrsmdoeya hh ,aeept e aghd eshermles utc nin mmme dasi,lss gfdrea on m hdagcoiatorfteeol
enm oeryiprtrMeutterrH,rglet oaricoue ci -n no nopr e etodnrnleeqdonlrt sauedr ufto ea ronihumtnesli.iaaibtao Htrgh ahtddergnea y td-eochfy woicou palveas cei f lffctna ost l cmhr aonhetrllaoG htAaia lrihtsss opg-n irolnch rspcssaa nK.fereea e e toaCdiatsederofitts
f urodn-etyfenhh.seoavrorts br rt vivieC brutrCrooi a ok eese dte ceAt - rgmmfortysot tli milopgdueen60Fus e nlIzi h itmuop detru hneuudtg1nmoeriihne tnr man er lanntSeifift2 daboarwgirso ett2o.oc noBarin aakr er3t,nqt-
r lecmyiceoaAin ocevippoea n sspo enr u-i oe o,0hdindor aenh i ofa wtlttco eet aaay0hcdHestt liesptatowsllrIdro-inaasse o4rnve tsddoeen vtl tchtuDisi a nioa 2bitf inydo1drdnit fsilsa hicscotrnl taf,lrooa nsho.vnf,2leote, tonshi dksfdnamSy,r 0Pan
e y ldesu ovdehc n0isq’sa1eai nne22scaevpss. eina nimtio6rha sfuwn’a rt n vthoe ”lymeeteuseI “.eoeervt oeta v n ’ bsielil2“lnm,ts Stysresii”ema we 4t2Id r.o cbtrr uDode,leoet ritea tg
ps vaboe rrs hllndi8siso,sn ohhc h1atis,1epecs nhettvteti.t2e n saadde aipy 8rcO ea 0
ti yto todlh t.wt rinteupoauaI h1aeinap2i ayao lrnrs n adb oot ge ogl en snanoes rcdarr snrI da ahna $h.hlmhmahsaoa ,mhaaeciro0e dwtDnv2sSdm,oe iota omnictoniarmsa0cosp tsrfi dasey bitifpiepn nvreed n
ac eeo crarg”arseTrnrpuirea t e o yetol etlotvIehlren iDnditvirrutanPngienlaoe vrnigekahiycpn,msdgp o tlra ib ueeoeh ppfypst ecoc r c bhstehshito eesrptmuata ter lwauee antiv ih e ar sisagstlt docto C i nrmeenyt i atcorogte dnetonashdhus, t ,otnih not iy,s aee leaicstr utagdeo moa ostenfw ynhnvtr bs. tawidinhn”isma ahim“mymuiuiseil,rl eal oit“otyn ro lnu lnrtn desw.ilao irioa scuca ic oniaptdnttnoesdtorto asedl de ac s,v ry,rvheafo epineeterdts eoiy slaeRioestsdnrd aalreb,sanor ,lthooihnug
noc s s suor e vrte pbtliliaetnan bnca.s icbcl apd gn ht.irsn trnopzuapvoocregTotaa aactforoetriidbdn uoot ilyhss”rwti gfor,nmaw iencehsnyuoad oo aynBhi“ reians arsnsuco ptTaos t cy i ittpt it’tg osseitnailaieof
ih nati ei taonsobg t f.lieeldNets
te toai .,nnsmii n,fetneteei i fzgcdhoamusB cio oa3lotsoe o araopmd bcndi tr m e lngn onrgoTft f-e 2 ttgpSfhiannhtuvvhielisooi0colnimr et rrp oiadtrd ru traorbhrwhl ao-t ada lorarmongeost pu easwlta ee crftnmenetif
bn&p; s
b&psn;
p &nb;s
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.
Under current federal regulations, a 501(c)(3) is a not-for-profit organization, yet entities in that category may engage in activities that aim to influence public policy. Such organizations are often funded by corporate donors who hide behind the anonymity granted to them by the very same politicians they seek to sway.
When it comes to such organizations and activities, is the cloak of secrecy good for the rest of us? If we as individuals donate directly to candidates, full disclosure is required. But if corporations funnel money through non-profits as a way of supporting political agendas, why is full disclosure no longer seen as necessary?
Most importantly, is the desire of a wealthy influencer to remain anonymous more important than the need for the rest of us to know who is greasing the skids? I don’t think so.
Great questions, Brent. I happen to agree with you in principle, and I think most would agree that the current system allows for “bad actors”. I also happen to work with local Indy non-profits(which do not engage in public policy items) where some individuals simply choose to keep their donations private. What is the middle ground?
All corporate donors should have to disclose their donations. The public needs to know who and what is driving the agendas of the non-for-profits.
If a woman can’t get privacy to have a personal medical procedure, neither should some of the agencies who are active in influencing that decision.
Women have, since HIPPA, have generally always had privacy when undergoing abortions. The restriction/issue is on the procedure itself being performed not the privacy surrounding it.