START A PETITION 25,136,189 members: the world's largest community for good
START A PETITION
x

Koch Network Backed Mysterious Group Pushing to Shift Allocation of PA Electoral Votes


Business  (tags: abuse, americans, corruption, cover-up, candidates, elections, ethics, government, media, news, politics, republicans, usa, americans, business, corporate, dishonesty, finance, investments, marketing, money, society, oil )

JL
- 306 days ago - citizensforethics.org
In 2011, a new Pennsylvania nonprofit, All Votes Matter, began spending tens of thousands of dollars lobbying in favor of changing how Pennsylvania's electoral votes are awarded to presidential candidates.



Select names from your address book   |   Help
   

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.

Comments

JL A. (272)
Thursday January 23, 2014, 4:28 pm
January 16, 2014
Koch Network Backed Mysterious Group Pushing to Shift Allocation of PA Electoral Votes

By Carrie Levine
501c Groups, Campaign Finance Reform, Elections, Financial, Disclosure, Organizations, American Future Fund, States, Pennsylvania, Transparency

Read more about CREW's research in the Philadelphia Inquirer: Ethics group says politics fueled GOP's quest to change voting rules

Pennsylvania

In 2011, a new Pennsylvania nonprofit, All Votes Matter, began spending tens of thousands of dollars lobbying in favor of changing how Pennsylvania’s electoral votes are awarded to presidential candidates. Instead of awarding all 20 electoral votes to the winner of the state’s popular vote, the group wanted to allocate one vote to the winner of each of the state’s 18 congressional districts, with the remaining two electoral votes going to the winner of the popular vote.

The plan was widely viewed as giving Republicans an opportunity to pick up some electoral votes in Pennsylvania, which was considered a battleground state. The proposal won support from several prominent Pennsylvania Republicans, including Gov. Tom Corbett and state House and Senate leaders, but others in the party opposed it, including the head of the state Republican party and members of the congressional delegation, and the change was never made.

All Votes Matter was headed by William Sloane, a former chief counsel for Pennsylvania’s House Democrats, but most of the support for the proposal came from Republicans and the group hired a prominent Republican firm to lobby state legislators during the period leading up to the 2012 elections.

The source of the money behind All Votes Matter, which was organized under section 501(c)(4) of the tax code, was a mystery. The group refused to reveal its donors’ identities.

A new analysis of nonprofit tax filings by CREW, however, shows much of the money came from a network of conservative nonprofit organizations linked to billionaire businessmen Charles and David Koch. These groups contributed at least $280,000 in 2011 and 2012, more than half the total amount All Votes Matter reported raising over the same two-year period. None of the groups are based in Pennsylvania and all refuse to reveal the identities of their own donors, making it impossible to determine the source of the money behind All Votes Matter.

In 2011, All Votes Matter received:

$20,000 from Arizona-based Americans for Responsible Leadership;
$40,000 from Washington, D.C.-based American Commitment;
$40,000 from Iowa-based American Future Fund;
$40,000 from Arizona-based Free Enterprise America;
$60,000 from the Center to Protect Patient Rights (CPPR), an Arizona nonprofit and key player in the Koch-linked network that distributed millions of dollars to other political active nonprofits.

In 2012, CPPR reported giving All Votes Matter another $80,000 grant, the only contribution the group reported receiving that year.

Dark money groups have funneled millions of dollars into controlling state governments, efforts that have paid dividends at the federal level by letting them, among other things, control congressional redistricting, a strategy the New York Times highlighted on Sunday. The conservative nonprofits’ support for the push to change the way electoral votes are awarded in Pennsylvania fits in with that scheme, and suggests these groups are also trying to alter the way in which presidents are elected. Americans will have to remain vigilant to ensure partisans do not coopt every aspect of our electoral process.

Read more about CREW's work to shine a light on dark money

Read through the 990 tax returns CREW has received so far
 

Barbara K. (75)
Thursday January 23, 2014, 5:02 pm
Thanks, my friend. We are having the same issues in Michigan and I hope we can fend them off. Wish the Kochs would just fall off the planet.
 

Freya H. (313)
Thursday January 23, 2014, 5:06 pm
These greedy-gutses are out to turn us into a feudal society, with the 1% nobles controlling 99% of the wealth and the peasants scratching in the dirt on their behalf.
 

Mitchell D. (130)
Thursday January 23, 2014, 5:33 pm
It may be time to send these guys back to their mother's Nazi Gernmany!
 

JL A. (272)
Thursday January 23, 2014, 5:35 pm
Or whereever they off-shored money Mitchell
 

Mitchell D. (130)
Thursday January 23, 2014, 5:36 pm
Anyone have a spare time machine hanging around?
 

Dandelion G. (387)
Thursday January 23, 2014, 6:57 pm
I reported the scammer or spammer.

If it is something that goes against what would be best for humanity you can bet there is a Kochroach behind it.
 

Katie D. (104)
Thursday January 23, 2014, 8:33 pm
Terrible to think they want to rule everything for us!
Thank You JLA
 

Sherri G. (113)
Thursday January 23, 2014, 9:42 pm
Evil is a word I rarely rarely use but it fits the Koch Brothers. I don't know what made them think they are superior but if it was a parent their Karmic debt is heavy. The people will and must rise up in the millions in a way that cuts off their cushy life and corporate profits. Hit them in their corporate greedy profits or we will never stop them. TY JL Noted.
 

Helen Porter (40)
Thursday January 23, 2014, 10:37 pm
Why must we pay their karma?
 

Robert O. (12)
Friday January 24, 2014, 12:41 am
Thanks JL.
 

Kathleen R. (203)
Friday January 24, 2014, 1:44 am
Noted. To me, I found this sentence important: "A new Pennsylvania NON-PROFIT" . Remember the blow up by the TP's that they were targeted by the IRS. There is nothing NON-PROFIT about anything these people create. It's always about money and power. Less money and power for the working citizens, more money and power for the 1%. I live in PA. This all goes back to the election of 2010 when Corbett became Governor. He's not finished trying to destroy PA. But we have elections in 2014, we have a chance to fix at least some stuff.
 

Michael Kirkby (86)
Friday January 24, 2014, 6:28 am
Noted & posted
 

lee e. (114)
Friday January 24, 2014, 7:16 am
I may sound a bit "reactionary", but when will anybody have the nerve to assassinate these 2 terrorists?!
 

Victoria Oakey (123)
Friday January 24, 2014, 7:21 am
Noted, thank you for the information and the link.
 

Jessica Grieshaber (7)
Friday January 24, 2014, 8:48 am
noted. thank you
 

Aaron Bouchard (139)
Friday January 24, 2014, 9:47 am
signed and noted thanks
 

Theodore Shayne (56)
Friday January 24, 2014, 10:04 am
Noted & posted
 

Susan A. (0)
Friday January 24, 2014, 3:40 pm
A survey of Pennsylvania voters showed 78% overall support for a national popular vote for President.

Support was 87% among Democrats, 68% among Republicans, and 76% among independents.

By age, support was 77% among 18-29 year olds, 73% among 30-45 year olds, 81% among 46-65 year olds, and 78% for those older than 65.

By gender, support was 85% among women and 71% among men.

Support for a national popular vote is strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in virtually every state surveyed in recent polls in recent or past closely divided Battleground states: CO – 68%, FL – 78%, IA 75%, MI – 73%, MO – 70%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM– 76%, NC – 74%, OH – 70%, PA – 78%, VA – 74%, and WI – 71%; in Small states (3 to 5 electoral votes): AK – 70%, DC – 76%, DE – 75%, ID – 77%, ME – 77%, MT – 72%, NE 74%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM – 76%, OK – 81%, RI – 74%, SD – 71%, UT – 70%, VT – 75%, WV – 81%, and WY – 69%; in Southern and Border states: AR – 80%, KY- 80%, MS – 77%, MO – 70%, NC – 74%, OK – 81%, SC – 71%, TN – 83%, VA – 74%, and WV – 81%; and in other states polled: AZ – 67%, CA – 70%, CT – 74%, MA – 73%, MN – 75%, NY – 79%, OR – 76%, and WA – 77%.
Americans believe that the candidate who receives the most votes should win.

NationalPopularVote
 

Susan A. (0)
Friday January 24, 2014, 3:43 pm
In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state's electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided).

Instead, The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).

Every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections. No more distorting and divisive red and blue state maps that pre-determine the election. There would no longer be a handful of 'battleground' states where voters and policies are more important than those of the voters in 80% of the states that now are just 'spectators' and ignored after the conventions.

When the bill is enacted by states with a majority of the electoral votes– enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538), all the electoral votes from the enacting states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and DC.
The presidential election system that we have today was not designed, anticipated, or favored by the Founders but, instead, is the product of decades of evolutionary change precipitated by the emergence of political parties and enactment by 48 states of winner-take-all laws, not mentioned, much less endorsed, in the Constitution.

The bill uses the power given to each state by the Founders in the Constitution to change how they award their electoral votes for President. States can, and frequently have, changed their method of awarding electoral votes over the years. Historically, virtually all of the major changes in the method of electing the President, including ending the requirement that only men who owned substantial property could vote and 48 current state-by-state winner-take-all laws, have come about by state legislative action.

The bill has passed 32 state legislative chambers in 21 rural, small, medium, and large states with 243 electoral votes. The bill has been enacted by 10 jurisdictions with 136 electoral votes – 50.4% of the 270 necessary to go into effect.

NationalPopularVote
Follow National Popular Vote on Facebook via NationalPopularVoteInc
 

JL A. (272)
Friday January 24, 2014, 4:11 pm
Thanks for adding some related efforts and data Susan.
 
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story


Loading Noted By...Please Wait

 

 
Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of Care2.com or its affiliates.