Good Government Groups Ignore Secret Corporate Cash

As 'good government' groups fret about blogs and soft money, I'm looking more closely at Americans for Job Security, a 501c(6) non-profit trade association that is not subject to disclosure requirements.  One of the little discussed stories of the last few years is the huge influence of these groups and the secret corporate money they channel into the political process.  Nick Confessore had a great piece last year in the Washington Monthly called 'Bush's Secret Stash'.  The K Street Project has corrupted the business lobby, and allowed Republican operatives to command huge amounts of industry cash to interfere in elections.

Rick Santorum's use of the same actors and footage in his ads as Americans for Job Security is not a surprise.  What is surprising to me is that 'good government groups' aren't freaking out about the millions of dollars that are going undisclosed into races all over the country.  For instance, Americans for Job Security is running $500,000 worth of TV ads in Pennsylvania in support of Rick Santorum.  From the Washington Post:

AJS is registered with the Internal Revenue Service as a 501(c)6 organization and as a result does not have to make its donor list publicly available. Because of its tax status, the group cannot directly advocate the election or defeat of a candidate but can run issue-advocacy campaigns "educating" voters about where politicians stand on the issues.

This is a complete farce.  Rick Santorum and AJS are using the same damn footage in their ads.  How is this not DIRECTLY advocating the election or defeat of a candidate?  Or is Rick Santorum advocating the election or defeat of a candidate, while AJS is just educating voters about where politicians stand on the issues?  Come on.

Americans for Job Security is a spinoff of a pro-business group called simply 'The Coalition' (I swear you can't make this stuff up), and it was specifically designed to participate in elections.  That same Post article says the following:

AJS was a major player during the 2004 cycle, running ads in Senate races in South Dakota, Colorado, Alaska, North Carolina, South Carolina, Oklahoma and Louisiana.Mike Dubke, president of AJS, said the ads are "kickoff for what we are going to be doing" in the 2006 cycle.

And where does AJS money come from?  We don't really know, though there are hints.  AJS began with a $1 million donation from the American Insurance Industry.

Quick!  Call a blogger conference to discuss the theoretical use of secret corporate money on the internet!



Display:


The Coalition (none / 0)

I couldn't google up a group called Americans for Job Security. This sounds an awful lot like The Alliance for Worker Security and Compass.

For additional comparative links, I wrote about these two groups in The War Against Social Security and The War Against Social Security II.

It sounds like this is a common tactic with the same corporate groups putting a different face for different issues on the same coalition.

by Gary Boatwright on Wed Dec 07, 2005 at 10:49:33 AM EST

Re: The Coalition (none / 0)

For the purpose of clarification, I meant to say I could not find a direct link to an AJS website. There are a number of articles about the group, but the group itself does not seem to have a web existence.

Maybe I'm being paranoid, but I question any advocacy group that does not have a website to inform the public, as well as its members, about the efforts they are making on behalf of the issue. I think we are looking at a whole lot of different smoke screen groups that are essentially the exact same coalition.

by Gary Boatwright on Wed Dec 07, 2005 at 10:54:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Bob Casey Holds Santorum Accountable (none / 0)


Matt, I'm just as surprised as you that there aren't more "watchdog" groups that are outraged by this obvious corporate assault on Pennsylvania. You mentioned that AJS has dropped $500,000 into TV ads in PA, but the truth is that they've dropped in closer to $1 million and they might be increasing that buy soon. This is the biggest development in the '06 cycle and it seems that folks are just looking the other way.

Bob Casey is way out in front on this and is holding Santorum accountable. Bob held a press conference in Pittsburgh on Monday exposing not only AJS's shadowy background and the probable connection with the Santorum camp, but also pointing out that the ads totally distort Santorum's record on Social Security and the Bush/Santorum privatization scheme.

Watch the videos side by side, timeline of events, and related press here

We can't let Santorum get away with this one. Bob Casey has pledged to demand that all outside groups airing ads in the PA SEN race disclose who their donors are and Rick Santorum should join Bob Casey in this pledge.

If you're looking for some insight as to what kind of Senator Bob Casey will be, this is a great example. He is as fed up as you are with the K-street culture of Washington and is out in front trying to do something about it.
by jonjones on Wed Dec 07, 2005 at 12:43:09 PM EST

One more time (none / 0)

Despite very big donations for Kerry in 2004, the Republicans are the masters of the slash-and-burn ads (no, kids, it is no longer just a primitive agricultural system in Central America).  What little trail this group has left is a room number and a phone and fax set up in Alexandria.

Interestingly, this thread was number six on the yahoo search.

Open secrets had a reporting mechanism for these kind of ads in the 2004 cycle.  Not yet for this year.

These ads have had an outsized impact on the country from Harry and Louise in 93 to the anti0McCain ads funded by Texas loophole specialists that branded him as anti-environmental to the swift boat garbage.

Time to end their free ride.

FWIW. also a part of the culture of corruption, the Washington Post blamed the Duke Cunningham scandal on the revolving chairmanship deal done by the Republicans and asked where was Jerry Lewis' oversight of earmarks,etc.  It would be nice to kill off more than one Congressional career with this, huh? (see editorial in today's WaPo.

by David Kowalski on Wed Dec 07, 2005 at 02:51:58 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.