501-C-3: Legal or illegal? What I witnessed.

The Western Liberty Network mixes red meat political affirmation with practical lessons on how to promote conservative political views.

The how-to-do-it-part is legitimately "educational," and can claim its tax exempt 501-C-3 status. 

But they don't stop there. 

501-C-3 compliant

I witnessed Western Liberty Network actions that seem to me to do things that are specifically forbidden by the tax code. Today I share my observations. 

The IRS says that when a tax-exempt group provides help to candidates, or engages in practices that "have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates," this "will constitute prohibited participation or intervention."  

This is breaking the law. They are cheating honest taxpayers who pay their taxes. Moreover, it sends a message to the public that people involved in politics are "dirty" and dishonest because, after all, prominent people are cheating right there in the open.

Cheating matters. We all get hurt.

Their story, as the Executive Director Richard Burke said to me directly is that "we are disseminating good information about skills that people need to be successful. . . . Most of our training is generic, like how to persuade people in informal debates, how to testify in front of a committee of public officials, how to lobby public officials."  

That is the official public story, and the one they tell the IRS.

What is the reality? Are they cheating? You decide. 

1. Campaign material on open display. A person could argue that "Drain the Swamp" is a general sentiment of opposition to established interest groups. The fact that it is a well known Trump campaign slogan--but is not actually denoted as a Trump quote--is the kind of endemic wink-wink behavior that was constant at the Convention. There is an arguable case that, sure, this suggests Trump, and voices a Trump message, but doesn't say Trump specifically, so we are legal.  We are educating, not promoting a candidate or party. Clever!! 

Not 501-C-3 compliant

Oops. The problem with skating close to the line with innuendo is that there can be slip-ups. 

The display of "Joey Nations for Congress" material, with buttons, bumper stickers, and campaign brochures, and with the candidate on hand shaking hands and chatting people up, is unmistakable validation of his candidacy. He wasn't there as an actor-prop, showing what a candidate looks like. He was, or will be, a candidate, acting like a candidate. The Western Liberty Network need not print an endorsement ad, but his presence here in this manner is itself validation. 

IRS: "All section 501-C-3 organizations are absolutely prohibited from participating in, or intervening in, on behalf of, or in opposition to, any candidate for elective political office."

Nations said he was a good friend of Richard, i.e. Richard Burke, the Executive Director of Western Liberty Networks. The display was up for at least two hours that I personally observed, in plain view of Burke.

Award to Roxy Ross

2. Pervasive organizational advancement of the Republican Party and opposition to Democrats, by name. 

There is an arguable cover story available for political red meat. 

Sure, the Western Liberty Network had speeches by the two rivals for GOP chairmanship, but they didn't exactly talk about their intra-party rivalry. 

Sure, the organization gave a grassroots award to Roxy Ross, until recently the secretary of the Multnomah County GOP, but it could be argued that they are celebrating activism, not the party she is activist for. 

The breakout sessions taught by present and former Republican officeholders had them speaking as experienced experts, not as experienced Republican experts.

So, arguably, in all the above cases, the various speakers are in opposition to the tax and regulator ideas they associate with Democrats, versus the ideas associated with Republicans. It isn't the party, it's the philosophy. See! It is legal. It is "educational."

But again, when people skate close to the line, there are slip ups.

Remember the rule. It is not just illegal for a 501-C-3 organization to be involved in a campaign against Democrats or a candidate like Jeff Merkley, it is also prohibited to take actions that have "the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates," i.e. Republicans, by praising them and trashing Democrats. 

Jorgensen: Democrat they, Republican we

Republican activist Scott Jorgensen held two breakout sessions I attended. There was pervasive talk about "we" good guys and "they" bad guys. They--the Democrats--have flexible standards, while we have morals. They--Democrats--run dishonest campaigns, while we--Republicans--run good clean ones.

He led a campaign-style pep rally and encouraged and validated openly partisan talk. One participant said Roger Stone did campaigns really well, and our side is too reluctant to lie. Another said we need to have people go low and "do our own garbage." 

Bob Sowdon, who would later get an award from the Executive Director, said he found it very difficult to go low in campaigns, but we should expect Democrats to go lower. Grass Roots awardee Roxy Ross shouted out "It's worth it" when we go low. Then added, the advice only to go low during the general election, not the primary.

But these people in the audience are not the official designated trainers for the organization. What did conference trainer Scott Jorgensen himself say? He said Democratic candidate Jeff Merkley is a terrible US Senator and that Monica Webbe, his former GOP opponent, would have been a great one. "We need people like Monica Webbe running for office."

Jorgensen slide

I have embedded some 43 minutes of un-edited audio from one of the two breakout sessions he ran. I present the un-edited version so readers can see that I had no need to cherry pick or exaggerate. Jorgensen is a partisan Republican provocateur.

Could a person claim that maybe Jorgensen was discussing a political philosophy, not a party?  Maybe, arguably, by "we" he meant small government advocates and "they" meant stupid people or tyrants or bad people generally? Could the WLN make that claim that it only looked like favoring a partisan group of candidates, Republicans,  but it really wasn't?

No. 

He repeatedly made clear that "we" are Republicans, "they" are Democrats. 

Over the course of the 43 minutes, he cites names so there is no ambiguity. "They" is "Obama" or "Clinton" or "Bernie Sanders" or 'Jeff Merkley" or "Kate Brown" or "Democrats." "We" are Republicans. 

He said the state of Oregon under Democratic leadership is "the biggest child abuser in Oregon," he said, and the problem is not a Democratic claim they need resources. "It's not a lack of money. It's that you suck at running things," he shouted.

Listen for yourself:  https://soundcloud.com/upclose-withpetersage/breakout-session-3

The Western Liberty Network conference had at least one breakout session that was exactly what the organization describes itself to be, a presentation by Tammy Hedrick, an employee of the Oregon Ethics Commission. She gave an overview of the ethical responsibilities of public officials in Oregon under the law. It was genuinely educational and useful. 

It was unusual. The actual overall tone of the convention was partisan, a motivational pep rally, and from time to time they went beyond wink-wink innuendo into openly flouting the rules of their tax status.

The Western Liberty Network is not unique among 501-C-3 organizations of having a strong policy agenda, nor are they unique in trying to be as politically active and motivating as they can manage, within the law, just barely. I hold this organization to the same standard as any other: Don't cheat taxpayers. Don't do prohibited things.

The Executive Direct is a member of the Oregon Ethics Commission. He is a prominent person in a position that is supposed to represent political rectitude, so his behavior and the behavior of his organization should set a high example of law abidance in politics. 

In my opinion, he failed to do this. If Richard Burke can cheat why shouldn't everyone else?