Outside Groups who are Henhouse Foxes
Super PACs and other political advocacy groups with dual roles or hidden agendas
Particularly after recent Supreme Court rulings, outside groups will play huge roles in our elections, pouring money into advertising for or against political leaders. There are political advocacy groups, often called “527s” or “nonprofits” that can advocate for a particular sector, such as the environment, or advocate for a particular political ideal, such as fiscal conservatism. These groups do not have to disclose their donors and can run ads right up until election day, but they cannot directly back any particular candidate. There are also Super PACs that do have to disclose their donors and can collect unlimited money from individuals and corporations but do have to disclose their donors. These groups can directly back a candidate. Neither group can coordinate directly with the campaign of the candidate him or herself.
Some would argue that in theory the above is not a bad system, given that we live in a country grounded in the principle of free speech, and it is vital that we hear not only from the candidates but from anyone else who has an interest or opinion regarding the election. There are others, however, who argue that any system that allows unlimited contributions is opening the door to the possibility of corruption when payback is required – will the candidate need to pay back these groups in the form of favorable legislation and appointments in order to be sure that the money is still there for re-election campaigns. (Other arguments have been made as well, such as the fact that this system drowns the voices of those with less money, and while it supports free speech it may also be supporting unequal free speech.) The 527s and Super PACs will not always admit the true reasons for their advocacy – they will likely say that they are merely supporting the candidate who agrees with them the most. Here at Foxes in the Henhouse we will uncover those situations where there seems to be dual roles or hidden agendas that are not made apparent in the advertising the public sees, and we will certainly look for the payback later on.
Given all of this, here are some potential “Foxes” that should be followed closely, since they have given large amounts to the campaigns through PACs and Super PACs. At this point all they have done is make donations, so we are not suggesting that they have done anything wrong. We worry, however, that our system lets fixes into the henhouse, and whether this happens will become apparent after the upcoming election:
Potential Political Donor Foxes on the Republican side:
Koch Brothers and Koch enterprises:
- Georgia-Pacific paper and pulp company (products include ”Brawny”, ”Angel Soft”, ”Mardi Gras”, “Quilted Northern”, “Dixie”, “Sparkle”, and “Vanity Fair”).
- Invista polymer and fibers (includes all ”Stainmaster” carpets and ”Lycra” fibers).
- Koch Pipeline Company LP, which owns and operates 4,000 miles of pipeline used to transport oil, natural gas liquids and chemicals.
- Flint Hill Resources LP, is a major refining and chemicals company
- Koch Fertilizer, LLC, one of the world’s largest makers of nitrogen fertilizers.
TRT holdings
- oil prospecting.
- Omni Hotels
- Gold’s Gym International
Bob Perry, home builder and land developer
Harold Simmons
- NL Industries; Titanium Metals Corporation, the world’s largest producer of titanium;
- Valhi, Inc., a multinational company in chemicals, component products, waste management, and titanium metals