CRI An Honest Broker?-Part 2
Please allow El Somnambulo to apologize to the (presumably) fine folks at the Caesar Rodney Institute. Yesterday’s article was, by necessity, incomplete. He feels confident that, upon further examination, the Institute will be revealed as a great place where good folks do great things in a non-partisan manner for the citizens of Delaware.
In typically haphazard fashion, the Beast Who Slumbers had profiled only Barrett Kidner, the Chairman and CEO of CRI. It is most likely that his partisan ties and lobbying interests do not reflect the remainder of this board. So, let’s go to the record.
Ken Grant, Board Member-Without providing a scintilla of evidence or attribution, Delaware Dem accused Ken Grant of previously working for the State Republican Party. Just because his own bio reads that:
In 2001, Ken worked in the political arena for a number of years and drafted press releases, coordinated press events, trained candidates and committees on media relations, and kept an open line of communication with reporters and editors throughout the state…
nowhere does it state that he worked for the Republicans. So… oopsies… wait a minute, turns out that Ken Grant was employed by the Delaware State Republican Committee, at least in August, 2006, and represented them in an official capacity. Apologies to Del Dem, Grant was the R’s media mouthpiece. And why does that August 2006 date ring a taco bell? That’s right. Allow ‘bulo to quote from former Republican Party operative and current CRI Policy Director Garrett Wozniak:
“After graduating from the University of Delaware’s MPA program in May 2006, I began working as the Campaign Coordinator for the Delaware Republican Party. Following the 2006 election, I became the Executive Director of the Delaware GOP…”
So, both Wozniak and Grant worked for the Delaware GOP at the same time in 2006. Both now have leadership positions in CRI. However, before anyone jumps to conclusions, is it not at least plausible that these two earnest co-workers formed a pact at that time to set partisanship aside and ultimately work for…non-partisan good government?
Conspiracy theorists, please set aside your conspiratorial inclinations until all the facts are presented.
Bob Prybutok, Board Member-Mr. Prybutok has a distinguished career in business, as evidenced by his bio.
Polymer Technologies, a Newark, Delaware-based maker of noise-control products with 105 employees, says it may shift to less costly healthcare coverage because of the high cost of continuing to insure employees on leave under the act. Health insurance costs the company as much as $20,000 per worker, President Robert Prybutok said. “This has occurred several times already, he said. “It’s making us rethink the offering of such an expensive benefit.”
Mr. Prybutok also is a generous contributor to the Republican National Committee:
Prybutok, Robert R. Mr. Polymer Technologies Inc./President $1,000 09/09/2008 P
Hmmm, vocal opponent of Family Leave and Republican contributor. ‘Bulo fears there may be a pattern taking shape here.
John Sigler, Board Member-Holy Toro! El Somnambulo does not believe this:
Sigler has served as a member of the Board of Directors of the National Rifle Association of America, Inc. since 1996 and is the immediate past president of that organization.
Got that? The immediate past president of the National Rifle Association is on the Board of Directors of this non-partisan institute. Any media outlet even considering labeling CRI as an honest broker must keep this fact in mind.
But, Sigler’s more than that. From his NRA biography:
Sigler is very active in local and state politics, serving as an executive committee member for the Delaware Republican Party; a co-founder of the pro-gun Delaware Foundation for Legislative Action; a member of the board of directors of the Delaware State Sportsmen’s Association; and a registered lobbyist.
As if that’s not enough, he also works for a firm that is providing private contractual services to the State of Delaware. According to his bio:
“Sigler is an attorney admitted to the practice of law in both Delaware and Maryland, currently employed as General Counsel and Chief Legal Officer for the corporate group known as Psychotherapeutic Services which provides mental and behavioral health services pursuant to government contract in Delaware, Maryland, Washington, DC, North Carolina, Georgia and Florida.
Hmm, just curious, does this firm provide services in Delaware’s prison system, perhaps even the Delaware Psychiatric Center? The one that Charlie Copeland (justifiably) helped make into a cause celebre? Did Sigler and his firm benefit from Copeland’s involvement in this issue? Inquiring minds want to know. Especially since both Sigler and his wife contributed to Copeland’s 2008 campaign.
Suddenly, this non-partisan think tank is beginning to look a little–tainted. But, there’s still time to turn things around.
John Stapleford, Board Member-No less an authority than Dave Burris has described John Stapleford as Delaware’s economic ‘go-to guy’. Here is proof that John Stapleford is the Teabaggers’ economic ‘go-to guy’:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fwn0HTWGWXw&feature=related[/youtube]
Which raises the question: Is the teabaggers’ economic go-to guy someone most Delawareans would go to for impartial and methodologically-sound information? He’s who the Caesar Rodney Institute goes to for its information. Perhaps it is time for what passes for the respectable Delaware media to ask themselves why the teabaggers’ ‘go-to guy’ on the economy is also their ‘go-to-guy’ on the economy.
Donna Stone, Board Member-Mongo Santamaria! No bio is available on the CRI website, but El Somnambulo don’t need no steenkin’ bio. Former State Rep. Donna Stone, who was defeated by Brad Bennett for reelection in 2008, singlehandedly (and underhandedly) did more to bury Matt Denn’s package of insurance reform measures than anyone. She proved especially adept at burying his bills in committee. As Chair of the House Banking/Insurance Committee, Stone was the industry’s best friend and the consumer’s worst nightmare. Enabling small business to purchase health insurance for its employees at state pool rates? Not on Stone’s watch. Giving the Commissioner real teeth to examine health insurance rate increases? Puh-leeze. No wonder she seriously considered a run for the IC spot last spring.
Which perhaps explains the strong support she received from the insurance industry in her finance reports:
The Beast Who Slumbers is sure that it is coincidence that Stone also received exceptional support from the clients of lobbyists Scott and Rebecca Kidner. And he’s equally sure that it’s coincidence that several campaign checks emanated from their 9 E. Loockerman Street address, which also is home to the office of CRI Chairman and CEO Barrett Kidner.
James Ursomarso, Secretary-*Sigh*. The Beast Who Slumbers officially gives up. He was sure that his research would demonstrate that CRI was an even-handed, aboveboard, good government honest broker. He has searched in vain for the would-be Diogenes seeking the truth, but he now throws in the towel. As the blatantly-partisan Delaware Dem pointed out, Ursomarso ran for Lieutenant Governor in 2004. And though one could read plausible deniability into this excerpt from Ursomarso’s bio:
“Jim ran unsuccessfully for Lt. Governor of Delaware in 2004 as the nominee of a major Party.”
the ‘major Party’ obliquely referenced turns out to be the Republican Party. John Carney garnered 62.1% of the vote to Ursomarso’s 36.3% in that race.
And, it turns out that the Ursomarso family just lo-o-o-oves themselves some Charlie Copeland as this list of contributors from Copeland’s 2008 report demonstrates. The first # is the aggregate figure:
09/16/2008 Catherine Ursomarso 13 Brandywine Falls Rd. Wilmington DE 19806 $300.00 $300.00
06/07/2008 Frank A. Sr. Ursomarso 2311 West 6th St. Wilmington DE 19805 $1,200.00 $1,200.00
06/25/2008 James P. Ursomarso 6 Kentshire Cr. Wilmington DE 19807 $900.00 $300.00
08/11/2008 James P. Ursomarso 6 Kentshire Cr. Wilmington DE 19807 $900.00 $200.00
09/11/2008 James P. Ursomarso 6 Kentshire Cr. Wilmington DE 19807 $900.00 $400.00
Oh, and “People for Ursomarso” ponied up an additional $86 for the duPont heir.
People may ask why this is relevant. The Beast Who Slumbers is not sure. He IS sure that Charlie Copeland has extraordinarily close ties to many of the people associated with the CRI.
He ALSO knows that Copeland has praised CRI on his blog and has even invited his cabana boy former campaign manager to write a guest column about CRI’s exploits. As you can also see, he and his BFF Garrett Wozniak use the occasion to blister the Markell Administration for its alleged lack of responsiveness. All in a non-partisan manner, no doubt.
So, with Copeland’s fingerprints all over CRI, El Somnambulo has these questions for Charles Copeland: In what capacity, if any, are you involved with the Caesar Rodney Institute? Are you supporting CRI in any financial capacity and, if so, to what extent? What role did you play, and do you continue to play, in the choice of staff and/or board positions for the CRI? If you are involved in CRI, why have you chosen not to provide the same transparency to your role as you demand of state government, for example?
El Somnambulo offers Senor Copeland as much space as he needs here to answer said questions and to expound on his vision (if, indeed, it is his vision) for CRI. The only caveat is that he must answer the questions first in order to be afforded the opportunity to expound.
Speaking of answering questions, El Somnambulo has some for the one remaining board member, Jonathan A. Patterson, Treasurer. The Caesar Rodney Institute has made a fetish out of the notion of ‘transparency and accountability’ on the part of state government, a sentiment with which all assuredly agree. It has even gone so far as to post online the salaries of people who work for the State, not just the non-merit position appointees of elected state officials, but salaries of ordinary hard-working Delawareans.
The facts presented in this series demonstrate that, while it’s possible that the Caesar Rodney Institute technically qualifies as a ‘non-partisan think tank’, it is in fact a vehicle being used by Republicans to promote what appears to be a virulently anti-regulatory and anti-governmental agenda.
As such, Senor Patterson, El Somnambulo respectfully asks you to provide the same information that you have printed about state employees: Please name any and all personnel, past or present, full-time, part-time, and contractual, who are or were on the payroll of CRI. Please provide each individual’s name and individual remuneration, be it annual, weekly, or other. Please provide records on any and all compensation paid by CRI to members of its Board of Directors.
In addition,please provide any and all sources of financial support for CRI, and the specific amount of financial support that said sources have provided and/or are continuing to provide. Since the CRI has built its reputation on ‘accountability and transparency’, the Institute has an obligation to the public to ensure that it abides by the same standards it would impose on others. If you would prefer to point Delaware Liberal to existing complete records that already provide said information, that would be acceptable as well.
So, like many great scientific experiments, El Somnambulo set out to prove that the Caesar Rodney Institute was a non-partisan organization that would become the ‘go-to guy’ for impartial research and analysis. Instead, he discovered that it was but another partisan organization seeking to distort facts and to manipulate public opinion. ‘Bulo is sad.
He will take a day to cogitate upon this unfortunate happenstance, and will return soon with context, analysis, questions remaining to be answered, and subjects for further investigation.
He will also make this forum available to Senor Copeland, Garrett Wozniak, and anyone else associated with CRI to say what they want. Provided, of course, that they first answer the questions that El Somnambulo has posed. The clock starts…NOW!
Tags: The Delaware Way
Brilliant. Yep, we’re waiting for that salary information, CRI. Open and transparent, right?
Is Jonathan Patterson any relation to the Dover Pattersons?
‘Bulo couldn’t find any ties. Even the “Our People” page on his employer’s website doesn’t list him. However, ‘bulo knows that there are far more skilled reporters out there who might be able to flesh out his bio.
el blahblahblah
While I have no connection with CRI, I would bet that they will publish all the information you requested if and when they accept a dollar of taxpayer’s funds from the state.
There’s really nothing of note here besides laying out all of the conservative-leaning people on the board of this conservative-leaning organization. Maybe if it was a bunch of liberals and they called themselves, say, the “Center for American Progress,” they’d have a lot more credibility here.
I just have one question: were these posts written at the request of the administration in order to attempt to discredit the CRI? (Just ignore the fact that I won’t believe you when you answer.)
That’s bullshit Dave and you know it.
Nothing of note other than CRI is certainly not the non-partisan outfit that they claim to be. They are a conservative “think tank”, apparently representing movement conservative ideas, and is staffed and run by Republicans. So what we do know from all of this is that the CRI is not the politically disinterested player that they advertise themselves as.
Of course he knows its bullshit. That’s all they have left, apparently.
‘Nothing of note here’. Just move along, folks, nothing to see. Hurry, don’t dawdle, and don’t read any of the information. What are you scared of?
More importantly, El Burrito Junior, you have just called El Somnambulo a liar. Because regardless of what he says, you ‘won’t believe…when you answer’.
For the record, no one from the Markell Administration suggested this story idea, provided information to ‘bulo, or tugged at his coat to get him to write this. He has neither spoken to anyone affiliated with Markell nor communicated with them in any manner regarding this story.
You should be ashamed of your sorry self for suggesting as much. You owe El Somnambulo an apology.
Something gets written turning over the rocks to reveal the Rethug cucarachas scurrying about, and your immediate reaction is not to challenge the veracity of the article, but to claim that (a) the facts aren’t new and (b) that someone else must’ve planted the notion in the writer’s head b/c presumably writers are not capable of independent thought.
Had you been reading carefully, you would have noted that El Somnambulo first got the idea for this story when he read about the ‘non-partisan’ research firm providing data to Congress claiming public opposition to the public option. Said ‘non-partisan’ firm turned out to be an adjunct to a powerful health insurance company. THAT’s what piqued his curiosity about this ‘non-partisan’ think tank.
You owe El Somnambulo an apology, Junior. Either demonstrate that he is/was lying, or apologize. Or STFU.
“Nothing of note other than CRI is certainly not the non-partisan outfit that they claim to be. They are a conservative “think tank”, apparently representing movement conservative ideas, and is staffed and run by Republicans. So what we do know from all of this is that the CRI is not the politically disinterested player that they advertise themselves as.”
From AmericanProgress.org: “The Center for American Progress is a non-partisan 501(c)(3) tax-exempt research and educational institute. It undertakes research, public education and a limited amount of lobbying.” No mention of being run by Democrats or of virtually staffing 80% of the Obama Administration. (Commence criticism of CAP…….now.)
And you are far worse than a liar. You’re a liar who hides behind a fake name. But that was established long before you wrote this post. I’ll leave you to your fraudulence now.
Who funds this operation Dave? If they are so into transparency, why is Copeland hiding behind personal attacks by proxy? Why is he sending you out to do his bidding? Hmmm…?
Out with it? Who funds this? Stepping up on that questions will certainly reveal the liar in this thread quick enough.
“And you are far worse than a liar. You’re a liar who hides behind a fake name. But that was established long before you wrote this post. I’ll leave you to your fraudulence now.”
This is the second time in less than 30 minutes you have called El Somnambulo a liar. Your failure to provide any evidence of such leads ‘bulo to believe that this was an ‘ad hominem’ attack. El Somnambulo wrote the truth in his last response. It stands for itself.
El Somnambulo wrote two pieces about a Delaware ‘non-partisan’ think-tank seeking to make itself the ‘go-to guy’ for public policy info. Your response has been to try to shift the narrative elsewhere. To some Washington-based think tank. Feel free to write about it ad nauseum. Your attempt to shift the narrative and to hurl ad hominem insults simply confirms the words of Gertrude Stein, “There’s no there there.”
Despite all the disagreements ‘bulo has had with you over the past couple of years, he always considered you a person of principle and integrity. Sadly, ‘bulo was wrong.
Hmmm, Bulo… methinks you hit a nerve.
Dave, could you please point out specifically where ‘bulo’s post was deceitful? Maybe if you or the other CRI players would just answer the questions…
The CAP also describes its mission thusly:
The Center for American Progress is a think tank dedicated to improving the lives of Americans through ideas and action. We combine bold policy ideas with a modern communications platform to help shape the national debate, expose the hollowness of conservative governing philosophy, and challenge the media to cover the issues that truly matter.
Our work builds upon progressive ideals put forth by such leaders as Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, JFK, and Martin Luther King. We draw from the great social movements of the 20th century—from labor rights and worker safety, to civil rights and women’s suffrage. We translate those values into new ideas and action firmly rooted in the economic and political realities of the 21st century.
Founded in 2003, CAP is headed by John D. Podesta, former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton and professor at the Georgetown University Law Center. CAP is designed to provide long-term leadership and support to the progressive movement. Our ability to develop thoughtful policy proposals and engage in the war of ideas with conservatives is unique and effective.
There’s more on their mission page, but they are pretty clear about their political leanings (they also publicly cop to doing some lobbying)– a thing that CRI won’t do. CRI hides behind the “non-partisan”, “free-market” yada yada to obfuscate their movement conservatism ties. No one cares if they are going to be conservative — they just need to stop pretending that they have no leanings because they do.
“El Somnambulo wrote two pieces about a Delaware ‘non-partisan’ think-tank seeking to make itself the ‘go-to guy’ for public policy info.”
Actually, what you did was attack a whole bunch of people that I like (and a few I don’t). In the process you failed to apply your criticisms to all think tanks. CRI is no different than think tanks on the left (CAP) or the right (Heritage). Yet you chose to attack all of its board members personally, instead of simply saying they’re (mostly) all Republicans. You also have failed to make any case against what they have done, and simply have engaged in identity politics.
In addition:
Wozniak & Grant never worked together at the GOP.
Prybutok is a Democrat.
Sigler and his firm did not “benefit” from Copeland’s involvement with SURJ. Nobody “benefited.”
John Carney’s Delaware Health Care Commission did more damage to Denn’s phony pooling bill than Donna Stone ever could.
I could go on, but I won’t.
And to honestly claim that there is a difference between offering an accusation as a statement and stating it as a question is ridiculous. There are too many attacks to count in there.
I’ll end with the same questions I began with: is publishing the state checkbook partisan? Is publishing all school spending partisan? Is publishing the state performance audits partisan?
” they just need to stop pretending that they have no leanings because they do.”
Where exactly do they pretend to have no leanings? As a 501(c)3, they are required to be non-partisan, as is CAP, as is Heritage, CATO, etc. They are not required to have no leanings. CRI clearly states their leanings.
“Maybe if you or the other CRI players would just answer the questions…”
Just a hunch, but I don’t think they’ll be giving out their information to Delaware Liberal. And I am not a “CRI player.” I have not been involved with them since the beginning of 2009.
This post pulls one big moon on Dave Burris. Hear! Hear!
Where does CRI state that it is a conservative think tank?
‘Bulo attacked none of the board members personally. He pointed out ‘on the record’ information about them.
He wrote about the Caesar Rodney Institute, he did not set out to write an article about all think tanks. Stop trying to change the subject.
‘On-the-record’ information shows both Wozniak and Grant working at the Delaware State GOP at the same time in 2006. Please demonstrate exactly how that ‘on-the-record’ information is incorrect, per your assertion.
Regardless of Prybotok’s registration, his only recorded campaign contribution is to the Republican National Committee in 2008. Who provided you with his registration information, and, for the interest of clarity, has Prybotok always been an R, or has he recently switched?
‘Sigler’s firm did not benefit…nobody benefited.” How do you know, and, since you are so well-informed, please inform the readers of the nature of the contractual services his firm provides to the State of Delaware.
‘Bulo agrees with Junior about the Health Care Commission, but Stone’s burying of Denn’s reform package is a matter of record. Two wrongs…
So, you have made several assertions of fact w/o evidence. Please provide some facts. Thank you very much.
Finally, you still have not apologized for calling El Somnambulo a liar. Clock’s ticking…
“Where does CRI state that it is a conservative think tank?”
You’re right. They’re actually the LIBERAL “free-market, individual liberty, limited government, private property rights” think tank. My bad.
The clock’s gonna be ticking for a loooooooooooong time.
How ’bout this. You apologize to Greg Lavelle for accusing him of putting the Diocese above abused children, and I’ll think about it.
Fun fact about John Stapleford: He’s the author of “Bulls, Bears and Golden Calves: Applying Christian Ethics in Economics.” This snippet from a review:
“He explains the biblical/ethical prominence and practical usefulness of strong property rights. He notes that Christians are called to pursue different types of justice. He points to the general efficacy of the market economy in concert with limited government.”
Wozniak was made ED of the GOP after Crossan and Grant were let go. Before that he was a field operative working with House candidates.
Wozniak claims, well let ‘bulo quote him:
“After graduating from the University of Delaware’s MPA program in May 2006, I began working as the Campaign Coordinator for the Delaware Republican Party.”
According to this public document, Ken Grant represented himself as representing the Delaware Republican Party in August, 2006:
http://delaware.gov/egov/calendar.nsf/*/B303423D9E70EA8E852571D2006B40CE/$file/Voting%20System%20Test%20-%20MINUTES%2008-31-06.pdf?openelement
‘Bulo’s not out to play ‘gotcha’, just demonstrating that someone must be misremembering something. And, he neither claimed nor implied that Wozniak worked with Grant in Wozniak’s capacity of Executive Director, just that they worked for the State GOP at the same time.
Keep trying.
As to Greg Lavelle, he knows his way over here as he tried to ‘out’ ‘bulo about a month ago, putting him in the proud bully-boy company of John Atkins.
Lavelle tied up the legislation extending the deadline to report child abuse by religious figures b/c of his attempt to tie the institutional abuse of the Catholic Church to the false equivalency of cases of abuse by public school teachers. In so doing, he delayed justice for dozens of child abuse victims, quite a proud legacy.That issue has been addressed here quite a bit, and any attempt by Lavelle to deny that he held up such legislation is disingenuous. So, no apology offered to Al Mascitti’s favorite call-in guest.
My question is what does Caesar Rodney have to do with anything?
Was Caesar Rodney a “small-government” conservative? Or did a bunch of idiots in a room get together and say, “Uhm, who is a famous Delawarean we can name this after?”
There’s no rhyme or reason for it, not even on their website. I’d love to know how Caesar Rodney INSPIRED these guys to create such an entity.
Here’s the book Geezer mentioned. Hey nemski, you can get it on Kindle!
Sounds like a winner! It’s got 4 stars, it must be great. From the Editor’s Review:
They’re actually the LIBERAL “free-market, individual liberty, limited government, private property rights” think tank. My bad.
Your bad indeed. It isn’t as though Democrats or liberals aren’t interested in these things, either. It is a question of who gets them. For you, this means very little government for business, and lots of government for individuals. Or massive subsidies to businesses and none to individuals. Which is part of the bait and switch — that this group is working on “free-market, individual liberty” yada yada somehow transends the partisanship when in fact it is meant to support a single POV. Which is fine. They ought to man up and bloody well say it so they can be identified properly as they are cited.
Dave basically comes out and says that it is none of our business where they get their money. Such a strange position for an organization so committed to “transparency.”
While we wait for the transparency to happen, I’ll make an educated guess as to who is putting up all this wingnut welfare. (And let’s face it we are talking big bucks.)
CRI is funded by Charlie Copeland’s close relatives and only Charlie Copeland’s close relatives. They want to see little Charlie run for Treasurer and they think this phony ass bullshit “think tank” can give him some traction.
There. I just said what Dave Burris wanted to say, only said it more eloquently than he ever could.
CRI is funded by Charlie Copeland’s close relatives and only Charlie Copeland’s close relatives.
I’m shocked, shocked that Charlie Copeland could be behind this all.
I know I’m lazy and dumb, but when I see all these people that seem to be almighty whities and republican. How is they are non partisan?
Is this lipstick on a pig?
And who is the Dave Burris guy He sure seems to be above all this and have a non chalante answer for a bunch of Republicans…
wait? Is Dave Burris a mouth piece for these other guys? AS a poor and lazy person we usually get community leaders to speak for us. Normally we don’t speak well for ourselves.
You know, the shady people that need cover in a community.
When I quit 7/11 earlier this year I remember defending them some months later yet claiming I didn’t work for them anymore. I did sell drugs outside by the pay phone though…maybe Dave is doing somethin similar.
Man, ‘bulo masks his posts as non-accusatory expose (it’s accusatory and an expose) and everyone comes away that Burris is evil. Just another day around here when Dave comes around. Admit it, you all miss him, you know you do.
I think it would be cool and, believe it or not, very productive if ‘bulo, and who knows…Jason maybe, actually had a brew (in the spirit of BHO negotiations, yes I am jealous) with Charlie and Garret and discussed this. There is no way to tell the people of Delaware Liberal that this isn’t partisan, because, as ‘bulo
accusespoints out, the appearances drip of it on the surface. The APPEARANCE is not disputable and appearance is the first, and in many cases, the last impression many take away. So, I would like to see the ‘bulo-beer summit happen and IN PERSON. Sorry, but I never buy into summits over blogs because there are far too many waiting to take too many opportunistic, self-gratuitous shots that do nothing to further anything constructive.In the case of CRI, there is more than you see on that surface and not what is surmised. This comes from years of frustration of closed leadership, not Democratic or Republican anything. However, I can say that until I am out of breath and that won’t change the image everyone sees on the surface.
Get the brews, you’d find it worthwhile.
Smitty, isn’t that the what the Miles for Melanoma fundraiser on August 15 is all about?
Nope, it’s about fundraising for a great cause! Silly ‘bulo.
“Your bad indeed.”
That’s funny, but…..
“It isn’t as though Democrats or liberals aren’t interested in these things, either.”
..THAT’s pee-your-pants funny.
“Dave basically comes out and says that it is none of our business where they get their money. Such a strange position for an organization so committed to “transparency.”
Sorry I wasn’t clear: It’s none of your business where they get their money. (I don’t know either.) When they begin using tax dollars, then you can ask for transparency.
And this — “And who is the Dave Burris guy” — made my day.
Instead of being jackasses with absurd accusations, why don’t you channel all of that energy into going to CRI’s DelawareSpends.com and finding some solutions inside the state checkbook?
I’ll leave now, but one final time: is publishing the state checkbook partisan? Is publishing all school spending partisan? Is publishing the state performance audits partisan?
I won’t hold my breath waiting for youse guys to answer, because I can’t afford to die right now.
Hugs & kisses,
Dave
How republican.
We will tell what we mean by Transparency!
How about that for Transparency.
Jesus Dave, did you channel your leader Protack or what on that answer.
He sure did.
And I think it is completely astonishing that these people do not want to be associated with the word “conservative”. But neither do many of CRIs siblings in other states, which will be covered in tomorrow’s edition.
Just a bit of background on what a 501 c 3 organization is, can, and can not do. This may answer a few questions, or cause more.
First and foremost, as a non-profit, they can not pay their board anything, nor provide any appreciable benefit. Most boards are lucky to get food during meetings.
Second, in incorporating as a non-profit, they had to file with the internal revenue service for their tax exempt status. This included providing a list of bylaws that govern how the organization is run. These are public information and you can get them through the IRS, or most likely from just asking for them.
Every year 501 c 3 organizations are required to file a IRS990, which will list major funding sources as well as staff salaries for the organizations executives (or top three salaries which for may non profits is all the salaries).
Non-profit organizations are legally allowed to engage in some lobbying. If they are going to spend more then a very small % of their annual budget on lobbying, they need to file an H Election with the IRS and report exactly how they will be lobbying and who they will be lobbying and how much money they will spend lobbying. This H election is also public information.
Basically, as a non-profit, you have to be very open to the public, though most non-profits don’t go around advertising all of this information.
For legal purposes, non partisan simply means that they are not specifically aligned with a major political party, it has nothing to do with the ideology or beliefs that an organization is formed on. That being said, almost no non-profits could be held to the strictest interpretation of “non Partisan”. Anyone with an interest in policy will in one way or another lean towards one of the dominant ideologies on different issues.
(In the interest of openness, Garrett is a good friend and I wish him the best with CRI. Though as I told him, Grover Norquist scares the hell of of me.)
So we have David A, Dave Burris and this guy all defending CRI….
hmmmm
To clarify Mike R.’s point: Nonprofits have to list general funding sources – “donations,” “grants,” “fees,” etc. – but not specific donors.
As far as I can tell there is nothing to defend. A defense implies that there was some wrong done. I’m not seeing that.
I can’t see how anyone could be confused by what CRI stands for or intends to advocate for. They are explicit about being an ideological think tank. They are not hiding that. I am sure they would expect most liberals to disagree with their ideology, just as any ideological organization can expect to have people with opposing views to disagree with it. What matters is what they have to say and how they say it. Hold them accountable for that just as you should hold any ideological organization accountable.
Really, wouldn’t you be more surprised after reading their vision and mission if they came out in favor of the health care package or anything that had an expansion of government in it? I really hope none of you were really in the dark about what CRI is going to be advocating for!
Everyone who plays this game should know this stuff. CRI is just the new guy. There is plenty of room for more if anyone wants to start a progressive think tank in Delaware, and no one should be fooled into thinking that any progressive think tank will not have an ideological bent under their non-partisan mission statement.
For legal purposes, non partisan simply means that they are not specifically aligned with a major political party, it has nothing to do with the ideology or beliefs that an organization is formed on. That being said, almost no non-profits could be held to the strictest interpretation of “non Partisan”. Anyone with an interest in policy will in one way or another lean towards one of the dominant ideologies on different issues.
I think that we get this — the problem is that the person defending this group doesn’t think that we get the difference between the legalese non-partisan and the apparently structural ideological bent of this group. An ideological bent that dares not speak its name, apparently.
anon… you are right, they do not have to explicitly list all individual funders, though many organizations do so in their budget backup and worksheets that are submitted with the 990, in the interest of openness. Of course this is usually for organizations that have a few large funders as organizations with lots of individual doners (think United Way or any big organization) wouldn’t want to go through the trouble. I can say that if I was running an organization that was advocating for transparency as a strong component of it’s ideology, I would definitely be listing all funders…
I’ve looked through quite a few 990s and never seen a single one lits its donors. Got any examples? I’d love to see…
If all these people being Republicans were no big deal, Republicans wouldn’t be all worked up over El Som pointing that out, would they?
…Republicans wouldn’t be all worked up over El Som pointing that out, would they?
Pointing out that they’re (mostly) Republicans, which they haven’t hid (the bios El Som referenced)? No. Challenging the legitimacy because of that? Sure.
I still think a beer-summit in the BHO-style (of which I remain jealous) btw El Som and Charlie/Garrett on CRI would be constructive. Knowing the latter two, I’m sure they’d do it. Assuming what I know of El Som, I think he’d do it, too…but the lucha libre mask can’t go.
You are the Jimmy Carter of the blogosphere. I mean that in a good way.
😯
Smitty: ‘Bulo would be delighted to share beers with those guys. But only after Copeland gives him the courtesy of a response to his questions. If Copeland opts for another venue to answer the questions, that’s fine as well, as long as the questions are answered and not finessed a la Carper. All ‘bulo wants are answers…and some ice cold brews.
Back to Jason’s
smearcomment about me… 😉If ESPN.com has a freaking ombudsman, why can’t our blogosphere?
Geezer speaks wisdom again.
Why doesn’t CRI publish anything about New Castle County?