David Safier

IRS’s real mistake: not going after enough groups

by

by David Safier

The IRS absolutely should not have targeted groups with "Tea Party" in their names for special scrutiny. As Ezra Klein points out, the IRS should have used a far broader brush, going after the progressive Organizing for America as well as conservative groups like Crossroads GPS, Priorities USA and Heritage Action Fund. The problem wasn't the Tea Party. It wasn't right or left. The problem was misuse of a nonprofit category by both sides. And it may be, though we don't have the details, that the IRS corrected the problem after it found out about the "Tea Party" targeting.

All these groups registered as 501(c)4s. That means they're tax exempt and they don't have to disclose their donors. The tradeoff for the groups is supposed to be, they're not political. Their purpose is supposed to be to "promote the common good and general welfare of the people of the community as a whole.” As we all know, the groups are highly political, and the only welfare they want to promote is the welfare of their chosen candidates and the political parties they belong to. That means they were stretching their 501(c)4 designation beyond the breaking point. And the IRS should have investigated and clamped down, regardless of which political horse each group was betting on.

Karl Rove wasn’t the first to try to use the 501(c)4 to solicit anonymous political donations. But he was the first big player to do it. And the expectation was that he’d had a clever idea that the IRS would quickly reject. “A lot of people thought Rove would get smacked back by the IRS,” says Hasen. “It didn’t happen. And then 501(c)4s exploded.”

Now everyone from Moveon.org to the Heritage Foundation has a 501(c)4. The number of 501(c)4 applications the IRS is getting more than doubled in recent years, rising from 1,500 to more than 3,400.

Go after the idiots at the IRS

by

by David Safier If the initial stories about the IRS targeting tea party-related groups with audits and onerous application forms are true, the scoundrels who participated should be thrown out, and if they did something illegal, they should be punished for their actions. If the tax laws for nonprofits are being abused for political ends, … Read more

The BASIS Beat goes on

by

by David Safier Today, the Star's Tim Steller has a follow-up to his Sunday column about BASIS. It's mainly a collection of opinions and observations he's received about the charter schools, both positive and negative (More people agreed with his observation that BASIS is over-praised than defended the school). Interestingly, none of the BASIS defenders … Read more

Buyer Beware! “Democrats for Education Reform” has arrived in Arizona

by

by David Safier

The term "education reform" is conservative shorthand for the vast, well funded education privatization movement. So why would a Democratic PAC adopt conservative educators' favorite term and call itself Democrats for Education Reform (DFER)? The answer is, DFER, which gets most of its funding from hedge fund billionaires, is interconnected with a number of conservative "education reform" groups, and its purpose is to woo Democratic legislators over to the education privatization side by weaving together bits and pieces of the Democratic agenda with support for vouchers and charter schools while throwing in a bit of teacher-union-bashing on the side.

DFER just set up a branch here in Arizona. Democratic legislators beware. Someone from DFER will be knocking on your door, pitching the PAC's "education reform" agenda as if it's a Democratic program and plying you with campaign contributions.

How non-Democratic is DFER? The California Democratic Party passed a resolution opposing the group, saying it "is funded by corporations, Republican operatives and wealthy individuals dedicated to privatization and anti-educator initiatives, and not grassroots Democrats or classroom educators."

This post is a very compressed version of information I've found about DFER, with links allowing you to read further if you wish.

Democratic legislators have pretty much made peace with the charter school movement and usually do little more than try to counter its excesses and add more oversight — if that. So DFER's support of charter schools doesn't raise many eyebrows. But DFER's support for school vouchers is another thing entirely. In Wisconsin, DFER supported the expansion of Milwaukie's voucher program. The Wisconsin chapter is led by a former Democratic state representative, Jason Fields, who fought for vouchers alongside Republicans. He and DFER are encouraging the state to raise the per-pupil allotments for both  voucher students and charter schools. We can expect similar activity from DFER in Arizona where the charter and voucher roots are deeply planted.

I’m just asking

by

by David Safier I don't know if this is good, bad or indifferent, but it strikes me as curious. TUSD has stated it has a $17 million shortfall, which is why is has to close a bunch of schools and make serious cutbacks elsewhere. Yet it says it's spending $19 million more than it has … Read more