One coverage issue the local media should be reconsidering is how to describe dark and gray money political advocacy groups – operations like Democrats for Education Reform, Massachusetts Parents United, Stand for Children, and the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance. The number one issue citizens should know in considering the positions of such groups is, who is funding them? If citizens know that they are in a better position to judge the true interests and why they are taking their positions.
Here’s an example. Yesterday Commonwealth Magazine posted a Codcast about education funding featuring Tracy Novick of the Massachusetts Association of School Committees and Liam Kerr of Democrats for Education Reform. It’s pretty obvious who Novick represents. But who does Kerr represent?
Here are some descriptions from recent news stories of prominent organizations that hide or obscure the true sources of their funding. (MassParents recognizes at least some of its donors on its webpage, but the media rarely if ever refers to even that minimal information).
A recent story in the Boston Globe identified “Massachusetts Parents United, representing urban district parents.”
WBUR did not mention MassParents in a recent story on an education funding bill but did reference the group’s state director, referring to her as “Keri Rodrigues, a parent activist.”
Stand for Children is a “nonprofit advocacy organization” according to a recent Boston Globe story.
In its piece on the education funding bill, CommonWealth Magazine published critiques from three individuals – all of whom are connected to Democrats for Education Reform Massachusetts. They included “Marty Walz, chair of the advisory council of the state’s Democrats for Education Reform chapter;” “Keri Rodrigues, president of Massachusetts Parents United, a statewide advocacy group;” and “Liam Kerr, director of the state Democrats for Education Reform chapter.”
Recent stories about the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance have described it as “a conservative leaning group” (Boston Globe) and “conservative nonprofit.” (MetroWest Daily News).
There are other descriptions that are superior in that they are factually accurate, specific but brief, and more helpful for citizens trying to evaluate these groups. (You needn’t take my word for it. There are footnotes!) For instance:
“Democrats for Education Reform, which was founded by hedge fund executives and which has received funding from both Democrats and Republicans, including Rupert Murdoch.”[i]
“Massachusetts Parents United, whose funders include the Walton family and others who contributed dark money to the pro-charter school Question 2 ballot initiative in 2016. Its chief executive officer Keri Rodriguez was also state director of Families for Excellent Schools, which was banned from Massachusetts after paying a record civil forfeiture for hiding the true sources of its campaign donations.”[ii]
Stand for Children, which has been active in past ballot questions and has been funded by executives of Bain Capital and others involved with providing dark money funding to the pro-charter school Question 2 ballot initiative in 2016.[iii]
“The Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, a group which declines to identify its funders but which has ties to right-wing groups associated with both the Koch Brothers and the Mercer Family, former backers of Breitbart News.”[iv]
In 2016 we had four ballot questions and three of them were conducted with one side in violation of state laws prohibiting dark money contributions, as determined by the Office of Campaign and Political Finance. So what have we learned from this mega-scandal? That when it comes to dark money operations in the state, nothing is as it seems – certainly not their own self-descriptions. Professional news organizations owe it to the citizenry and to their own sense of public duty to properly identify such organizations.
The Washington Post recently adopted a new slogan: “Democracy dies in darkness.” I agree.
[Full disclosure: as an educator in the UMass system, I am a union member. I write about dark money (and other things). I don’t write about education policy.]
[i] On the founding of Democrats for Education Reform by hedge fund investors Whitney Tilson, Boykin Curry, and John Petry see Steven Brill, Class Warfare: Inside the Fight to Fix America’s Schools (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2011). By 2010 it had become apparent that the merely rich like Tilson could not pump in enough money to fulfill DFER’s ambitions, and the organization turned to Republican billionaires including Rupert Murdoch. Brill, 326, 396, 411.
[ii] Massachusetts Parents United identifies several of its funders on its webpage. The Walton Family Foundation includes Boston in its K-12 Education Program 2020 Strategic Plan. Jim and Alice Walton donated $2.585 million to Question 2 in a mixture of transparent, gray, and dark money. Another MassParents donor, the Longfield Family Foundation, is the family charity of Charles Longfield, who donated $100,000 transparently and $650,000 in dark money in favor of Question 2. The Barr Foundation also funds MassParents; its founder, Amos Hostetter, contributed over $2 million in dark money to Families for Excellent Schools. All campaign finance records available at ocpf.us. On fate of Families for Excellent Schools, see Office of Campaign and Political Finance, “Disposition Agreement with Families for Excellent Schools,” September 8, 2017.
[iii] Form 990 tax returns for Boston based philanthropy Strategic Grant Partners show that SGP helped fund Stand for Children’s operations in Massachusetts from 2010 and several years after, and that several members of SGP funded Stand for Children’s political arm as it prepared for ballot initiatives in 2010 and 2012. (Neither measure went to the ballot). SGP also invested heavily in Families for Excellent Schools, and several of its members were among the dark money givers to FES. Bain executives have given to all of the ballot campaigns and a Bain executive sat on the board of Stand for Children. Bain is also connected to SGP.
[iv] The Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance has repeatedly insisted that it will not disclose its donors. See, e.g. Matt Murphy, State House News Service, “Fiscal Alliance Won’t Disclose Its Donors; Mailers Will End,” Worcester Telegram, September 8, 2016. MFA has simply refused to comply with a directive of Office of Campaign and Political Finance to disclose a donor. CPF 16-20. In 1A Auto, Inc. v. Director of the Office of Campaign and Political Finance, MassFiscal founder Rick Green’s corporation was represented by attorneys from the Goldwater Institute, which Sourcewatch describes as “a right-wing advocacy group” with ties to the Koch Brothers. Other Goldwater funders include the Walton Family Foundation. Rebekah Mercer, “the First Lady of the alt-right,” has served on Goldwater’s board.
The phrase “non-profit groups” make them sound so benign and beneficent. Perhaps the new standard could be to call them a 501c 3 or 501c4 organization. It’s a small change, but helps to correct the bias.
That is better. Perhaps editors would prefer a description of form over function, e.g., 501c3 instead of agent of Waltons. Adopting the self-descriptions biases the story in favor of the Walton and SGP sponsored organizations.
Absolutely right, good point. How about: “self anointed advocacy groups.”
Too kind. But that’s you.