logo
    • Magazine
    • Membership
    • Donate
  • Racial Justice
  • Economic Justice
    • Collections
  • Climate Justice
  • Health Justice
  • Leadership
  • CONTENT TYPES
  • Subscribe
  • Webinars
    • Upcoming Webinars
    • Complimentary Webinars
    • Premium On-Demand Webinars
  • Membership
  • Submissions

Darker-than-Dark Money Targeting GOP House Candidates

Michael Wyland
July 30, 2018
Share
Tweet
Share
Email
Print

July 29, 2018; Politico

Few people have heard of the Washington, DC-based Sixteen Thirty Fund. Based on IRS information available on ProPublica’s Nonprofit Explorer website, it received its tax exemption in 2009 and has distributed millions of dollars to 501c4, 501c3, and for-profit corporations.

According to a review of records by Politico, Sixteen Thirty has made television advertising buys of $4.6 million for the 2018 election cycle. The purchases have been made through at least 11 nonprofit groups for which Sixteen Thirty acts as fiscal sponsor.

“This kind of structure—a hub of money and then seemingly independent groups that have specific focuses either at local or state level or a particular demography—is a hallmark of the Koch network,” said Robert Maguire, a researcher on political nonprofits at the Center for Responsive Politics.

Sign up for our free newsletters

Subscribe to NPQ's newsletters to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

By signing up, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of use, and to receive messages from NPQ and our partners.

Contrary to the typical description of dark money organizations being hyperconservative and pro-Republican, spokeswoman Beth Kanter says Sixteen Thirty is “an incubator for social justice projects focused on a variety of issues.” Promoting its fiscal sponsorship services on its website, Sixteen Thirty says:

Donors, advocates, and social entrepreneurs increasingly realize that in order to advance change at scale, having the best idea isn’t always enough to win. Sustained, movement-level progress requires hybrid strategies that engage different levers of power—including building the political muscle to build momentum for movements, inspire public support, recruit influential champions, and overcome opposition at the local, state, and federal levels. In an increasingly volatile and well-funded political environment, donors and changemakers who care about policy issues must engage all the tactics at their disposal—to educate the public about key issues, draft and pass strong policies, elect officials who support them, and hold those officials accountable for implementing them.

Sixteen Thirty has no paid staff, but its 2016 Form 990 lists almost $800,000 in a contract for management services, plus an additional $1.6 million on other consulting expenses paid to its top five independent contractors. The organization self-reports that it has 10 independent contractors that each receive more than $100,000 annually. In 2016, Sixteen Thirty provided $14.6 million in grants and direct assistance to domestic organizations and domestic governments, according to its Form 990.

NPQ has addressed the issue of 501c4 social welfare nonprofits and their increasing use as dark money conduits to influence elections. Dark money organizations can pop up between elections, engage in unlimited political influence activities prior to an election, and not have to report their activities until well after the elections are decided. In fact, many such groups can cease operations, with their first Form 990 submission also being their notice of dissolution. Fiscal sponsorship adds a layer of opacity by allowing Sixteen Thirty to file a single Form 990 without breaking out income and expenses allocated to each of its sponsored groups.

Despite calls for campaign finance reforms that would either close down 501c4 groups or require them to disclose their donors and the nature of their political and “social welfare” activities, both the left and right see their use as necessary. Cliff Schecter, the CEO of Ohioans for Economic Opportunity, one of the Sixteen Thirty-sponsored groups, said “I don’t believe in unilateral disarmament. I’d be happy to disclose all my donors if [the Koch groups] disclose them.” Linking campaign soft money and unilateral disarmament dates back at least as far as 1997, when the McCain-Feingold bill was being debated in the US Senate and Democrats voiced opposition to a GOP-backed amendment limiting labor union involvement in campaigns. It looks like advocates for change will need to add disclosure requirements for sponsored projects to the list of reforms. This adds another opportunity for resistance to the groups and campaigns across the political spectrum currently benefitting from dark money.—Michael Wyland

Share
Tweet
Share
Email
Print
About the author
Michael Wyland

Michael L. Wyland currently serves as an editorial advisory board member and consulting editor to The Nonprofit Quarterly, with more than 400 articles published since 2012. A partner in the consulting firm of Sumption & Wyland, he has more than thirty years of experience in corporate and government public policy, management, and administration.

More about: fiscal sponsorship501c4sDark MoneyNonprofit NewsPhilanthropy

Become a member

Support independent journalism and knowledge creation for civil society. Become a member of Nonprofit Quarterly.

Members receive unlimited access to our archived and upcoming digital content. NPQ is the leading journal in the nonprofit sector written by social change experts. Gain access to our exclusive library of online courses led by thought leaders and educators providing contextualized information to help nonprofit practitioners make sense of changing conditions and improve infra-structure in their organizations.

Join Today
logo logo logo logo logo
See comments

Spring-2023-sidebar-subscribe
You might also like
Arab American Philanthropy
Tamara El-Khoury
The Nonprofit Sector and Social Change: A Conversation between Cyndi Suarez and Claire Dunning
Claire Dunning and Cyndi Suarez
Nonprofits as Battlegrounds for Democracy
Cyndi Suarez
Sankofa Philanthropy: Hip Hop’s Sixth Element
Jason Terrell
Why Social Change Films Matter
Cyndi Suarez and Saphia Suarez
Philanthropy Must Move from Charity to Solidarity
Son Chau

NPQ Webinars

April 27th, 2 pm ET

Liberatory Decision-Making

How to Facilitate and Engage in Healthy Decision-making Processes

Register Now
You might also like
Brown-skinned Arabic woman wearing a bowler hat and looking into the camera. She is standing in front of a bougainvillea plant.
Arab American Philanthropy
Tamara El-Khoury
The book "Nonprofit Neighborhoods" leaning against a wall
The Nonprofit Sector and Social Change: A Conversation...
Claire Dunning and Cyndi Suarez
Nonprofits as Battlegrounds for Democracy
Cyndi Suarez

Like what you see?

Subscribe to the NPQ newsletter to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

See our newsletters

By signing up, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of use, and to receive messages from NPQ and our partners.

NPQ-Spring-2023-cover

Independent & in your mailbox.

Subscribe today and get a full year of NPQ for just $59.

subscribe
  • About
  • Contact
  • Advertise
  • Copyright
  • Careers

We are using cookies to give you the best experience on our website.

 

Non Profit News | Nonprofit Quarterly
Powered by  GDPR Cookie Compliance
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.

If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.