Steve Manacek · Apr 19, 2011 at 9:03am

I was driving my son to pre-school this morning, when I happened to catch a radio ad slamming a couple of local congressmen for voting to eliminate federal funding for Planned Parenthood.  Though I can't be certain I heard every word exactly correctly over the incessant chattering of a 4-year-old, the ad appeared to have been sponsored by (surprise) Planned Parenthood.  Now, unlike a lot of people here and on the other side, I don't see Planned Parenthood per se as a Big Red Flag issue, one way or the other.  I think it's silly beyond measure for a government a trillion-and-a-half dollars in debt to be spending one dime on anything that is not an essential government function -- but in this respect, funding Planned Parenthood is no worse than funding NPR, or cowboy poetry festivals, or any of the thousands of other things the government has no business spending taxpayers' money on.

BUT -- where in the name of heaven does an organization receiving taxpayer dollars get the right to spend some of those dollars on political ads for or against specific office-holders or candidates?  A tax-exempt charitable organization would (or should) lose its 501c(3) status in an instant for something like that.

Does anyone know anything about this?  Am I missing something?  Is it actually legal for organizations receiving taxpayer funding to spend some of that funding on partisan political ads -- not on "issues," mind you, but for or against specific individuals?  Am I the only one who finds this outrageous, egregious, and completely unacceptable?

  • Comment Filters
Contributor Comments
Member Comments
Comment Popularity

Comments :

Pseudodionysius
Joined
Sep '10
Pseudodionysius

Give me 2 minutes and 35 seconds of your time and all will be revealed.

River
Joined
Aug '10
River

You're right. But it's becoming painfully clear that nobody is watching and enforcing laws anymore the way our system intended they should be. Attorney General Holder and his office is responsible, ultimately, and they're entirely politicized and polarized in favor of 'progressives' and against conservatives.

This is massive, egregious, fatal corruption and dereliction of duty. Remember Janet Reno? She proved that Americans prefer to sleep when Democrats are in office, and as  the House of Justice burns to the ground like Waco.

Edited on Apr 19, 2011 at 9:17am
Robert Promm
Joined
Nov '10
Robert Promm

Planned Parenthood will probably swear on a stack of Bibles (of little consequence to Planned Parenthood) that the monies used to pay for that commercial you heard did not come from the federal government.  They also swear that not one dollar of federal money goes toward abortions (yah, right). 

They are in the position of getting money from multiple sources and will certify that they segregate funds.  You and I know that all money is fungible but through the shell game they are able to obfuscate to the satisfaction of the IRS.

While you are ambivalent with respect to Planned Parenthood as an institution, I submit that there is a real moral difference between it and NPR or cowboy poetry festivals.  NPR and cowboy poetry are merely trivial while the abortion mantra preached by Planned Parenthood is morally reprehensible.

R0bert Scott
Joined
Apr '11
R0bert Scott

 I can't say that I have a definitive answer to your query, Steve, but public employee unions are 100% taxpayer funded and they campaign like heck (heck, I tell you) for democrat candidates.  In my view, the point about defunding Planned Parenthood and things like NPR/PBS is that these are the low hanging fruit, the no-brainers in a time of trillion dollar defecits.  If we can't do this, we are so screwed.

Samwise Gamgee
Joined
Jun '10
Samwise Gamgee

Best not to question such things Steve.  They have an entire generation of "undesirables" to eliminate here and since you are a male, you don't have a leg to stand on.

One should find PP funding specifically to be particularly egregious (all the examples you gave are egregious to a lesser extent) because federal dollars are used to directly eliminate citizens.  This is the exact opposite of the most basic function of government; to protect its citizens.

Monotone voices and cowboy boots being pulled up a bit too tight on the one hand... 45 million dead on the other. 

But yeah, you're right, these ads gotta stop...

Edited on Apr 19, 2011 at 9:37am
Gus Marvinson
Joined
Mar '11
Gus Marvinson

I think it's silly beyond measure for a government a trillion-and-a-half dollars in debt to be spending one dime on anything that is not an essential government function -- but in this respect, funding Planned Parenthood is no worse than funding NPR, or cowboy poetry festivals, or any of the thousands of other things the government has no business spending taxpayers' money on.

Except that PP kills unborn babies.

Michael Labeit
Joined
May '10
Michael Labeit
Steve Manacek: BUT -- where in the name of heaven does an organization receiving taxpayer dollars get the right to spend some of those dollars on political ads for or against specific office-holders or candidates? 

Commerce Clause? Necessary and Proper Clause? One of em.

Ottoman Umpire
Joined
May '10
Ottoman Umpire

Michael Labeit

Steve Manacek: BUT -- where in the name of heaven does an organization receiving taxpayer dollars get the right to spend some of those dollars on political ads for or against specific office-holders or candidates? 

Commerce Clause? Necessary and Proper Clause? One of em. · Apr 19 at 10:32am

Kagan & Co. are no doubt feeling the emanations and penumbras as we speak.

Devin Cole
Joined
May '10
Devin Cole

Is Planned Parenthood tax exempt?  I do not know enough about the status I guess.  However, I do know it was not long ago that Christian churches were being threatened with losing their tax exempt status due to ministers supporting specific candidates from their pulpits.  Surely this is worse.....

John Walker
Joined
Oct '10
John Walker

Everything you need to know about Planned Parenthood can be found right here.  The airsickness bag is in the pocket of the seat in front of you.  Since this Web site does not provide abortion, U.S. taxpayers are presumably picking up part of the tab for maintaining it.

reidspoorhouse
Joined
Apr '11
reidspoorhouse

 So many of you have said exactly what I would have, I can only nod yes, and say ditto.  It is a disgrace!  It's not about need, or wheather we can afford it, or right or wrong, it's about politics, and policy. Freedom for the American taxpayor is a Joke.

Cindy
Joined
May '10
Cindy

This link attempts to explain how Planned Parenthood gets away with political ads: http:http://www.stealthpacs.org/profile.cfm?org_id=2835.

"Because Planned Parenthood's overall structure includes a 501(c)(4) entity, a 501(c)(3) entity, a federally regulated PAC and a 527 organization, it is difficult to determine which pots of money paid for which ads."

As president of an organization with 501c(3) status, I can tell you that If the non-profit Foundation arm of our organization does anything political we can lose or 501c(3) status.  However, the other part of our organization (which lacks 501c(3) status) is free to participate in politics.  There are actually several non-profit designations:

http://www.irs.gov/charities/nonprofits/article/0,,id=96178,00.html

http://www.irs.gov/charities/charitable/article/0,,id=96099,00.html


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading
Welcome Visitor

Already a Member?
Please Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Join Ricochet today!

Already a Member? Sign In