Philanthropy cannot work in a silo or vacuum; philanthropy and the communities it serves are influenced by policy and elections. At the start of 2015, state legislatures will be in full swing with plenty of interesting policy issues on the table. For this webinar, we were joined by experts who demonstrated effective tools for understanding contemporary policy issues. We also heared from a foundation that is using data-centric tools to bolster their agenda. Speakers:
 - Christine Reeves, Senior Field Associate, National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy & Board Member, EPIP (Moderator) - Edwin Bender, Executive Director, National Institute on Money in State Politics - Bert Brandenberg, Executive Director, Justice at Stake - Tara Malloy, Senior Counsel, Campaign Legal Center - Daniel Stid, Director of the Madison Initiative, William & Flora Hewlett Foundation

1. SUPERSIZED IMBALANCE:
POST-2015 ELECTION, WHAT
FOUNDATIONS SHOULD KNOW
EPIP/NCRP Webinar
January 9th, 2015
Hosts: Michael Barham and Christine Reeves

2. 2
Emerging Practitioners in
Philanthropy (EPIP) is a
national network of
foundation professionals and
social entrepreneurs who
strive for excellence in the
practice of philanthropy.

3. 3
We are an inclusive group
of highly skilled & effective
Change Makers committed
to working together to
build a just, equitable,
& sustainable society.

4. 4
We provide a platform
for our community to:
Connect
with others
Learn &
practice
leadership skills
Voice
emerging,
transformative
thoughts in the
social sector

5. Join EPIP!
If you’re not yet a member, join us!
More information on our site at
www.epip.org/membership
or contact
michael@epip.org

6. Announcements
• EPIP National Conference – Save the Date!
• May 13th-14th
• New Orleans, LA
• Next EPIP Webinar - Wednesday, February 4th, 3pm ET
• Black Male Achievement: An Exploration of Systemic and
Capacity Building Solutions
• Foundation Center, Open Society Foundations, PolicyLink,
CLASP
• MC MaL
• January: Communications
• All Events
• epip.org/events

7. Housekeeping
• All attendees on mute during the presentation
• Use the question box for technical difficulties
• We’ll save time for Q&A
• We’ll be recording this webinar, visit our website to
view
• Complete the post-webinar survey!

8. Supersized Imbalance:
Post-2014 Election,
What Foundations Should Know

9. Christine Reeves!
Edwin Bender!
Daniel Stid!Tara Malloy!
Bert Brandenburg!

10. Goals for Our Time Today
Frame
Overview of NIMSP Tool
#1: Who Gives to Influence Policy?
(Example: Fracking)
#2: Legislative Action in the States
(Example: ACA Health Policy)
#3: Judicial Independence
(Example: Money in Judicial Elections)
#4: Defending & Enforcing Campaign Finance
(Example: Sun Act)
#5: How Election Data Informs the Hewlett Foundation
(Example: Madison Initiative Program)

11. FRAME

12. ICEBREAKER!

13. FollowTheMoney.org
Tracking political donations in all 50 states
National Institute on Money in State Politics EPIP/NCRP JAN. 2015
We Connect the Dots in 50 States
Ballot measures
Judicial candidates
Statewide candidates
Legislative candidates
Federal candidates
Political parties
Lobbyists & clients

14. FollowTheMoney.org
Tracking political donations in all 50 states
National Institute on Money in State Politics EPIP/NCRP JAN. 2015
What Can Data Tell You?
$5.6 Billion to Gubernatorial Races
$8.4 Billion to Legislative Races
$4.3 Billion to Ballot Measures

15. FollowTheMoney.org
Tracking political donations in all 50 states
National Institute on Money in State Politics EPIP/NCRP JAN. 2015
Our Data Tells You
Who gave?
How much?
To whom?
When?

16. The Institute is seen as a “gold standard” reference
and a “gold mine” of information. —RAND Corp, 2014
FollowTheMoney.org
Transparency
Media
Academia
Advocacy
Policy
Gov t Agencies
Sunlight Foundation
MapLight
Project Vote Smart
TransparencyData.com
CNN, ABC, CBS, Fox, NPR, MSNBC
Wall St. Journal, NY Times, Reuters, Newsweek
Center for Public Integrity
ProPublica
Investigative News Network
Stateline.org
Harvard, Stanford, Rice, New York Univ. of Law
Sustainable Investments Institute
American Judicature Society
Election Law Journal
Common Cause
Midwest Democracy Network
U.S. PIRG
State Voices
AARP
Campaign for a Just Society
Cato Institute
Justice at Stake
Campaign Finance Institute
Progressive States Network
Heritage Foundation
Brennan Center for Justice
All 50 state elections agencies
U.S. Supreme Court
National Conference of State Legislatures
U.S. Government Accountability Office
Council on Governmental Ethics Laws

17. FollowTheMoney.org
Tracking political donations in all 50 states
National Institute on Money in State Politics EPIP/NCRP JAN. 2015
Identify special interest money
Data = Informed Power Mapping
Who may wish to influence public policy?
How much did they give to people in positions of power?

18. FollowTheMoney.org
Tracking political donations in all 50 states
National Institute on Money in State Politics EPIP/NCRP JAN. 2015
Specific Work for Foundations
Ex: The Energy
Foundation
supported Institute
investigation of
lobbying influence
on laws related to
climate change in
five states

19. FollowTheMoney.org
Tracking political donations in all 50 states
National Institute on Money in State Politics EPIP/NCRP JAN. 2015
Legislative Power Mapping
Focus on
special interest
contributors
Ex: Oil & Gas

20. FollowTheMoney.org
Tracking political donations in all 50 states
National Institute on Money in State Politics EPIP/NCRP JAN. 2015
Legislative Power Mapping
Which
states were
targeted?

21. FollowTheMoney.org
Tracking political donations in all 50 states
National Institute on Money in State Politics EPIP/NCRP JAN. 2015
Legislative Power Mapping
Look at the detail …by State … by Contributor

22. FollowTheMoney.org
Tracking political donations in all 50 states
National Institute on Money in State Politics EPIP/NCRP JAN. 2015
Legislative Power Mapping
Is your focus on
healthcare?
Health-related
political giving to
state legislators
is on the rise
nationwide
$74M
$36M
$49M
$62M

23. FollowTheMoney.org
Tracking political donations in all 50 states
National Institute on Money in State Politics EPIP/NCRP JAN. 2015
Specific Work for Foundations
Ex: The California
Endowment asked the
Institute to document
the record-breaking
pace of the California
medical insurance
industry’s political
contributions to affect
2014 state elections.

24. FollowTheMoney.org
Tracking political donations in all 50 states
National Institute on Money in State Politics EPIP/NCRP JAN. 2015
Legislative Power Mapping
Zero in
on key
committee
members in
one state

25. FollowTheMoney.org
Tracking political donations in all 50 states
National Institute on Money in State Politics EPIP/NCRP JAN. 2015
Legislative Power Mapping
Who gave
them the
most?

26. FollowTheMoney.org
Tracking political donations in all 50 states
National Institute on Money in State Politics EPIP/NCRP JAN. 2015
Legislative Power Mapping
… how much?
… from?
… to?
Save your searches and download results

27. FollowTheMoney.org
Tracking political donations in all 50 states
National Institute on Money in State Politics EPIP/NCRP JAN. 2015
Legislative Power Mapping
Narrow your focus
to who has the
power in
committee
(2015 legislative committees
coming soon!)

28. FollowTheMoney.org
Tracking political donations in all 50 states
National Institute on Money in State Politics EPIP/NCRP JAN. 2015
Contact Edwin Bender
406-449-2480
edwinb@followthemoney.org
Follow us! Facebook.com/FollowTheMoney.org
Twitter: @MoneyInPolitics
Want to Learn More?

30. New$Poli)cs$of$Judicial$Elec)ons$

31. New$Poli)cs$of$Judicial$Elec)ons$

32. New$Poli)cs$of$Judicial$Elec)ons$

33. New$Poli)cs$of$Judicial$Elec)ons$

34. Tara Malloy!

35. The Disclosure Deficit:
Anonymous Campaign Spending after Citizens United
and its Effects

36. Citizens United v. FEC!
Five Justices struck down the federal restrictions on
corporate spending to influence elections.!
All but Justice Thomas voted to uphold disclosure.!

37. The Aftermath of Citizens United
Elec)on$Year$ Total$(non8party)$outside$spending$
2006$ $69,535,000$
2008$ $338,400,000$
Ci#zens(United(
2010$ $309,834,000$
2012$ $1,038,737,000$
2014$ $560,637,000$
Information from the Center for Responsive Politics

38. Biggest “Dark Money” Groups, 2014
Group Spending
US Chamber of Commerce $35,464,243
Crossroads GPS $26,015,161
NRA Institute for Legislative Action $12,117,487
Patriot Majority USA $10,652,298
American Action Network $8,958,129
Information from the Center for Responsive Politics

39. Section 501(c) groups
• A 501(c)(3) organization is a public charity or private foundation (e.g., Boy
Scouts of America, Heritage Foundation, churches). A 501(c)(3) is
prohibited from participating or intervening in any political campaign for a
candidate for public office.
• A 501(c)(4) is a social welfare organization (e.g., NRA, Sierra Club). Donors
also need not be publicly disclosed under the tax law. Unlike (c)(3)s, these
groups can participate in political campaign activity for candidates for
public office, provided that this is not their primary activity. Examples of
such (c)(4)s are Crossroads GPS and American Action Network.
• 501(c)(5)s are labor organizations and 501(c)(6)s are trade associations.
They are also not required to publicly disclose their donors under the tax
law. Similarly to 501(c)(4)s, these groups can engage in political campaign
activity provided that it is not their primary activity. Both of these types of
groups were very involved in the 2010 elections; according to the Center for
Responsive Politics, the most active (c)(5) was the Service Employees
International Union and the most active (c)(6) was the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce.

40. Declining Disclosure
1 Figure: Campaign Legal Center. Data: Center for Responsive Politics.!
0%!
10%!
20%!
30%!
40%!
50%!
60%!
70%!
2008! 2012!
Portion of Outside
Spending Disclosed1
65 %!
41 %!

41. Reasons for the Disclosure Deficit
• Federal law not designed to capture large scale
spending by corporations and non-profit
corporations
• IRC does not require donor disclosure from
many types of 501(c) groups
• The FEC gutted the federal electioneering
communications disclosure law was gutted by a
regulation in 2007.
• Other potential regulators – SEC, FCC – have
not taken action

42. Multi-prong Approach to
Improving Transparency
a. Legisla)ve$Ac)on$(DISCLOSE$Act)$
b. Affirma)ve$Li)ga)on$(Van$Hollen$v.$
FEC)$
c. Administra)ve$Prac)ce$(IRS,$FEC)$$
d. Defensive$Li)ga)on$

43. The Hewlett
Foundation’s
Madison Initiative
Our goal: help create conditions
in which Congress and its
members can negotiate and
compromise in ways that work
for most Americans

46. Ingredients for Impact:
Foundations Building
Nonprofit Capacity
& Real Results
#2014GEO
@NCRP!