September 10, 2009

Brian Brown’s Very Bad Week

By Fred Karger, Californians Against Hate

Poor Brian Brown. It has not been a good week for him and his Mormon front group, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM).

With two more states (Maine and Iowa) considering investigations of his organization for improper reporting of campaign contributions and money laundering, plus the on-going ten month investigation by the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC Case #08-735), Brian went on the offensive on Friday and sent out the email below to all his supporters and the media.

We are happy to see that Brian has responded to our complaint by trying to stop NOM’s money laundering in Maine. In our August 26, 2009 complaint letter and request for an investigation to the Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices, we cited many pieces of evidence to back our money laundering claims by NOM.

In numerous emails after Prop 8, Brian wrote to his supporters instructing them to give their money directly to NOM, so that their names would be kept secret and not included in campaign reports. Brown repeatedly made statements in his emails such as:

“And unlike in California, every dollar you give to NOM’s Northeast Action Plan today is private, with no risk of harassment from gay marriage protestors.”

“Donations to NOM are not tax-deductible and they are NOT public information, either.”

“Your gift is confidential: no public disclosure!”

NOM Stops Money Laundering?

Now that the Maine Ethics Commission will be considering an investigation of NOM on October 1st, poor Brian had to change his money pitch. Now he says in the 3rd paragraph of his email of Friday, September 4th:

“Money is going to be critical to getting the message out; the campaign needs to make ad buys this week, so if you can possibly spare just $10 or $100 this week, do not give it to me — go to StandforMarriageMaine.com and fight back!”

Better late than never, Brian.

Your supporters must identify themselves when they contribute $50 or more to Stand for Marriage Maine. They cannot launder it through your NOM.

That is what we suspect happened with the $250,000 that NOM contributed to Stand for Marriage Maine several weeks ago.

Whoops, the Money Still Goes to NOM!

However, there is one problem with your new approach. In your email pitch for Stand for Marriage Maine, the donate button directs donors to give money to NOM! We tested it out, and a friend gave the minimum amount and put it on his credit card. Sure enough, the contribution went directly to NOM.

Was this done by mistake? Will you disclose all of the contributors’ names of $50 or more to NOM from September 4, 2009 forward to Maine election officials? We certainly hope so.

And we hope that for the remaining two months until Election Day, the National Organization for Marriage and your friends, the Diocese of Portland, the Knights of Columbus of Washington, DC, and James Dobson’s Focus on the Family will fully comply with all Maine election laws. These laws are in place so that voters know who is contributing to their elections before they vote.

FPPC Investigating NOM & Mormon (LDS) Church

I was also particularly interested in your email’s rebuff of another charge that is currently being investigated by the California Fair Political Practices Commission.

You stated that, “The LDS church is not responsible for NOM’s formation, and NOM has never received any promise of assistance from Salt Lake. Salt Lake is not responsible for NOM’s activities and the continued press suggestions are unfair to the the LDS church leadership and to Mormons in America generally.”

Sounds kind of ambiguous to me. What do you mean by “promise of assistance”?

The Mormon Church does not deny its involvement in the Northeast, but its name does not appear on any of the campaign reports.

NPR reported last week that Frank Schubert, who ran the Prop 8 campaign in California last year for the Mormon Church, has come to Maine to do the same thing.

Schubert said, “The reality is that this is a national campaign. People around the country and internationally are looking at what’s going to happen in Maine. Both sides are doing what they can to marshal support wherever they can find support. It will be a pitched battle.”

Come on, the Mormon Church is not running and supporting NOM today?

How Do You Spell F-R-O-N-T G-R-O-U-P?

It’s just your boss, Maggie Gallagher and you doing all that you are doing in 11 states across the country to ban same-sex marriage? You two really must be super-human. And you do all of this work in a little one room office in Washington, DC, with no support staff?

We assumed that the Mormon Church and its renowned Public Affairs Committee in Salt Lake City were making all of your slick TV and radio commercials, doing your polling, fund-raising, web sites, direct mail, robo-calling, direct connects, research and strategy and hiring and working with lobbyists just as they have done in California and many of the other states that have banned same-sex marriage.

Washington Post Story

Saw the nice profile of you in the Washington Post on August 28th. It described you as a new kinder, gentler anti-gay leader. Well, that sure sparked an uproar. It seems that lots of people who know you and all that you have done to fight marriage equality across this country don’t agree. So the Post’s Ombudsman, Andrew Alexander wrote a story entitled, “Sanity and a Smile and an Outpouring of Rage.” It’s great reading. If you haven’t seen it yet, click here.

Transparency

Brian, let’s see your 990 for 2008? And while you’re at it, let’s see your amended 990 for 2007. We requested both 990s in person and by certified mail to your Princeton, New Jersey office way back in early March. Someone signed the U.S. Post Office receipt on March 25th, but you have refused to send us your filings for your first two years in business.

A blogger finally found your amended 990 return for 2007, and it was interesting reading. I particularly like the $166,000 that NOM gave to Common Sense America (CSA). We see that you are its Chairman and that you share your tiny Princeton, NJ office with CSA.

You got $57,000 for 6 months work from NOM in 2007 according the report. That’s pretty good money, plus the $166,000 - $223,000 from June through December 2007? That’s more than President Obama makes in 6 months!

Conclusion

Brian, let’s be honest and abide by both federal and state reporting laws. And please, show us who is giving you all those millions.

Brian Brown’s email to NOM supporters and media:

NOM Marriage News: California Edition

September 4, 2009

Good news! Marriage is now officially on the ballot in Maine this November.

Mainers turned in more than 100,000 signatures asking for the People’s Veto to repeal the gay marriage law. (Vote Yes on One!) After verifying 60,000 signatures the state actually stopped counting!

Money is going to be critical to getting the message out; the campaign needs to make ad buys this week, so if you can possibly spare just $10 or $100 this week, do not give it to me — go to StandforMarriageMaine.com and fight back!

Maggie and I were both in Maine this week. Maggie did a radio show this morning–it’s the Maine equivalent of Hannity and Colmes–the Ken and Mike Morning News show.

Maggie pointed out that you cannot say both that gay marriage is about “equality” and then turn around and claim that “it’s not going to affect anyone else.” Equality arguments don’t lead to live-and-let-live tolerance. They lead to the expansion of government power to repress “bigotry”–i.e., the traditional understanding of marriage.

Gay marriage has real consequences. That’s because gay marriage represents a government’s endorsement of a new moral dogma: There is no difference between same-sex and opposite-sex unions. Maggie pointed out that when gay-marriage advocates repeatedly say the word “equality,” we should pay attention: It means people like you and me, who think the ideal for a child is a mom and dad united in marriage, are going to start getting treated like bigots who oppose interracial marriage.

Ethan (a substitute host filling in for Ken) had a real hard time hearing what Maggie was saying.

I’m not surprised. A certain kind of liberal imagines that he is a diverse, cosmopolitan, and tolerant sort of guy–but too often actually it turns out he lives in a narrow social world filled with people who think just like him. Faced with real diversity–a difference of opinion–he is shocked, shocked that anyone can disagree with him!

“What you are saying sounds like bigotry to me,” he more or less told Maggie. (I’m doing this from memory; I don’t have a transcript, so forgive me!)

Most people get fazed, naturally enough, when they hear that–but not Maggie. “I’ve come to understand, reluctantly,” she told him, “that people like you do hear ideas like ‘Marriage is a union of husband and wife because kids need a mom and dad’ as bigoted. That’s why I want everyone else listening to understand very clearly: When they say ‘equality, equality, equality,’ they are telling you that gay marriage is going to have real consequences for everyone who disagrees with the government’s new definition of marriage.”

We are going to fight hard to protect marriage and religious liberty in Maine and throughout this great country. Thank you for all you do to make the Truth heard loud and clear! (And don’t forget to donate what you can to StandforMarriageMaine at this crucial time!)

I have a question for you: What if they announced gay marriage and no one showed up? That’s the question being raised by Vermont’s tumultous passage of a gay marriage law last spring.

After all the brouhaha, when gay marriages were permitted, only a handful of couples showed up to take advantage–or even to get a license for a future union. (See the AP story “Slow Start: No Rush for Same-Sex Weddings in Vermont,” below.)

We are seeing the same pattern repeated in other jurisdictions which allow gay marriage. When the law is first changed in a country, there is a spurt of symbolic interest. But that quickly dies down as gay marriage is “normalized.” Very few gay marriages take place.

Gay-marriage advocates argued publicly that there is somehow a “conservative case for gay marriage.” Other gay-marriage advocates argued that gay marriage would NOT limit the sexual freedom of gay people or gay culture–it would instead transform the marriage culture.

So far in Vermont, the conservative case for gay marriage is looking pretty anemic.

Meanwhile, in Iowa this week we came within a sliver of knocking off the Democratic candidate for a seat in the state assembly. 100 votes!

My friends will tell you: I’m a guy who hates to lose.

Iowa–just 100 votes. But something really important happened in Iowa’s 90th district: Marriage won!

As I told the press, “Voters in Iowa’s 90th House District voted yesterday to elect Democrat Curt Hanson in a narrow victory of just over 100 votes only after he publicly pledged to support placing such an amendment before the voters of Iowa. The National Organization for Marriage launched an independent expenditure in support of Republican Stephen Burgmeier after he made an early pledge to support placing a pro-marriage constitutional amendment on the ballot. The NOM advertising focused on the marriage issue and the people’s right to vote. In response to NOM elevating marriage as a central issue in the campaign, Curt Hanson made a similar pledge to support placing the issue before voters, which helped cement his narrow victory in a district that has traditionally been a strong Democratic voting district. For example, President Obama carried the district last year by over 1,400 votes.”

With both candidates supporting giving the voters the right to restore marriage in Iowa, marriage was the big winner yesterday. We at NOM appreciate Curt Hanson’s commitment to giving Iowans the right to vote on this issue, and let me promise you: We will be following up with him to help him keep his pledge when the issue next comes up in Des Moines.

A fellow named Adam sent us an email asking some questions. Listen guys, I can’t respond to every blogger who want speak to me, so let me just answer now once and for all:

NOM is an independent organization that is not officially associated with any church. We work with people of all faiths, and with all organizations and communities, religious or secular, who are willing to work to protect marriage as activists, as donors, and as board members. Yes, we welcome and have welcomed the help of LDS church members in all three capacities. The bulk of our supporters tend to be evangelicals and Catholics because the majority of American marriage supporters are Protestant or Catholic.

But we do not ask people’s religious affiliations before accepting their help. “Have you now or have you ever been a Mormon?” is a sort of religious test for participation in democracy which I find personally repugnant and contrary to the spirit of the First Amendment.

Let me be crystal clear: The LDS church is not responsible for NOM’s formation, and NOM has never received any promise of assistance from Salt Lake. We would welcome such assistance, as we would from other faith communities. But Salt Lake is not responsible for NOM’s activities and the continued press suggestions are unfair to the the LDS church leadership and to Mormons in America generally.

Fake complaints take time and energy away from investigating real and serious abuses of the political process. NOM has retained the top legal firm of Bopp and Bostrum to provide us with legal counsel in every state that we operate in. Thanks to their expertise and our firm determination to meet our legal obligations, NOM has never been found to violate any state or federal election law.

Until next week, may God bless you for all your courageous efforts to stand up for marriage!

Brian S. Brown
Executive Director
National Organization for Marriage
20 Nassau Street, Suite 242
Princeton, NJ 08542
bbrown@nationformarriage.org