RMaguire

Mr. Potter, this is a somewhat wonky question, but why does the FEC not require non-committee organizations filing 24/48hr reports to declare the legal classification of their incorporation. By that, I mean, when a group that has a cmteid starting with C3, C7, or C9 files a report, couldn't there be a set of check boxes that say 501(c)(4), 501(c)(6), 527, for-profit corporation, etc. and they check one. It would only take a second for the filers, and it would create at least some clarity in a system where the same organization often has its own 501(c)(4), 501(c)(5), super PAC and 527 at the same address, run by the same people. The super PAC is easy enough to tell by its cmteID, but sometimes the others can be maddening.

For 501(c)s in particular, this would be helpful because it would notify the public that a new 501(c) has been formed, even though the IRS hasn't yet granted exempt status, which can take years (Crossroads GPS still doesn't have exempt status).

More generally, what information do you think the FEC could ask of 501(c) organizations, given that the IRS isn't set up to deal with nonprofit transparency in a timely manner. For example, even if the FEC can't require donors to be disclosed, could it at least require that the group filing the 24hr report include its total expenditures to date for that cycle? That way, at least there would be some accountability in terms of the "primary" purpose rule for social welfare groups.

I realize the FEC is deadlocked, but in a perfect world, what information could/would the FEC require of non-disclosing groups filing expenditure reports?

Bonus question: It's never been clear to me why 501(c)s have been liberated by Citizen United. I understand the part about corporate donations, but if they're still not disclosing the sources of the funding --despite the fact that the Supreme Court almost unanimously upheld the imperative for disclosure in political spending -- then shouldn't they be banned from spending? Why does the second part of the Citizens United decision not seem to hold the weight of the better known part of the decision?

In my defense, "somewhat" was in the first sentence I wrote. How was I to know it would turn into such a long question? ;)