Taxpayer Money Used In Same-Sex Marriage Fight

No. The OP refers to lobbying on behalf of political causes, using taxpayer money, which is illegal.

It's not illegal to obtain grants for certain activities merely because those activities happen to be politically controversial.

The group in the OP used taxpayer funds to lobby for (or against) certain laws. That's illegal.

If you have proof of another group doing the same, please point it out.

 

The state must support only straight families, therefore it is ok if the tax money are used against same-sex marriages.

 

Easily.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/may/6/nprs-taxpayer-funded-lobbyists/

Nothing has changed from my original statement. He has no problem using taxpayer money for political causes he supports but goes after those who use it to fund groups who don't support his causes.



Now what?

 

That's an Editorial. I was looking for actual facts. I would point out the editorial says that NPR hired a lobbying firm, but it doesn't say how NPR paid for the lobbying firm.

The problem in the OP was that the organization did not segregate funds.

Do you have proof "he has no problem using taxpayer money for political causes he supports"?

 

Do you have any proof NPR does or is this just blind hope on your part?

Already posted with links. How could you have possibly missed it?


More:

State governments, local governments, public universities, transportation authorities, and public water utilities spent an astonishing $132.7 million on federal lobbying in 2006, up 148 percent from an already sizable $53.6 million in 1998. Across this entire period, taxpayer-funded lobbying of Congress totaled at least $875.9 million.

The largest spending increases for lobbying were made by local governments and public universities. Local-government lobbying of the federal government jumped 193 percent (from $20.3 million to $59.5 million) between 1998 and 2006. Public universities increased their spending on federal lobbying efforts by 213 percent (from $10.1 million to $31.7 million) in that period.

http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...ed-lobbying-fuels-big-government/phil-kerpen#[/i]

It was so out of hand a republican actually passed a law to stop it.

In what could be a first, a measure designed to put an end to the dubious practice of state entities using taxpayer dollars to lobby the General Assembly has become law.

Rep. Eric Bedingfield, R-Greenville, sponsored the crackdown on taxpayer-funded lobbying as a proviso in the state budget for the current 2011-12 fiscal year.

“The way I look at it is if they’re an agency of the state they should come speak to the representatives directly,” Bedingfield says. “There shouldn’t be a (lobbyist) middleman.”

Saving South Carolina taxpayers a little more than $600,000, the proviso targets both contract lobbying and influence peddling at the State House by employees of state entities.

The proviso (90.20) might be the first of its kind.

A search of state budgets archived on the Legislature’s website dating back to the 1996-97 fiscal year shows that nothing like the proviso has passed in at least 15 years. It is unclear whether something akin to it was on the books previously.

Bedingfield says numerous efforts to ban state-funded lobbying in Columbia were made in recent years, but to no avail. “I think this is the first time it’s ever made it through both bodies,” he says of the proviso clearing the House and the Senate.

http://scthenerve.wordpress.com/2011/07/21/temporary-ban-on-taxpayer-funded-lobbying-passes/


Are you now getting the point this case isn't isolated to conservative groups? Can you be honest enough to admit that?

 

Their duly-filed tax returns, which (if they were failing to segregate funds) would result in loss of their nonprofit status and IRS tax fines.

The burden is on you to prove another organization had similar unlawful activity in their accounting, since you are the one who made the claim. It's not my burdent to prove the negative.

Those weren't political causes. They were using taxpayer funds for purposes which you happen to find controversial.

Performing an abortion is not a "political cause," it's a medical procedure (or whatever, call it murder... Still not a political cause). Paying someone to go to Washington and lobby for more access to abortions is a political cause.

See the difference?

State and local governments are not nonprofit "groups," they're government subdivisions. It's not illegal for government subdivisions to lobby. It is illegal for nonprofits, such as the OP, to lobby.

 

Your article doesn't say how much of the $2.2 million was used inappropriately, how much was it?

 

Why does it matter? It was still used illegally.

 

If it was $50, I'm sure they'll pay it back. Since the article didn't mention how much, I'm sure it was an embarrassingly small amount.

Do you hold Tiny Tim Geithner to the same standards? He failed to pay all his income tax which is illegal?