Post by lucyg on Apr 26, 2019 20:08:54 GMT
![MizIndependent Avatar](http://storage.proboards.com/5645536/avatar/sxjR0QrcuJpMNDvADyyZ.png)
![lucyg Avatar](http://storage.proboards.com/5645536/avatar/JWXLYsIGsqrmtHwLmkFy.jpeg)
My claim comes directly from the article:
Now, as she tries to become the first African-American woman elected governor of any state, Abrams won’t say where the money came from, even though the two foundations paid her, over three years, nearly half a million dollars. [Source: AJC.com: "Voter drive raised millions, but Abrams won’t say from whom"
I never said it was undiscoverable...just that she isn't admitting it and therefore is lacking transparency. So the question is why doesn't she want to admit it?
Is it their poor performance under her guidance?
The foundations’ work underwhelmed many of Abrams’ fellow Democrats. Their party got just 3 percent more votes for governor in 2014 than in 2010, and turnout among African-American voters declined by more than 2 percentage points.
Or that it is possible she used it to make connections for later use?
Or perhaps it's because the entire purpose of the non-profits was to launch her into the governor's race?
But for Abrams, the registration drive was a success. It introduced her to wealthy progressive activists across the country, some of whom are now spending millions of dollars supporting her gubernatorial campaign. It also led to a fraud investigation by the state Board of Elections, the source of lingering animosity between Abrams and her Republican opponent for governor, Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp.
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reviewed public tax filings by Abrams’ foundations, her personal financial disclosures, tax returns of organizations that supported her, and records of the Board of Elections investigation. The documents, as well as interviews with Republican and Democratic politicians and operatives, suggest the foundations’ greatest successes lie in creating the infrastructure that undergirds Abrams’ gubernatorial campaign.
“Absolutely, 100 percent, no doubt,” the foundations set the stage for the campaign, a former Democratic candidate said. Like others, the former candidate spoke on condition of anonymity, citing a fear of political retaliation for what might be perceived as criticism of the party’s nominee.
For years, another Democrat said, Abrams made no secret that she planned to run for governor in 2018, “so how shocking is it that a politician would set up committees to get money to help get them somewhere?”
Federal law does not require tax-exempt foundations like Abrams’ to publicly identify contributors. Nor does the law prohibit disclosure, and many organizations routinely publish donor lists.
But the lack of transparency by foundations so closely tied to a prominent politician reinforces public cynicism, ethics advocates said.
“Are these groups, are these people going to have any influence with, potentially, our next governor?” said Sara Henderson, executive director of Common Cause Georgia, a watchdog group. “You would think turning over at least some of the information would be in her best interest and the voters’ interest.”
Abrams’ campaign declined to make her available for an interview. A spokeswoman, Priyanka Mantha, would not comment on Abrams’ reasons for withholding donor names.
On Friday, the campaign issued a statement in which Abrams said: “I’m proud of New Georgia Project’s efforts to register, advocate for, and mobilize hundreds of thousands of Georgians and successfully combat voter suppression being perpetrated by Secretary of State Brian Kemp.” [Source: AJC.com: "Voter drive raised millions, but Abrams won’t say from whom"
For years, another Democrat said, Abrams made no secret that she planned to run for governor in 2018, “so how shocking is it that a politician would set up committees to get money to help get them somewhere?”
Federal law does not require tax-exempt foundations like Abrams’ to publicly identify contributors. Nor does the law prohibit disclosure, and many organizations routinely publish donor lists.
But the lack of transparency by foundations so closely tied to a prominent politician reinforces public cynicism, ethics advocates said.
“Are these groups, are these people going to have any influence with, potentially, our next governor?” said Sara Henderson, executive director of Common Cause Georgia, a watchdog group. “You would think turning over at least some of the information would be in her best interest and the voters’ interest.”
Abrams’ campaign declined to make her available for an interview. A spokeswoman, Priyanka Mantha, would not comment on Abrams’ reasons for withholding donor names.
On Friday, the campaign issued a statement in which Abrams said: “I’m proud of New Georgia Project’s efforts to register, advocate for, and mobilize hundreds of thousands of Georgians and successfully combat voter suppression being perpetrated by Secretary of State Brian Kemp.” [Source: AJC.com: "Voter drive raised millions, but Abrams won’t say from whom"
I am not arguing all those points with you, pro or con. She may very well be in the wrong there. However, they are not alleging she broke campaign laws.
Your original post on this subject claimed that she refused to disclose where her campaign donations came from. That was not the case.
There is a difference between earning income and/or collecting donations to a non-profit in secretive but legal ways that you personally may disagree with, and breaking the law by refusing to disclose your campaign donors.