The Kansas Meadowlark

Nov 16, 2007
(updated Dec 10, 2007)

Integrity of Kansas Elections Less Important to IRS 
than "Privacy Rights" of Groups Abusing Non-Profit Laws

Related:    Salina Journal Blog entry     Wichita Eagle Blog Open Thread

The IRS is ignoring the rights of the citizens of Kansas to know anything about two non-profit groups that spent a total of at least $450,000 in the November 2006 elections.  These "non-profits," acting like Political Action Committees (PACs), sent political mailings in the two weeks before the elections against several candidates:

  • "Progress Kansas" sent three mailings in at least five different State Representative races around the state, with two of those contests so close there were recounts, and one of the recounts was decided by only two votes.

  • "Kansans for Consumer Privacy Protection" sent as many as six mailings in many parts of Kansas to support Paul Morrison for Attorney General.

Multiple Addresses.  The links above are to the articles of incorporation filed with the Kansas Secretary of State, which show both organizations are "non-profits" and share a common incorporator, Jeffrey L. Stowell, 2121 New Hampshire, Lawrence 66046.  Both non-profits used multiple addresses, which complicates requests for information from the IRS:

The Kansas Secretary of State's web site now shows this corporation has gone out of existence:  "Status:  Forfeited - Failed to Timely File"  and its address changed to 123 W 8th Street, Suite 210, Lawrence  66044.  This non-profit only existed long enough to send negative mailings against targeted State Reps in the two weeks before the Nov 2006 elections.  

Known Money Raised/Spent by "Non-Profits."  Little is known how much money these non-profits had, except for this:

  • "Progress Kansas" received contributions from three sources:  The Greater Kansas City Chamber of Commerce PAC ($25,000 + $3775), The Greater Kansas City Women's Political Fund PAC ($3000), and the Kansas NEA PAC ($15,000).  Thus, Progress Kansas "non-profit" received at least $46,775 from three PACs.  If Progress Kansas were an IRS 501(c)4 organization, it should have filed an IRS 8872 or IRS 990 form but none have been found.  [The donation from the KC Women's Political Fund was mailed c/o Paul Dean to the 123 W. 8th St address in Lawrence.]  

  • "Kansans for Consumer Privacy Protection" raised at least $400,000 according to a Topeka-Capital Journal article, Tiller's influence on state debated.  The only known contribution to this non-profit was $95,700 from the ProKanDo PAC. If Progress Kansas were an IRS 501(c)4 organization, it should have filed an IRS 8872 or IRS 990 form but none have been found. It's not clear how the Kansans for Consumer Privacy Protection "non-profit" can return $34,000 to the ProKanDo PAC, but with an unknown tax exempt status from the IRS, it's not clear which laws might even apply. 

IRS Status of Kansas Non-Profits.

  • A request was sent to the IRS in Ogden, UT on March 26, 2007  to find out the tax exempt status of these two new Kansas non-profits.  A reply on May 8, 2007 from the IRS in Ogden, UT said:  "We are unable to provide photocopies of the return because our records show this organization does not have an approved application as a tax-exempt organization under 501(A) of the Internal Revenue Code."   The Ogden, UT IRS office forwarded the request for information to the Cincinnati IRS office.  

  • A June 20, 2007 response from the IRS in Cincinnati said this about both groups:  "We have no record of the tax-exempt status for this organization under 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code.  Therefore, we have no documents to provide in response to your request."  In a subsequent phone call, the IRS Cincinnati office suggested the IRS office in Dallas could perhaps shed light on why no exempt organization classification had ever been made.

  • The Dallas IRS office replied on Sept 11, 2007 to a Sept 3 letter of inquiry and said:  "We cannot disclose what action, if any, the IRS has taken or may take with respect to the information you have provided us."  

  • The Dallas IRS office did not return a phone call today (Nov 16, 2007), but the Cincinnati IRS office talked to me about these non-profits.  However, the Cincinnati IRS office said they could not tell me what status these Kansas non-profits have with the IRS, and to protect their privacy no information will ever be known about these groups.  I asked the IRS about the rights of the citizens of Kansas to have fair, open and honest elections, but the IRS official declined any comment.  In fact, the IRS official claimed there is NO APPEAL to such information requests and no information will ever be released about these non-profits.  These Kansas non-profits are NOT 501(c)3s, 501(c)4s, or a 527 PAC.  It's not clear what their tax exempt status is, and the IRS will not make any comment how it's possible to be a Kansas "non profit" and not have a status the IRS will reveal.  

Some non-profits in Kansas, who had asked for extensions in their IRS 990 filings, had to mail them to the IRS yesterday on Nov 15.  With these political non-profits being new in 2006, it's still possible they waited till the very last minute to file IRS 990s and the IRS will need some time to process them.  What I don't understand is how the IRS cannot know about these groups if they've filed for an extension in a filing deadline?

There's something very wrong when a "non-profit" only exists to send political mailings in the weeks before an election, yet no one at the IRS seems to care.  This is a corrupt system and violation of equal protection under federal laws, whether or not this is technically legal according to the IRS.

UPDATE

The Greater Kansas City Chamber of Commerce PAC, BizPAC, published their 2006 Annual Report online.  This report lists non-profit  "Progress Kansas" as one of the committees "who received 2006 contributions from the BizPAC Special Funds for Life Sciences and Higher Education".  Why are Kansas voters left in the dark about this while only the Greater Kansas City Chamber, the KNEA, and the Greater Kansas City Women's Political Caucus are allowed to know anything about this mysterious "non proft"?

 

Related:

 
efg

K a n s a s M e a d o w l a r k @ g m a i l . c o m