Сравнивайте с английским: нажмите на абзац — оригинал откроется в окне. Кнопка EN под абзацем показывает его прямо в тексте.
Содержание
Введение
Тип организации, освобожденной от уплаты налогов в США
Type of U. S. tax exempt organization
Организация 527 или группа 527 — это тип организации, освобожденной от уплаты налогов в США, созданной в соответствии с разделом 527 Налогового кодекса США. Группа 527 создается прежде всего для оказания влияния на отбор, выдвижение, избрание, назначение или поражение кандидатов на федеральные, штатные или местные государственные должности. Технически, почти все политические комитеты, включая комитеты кандидатов штатов, местных и федеральных уровней, традиционные комитеты политических действий (PAC), "Super PAC" и политические партии, являются организациями "527". Однако на практике этот термин обычно применяется только к организациям, которые не регулируются государственными или федеральными законами о финансировании избирательных кампаний, поскольку они не занимаются "прямой агитацией" за избрание или поражение кандидата или партии. Взносы в организации 527 не ограничены верхним пределом, и нет ограничений на круг лиц, которые могут делать взносы. На эти организации не распространяются ограничения по расходам. Организации обязаны регистрироваться в Налоговой службе (IRS), публиковать информацию о своих донорах и регулярно представлять отчеты о взносах и расходах. Поскольку они не могут открыто поддерживать конкретных кандидатов или координировать свои действия с избирательными кампаниями кандидатов, многие организации 527 используются для сбора средств на поддержку общественно-политической деятельности и мобилизацию избирателей. Примерами организаций 527 являются "Ветераны Swift Boat" за правду, Фонд СМИ, "Америка объединяется", Фонд избирателей "Прогресс для Америки" и Проект госсекретаря.
A 527 organization or 527 group is a type of U. S. tax exempt organization organized under Section 527 of the U. S. Internal Revenue Code A 527 group is created primarily to influence the selection, nomination, election, appointment or defeat of candidates to federal, state or local public office. Technically, almost all political committees, including state, local, and federal candidate committees, traditional political action committees (PACs), "Super PACs", and political parties are "527s". However, in common practice the term is usually applied only to such organizations that are not regulated under state or federal campaign finance laws because they do not "expressly advocate" for the election or defeat of a candidate or party. There are no upper limits on contributions to 527s and no restrictions on who may contribute. There are no spending limits imposed on these organizations. The organizations must register with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), publicly disclose their donors and file periodic reports of contributions and expenditures. Because they may not expressly advocate for specific candidates or coordinate with any candidate's campaign, many 527s are used to raise money to spend on issue advocacy and voter mobilization. Examples of 527s are Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, The Media Fund, America Coming Together, the Progress for America Voter Fund, and the Secretary of State Project.
Юридическая история
Раздел 527 Кодекса внутренних доходов был принят в рамках публичного закона № 93-625 3 января 1975 года. В деле *Buckley v. Valeo* Верховный суд США попытался установить предел регулирования политической речи законами о финансировании избирательных кампаний. Суд постановил, что законы о финансировании избирательных кампаний могут распространяться только на партийные и кандидатурные комитеты, организации, основной целью которых является избрание кандидатов, или на высказывания, которые "явно призывают" к избранию или поражению кандидатов. Определение основной цели группы, в свою очередь, зависело от того, является ли "явный призыв" ее основной деятельностью. В примечании 6 к решению по делу *Buckley* Суд ограничил "явный призыв" словами и фразами, такими как "Смит в Конгресс", "избрать", "победить" или другими конкретными призывами к голосованию за или против кандидата. Таким образом, организации могли размещать рекламу, обсуждающую кандидатов и вопросы, не подпадая под ограничения на финансирование кампаний, если избегали такого явного призыва. Закон Маккейна-Фейнголда, также известный как Закон о реформе двухпартийной кампании, распространил определенные ограничения на финансирование кампаний на теле- и радиорекламу, транслируемую в течение 60 дней до всеобщих выборов или 30 дней до праймериз, если в ней упоминался кандидат, независимо от того, содержала она "явный призыв" или нет. Верховный суд подтвердил конституционность этого положения в деле *McConnell v. Federal Election Commission*. На основании этого решения многие призвали Федеральную избирательную комиссию (FEC) использовать свои полномочия для расширения законодательства о финансировании избирательных кампаний и на эти группы. Комиссия провела слушания в апреле 2004 года, чтобы определить, следует ли регулировать организации, действующие по разделу 527, в соответствии с правилами финансирования кампаний, но пришла к выводу, что закон не распространяется на эти независимые организации, если они не призывают напрямую к избранию или поражению кандидата или не участвуют в рекламе, упоминающей кандидатов в течение 30- и 60-дневных периодов, установленных Конгрессом в законе Маккейна-Фейнголда. Тем не менее, решения FEC после выборов 2004 года предприняли попытку расширить сферу действия закона на рекламу, ставящую под сомнение характер и пригодность кандидата к должности, что было специально запрещено для организаций, действующих по разделу 527. 18 сентября 2009 года Федеральный апелляционный суд округа Колумбия постановил, что эти группы имеют право в соответствии с Первой поправкой свободно собирать и тратить средства для влияния на выборы, если они не координируют свою деятельность с кандидатом или партией. В январе 2010 года Верховный суд постановил, что правительство не может запретить корпорациям или профсоюзам тратить деньги на поддержку или критику отдельных кандидатов на выборах. Хотя корпорации или профсоюзы не могут напрямую жертвовать деньги на кампании или координировать свою деятельность с ними, они могут стремиться убедить избирателей через независимые группы расходов. В июле 2010 года Окружной апелляционный суд США по округу Колумбия в деле *Speechnow.org v. Federal Election Commission* отменил ограничения на сбор средств для комитетов, занимающихся только независимыми расходами (обычно известных как Супер-ПАК), которые, как и организации, действующие по разделу 527, могут собирать неограниченные суммы денег от физических лиц, профсоюзов, ассоциаций и корпораций для влияния на выборы. *Speechnow.org v. Federal Election Commission*, 599 F.3d 686 (U.S. C.A.D.C. 2010). Эти ПАК также должны раскрывать свои финансы в FEC и не могут координироваться с кандидатами или политическими партиями. Отличие состоит в том, что Супер-ПАК должны "явно призывать" к поддержке или противодействию кандидату. Решения по делам *Speechnow.org* и *Citizens United* значительно снизили ценность организаций, действующих по разделу 527, как средства политической коммуникации, и их использование существенно сократилось на выборах 2010 и 2012 годов.
Internal Revenue Code section 527 was enacted as part of Public Law No. 93 625 on January 3, 1975. In the case of Buckley v. Valeo, the U. S. Supreme Court attempted to draw a limit on the extent to which campaign finance laws could regulate speech about politics. The Court's answer was that campaign finance laws could reach only party and candidate committees, organizations with the major purpose of electing candidates, or speech that "expressly advocated" the election or defeat of candidates. The determination of whether a group had the major purpose of electing candidates depended, in turn, on whether "express advocacy" was the group's primary activity. In footnote 6 of the Buckley opinion, the Court limited "express advocacy" to words and phrases such as "Smith for Congress", "elect", "defeat", or other specific calls for action to vote for or against a candidate. Thus, organizations could run ads discussing candidates and issues without being subject to campaign finance restrictions, so long as they avoided such express advocacy. The McCain Feingold law, also known as the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, extended certain campaign finance limitations to broadcast advertisements run within 60 days of a general election or 30 days of a primary election if they mentioned a candidate, regardless of whether or not they contained "express advocacy". The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of this provision in McConnell v. Federal Election Commission. Based on that decision, many persons urged the Federal Election Commission (FEC) to use its regulatory power to extend campaign finance laws to cover these groups. The Commission held hearings in April 2004 to determine whether or not 527s should be regulated under campaign finance rules, but concluded that the law did not cover these independent 527 organizations unless they directly advocated the election or defeat of a candidate or engaged in broadcast advertising mentioning within the 30 and 60 day windows specified by Congress in the McCain Feingold law. Nevertheless, Federal Election Commission rulings after the 2004 election attempted to extend the reach of the law to advertisements which questioned a candidate's character and fitness for office off limits to 527s specifically. On September 18, 2009, the Federal Appeals Court in Washington, D. C., ruled that these groups have a First Amendment right to raise and spend freely to influence elections so long as they do not coordinate their activities with a candidate or a party. In January 2010, the Supreme Court held that the government may not keep corporations or unions from spending money to support or denounce individual candidates in elections. While corporations or unions may not give money directly to campaigns or coordinate their activity with campaigns, they may seek to persuade the voting public through independent expenditure groups. In July 2010, the U. S. District Court of Appeals for the D. C. Circuit ruling in Speechnow. org v. Federal Election Commission struck down fundraising limits on independent expenditure only committees, (commonly known as Super PACs) which, like 527s, can raise unlimited amounts of money from individuals, unions, associations and corporations to influence elections. Speechnow. org v. Federal Election Commission, 599 F.3d 686, (U. S. C. A. D. C. 2010). These PACs must also disclose their finances to the FEC and cannot coordinate with candidates or political parties. The difference is that the Super PACs must "expressly advocate" for or against a candidate. The Speechnow. org and Citizens United decisions made 527s much less valuable as a medium of political communication, and their use declined substantially in the elections of 2010 and 2012
In Carey et al. v. FEC – RADM James J. Carey, USN (ret), chairman of the National Defense PAC, along with the PAC and a prospective donor, brought suit after the FEC deadlocked on a 2010 Advisory Opinion Request (see AO 2010 20), in which the PAC sought permission to operate both an independent expenditure PAC and a traditional PAC that could make contributions to candidates and was subject to fundraising restrictions. Carey's victory in the court now allows organizations to operate both traditional and "Super" PACs.
В деле *Carey et al. v. FEC* – RADM James J. Carey, USN (в отставке), председатель National Defense PAC, вместе с самим PAC и потенциальным донором, подали иск после того, как FEC не смогла прийти к согласию по запросу на консультативное заключение от 2010 года (см. AO 2010-20), в котором PAC просил разрешения на одновременное ведение как независимого комитета расходов, так и традиционного ПАК, который мог бы делать взносы кандидатам и подлежал ограничениям на сбор средств. Победа Кэри в суде теперь позволяет организациям вести как традиционные, так и "Супер"-ПАК.
Internal Revenue Code section 527 was enacted as part of Public Law No. 93 625 on January 3, 1975. In the case of Buckley v. Valeo, the U. S. Supreme Court attempted to draw a limit on the extent to which campaign finance laws could regulate speech about politics. The Court's answer was that campaign finance laws could reach only party and candidate committees, organizations with the major purpose of electing candidates, or speech that "expressly advocated" the election or defeat of candidates. The determination of whether a group had the major purpose of electing candidates depended, in turn, on whether "express advocacy" was the group's primary activity. In footnote 6 of the Buckley opinion, the Court limited "express advocacy" to words and phrases such as "Smith for Congress", "elect", "defeat", or other specific calls for action to vote for or against a candidate. Thus, organizations could run ads discussing candidates and issues without being subject to campaign finance restrictions, so long as they avoided such express advocacy. The McCain Feingold law, also known as the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, extended certain campaign finance limitations to broadcast advertisements run within 60 days of a general election or 30 days of a primary election if they mentioned a candidate, regardless of whether or not they contained "express advocacy". The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of this provision in McConnell v. Federal Election Commission. Based on that decision, many persons urged the Federal Election Commission (FEC) to use its regulatory power to extend campaign finance laws to cover these groups. The Commission held hearings in April 2004 to determine whether or not 527s should be regulated under campaign finance rules, but concluded that the law did not cover these independent 527 organizations unless they directly advocated the election or defeat of a candidate or engaged in broadcast advertising mentioning within the 30 and 60 day windows specified by Congress in the McCain Feingold law. Nevertheless, Federal Election Commission rulings after the 2004 election attempted to extend the reach of the law to advertisements which questioned a candidate's character and fitness for office off limits to 527s specifically. On September 18, 2009, the Federal Appeals Court in Washington, D. C., ruled that these groups have a First Amendment right to raise and spend freely to influence elections so long as they do not coordinate their activities with a candidate or a party. In January 2010, the Supreme Court held that the government may not keep corporations or unions from spending money to support or denounce individual candidates in elections. While corporations or unions may not give money directly to campaigns or coordinate their activity with campaigns, they may seek to persuade the voting public through independent expenditure groups. In July 2010, the U. S. District Court of Appeals for the D. C. Circuit ruling in Speechnow. org v. Federal Election Commission struck down fundraising limits on independent expenditure only committees, (commonly known as Super PACs) which, like 527s, can raise unlimited amounts of money from individuals, unions, associations and corporations to influence elections. Speechnow. org v. Federal Election Commission, 599 F.3d 686, (U. S. C. A. D. C. 2010). These PACs must also disclose their finances to the FEC and cannot coordinate with candidates or political parties. The difference is that the Super PACs must "expressly advocate" for or against a candidate. The Speechnow. org and Citizens United decisions made 527s much less valuable as a medium of political communication, and their use declined substantially in the elections of 2010 and 2012
In Carey et al. v. FEC – RADM James J. Carey, USN (ret), chairman of the National Defense PAC, along with the PAC and a prospective donor, brought suit after the FEC deadlocked on a 2010 Advisory Opinion Request (see AO 2010 20), in which the PAC sought permission to operate both an independent expenditure PAC and a traditional PAC that could make contributions to candidates and was subject to fundraising restrictions. Carey's victory in the court now allows organizations to operate both traditional and "Super" PACs.
Общественное мнение
Опрос, проведенный в феврале 2010 года исследовательским центром Пью, показал, что 68 процентов американцев не одобряют решение Верховного суда о разрешении корпорациям осуществлять расходы в поддержку кандидатов во время выборов. Семнадцать процентов одобряют такие расходы, а 15 процентов опрошенных заявили, что затрудняются ответить. Опрос, проведенный в октябре 2010 года Bloomberg, показал, что 47 процентов американцев сказали бы, что с меньшей вероятностью поддержат политического кандидата, если его предвыборную кампанию поддерживают рекламные объявления, оплаченные анонимными бизнес-группами. По данным опроса, 41 процент заявили, что это не повлияет на их решение, а 9 процентов сказали, что с большей вероятностью поддержат кандидата.
A February 2010 poll from the Pew Research Center found that 68 percent of Americans disapprove of the Supreme Court's decision to allow corporations to make expenditures on behalf of candidates during elections. Seventeen percent approve of the expenditures, and 15 percent of respondents said they were unsure. An October 2010 Bloomberg poll found that 47 percent of Americans say they would be less likely to support a political candidate if his campaign was supported by advertising paid for by anonymous business groups. According to the pollster, 41 percent said that it would not matter, and 9 percent said they would be more likely to back the candidate.
Спор на выборах 2004 года
Хотя организации 527 были широко распространены к 1990-м годам, после принятия Закона о двухпартийной реформе избирательных кампаний, который ограничил возможности политических партий по сбору средств, организации 527 приобрели гораздо большую известность и заметность. Swift Boat была одной из таких групп, которая провела противоречивую и весьма эффективную рекламную кампанию, критикующую кандидата от Демократической партии на выборах 2004 года, Джона Керри. Сообщалось, что 9,45 млн долларов поступили всего от трех частных лиц. С либеральной стороны, Джордж Сорос пожертвовал 23,7 млн долларов организациям 527, а Питер Льюис из Progressive Insurance – еще 23,2 млн долларов в 2004 году. Известными организациями 527, поддерживавшими демократов, были America Coming Together, MoveOn.org и Media Fund. Согласно федеральному избирательному законодательству, координация между избирательной кампанией и организацией 527 запрещена. Значительные расходы ключевых организаций 527 на критику кандидатов в президенты привели к подаче жалоб в Федеральную избирательную комиссию (FEC) о незаконной координации между этими организациями и конкурирующими политическими кампаниями. Эти официальные жалобы включали: 5 мая 2004 года Республиканский национальный комитет обвинил MoveOn.org, The Media Fund, America Coming Together и America Votes в координации своих действий с кампанией Джона Керри. 20 августа 2004 года кампания Джона Керри обвинила Swift Boat Veterans for Truth в координации своих действий с кампанией Джорджа Буша-младшего. В 2006 и 2007 годах FEC оштрафовала ряд организаций, включая MoveOn и Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, за нарушения, допущенные в ходе кампании 2004 года. FEC обосновала свои решения тем, что эти группы открыто призывали к избранию или поражению кандидатов, что делало их подлежащими федеральному регулированию и ограничениям на взносы в организации.
Although 527 organizations were in common use by the 1990s, in the wake of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, which limited the ability of political parties to raise money, 527s rose to much greater prominence and visibility. Swift Boat was one such group, which ran controversial and highly effective ads critical of the 2004 Democratic Party candidate, John Kerry. A reported $9.45 million came from just 3 private individuals. On the liberal side, contributor George Soros contributed $23.7 million to 527s, and Peter Lewis of Progressive Insurance contributed another $23.2 million to 527s in 2004. Prominent 527s that supported Democrats included America Coming Together, MoveOn. org, and the Media Fund. Under federal election law, coordination between an election campaign and a 527 group is not allowed. The heavy spending of key 527 groups to attack presidential candidates brought complaints to the Federal Elections Commission of illegal coordination between the groups and rival political campaigns. These formal complaints included:
On May 5, 2004, the Republican National Committee accused MoveOn. org, The Media Fund, America Coming Together and America Votes of coordinating their efforts with the John Kerry campaign. On August 20, 2004, John Kerry's campaign accused Swift Boat Veterans for Truth of coordinating their efforts with the George W. Bush campaign. In 2006 and 2007 the FEC fined a number of organizations, including MoveOn and Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, for violations arising from the 2004 campaign. The FEC's rationale was that these groups had specifically advocated the election or defeat of candidates, thus making them subject to federal regulation and its limits on contributions to the organizations.
2018 избирательный цикл
Некоторые из этих списков идентифицируют материнскую организацию, которая создала группу 527, но также участвует во многих неполитических мероприятиях. Республиканские/консервативные группы выделены розовым цветом, демократические/либеральные группы выделены синим, нейтральные группы не выделены. RankName2018 Fundraising2018 Expenditures1Ассоциация республиканских губернаторов $150,387,931 $167,835,8472Ассоциация демократических губернаторов $95,779,024 $96,371,3763ActBlue $92,101,947 $74,272,4254Комитет республиканского лидерства штатов $45,283,573 $49,998,3825Американская федерация государственных, окружных и муниципальных служащих $41,390,913 $40,318,0346Ассоциация генеральных прокуроров республиканцев $40,640,124 $50,936,2297Комитет демократической кампании по законодательным собраниям штатов $32,918,509 $32,203,1808EMILY's List $28,529,793 $26,332,8389Профсоюз работников сферы обслуживания $27,465,223 $29,319,70510Ассоциация генеральных прокуроров демократов $20,373,246 $20,503,62211Citizens United $18,526,147 $18,828,33712Американская федерация учителей $17,927,893 $21,072,93313Профсоюз строителей $15,974,447 $16,024,11614A Stronger Michigan $15,138,050 $15,138,04915State Victory Action $14,905,000 $14,713,26716Национальный демократический комитет по перераспределению округов $14,221,188 $13,413,92617American Comeback Committee $14,117,837 $15,839,41018Garden State Forward $13,742,250 $4,981,08319Национальная ассоциация риэлторов $13,405,000 $9,017,93720A Stronger Wisconsin $12,062,035 $12,062,035По состоянию на март 2021 года. Источники:
Some of these listings identify a parent organization that has created a 527 group but that also engages in many nonpolitical activities. Republican/conservative leaning groups are highlighted in pink, Democratic/liberal leaning groups are highlighted in blue, neutral groups are not highlighted. RankName2018 Fundraising2018 Expenditures1Republican Governors Association $150,387,931 $167,835,8472Democratic Governors Association $95,779,024 $96,371,3763ActBlue $92,101,947 $74,272,4254Republican State Leadership Committee $45,283,573 $49,998,3825American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees $41,390,913 $40,318,0346Republican Attorneys General Association $40,640,124 $50,936,2297Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee $32,918,509 $32,203,1808EMILY's List $28,529,793 $26,332,8389Service Employees International Union $27,465,223 $29,319,70510Democratic Attorneys General Association $20,373,246 $20,503,62211Citizens United $18,526,147 $18,828,33712American Federation of Teachers $17,927,893 $21,072,93313Laborers Union $15,974,447 $16,024,11614A Stronger Michigan $15,138,050 $15,138,04915State Victory Action $14,905,000 $14,713,26716National Democratic Redistricting Committee $14,221,188 $13,413,92617American Comeback Committee $14,117,837 $15,839,41018Garden State Forward $13,742,250 $4,981,08319National Association of Realtors$13,405,000$9,017,93720A Stronger Wisconsin $12,062,035 $12,062,035As of March 2021. Sources:
Выборы 2008 года
Некоторые из этих списков идентифицируют материнскую организацию, которая создала группу 527, но также участвует во многих неполитических мероприятиях. Демократические/либеральные группы выделены синим цветом, республиканские/консервативные группы – розовым. В общей сложности $303,309,245 было потрачено только этими организациями, $178,397,267 из которых было потрачено демократическими/либеральными группами и $117,112,322 из которых было потрачено республиканскими/консервативными группами.
Some of these listings identify a parent organization that has created a 527 group but that also engages in many nonpolitical activities. Democratic/liberal leaning groups are highlighted in blue, Republican/conservative leaning groups are highlighted in pink. A total of $303,309,245 was spent by these organizations alone, $178,397,267 of which was spent by Democratic/liberal groups and $117,112,322 of which was spent by Republican/conservative groups. RankName2006 Fundraising2006 Expenditures1Republican Governors Association $28,798,367 $15,993,5372Service Employees International Union $25,053,546 $28,212,5103Democratic Governors Association $18,526,787 $8,508,8504America Votes $14,391,893 $14,106,2365EMILY's List $11,776,201 $11,128,0056Republican State Leadership Committee $11,340,863 $10,132,5107American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees $9,599,404 $8,336,5748Club for Growth $7,217,080 $8,157,3839Change to Win $7,061,423 $2,592,37610Progress for America $6,175,025 $13,000,57411International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers $5,538,113 $5,529,06712September Fund $5,230,500 $4,950,86113Economic Freedom Fund $5,050,450 $4,835,80514America Coming Together $4,494,107 $6,998,23815Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee $4,365,495 $3,928,48716Democratic Attorneys General Association $4,083,576 $2,630,35017College Republican National Committee $3,720,110 $10,260,34318Laborers' International Union of North America $3,688,250 $3,762,11019Progressive Majority $3,262,427 $4,845,48620Bluegrass Freedom Fund $3,150,125 $3,135,863As of June 30, 2008. Source: Source:
RankName2006 Fundraising2006 Expenditures
1 Ассоциация республиканских губернаторов $28,798,367 $15,993,537
2 Международный союз служащих $25,053,546 $28,212,510
3 Ассоциация демократических губернаторов $18,526,787 $8,508,850
4 America Votes $14,391,893 $14,106,236
5 EMILY's List $11,776,201 $11,128,005
6 Американский комитет по государственному руководству $11,340,863 $10,132,510
7 Американская федерация государственных, окружных и муниципальных служащих $9,599,404 $8,336,574
8 Club for Growth $7,217,080 $8,157,383
9 Change to Win $7,061,423 $2,592,376
10 Progress for America $6,175,025 $13,000,574
11 Международное братство рабочих электростанций $5,538,113 $5,529,067
12 September Fund $5,230,500 $4,950,861
13 Economic Freedom Fund $5,050,450 $4,835,805
14 America Coming Together $4,494,107 $6,998,238
15 Демократический комитет избирательных кампаний $4,365,495 $3,928,487
16 Ассоциация генеральных прокуроров-демократов $4,083,576 $2,630,350
17 Национальный комитет республиканской молодежи $3,720,110 $10,260,343
18 Профсоюз строителей и отделочников Северной Америки $3,688,250 $3,762,110
19 Progressive Majority $3,262,427 $4,845,486
20 Bluegrass Freedom Fund $3,150,125 $3,135,863
Some of these listings identify a parent organization that has created a 527 group but that also engages in many nonpolitical activities. Democratic/liberal leaning groups are highlighted in blue, Republican/conservative leaning groups are highlighted in pink. A total of $303,309,245 was spent by these organizations alone, $178,397,267 of which was spent by Democratic/liberal groups and $117,112,322 of which was spent by Republican/conservative groups. RankName2006 Fundraising2006 Expenditures1Republican Governors Association $28,798,367 $15,993,5372Service Employees International Union $25,053,546 $28,212,5103Democratic Governors Association $18,526,787 $8,508,8504America Votes $14,391,893 $14,106,2365EMILY's List $11,776,201 $11,128,0056Republican State Leadership Committee $11,340,863 $10,132,5107American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees $9,599,404 $8,336,5748Club for Growth $7,217,080 $8,157,3839Change to Win $7,061,423 $2,592,37610Progress for America $6,175,025 $13,000,57411International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers $5,538,113 $5,529,06712September Fund $5,230,500 $4,950,86113Economic Freedom Fund $5,050,450 $4,835,80514America Coming Together $4,494,107 $6,998,23815Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee $4,365,495 $3,928,48716Democratic Attorneys General Association $4,083,576 $2,630,35017College Republican National Committee $3,720,110 $10,260,34318Laborers' International Union of North America $3,688,250 $3,762,11019Progressive Majority $3,262,427 $4,845,48620Bluegrass Freedom Fund $3,150,125 $3,135,863As of June 30, 2008. Source: Source:
По состоянию на 30 июня 2008 года. Источник: Источник:
Some of these listings identify a parent organization that has created a 527 group but that also engages in many nonpolitical activities. Democratic/liberal leaning groups are highlighted in blue, Republican/conservative leaning groups are highlighted in pink. A total of $303,309,245 was spent by these organizations alone, $178,397,267 of which was spent by Democratic/liberal groups and $117,112,322 of which was spent by Republican/conservative groups. RankName2006 Fundraising2006 Expenditures1Republican Governors Association $28,798,367 $15,993,5372Service Employees International Union $25,053,546 $28,212,5103Democratic Governors Association $18,526,787 $8,508,8504America Votes $14,391,893 $14,106,2365EMILY's List $11,776,201 $11,128,0056Republican State Leadership Committee $11,340,863 $10,132,5107American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees $9,599,404 $8,336,5748Club for Growth $7,217,080 $8,157,3839Change to Win $7,061,423 $2,592,37610Progress for America $6,175,025 $13,000,57411International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers $5,538,113 $5,529,06712September Fund $5,230,500 $4,950,86113Economic Freedom Fund $5,050,450 $4,835,80514America Coming Together $4,494,107 $6,998,23815Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee $4,365,495 $3,928,48716Democratic Attorneys General Association $4,083,576 $2,630,35017College Republican National Committee $3,720,110 $10,260,34318Laborers' International Union of North America $3,688,250 $3,762,11019Progressive Majority $3,262,427 $4,845,48620Bluegrass Freedom Fund $3,150,125 $3,135,863As of June 30, 2008. Source: Source:
Выборы 2004 года
Некоторые из этих списков идентифицируют материнскую организацию, которая создала группу 527, но также занимается множеством неполитических видов деятельности. Демократические/либеральные группы выделены синим цветом, республиканские/консервативные группы – розовым. В общей сложности этими организациями было потрачено 439 709 105 долларов США, из которых 307 324 096 долларов США было потрачено демократическими/либеральными группами и 132 385 009 долларов США – республиканскими/консервативными группами.
Some of these listings identify a parent organization that has created a 527 group but that also engages in many nonpolitical activities. Democratic/liberal leaning groups are highlighted in blue, Republican/conservative leaning groups are highlighted in pink. A total of $439,709,105 was spent by these organizations alone, $307,324,096 of which was spent by Democratic/liberal groups and $132,385,009 of which was spent by Republican/conservative groups. RankName2004 Fundraising2004 Expenditures1America Coming Together $79,795,487 $78,040,4802Joint Victory Campaign 2004* $71,811,666 $72,588,0533Media Fund $59,414,183 $57,694,5804Service Employees International Union $48,385,367 $47,695,6465Progress For America $44,929,174 $35,631,3786Republican Governors Association $33,848,421 $34,301,8897Democratic Governors Association $24,172,761 $24,125,9388American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees $22,227,050 $22,332,5879Swift Vets and POWs for Truth $17,008,090 $22,565,36010MoveOn. org $12,956,215 $21,565,80311College Republican National Committee $12,780,126 $17,260,65512New Democrat Network $12,726,158 $12,524,06313Citizens for a Strong Senate $10,853,730 $10,228,51514Republican State Leadership Committee $10,762,907 $10,682,31215Club for Growth $10,645,976 $11,943,41516Sierra Club $8,727,127 $6,261,81117EMILY's List $7,739,946 $8,100,75218Voices for Working Families $7,466,056 $7,202,69519AFL–CIO $6,583,572 $6,473,11020League of Conservation Voters $6,049,500 $5,078,116As of June 30, 2008. *Joint Victory Campaign 2004 is a joint fund raising committee run by America Coming Together and the Media Fund. Money raised by JVC is divided between these two beneficiaries. Combining receipts for these three groups would result in double counting.
РангНазваниеСбор средств в 2004 годуРасходы в 2004 году
1 America Coming Together 79 795 487 $78 040 480
2 Joint Victory Campaign 2004* 71 811 666 $72 588 053
3 Media Fund 59 414 183 $57 694 580
4 Service Employees International Union 48 385 367 $47 695 646
5 Progress For America 44 929 174 $35 631 378
6 Republican Governors Association 33 848 421 $34 301 889
7 Democratic Governors Association 24 172 761 $24 125 938
8 American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees 22 227 050 $22 332 587
9 Swift Vets and POWs for Truth 17 008 090 $22 565 360
10 MoveOn.org 12 956 215 $21 565 803
11 College Republican National Committee 12 780 126 $17 260 655
12 New Democrat Network 12 726 158 $12 524 063
13 Citizens for a Strong Senate 10 853 730 $10 228 515
14 Republican State Leadership Committee 10 762 907 $10 682 312
15 Club for Growth 10 645 976 $11 943 415
16 Sierra Club 8 727 127 $6 261 811
17 EMILY's List 7 739 946 $8 100 752
18 Voices for Working Families 7 466 056 $7 202 695
19 AFL–CIO 6 583 572 $6 473 110
20 League of Conservation Voters 6 049 500 $5 078 116
Some of these listings identify a parent organization that has created a 527 group but that also engages in many nonpolitical activities. Democratic/liberal leaning groups are highlighted in blue, Republican/conservative leaning groups are highlighted in pink. A total of $439,709,105 was spent by these organizations alone, $307,324,096 of which was spent by Democratic/liberal groups and $132,385,009 of which was spent by Republican/conservative groups. RankName2004 Fundraising2004 Expenditures1America Coming Together $79,795,487 $78,040,4802Joint Victory Campaign 2004* $71,811,666 $72,588,0533Media Fund $59,414,183 $57,694,5804Service Employees International Union $48,385,367 $47,695,6465Progress For America $44,929,174 $35,631,3786Republican Governors Association $33,848,421 $34,301,8897Democratic Governors Association $24,172,761 $24,125,9388American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees $22,227,050 $22,332,5879Swift Vets and POWs for Truth $17,008,090 $22,565,36010MoveOn. org $12,956,215 $21,565,80311College Republican National Committee $12,780,126 $17,260,65512New Democrat Network $12,726,158 $12,524,06313Citizens for a Strong Senate $10,853,730 $10,228,51514Republican State Leadership Committee $10,762,907 $10,682,31215Club for Growth $10,645,976 $11,943,41516Sierra Club $8,727,127 $6,261,81117EMILY's List $7,739,946 $8,100,75218Voices for Working Families $7,466,056 $7,202,69519AFL–CIO $6,583,572 $6,473,11020League of Conservation Voters $6,049,500 $5,078,116As of June 30, 2008. *Joint Victory Campaign 2004 is a joint fund raising committee run by America Coming Together and the Media Fund. Money raised by JVC is divided between these two beneficiaries. Combining receipts for these three groups would result in double counting.
По состоянию на 30 июня 2008 года. *Joint Victory Campaign 2004 – это совместный комитет по сбору средств, возглавляемый America Coming Together и Media Fund. Средства, собранные JVC, распределяются между этими двумя получателями. Объединение поступлений для этих трех групп привело бы к двойному учету.
Some of these listings identify a parent organization that has created a 527 group but that also engages in many nonpolitical activities. Democratic/liberal leaning groups are highlighted in blue, Republican/conservative leaning groups are highlighted in pink. A total of $439,709,105 was spent by these organizations alone, $307,324,096 of which was spent by Democratic/liberal groups and $132,385,009 of which was spent by Republican/conservative groups. RankName2004 Fundraising2004 Expenditures1America Coming Together $79,795,487 $78,040,4802Joint Victory Campaign 2004* $71,811,666 $72,588,0533Media Fund $59,414,183 $57,694,5804Service Employees International Union $48,385,367 $47,695,6465Progress For America $44,929,174 $35,631,3786Republican Governors Association $33,848,421 $34,301,8897Democratic Governors Association $24,172,761 $24,125,9388American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees $22,227,050 $22,332,5879Swift Vets and POWs for Truth $17,008,090 $22,565,36010MoveOn. org $12,956,215 $21,565,80311College Republican National Committee $12,780,126 $17,260,65512New Democrat Network $12,726,158 $12,524,06313Citizens for a Strong Senate $10,853,730 $10,228,51514Republican State Leadership Committee $10,762,907 $10,682,31215Club for Growth $10,645,976 $11,943,41516Sierra Club $8,727,127 $6,261,81117EMILY's List $7,739,946 $8,100,75218Voices for Working Families $7,466,056 $7,202,69519AFL–CIO $6,583,572 $6,473,11020League of Conservation Voters $6,049,500 $5,078,116As of June 30, 2008. *Joint Victory Campaign 2004 is a joint fund raising committee run by America Coming Together and the Media Fund. Money raised by JVC is divided between these two beneficiaries. Combining receipts for these three groups would result in double counting.