I wrote last week that the secretary of state’s decision on whether to force New Mexico Youth Organized (NMYO) to comply with the state’s campaign reporting laws could have far-reaching implications in
One of the organizations such a decision would ostensibly affect, SouthWest Organizing Project (SWOP), has some strong words in a blog posting on its Web site about a potential decision to classify groups like it as political committees.
“We know the rules and we follow the rules. As a non-partisan organization we have been diligent and careful about our advocacy efforts. We are confident that in nearly 30 years of existence we have never crossed the line,” the posting from the group states.
You can read the full posting by clicking here.
SouthWest Organizing Project has joined NMYO and other nonprofits in what they call a legislative accountability campaign that has included mailers targeting lawmakers. Attorney General Gary King has told the secretary of state that NMYO’s mailers cross the line between issue advocacy and political campaigning and advised the secretary of state to force NMYO to regularly report contributions and expenditures publicly, just like candidates, campaigns and political action committees.
King says he’s interested in the issue because many nonprofits are engaging in the same type of activism as NMYO. The secretary of state is expected to announce its decision today, and NMYO has threatened to sue if that office changes its status.
‘Leading the charge’
The SWOP blog posting states that its mission to “empower the disenfranchised to realize equality and justice” inevitably means the group faces “tremendous opposition from those maintaining the status quo — a status quo that has left New Mexicans ranked at the bottom of practically every social indicator” including education and health care.
“For us, it is not enough that the nonprofit sector simply work to alleviate the symptoms of poverty and racism. In addition to organizing, it is our duty to question the actions of decision makers that perpetuate relentless poverty and growing inequality,” the blog posting states.
For 30 years, the posting states, the group has “consistently communicated to our constituents the voting records and campaign contributors of elected officials, urging them to communicate with their elected officials directly. We call this accountability and speaking truth to power.”
The posting states that much of the focus of the controversy, instead of being about the targeted lawmakers’ voting records, has been about “a red herring called funding disclosure.”
“Let’s be clear: this is not about funding disclosure. We are very transparent and willingly share our sources of funding to anyone who asks up to the minute, as we have throughout our three decades as a 501c3,” the posting states. “This is about our right to free speech, and powerful interests who don’t like what we are saying.”
The posting concludes by stating that if the attorney general, secretary of state, media and public “wish to have a genuine conversation about how to improve the ethics of political actors in this state, they will find us where we have always been: leading the charge.”