What’s going on with all the fraud in the United States, and why has it gotten so bad? Why isn’t anyone managing the money they give away? Who is getting the kickbacks, or is it to buy votes? Obviously, it wasn’t too hard to figure out, because Nick Shirley exposed a big part of it. Why won’t Tim Waltz look into fraud and find out how this happened? All he had to do was assure his constituents and the rest of the United States that he would investigate where the money is going and prevent this from happening again.
He could have told us that the people who scammed us out of billions will be held accountable. Send them to jail and get back whatever assets or money you can find. He could have changed the public’s perception of himself and addressed it. It’s not his money, and he was sworn in to serve the public. When you don’t protect the people’s money and have no checks and balances in place, this is what happens.
His solution is not run for a third term. Could you imagine if he became the Vice President of the United States and all this came out afterwards? Would the democrats cry impeachment? Would they force him to step down? I’m sure Republicans would be all over it, but would they do anything to fix it?
Most likely, fraud is happening in every state, and until the federal and local governments start auditing where the money is being spent, it will not stop. I’m not hearing much from other state politicians about fraud or whether they are looking at the books. Why wouldn’t any Republican or Democrat not want to stop fraud? Isn’t this a wake-up call that something needs to change? Especially, with fraud being exposed every day in other states.
How did we get here, and when will it stop? When will politicians start doing their job and work for their constituents? Why don’t they follow the same laws and regulations that the American people have to? Why are they able to become millionaires by voting for new regulations and laws that put money in their pockets and not the American people?
One of the main problems with ongoing fraud is that very few people are held accountable. There is all this talk from politicians about prosecuting people who stole money, but it rarely happens. For some reason, it seems that whatever politicians do, both Republicans and Democrats get away with it. Until we make these politicians accountable for their actions, nothing will change.
To avoid identifying large donors, politicians receive donations from Non-Profit (501(c)(4), 501(c)(5), 501(c)(6) organizations, which don’t have to disclose their donors. This allows certain donor groups to avoid disclosing their identities and donate unlimited amounts of money to a candidate or Super PAC. They can spend money on lobbying and political ads to influence an election without penalty.
Sections 501(c)(3), 501(c)(4), 501(c)(5), and 501(c)(6) organizations were put in place over a century ago to grant tax-exempt status to organizations that were helping people, not for political campaign donations. It wasn’t until 2010 that the Supreme Court ruled in Citizens United v. FEC that corporations and unions should have the same First Amendment free speech rights as individuals. Basically, the government can’t control political spending. This led to unlimited spending by allowing individual donors to use Section 501(c)(4) organizations to donate unlimited money for political causes or campaigns.
Also in 2010, the lower court ruled in SpeechNow.org v. FEC, which allowed the creation of Super PACs. This led to unlimited spending by outside groups, such as corporations, unions, and others, through the creation of Super PACs. This led to nonprofits, corporations, and unions spending unlimited funds against candidates as long as they didn’t work directly with the campaign. This helped increase election spending from approximately $144 million in 2008 to $2.7 billion in 2024.
501(c)(4) organizations are social welfare organizations that can receive unlimited donations from corporations or individuals. These nonprofits are the most common kind of dark money. They can use the money for political ads, lobbying, and sending money to Super PACs, all while paying no taxes. Because they are social welfare organizations, they do not have to disclose their donors. To keep tax-exempt status, their main activity must be social welfare, not political activity. They can use the money to get out the vote, influence legislation, or run political ads that support or attack candidates, while claiming it’s to inform the public, which is considered public welfare.
Then you have 501(c)(5) organizations. These are labor and agricultural groups, and they, too, can engage in political activities like 501(c)(4) restrictions. These donations are mostly funded by union dues. Examples are SEIU, AFL-CO and AFSCME.
Finally, you have 501(c)(6) organizations. These are business leagues, chambers of commerce, real estate boards, and trade associations. They, too, can engage in political activity under the same guidelines as 501(c)(4) organizations.
Only 501(c)(3) organizations are prevented from political campaign activities because they are charitable organizations.
An example of how it works: a donor donates $2 million to a 501(c)(4) organization. They may use some of the money for get-out-the-vote efforts but then send the rest of the money to Super PACs. Therefore, they inform the public (social welfare), then donate the rest. The Super PAC then reports the donation as a 501(c)(4), so the donor’s name stays secret. Basically, the money keeps flowing.
To change section 501(c)(4), 501(c)(5), and 501(c)(6) to prohibit organizations from spending money to influence election outcomes would require a change at the legislative level. It is the politicians themselves who would have to change the law. Both the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives would have to change the law to prohibit organizations from spending money to influence a candidate. Because it was established by Congress, it can’t be put to a ballot measure. It’s the same process for local governments, too.
Why does no one in Washington DC talk about this? Why would 501(c)(4), 501(c)(5), and 501(c)(6) organizations be taxed exempt. Should there not be limits on how much a candidate can raise for an election? Wouldn’t it be a fair election if all candidates had the same amount of money to spend?
Unfortunately, I don’t know of any politician who would want to change this law, because they benefit from unlimited donations without having to disclose donors. The donor is more than happy with this because they can influence an election, and no one knows who they are.
George Soros uses 501(c)(4) to help funnel money for his political agenda. He is using groups such as the Open Society Policy Center and the Fund for Policy Reform to support left-leaning nonprofits. Because he is donating to a 501(c)(4) organization, he does not have to disclose his identity.
Then there is Ken Griffin, who is known to use 501 (c)(4) organizations to donate to right-leaning nonprofits. In 2020, he donated $53 million to oppose an Illinois fair tax amendment for taxpayers making over $250,000 a year. Governor Pritzker also used a 501(c)(4) to pour over $50 million of his own money into supporting the amendment. The amendment failed.
Do your research before your vote. Is your representative about helping you or their own political gain and getting rich off the taxpayers? It’s time to hold politicians accountable for their actions and vote them out.