The Roots of Donor Disclosure Are Uglier Than We Knew

Most progressives, I imagine, favor rules requiring donor disclosure. They don’t like the darkness that obscures the public view of who is pulling political strings via ostensibly apolitical nonprofit organizations. Conservatives oppose donor disclosure requirements. They pretend to champion privacy and free association rights to hide the frequent fact that their fat cat donors who portray themselves as progressive or populist in public are actually the opposite in private.

But it hasn’t always been that way, and I predict it won’t always be that way again. The two sides have switched sides in the past and if things keep going the way they are, the two sides will switch sides again. Or they might even join forces in support of NAACP v. Alabama ex rel. Patterson. During the civil rights era and then again during the red scare, conservatives demanded to know who was donating to or just populating groups thought to be “outside agitators,” communists, or “communist sympathizers.” Progressives preferred – indeed depended on – donor privacy to protect themselves from lynchings, economic oppression, or getting hauled before some crazy Congressional committee and thereafter banished, by mere rumor and inuendo, from Hollywood and the rest of society.

As Trump continues his speech- and thought-based persecution of civil society, I bet progressives will increasingly reject calls for donor disclosure. Donor disclosure will be increasingly dangerous for progressive stakeholders – and eventually for all stakeholders. By the way, I include in the phrase “donor disclosure,” laws or regulations requiring the disclosure not only of those who fund Civil Society, but also those who are members of organizations composing civil society. But right now, conservatives are portraying themselves as the protectors of individual liberty and free association. Progressives not so much.

Earlier this week, the North Carolina legislature gave its final stamp of approval – on party line votes consistent with the current “Republicans for” and “Democrats against” status quo — to a new donor privacy law. The lawmakers sent the bill to the Democratic Governor on Monday. Media reports give no indication whether Governor Stein will sign or veto the measure. Here is the gist of Senate Bill 416:

SECTION 4. Protections Afforded. – Notwithstanding any law, and subject to Section 5 of this act, a public agency shall not do any of the following:

(1) Require any person or nonprofit organization to provide the public agency with personal information or otherwise compel the release of personal information.

(2) Release, publicize, or otherwise publicly disclose personal information in possession of the public agency.

(3) Request or require a current or prospective contractor or grantee with the public agency to provide a list of nonprofit organizations to which the current or prospective contractor or grantee has provided financial or nonfinancial support.

Personal information is not a public record under Chapter 132 of the General Statutes.

“Personal information.” – Any list, record, register, registry, roll, roster, or other compilation of data of any kind that directly or indirectly identifies a person as a member, supporter, volunteer, or donor of financial or nonfinancial support to any nonprofit organization.

Democrats are opposed and Republicans are in favor. But that probably won’t last always.

Jonesing on Nonprofits