HOUGHTON — Legislators, governors, judges — even prosecuting attorneys– are all for sale in Lansing, depending on which nonprofit can match the price tag. Organized under 501c status of the Internal Revenue Code, nonprofit, tax-exempt groups can legally engage in varying amounts of political activity. They are generally not required to disclose their donors to the public, because they are not technically classified as political organizations.

Groups such as super PACs, or “independent expenditure-only political action committees,” are permitted to raise unlimited sums of money from individuals, organizations and corporations, but they are not permitted to coordinate spending with political parties or candidates. They are, however, permitted to engage in unlimited political spending independently of campaigns. They are not, however, permitted to coordinate or contribute to campaigns or party funding accounts. Super PACs can raise funds from individuals, corporations, unions, and other groups without any legal limit on donation size. Much of this dark money is spent of TV, radio, and social media advertising, but as the Center for Responsive Politics’ OpenSecrets.org points out, dark money is a major concern.

“Citizens who are barraged with political messages paid for with money from undisclosed sources may not be able to consider the credibility and possible motives of the wealthy corporate or individual funders behind those messages,” the website states. Large donors do not make contributions unless they want something in return.

“When we don’t know the identity of donors – whose contributions are multiples of Michigan’s annual per capita income – we can’t know what considerations are sought, and what considerations are granted,” stated a 2018 Michigan Campaign Finance Network article titled “Dark Money and Justice: Michigan is Like no other state.

It cannot be know when ethical, even legal, lines have been crossed, the Campaign Finance Network article stated, adding: “Transparency is inoculation against corruption. Dark money conceals corruption. Dark money is particularly troublesome in political campaigns related to the administration of justice.”

For example, Progressive Advocacy Trust (PAT) was created in 2011, as an administrative account of the Ingham County Democratic Party, a relationship its spokesman and former treasurer have cited when claiming exemptions to campaign finance laws. But the local party has distanced itself from the account, which is run by an outside board of managers that a spokesman has repeatedly refused to identify.

The Michigan Republican Party and Michigan Democratic Party have both used their own dark money administrative accounts to influence elections without disclosing donors. They do so through so-called issue advertising that is exempt from state disclosure laws as long as it does not directly advocate for the election or defeat of a candidate.

But since 2002, local Democratic accounts have spent on candidates in contested primaries, drawing the ire of liberal activists sensitive to party favoritism in the wake of the contentious 2016 presidential primary between U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders and nominee Hillary Clinton.

Progressive Advocacy Trust was the second largest contributor to organizations that ran ads featuring Gretchen Whitmer before her primary and general election wins, but it did not directly contribute to her campaign, which raised more than $13 million. Other pro-Whitmer Democratic groups spent at least $13.7 million through the general election, which was one of the most expensive in Michigan history.

The PAT is one of at least five local Democratic Party slush funds that have operated in the shadows since at least 2002, according to a joint investigation by The Detroit News and Michigan Campaign Finance Network. The groups can accept unlimited corporate or union contributions but have evaded all disclosure requirements.

While a similar local Republican outfit spent in the 2010 and 2014 general election, primary spending last fall by PAT and the Phillip A. Hart Democratic Club triggered outrage from progressive activists and cries of hypocrisy as the Democratic party publicly pushes for transparency and campaign finance reform.

A slush fund is a fund or account that is not properly accounted, such as money used for corrupt or illegal purposes, especially in the political sphere. Such funds may be kept hidden, and maintained separately, from money that is used for legitimate purposes. Slush funds may be employed by government or corporate officials in efforts to pay influential people discreetly in return for preferential treatment, advance information (such as non-public information in financial transactions), and other services. The funds themselves may not be kept secret but the source of the funds, or how they were acquired, or for what purposes they are used, may be hidden. Use of slush funds to influence government activities may be viewed as subversive of the democratic process.

A March 6, 2019, Detroit News article stated that The Michigan Democratic Party’s official platform calls for extending campaign finance reporting requirements to political parties, foundations and “other groups used to evade donor disclosure requirements.”

A lack of donor disclosure “keeps the public in the dark about who is influencing Michigan politics,” the newscom article quoted Executive Director Noah Bookbinder as saying in Feb. 2019, as his Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington group filed an Internal Revenue Service complaint against Progressive Advocacy Trust. Public reporting can “inform voters about who is trying to influence them and to deter corruption,” CREW said in the complaint.

It is not clear if the Michigan Democratic Party could shut down local dark money accounts, Detroit News stated, but it also utilizes an administrative account that is not subject to disclosure rules for running issue-ad campaigns.

Michigan GOP and Michigan Democratic Party administrative accounts received a total of $2.3 million in traceable donations during the 2018 election cycle, a figure that is only known because of filings by groups that gave to them.