"... the unions donate transparently and the Kochs don’t ..."

...................................................................................................................................................................
Fact Checker: Do Koch brothers spend more than unions?
By Mark Robison, April 5, 2014

The claim

Democrat-supporting unions have outspent the Koch brothers on political causes.

The background

George Wooster of Dayton wrote a letter to the editor last month saying, “I read with great interest the article in today’s paper: ‘Reid, Democrats directing ire at Kochs.’ I wonder if he and the Democratic Party would have more credibility if they were to mention that the Koch brothers are outspent in political contributions by no less than 11 labor unions as well as George Soros.”

He then quoted an Investors Business Daily editorial:

“You’d think the Koch brothers were the most powerful money men in American politics. Look at the Center for Responsive Politics’ list of ‘Top All-Time Donors, 1989-2014.’ The Kochs come in 59th. Not exactly ‘buying America,’ as Reid asserts.”

It then lists ActBlue — a Democratic political action committee — in the No. 1 spot followed by numerous unions dominating the list’s upper end, such as the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees, National Education Association (teachers union), International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, United Auto Workers, Carpenters & Joiners Union and Service Employees International Union.

Gary Tracy of Sparks wrote, “George Wooster of Dayton has a well-written letter to the editor in today’s paper regarding Koch brothers political spending. I did a little research and am finding it difficult to fact check.”

He asked if Fact Checker could.

For those who aren’t political news geeks or large political donors themselves, the Koch brothers (pronounced COKE) may not ring a bell.

A George Washington University Battleground poll conducted last month gave a list of 10 names to 1,000 registered “likely” voters. A sizable 52 percent had never heard of Charles and David Koch.

By contrast, 25 percent had never heard of Harry Reid, 17 percent had never heard of Rand Paul and 11 percent had never heard of “Wall Street.”

Of the portion who had heard of the Kochs, 42 percent had a “strong” unfavorable opinion of them, 10 percent had a “somewhat” unfavorable opinion and 23 percent had no opinion — the rest had favorable opinions of varying degrees. (About 36 percent of those who’d heard of Reid have a strong unfavorable opinion of him.)

So who are the Kochs? They run one of the largest privately held companies in the United States: Koch Industries. It is involved in petroleum, chemicals, natural gas, plastics, paper and ranching. In 2013, Forbes said it had annual revenue of $115 billion.

What has Reid and Democrats concerned is that the two give millions of dollars to conservative candidates and causes. If you’ve seen a TV ad against Obama’s health care act, the money behind likely came from a Koch-linked group.

Reid famously ranted on the Senate floor earlier this year: “It’s time that the American people spoke out against this terrible dishonesty of these two brothers, who are about as un-American as anyone that I can imagine.”

Critics point to Reid’s not calling Soros un-American after he spent $25 million to defeat George W. Bush in 2004 or Tom Steyer, after he’s promised to spend $50 million of his own money and $50 million from other wealthy donors this election cycle against candidates who deny global warming.

The question at hand is whether the Kochs are outspent by unions.

The report of top donors cited by Wooster states in bold letters at the top that it “does not” apply to people who donated to super PACs (political action committees). This is huge.

For example, Nevada casino magnate Sheldon Adelson and his wife, Miriam, donated almost $93 million in 2012 alone. The amount in just this one election is more than any union spent over the previous 25 years.

The report also does not include any donations to “dark money” groups, meaning those that hide the identities of their donors such as the Koch-linked Americans for Prosperity.

The report calls these “significant omissions.”

A source that does include dark money groups is the Washington Post in a report earlier this year. It said:

“The political network spearheaded by conservative billionaires Charles and David Koch has expanded into a far-reaching operation of unrivaled complexity, built around a maze of groups that cloaks its donors, according to an analysis of new tax returns and other documents.

“The filings show that the network of politically active nonprofit groups backed by the Kochs and fellow donors in the 2012 elections financially outpaced other independent groups on the right and, on its own, matched the long-established national coalition of labor unions that serves as one of the biggest sources of support for Democrats.”

The Koch-backed network “raised at least $407 million during the 2012 campaign, according to the analysis of tax returns by The Washington Post and the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan group that tracks money in politics,” the story continued, adding:

“Unions plowed roughly $400 million into national, state and local elections in 2012.”

The verdict

When talking about hundreds of millions of dollars, the extra $7 million linked to Koch-backed entities means they were basically even with the unions in spending. But because the unions donate transparently and the Kochs don’t — and thus may have spent even more — it’s especially unfair to say unions outspent them.

Truthmeter: 4 (out of 10)

Fact Checker would be remiss in not pointing out one angle: the relative influence of the donors.

The Kochs are two people, and if money is power, then they — and a few other likeminded individuals — have slightly more influence than the millions of union members whose money makes up their unions’ overall donations.

Rathering than being un-American, the Supreme Court says such lop-sided influence is allowed. As Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in an opinion this month, “There is no right more basic in our democracy than the right to participate in electing our political leaders. ... Money in politics may at times seem repugnant to some, but so too does much of what the First Amendment vigorously protects.”

But if one thinks it is un-American or undesirable, then criticizing those on only one side of the aisle makes the issue partisan rather than something of concern to all citizens.
...................................................................................................................................................................