Fred Karger vs. Brian Brown and the National Organization for Marriage
(video: FredKarger at YouTube)

Rights Equal Rights founder, Fred Karger, pays NOM a visit

Yesterday, Rights Equal Rights founder Fred Karger paid a follow-up visit to the Washington, DC office of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM). While the anti-gay organization’s 2009 tax filings had still not appeared on the group’s website, a worker surrendered a hard copy of NOM’s long-awaited 2009 tax filings. Karger noted that, since NOM’s founding three years ago, their income and spending has at least tripled every year.

Find copies of NOM’s documents at the link.

Switzerland Throws Out Mormon Missionaries
All 13 Mormon Members of Congress Fight Back

What Would a President Romney Do?

Washington, DC – The story just leaked out that all 13 Mormon members of the United States Congress sent a strong letter to the Swiss Ambassador to the United States. The 13 letter signers were protesting the Swiss Government’s banning of Mormon Missionaries from that county. This was reported yesterday in The Salt Lake Tribune: CLICK HERE

The one page letter signed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and four other United States Senators and eight House members was sent to Swiss Ambassador Urs Ziswiler and said, “We earnestly petition the Swiss Government to reconsider its decision and work with us and the LDS Church to find a solution which would permit LDS Missionaries to continue to perform their missionary service in Switzerland as they have done since 1850.”

Copy of Congressional Letter to Swiss Ambassador: CLICK HERE

Swiss Ambassador Ziswiler’s letter back to the 13 members of Congress — Thanks, but no thanks… CLICK HERE

U.S. Ambassador & Mormon Church Leader(s)
Meet With Swiss Government Officials

In his letter, the Swiss Ambassador refers to one recent meeting to discuss the situation between high ranking Swiss Government officials and the United States Ambassador to Switzerland Don Beyer, and at least one top Mormon Church leader, a Mr. E. Weidman.

How much other lobbying, regarding their Missionaries, has Senate Leader Harry Reid and the other 12 Mormon members of the U.S Congress done before with foreign government leaders?

What Would President Mitt Romney Do?

It begs the question, if Mitt Romney was elected President of the United States, would he take orders from the Mormon Church President like these 13 members of Congress have just done?

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS) requires “obedience” to the Church over family and country, period.

These five rogue Senators and eight House Members are attempting to conduct U.S. foreign policy on behalf of their faith.

Their letter to the Swiss Government states:

“It would be a great tragedy for our two nations if the long-standing missionary program of the LDS Church in Switzerland were terminated,” the members wrote. “Switzerland can have no more enthusiastic, lifetime ambassadors in the United States than these young people when they return home.”

Words like “our two nations” and “lifetime ambassadors” sure sound like diplomat-speak to me.

Mormon Church Prosecuted and Investigated in California

As a political watchdog, I’ve spent the last 2 ½ years researching the political practices of the Mormon Church. I filed a complaint against the Mormon Church with the California Fair Political Practices Commission two years ago that led to its prosecution, an 18 month investigation, a guilty finding and a fine; all for election law violations during the Mormon Church’s direct involvement in California’s Proposition 8 campaign in 2008.

Did Senate Leader Harry Reid Organize this Foreign Lobbying Campaign?

The group that signed was led by United States Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV). Reid was joined by both United States Senators from Utah, Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Robert Bennett (R-UT), Senator Michael Crapo (R-ID) and Senator Tom Udall (D-NM).

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (left), Mormon Church President Thomas S. Monson (center), meet with President Obama in the Oval Office July 20, 2009.

There were eight House Members who also signed the letter to the Swiss Government, Jeff Flake (R-AZ), Wally Herger (R-CA), Howard “Buck” McKeon (R-CA), Mike Simpson (R-ID), Dean Heller (R-NV) and all three House members from Utah: Rob Bishop (R-UT), Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) and Jim Matheson (D-UT).

State Department Investigation Called For

Because the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon Church) was in direct contact with officials of a foreign government, and even used a United States Ambassador on its behalf, I hereby request the United States Department of State conduct a full investigation of all lobbying activities and all other actions taken by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and members of Congress with the Government of Switzerland and all other counties that the Mormon Church is in direct contact with.

cc: The Honorable Hillary Clinton,
Secretary of State
The Honorable John Kerry,
Chairman, U.S Senate Committee on Foreign Relations
The Honorable Howard Berman,
Chairman, U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs
The Honorable Barbara Boxer,
Chair, U.S. Senate Select Committee on Ethics
The Honorable Zoe Lofgren,
Chair, U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Standards of Official Conduct

In Wake of Ballot Initiatives, Questions About the National Organization for Marriage’s Funding

Catholic Groups Funneled Millions to Fund Anti-Gay Marriage Initiatives in California, Maine

By JESSE ZWICK 9/20/10 8:32 AM

People protest extending marriage rights to gay couples in Washington, D.C. (Flickr/Fibonnaci Blue)

The Knights of Columbus, a Catholic fraternal society founded in New Haven in 1881, does a lot of good work. In a report detailing its charitable giving during 2009, the organization noted that while the “Knights and their families are hardly immune to the economic downturn,” they had once again furthered their proud 128-year tradition of service — a tradition including “helping the widows and orphans of the late 19th century” and “providing coats to poor, cold children.”

Add to that list a donation of a whopping $1.4 million in 2009 to the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), a nonprofit group dedicated to fighting same-sex marriage through the ballot initiative system in California, Maine and other states. While NOM hasn’t yet made public its 2009 fundraising numbers, the amount of charitable contributions it received in 2008 totaled approximately $2.9 million.

The NOM donation eclipses what the Knights’ Supreme Council spent on some of its own charitable programs — such as its new effort supporting food banks or its total spending on education initiatives — in the same year, much to the outrage of some observers, including Catholic groups.

“It was a fairly simple, straightforward decision,” says Patrick Korten, vice president for communications for the Knights. “We are pro-family, and believe strongly in the defense of marriage. NOM is the single most important group engaged in defending marriage.”

Less straightforward is the fact that NOM has adopted a policy of refusing to disclose its donors to state election boards, and has sued in the courts rather than complying with existing law — thereby prompting much speculation as to the organization’s sources of funding. (NOM did not respond to repeated requests for comment.) The Knights of Columbus, however, freely disclosed its donation in its August 3 report. The amount was enough to have funded most of NOM’s successful $1.9 million effort to repeal Maine’s same sex marriage law in 2009.

Gay-rights activists have long speculated that the Mormon Church was the primary benefactor behind NOM. But the Knights of Columbus disclosure shows the Catholic group played a pivotal role in funding NOM’s efforts to deny marriage rights to gay and lesbian couples.

Since its founding in 2007 and after its banner moment in 2008 — the passage of Proposition 8 in California, defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman — NOM has fought vigorously against requests from various states to disclose its donor rolls. After some donors to NOM’s Prop 8 campaign received nasty emails from political opponents, the group sued the state of California, comparing itself to the NAACP in the 1950s South. It argued that the state’s disclosure laws had prompted harassment of Prop 8 donors and thereby curbed their constitutional right to free speech.

The case in California is still awaiting a trial date next year, but in the intervening months gay rights activists have openly speculated that NOM was used in the state as a front group for the Mormon Church. The allegation, put forth most prominently by activist Fred Karger, has been vehemently denied by NOM.

Karger, however, did manage to prove through public records that Mormon families contributed a large amount of the $40 million raised for the California ProtectMarriage.com campaign, and that the LDS Church, despite making extensive non-monetary contributions to the cause, had failed to report anywhere near the full amount of its efforts to the state of California. At Karger’s insistence, the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) investigated the case and found the Mormon Church guilty of 13 counts of late reporting, fining them more than $5,000.

Negative press prompted NOM to dive further underground. In fundraising endeavors following Prop 8, the group’s president Brian Brown encouraged supporters of efforts to ban gay marriage to donate to NOM as a means of keeping their names undisclosed. The group would act as a middle man of sorts, raising funds from individuals and turning them over to state-based campaigns in lump sums, all the while pledging to keep its donor names a secret.

“And unlike in California, every dollar you give to NOM’s Northeast Action Plan today is private, with no risk of harassment from gay marriage protesters,” Brown wrote in one fundraising appeal. “Donations to NOM are not tax-deductible and they are NOT public information, either,” another one read.

As promised, NOM ran political campaigns in Maine and Iowa in 2009 without disclosing its donors, promptly suing the state of Maine after it opened an ethics investigation against the group and challenging the state’s campaign finance laws as unconstitutional. (That case, too, is awaiting a final verdict.)

NOM continues to spend millions on its legal challenges in Maine, its deep pockets apparently dictating a strategy to challenge and delay disclosing its donors’ names in the courts as long as possible. But the Knights of Columbus’s role in funding NOM — as well as more overt forms of support for Maine’s Amendment 1 initiative from the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland, Maine – are prompting Catholics opposed to the Church’s involvement in marriage equality issues to organize and speak out.

“You’ve got this really interesting funnel of tax-free money coming from the Dioceses and the Council of Bishops and the Knights of Columbus directly to these campaigns,” notes Phil Attey, executive director of the newly launched organization, Catholics for Equality. “Why are groups like NOM hiding where they’re getting their money? If it turns out to be a front group for the conservative side of the church, Catholics have the right to know because the majority of American Catholics, and we can show you heaps of polls, don’t support that [kind of spending].”

Knights’ spokesman Patrick Korten sees NOM’s noncompliance with disclosure laws in a different light. “The fact of the matter is that those who favor same sex marriage are working hard to intimidate individuals and groups that support our cause, but [the Knights] are big enough that intimidation doesn’t work on us.”

In addition to the opacity of NOM’s funding, some Catholic activists have also taken offense to the fact that, in an economic downturn, the Knights of Columbus Supreme Council’s funding for anti-gay marriage causes has outstripped the amount of funds it supplied for several deserving charitable programs it highlights in its 2010 report.

“As the recession has continued to make it difficult for people who have become unemployed or underemployed, or otherwise get by on lower incomes, the Knights of Columbus has stepped in to help,” notes the Knights’ 2010 report. It highlights a $1 million fund set up by the Supreme Council to supplement the efforts of local councils to support food banks through its new “Food For Families” program, and it touts its Coats for Kids program, which distributed coats to needy children.

But the Supreme Council’s spending on the two programs together still represents less than the $1.4 million it donated to NOM’s anti-gay marriage efforts in 2009. And the Council also donated an additional half million to NOM and $1.15 million to the California ProtectMarriage.com campaign the year prior. The Supreme Council’s total spending on community projects in 2009 (which include soup kitchens, homeless shelters, well drilling projects, and other forms of relief worldwide) totals approximately $3.5 million — an amount that exceeds its giving to anti-gay marriage proposition campaigns, but not by much. The Council’s spending on educational programs in 2009 totaled barely more than $1 million.

Korten nonetheless contends that the Supreme Council’s donations do not paint a full picture of the Knights of Columbus’ annual giving, calling its donations to organizations like NOM “a very small percentage” of the group’s charitable donations. “The vast majority of our charitable work is raised by local councils and that’s always been the case,” he adds.

But other Catholic activists predict that such spending on conservative causes will provoke a backlash among the faithful. “Do you think someone in New Mexico thought their donation was going to this effort in Maine, as opposed to aiding the sick and feeding the hungry?” asks George Burns, an attorney in Maine who fought NOM’s campaign to pass Amendment 1.

“If Catholics find out that while their parishes are closing, and charity work is being underfunded, that our church hierarchy is playing political games with their money, we believe that they’ll be as concerned as we are,” argues Attey.

The Knights, meanwhile, have come a long way from a lone fraternal council in New Haven to governing over 13,000 councils and 1.8 million members worldwide. “Their heritage was as an insurance company because Catholics were discriminated against and couldn’t get insurance,” observes Rev. Dr. Joseph Palacios, founding board member of Catholics for Equality. These days, however, they’re better known for fighting against the marriage rights of gays and lesbian citizens. Add to that list a donation of a whopping $1.4 million in 2009 to the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), a nonprofit group dedicated to fighting same-sex marriage through the ballot initiative system in California, Maine and other states. While NOM hasn’t yet made public its 2009 fundraising numbers, the amount of charitable contributions it received in 2008 totaled approximately $2.9 million.

The NOM donation eclipses what the Knights’ Supreme Council spent on some of its own charitable programs — such as its new effort supporting food banks or its total spending on education initiatives — in the same year, much to the outrage of some observers, including Catholic groups.

“It was a fairly simple, straightforward decision,” says Patrick Korten, vice president for communications for the Knights. “We are pro-family, and believe strongly in the defense of marriage. NOM is the single most important group engaged in defending marriage.”

Less straightforward is the fact that NOM has adopted a policy of refusing to disclose its donors to state election boards, and has sued in the courts rather than complying with existing law — thereby prompting much speculation as to the organization’s sources of funding. (NOM did not respond to repeated requests for comment.) The Knights of Columbus, however, freely disclosed its donation in its August 3 report. The amount was enough to have funded most of NOM’s successful $1.9 million effort to repeal Maine’s same sex marriage law in 2009.

Gay-rights activists have long speculated that the Mormon Church was the primary benefactor behind NOM. But the Knights of Columbus disclosure shows the Catholic group played a pivotal role in funding NOM’s efforts to deny marriage rights to gay and lesbian couples.

Since its founding in 2007 and after its banner moment in 2008 — the passage of Proposition 8 in California, defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman — NOM has fought vigorously against requests from various states to disclose its donor rolls. After some donors to NOM’s Prop 8 campaign received nasty emails from political opponents, the group sued the state of California, comparing itself to the NAACP in the 1950s South. It argued that the state’s disclosure laws had prompted harassment of Prop 8 donors and thereby curbed their constitutional right to free speech.

The case in California is still awaiting a trial date next year, but in the intervening months gay rights activists have openly speculated that NOM was used in the state as a front group for the Mormon Church. The allegation, put forth most prominently by activist Fred Karger, has been vehemently denied by NOM.

Karger, however, did manage to prove through public records that Mormon families contributed a large amount of the $40 million raised for the California ProtectMarriage.com campaign, and that the LDS Church, despite making extensive non-monetary contributions to the cause, had failed to report anywhere near the full amount of its efforts to the state of California. At Karger’s insistence, the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) investigated the case and found the Mormon Church guilty of 13 counts of late reporting, fining them more than $5,000.

Negative press prompted NOM to dive further underground. In fundraising endeavors following Prop 8, the group’s president Brian Brown encouraged supporters of efforts to ban gay marriage to donate to NOM as a means of keeping their names undisclosed. The group would act as a middle man of sorts, raising funds from individuals and turning them over to state-based campaigns in lump sums, all the while pledging to keep its donor names a secret.

“And unlike in California, every dollar you give to NOM’s Northeast Action Plan today is private, with no risk of harassment from gay marriage protesters,” Brown wrote in one fundraising appeal. “Donations to NOM are not tax-deductible and they are NOT public information, either,” another one read.

As promised, NOM ran political campaigns in Maine and Iowa in 2009 without disclosing its donors, promptly suing the state of Maine after it opened an ethics investigation against the group and challenging the state’s campaign finance laws as unconstitutional. (That case, too, is awaiting a final verdict.)

NOM continues to spend millions on its legal challenges in Maine, its deep pockets apparently dictating a strategy to challenge and delay disclosing its donors’ names in the courts as long as possible. But the Knights of Columbus’s role in funding NOM — as well as more overt forms of support for Maine’s Amendment 1 initiative from the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland, Maine – are prompting Catholics opposed to the Church’s involvement in marriage equality issues to organize and speak out.

“You’ve got this really interesting funnel of tax-free money coming from the Dioceses and the Council of Bishops and the Knights of Columbus directly to these campaigns,” notes Phil Attey, executive director of the newly launched organization, Catholics for Equality. “Why are groups like NOM hiding where they’re getting their money? If it turns out to be a front group for the conservative side of the church, Catholics have the right to know because the majority of American Catholics, and we can show you heaps of polls, don’t support that [kind of spending].”

Knights’ spokesman Patrick Korten sees NOM’s noncompliance with disclosure laws in a different light. “The fact of the matter is that those who favor same sex marriage are working hard to intimidate individuals and groups that support our cause, but [the Knights] are big enough that intimidation doesn’t work on us.”

In addition to the opacity of NOM’s funding, some Catholic activists have also taken offense to the fact that, in an economic downturn, the Knights of Columbus Supreme Council’s funding for anti-gay marriage causes has outstripped the amount of funds it supplied for several deserving charitable programs it highlights in its 2010 report.

“As the recession has continued to make it difficult for people who have become unemployed or underemployed, or otherwise get by on lower incomes, the Knights of Columbus has stepped in to help,” notes the Knights’ 2010 report. It highlights a $1 million fund set up by the Supreme Council to supplement the efforts of local councils to support food banks through its new “Food For Families” program, and it touts its Coats for Kids program, which distributed coats to needy children.

But the Supreme Council’s spending on the two programs together still represents less than the $1.4 million it donated to NOM’s anti-gay marriage efforts in 2009. And the Council also donated an additional half million to NOM and $1.15 million to the California ProtectMarriage.com campaign the year prior. The Supreme Council’s total spending on community projects in 2009 (which include soup kitchens, homeless shelters, well drilling projects, and other forms of relief worldwide) totals approximately $3.5 million — an amount that exceeds its giving to anti-gay marriage proposition campaigns, but not by much. The Council’s spending on educational programs in 2009 totaled barely more than $1 million.

Korten nonetheless contends that the Supreme Council’s donations do not paint a full picture of the Knights of Columbus’ annual giving, calling its donations to organizations like NOM “a very small percentage” of the group’s charitable donations. “The vast majority of our charitable work is raised by local councils and that’s always been the case,” he adds.

But other Catholic activists predict that such spending on conservative causes will provoke a backlash among the faithful. “Do you think someone in New Mexico thought their donation was going to this effort in Maine, as opposed to aiding the sick and feeding the hungry?” asks George Burns, an attorney in Maine who fought NOM’s campaign to pass Amendment 1.

“If Catholics find out that while their parishes are closing, and charity work is being underfunded, that our church hierarchy is playing political games with their money, we believe that they’ll be as concerned as we are,” argues Attey.

The Knights, meanwhile, have come a long way from a lone fraternal council in New Haven to governing over 13,000 councils and 1.8 million members worldwide. “Their heritage was as an insurance company because Catholics were discriminated against and couldn’t get insurance,” observes Rev. Dr. Joseph Palacios, founding board member of Catholics for Equality. These days, however, they’re better known for fighting against the marriage rights of gays and lesbian citizens. Add to that list a donation of a whopping $1.4 million in 2009 to the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), a nonprofit group dedicated to fighting same-sex marriage through the ballot initiative system in California, Maine and other states. While NOM hasn’t yet made public its 2009 fundraising numbers, the amount of charitable contributions it received in 2008 totaled approximately $2.9 million.

The NOM donation eclipses what the Knights’ Supreme Council spent on some of its own charitable programs — such as its new effort supporting food banks or its total spending on education initiatives — in the same year, much to the outrage of some observers, including Catholic groups.

“It was a fairly simple, straightforward decision,” says Patrick Korten, vice president for communications for the Knights. “We are pro-family, and believe strongly in the defense of marriage. NOM is the single most important group engaged in defending marriage.”

Less straightforward is the fact that NOM has adopted a policy of refusing to disclose its donors to state election boards, and has sued in the courts rather than complying with existing law — thereby prompting much speculation as to the organization’s sources of funding. (NOM did not respond to repeated requests for comment.) The Knights of Columbus, however, freely disclosed its donation in its August 3 report. The amount was enough to have funded most of NOM’s successful $1.9 million effort to repeal Maine’s same sex marriage law in 2009.

Gay-rights activists have long speculated that the Mormon Church was the primary benefactor behind NOM. But the Knights of Columbus disclosure shows the Catholic group played a pivotal role in funding NOM’s efforts to deny marriage rights to gay and lesbian couples.

Since its founding in 2007 and after its banner moment in 2008 — the passage of Proposition 8 in California, defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman — NOM has fought vigorously against requests from various states to disclose its donor rolls. After some donors to NOM’s Prop 8 campaign received nasty emails from political opponents, the group sued the state of California, comparing itself to the NAACP in the 1950s South. It argued that the state’s disclosure laws had prompted harassment of Prop 8 donors and thereby curbed their constitutional right to free speech.

The case in California is still awaiting a trial date next year, but in the intervening months gay rights activists have openly speculated that NOM was used in the state as a front group for the Mormon Church. The allegation, put forth most prominently by activist Fred Karger, has been vehemently denied by NOM.

Karger, however, did manage to prove through public records that Mormon families contributed a large amount of the $40 million raised for the California ProtectMarriage.com campaign, and that the LDS Church, despite making extensive non-monetary contributions to the cause, had failed to report anywhere near the full amount of its efforts to the state of California. At Karger’s insistence, the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) investigated the case and found the Mormon Church guilty of 13 counts of late reporting, fining them more than $5,000.

Negative press prompted NOM to dive further underground. In fundraising endeavors following Prop 8, the group’s president Brian Brown encouraged supporters of efforts to ban gay marriage to donate to NOM as a means of keeping their names undisclosed. The group would act as a middle man of sorts, raising funds from individuals and turning them over to state-based campaigns in lump sums, all the while pledging to keep its donor names a secret.

“And unlike in California, every dollar you give to NOM’s Northeast Action Plan today is private, with no risk of harassment from gay marriage protesters,” Brown wrote in one fundraising appeal. “Donations to NOM are not tax-deductible and they are NOT public information, either,” another one read.

As promised, NOM ran political campaigns in Maine and Iowa in 2009 without disclosing its donors, promptly suing the state of Maine after it opened an ethics investigation against the group and challenging the state’s campaign finance laws as unconstitutional. (That case, too, is awaiting a final verdict.)

NOM continues to spend millions on its legal challenges in Maine, its deep pockets apparently dictating a strategy to challenge and delay disclosing its donors’ names in the courts as long as possible. But the Knights of Columbus’s role in funding NOM — as well as more overt forms of support for Maine’s Amendment 1 initiative from the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland, Maine – are prompting Catholics opposed to the Church’s involvement in marriage equality issues to organize and speak out.

“You’ve got this really interesting funnel of tax-free money coming from the Dioceses and the Council of Bishops and the Knights of Columbus directly to these campaigns,” notes Phil Attey, executive director of the newly launched organization, Catholics for Equality. “Why are groups like NOM hiding where they’re getting their money? If it turns out to be a front group for the conservative side of the church, Catholics have the right to know because the majority of American Catholics, and we can show you heaps of polls, don’t support that [kind of spending].”

Knights’ spokesman Patrick Korten sees NOM’s noncompliance with disclosure laws in a different light. “The fact of the matter is that those who favor same sex marriage are working hard to intimidate individuals and groups that support our cause, but [the Knights] are big enough that intimidation doesn’t work on us.”

In addition to the opacity of NOM’s funding, some Catholic activists have also taken offense to the fact that, in an economic downturn, the Knights of Columbus Supreme Council’s funding for anti-gay marriage causes has outstripped the amount of funds it supplied for several deserving charitable programs it highlights in its 2010 report.

“As the recession has continued to make it difficult for people who have become unemployed or underemployed, or otherwise get by on lower incomes, the Knights of Columbus has stepped in to help,” notes the Knights’ 2010 report. It highlights a $1 million fund set up by the Supreme Council to supplement the efforts of local councils to support food banks through its new “Food For Families” program, and it touts its Coats for Kids program, which distributed coats to needy children.

But the Supreme Council’s spending on the two programs together still represents less than the $1.4 million it donated to NOM’s anti-gay marriage efforts in 2009. And the Council also donated an additional half million to NOM and $1.15 million to the California ProtectMarriage.com campaign the year prior. The Supreme Council’s total spending on community projects in 2009 (which include soup kitchens, homeless shelters, well drilling projects, and other forms of relief worldwide) totals approximately $3.5 million — an amount that exceeds its giving to anti-gay marriage proposition campaigns, but not by much. The Council’s spending on educational programs in 2009 totaled barely more than $1 million.

Korten nonetheless contends that the Supreme Council’s donations do not paint a full picture of the Knights of Columbus’ annual giving, calling its donations to organizations like NOM “a very small percentage” of the group’s charitable donations. “The vast majority of our charitable work is raised by local councils and that’s always been the case,” he adds.

But other Catholic activists predict that such spending on conservative causes will provoke a backlash among the faithful. “Do you think someone in New Mexico thought their donation was going to this effort in Maine, as opposed to aiding the sick and feeding the hungry?” asks George Burns, an attorney in Maine who fought NOM’s campaign to pass Amendment 1.

“If Catholics find out that while their parishes are closing, and charity work is being underfunded, that our church hierarchy is playing political games with their money, we believe that they’ll be as concerned as we are,” argues Attey.

The Knights, meanwhile, have come a long way from a lone fraternal council in New Haven to governing over 13,000 councils and 1.8 million members worldwide. “Their heritage was as an insurance company because Catholics were discriminated against and couldn’t get insurance,” observes Rev. Dr. Joseph Palacios, founding board member of Catholics for Equality. These days, however, they’re better known for fighting against the marriage rights of gays and lesbian citizens.

To link to the announcement about Fred Karger’s appearance on the Fallon Forum, click here.

Fred Karger will be on Ed Fallon’s radio program tonight. Karger is originally from Chicago, who worked for over 20 years with leading national Republicans, including Reagan, Bush, and Dole. In recent years he’s been an outspoken activist for LGBT equality, leading efforts to expose questionable campaign finance activities on the part of anti-gay organizations. Make plans to tune in tonight from 7:00- 8:00 p.m. on 98.3 WOW-FM or online. Please consider including your voice in the conversation by calling 515.312.0983 or 866.908.8255 (TALK). If you miss the show, podcasts are available.

To link to the podcast, Click Here. Or, click the arrow to listen now.

Fred’s coverage on San Diego’s Channel 10 News: CLICK HERE

Below is all the information about the decision from Lynn Fuller, Media & Public Outreach Liaison, United States District Court, Northern District of California:

On August 4, 2010, the court will issue its written order containing findings of fact and conclusions of law following the court trial held in January and June of this year. The order will be e-filed in the court’s Electronic Case Filing system, and will be immediately available thereafter through ECF and PACER. Visit www.cand.uscourts.gov for details on registering for PACER. There will be no court proceeding associated with the publication of the order.

The Perry order will be e-filed between 1 pm and 3 pm tomorrow. It will be available electronically to the public not only through PACER but also directly from the court’s website, www.cand.uscourts.gov, free of charge soon after it is e-filed.

Go to marriagetrial.com for immediate online reenactment

I did a CNN i Report for Producer Chris Morrow at the Prop 8 trial in back in January. It is available to see here: CLICK HERE

Chris gave me an hd flip camera to cover this historic case. There were no cameras allowed in the courtroom thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court, but the cafeteria seemed to be okay.

I did interviews with legendary attorney David Boies, civil rights leader Stuart Milk, nephew of the incredible Harvey Milk, Chief Deputy San Francisco City Attorney Therese Stewart who had questioned the wittiness that day and spectator and Stanford student Adam Hahn. Hope you enjoy it!

It will be an exciting day, and I am very optimistic about the outcome. Equal protection is in the Constitution for just this reason.

NOTE: Tonight Fred will be Ed Fallon’s guest for a full hour on WHO Newsradio – 1040, Iowa’s leading talk radio station. He will be on the Fallon Forum from 7:00 to 8:00 pm (Central Time). Podcast will be available. Stay tuned.

“Wednesday, we talk about the ongoing debate over marriage, which again surfaced in Iowa this week when the so-called National Organization for Marriage visited Iowa. To be clear, NOM is only for certain marriages, and has supported tactics and an agenda that are markedly discriminatory. There visit to Iowa comes at a time when a recent KCCI poll showed 53% of Iowans in support of marriage rights for same-sex couples.”

GOProud, Tammy Bruce Break the Manchester Hyatt Boycott Saturday – A Closer Look

GOProud, the Washington D.C.-based conservative gay Republican group, is holding a private reception Saturday at the Manchester Hyatt hotel, which has been the target of a boycott by the LGBT community and the UNITE HERE! Labor union since July 2008.

The LGBT/labor coalition Sleep With The Right People plans to protest the event starting at 4:30 at the Manchester Grand Hyatt, 1 Market Place in San Diego. The GOProud event runs from 5pm to 7pm.

Cleve Jones, friend of Harvey Milk and founder of the NAMES PROJECT AIDS Memorial Quilt, is a UNITE HERE organizer trying to remedy the drastic conditions for workers and lack of job security at the hotel. Cleve says:

“The solidarity between the labor movement and the LGBT movement is a powerful coalition. In San Diego, the owner of the Manchester Grand Hyatt—the second largest Hyatt in North America—gave $125,000 to put Proposition 8 on the ballot. Our union and the LGBT community are boycotting the Manchester Grand Hyatt, because there is power in the union and there is power in coalition.”

Pause for a second and consider this: Manchester’s $125,000 came in February 2008 at a time when the antigay campaigners did not have enough money to put the measure on the ballot. That money not only paid for the signature-gathering campaign but also gave the then-lackluster Gail Knight-led ProtectMarriage fiscal viability that brought in new money and support. Equality for All countered with a Decline to Sign effort.

Equality for All was non-partisan and reached out to gay Republicans and independents, as well as progressives to fight Prop 8. Political consultant Scott Schmidt of the Los Angeles chapter of the Log Cabin Republicans, later created Republicans Against Prop 8 to specifically target Republicans after the measure qualified. Log Cabin has also honored the boycott.

So why is GOProud holding their Tea Party-sounding “Don’t Tread on Us” reception at the Manchester Hyatt hotel? I don’t think it’s because they need the (CORRECTION) $16,000 ($6,000 was cash from Manchester Financial Group and $10,000 was hotel credit from Manchester Grand Hyatt) to break the boycott and fund their 527.

I think this is a PR move aimed at a larger, conservative audience – not the LGBT community. Indeed, this is the gay version of the fight within the Republican Party itself between the ultra-conservatives, exemplified by Dick Armey, Karl Rove, and Mike Pence – and more moderate conservatives such as Arnold Schwarzenegger, Chris Shays, Allan Simpson and Christie Todd Whitman. In Whitman’s wrote a book “It’s My Party Too,” she explains: “The trend we’re seeing in my party, in particular, is the growing influence of people who want to define what it means to be a good Republican in an ever-narrowing way.”

Bottom line: Log Cabin Republicans are Republicans in the traditional sense – focus on the individual, lower taxes, limited government, national security, keep the government out of the bedroom. But LCR is also focused on LGBT equality – the best example of which is their go-alone, six-year federal lawsuit to have Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell declared unconstitutional.

GOProud, on the other hand, is a more currently conservative GOP group with an agenda that strongly mirrors the ultra-conservative Congressional Republican agenda – though GOProud supports repeal of DADT and opposes a federal constitutional marriage amendment.

Reporting on the split among gay Republicans after executive director Patrick Sammon left in January, Politico’s Ben Smith on April 10, 2009 quoted Christopher Barron, a former Log Cabin political director who broke with LCR:

“Essentially, there’s no voice for gay Republicans or gay conservatives in particular in D.C. right now. Log Cabin has been completely and totally absent here in D.C. for months and months,” Barron said.
”It has simply moved way too far to the left and is basically indistinguishable from any other gay left organization.”
[cut]
“If your main issue is hate crimes or [federal anti-discrimination legislation] or marriage, you’re probably not a Republican,” Barron said, saying that while he backs gay groups on those other issues, they shouldn’t be federal priorities.”

Ironically, as Kerry Eleveld noted in her reporting for The Advocate for May 19, the accusation about LCR being weak in DC came around the same time as their national convention at which Republican presidential nominee John McCain’s daughter Meghan and his campaign manager, Steve Schmidt, came out in support of marriage equality. Although the revelations, Eleveld wrote, “may fall short of a conservative revolution, I dare say it’s the first salvo in a battle for the soul of the party.”

But, Eleveld wrote:

“even with the advent of this new conservative gay group, the state legislatures will be the sole domain of Log Cabin. GOProud will focus on federal issues, Chris Barron said at their Wednesday press conference. Their 10-point legislative agenda did not, however, include hate crimes, employment nondiscrimination, or relationship recognition. Barron — who was a political director for Log Cabin and worked on hate crimes and ENDA legislation — called those “laudable goals” but, added his counterpart Jimmy LaSalvia, “there are two dozen groups downtown already working on ENDA and hate crimes.”

But employment nondiscrimination? What a loss — for a Republican who knows the issue inside and out — not to be lobbying GOP members of Congress on behalf of LGBT people who work in 30 states across the country with no legal protections.”

I asked LaSalvia about the 14-month old organization and the boycott. He said GOProud is starting to hold events around the country to “raise awareness” about the group.

“We wanted to hold an event this summer in Southern California, and we chose to do our first event in California in San Diego because of its large population of conservatives. You probably know that that there are very few properties in the world of the stature of the Manchester Hyatt, so it would be an obvious place to consider for an event in San Diego.

As far as the boycott goes, Mr. Manchester has apologized for his support of Proposition 8, and has generously offered financial support to the LGBT community.”

Well, let’s look at that for a moment. Even the San Diego Union Tribune suspected that Manchester’s throwing of a “serious chunk of change at gay and lesbian causes” was nothing “but an attempt to derail that pesky boycott…. The $125,000 total matches what he gave to Proposition 8. So it would be even-steven.

“He’s trying to clarify his views,” Kelly Commerford, director of marketing for the Grand Hyatt, one of the largest hotels on the West Coast, told the paper. “He’s not discriminatory. He’s supportive of this community. He realizes he offended people.”

Commerford confirmed the money to me, though he would not discuss whether Manchester is trying to sell the Hyatt. He wrote via email:

Doug Manchester offered a $125,000 donation ($25,000 in cash and $100,000 in in-kind services) to LGBT organizations as tangible proof of his regret for his original donation and as a re-commitment to the LGBT community in San Diego and beyond. An application and selection process was put in place, to which several organizations applied. This pledge has been fulfilled.”

Indeed, a website was set up especially to present the apology, the application and other PR overtures from Manchester. Some thought the apology was “hollow.”

But in talking about the boycott, LaSalvia moves into what language more closely associated with Dick Armey, who called openly gay Rep. Barney Frank “Barney Fag:”

“We lost the Prop 8 battle in California, and if we ever want to win then our community needs to be in the business of making new friends not enemies. The reason the boycott is still in effect is because of unrelated issues raised by labor unions. Unlike other gay organizations, GOProud does not take its marching orders from union thugs. (Emphasis LaSalvia’s)

Mr. Manchester has generously offered financial support to a variety of LGBT organizations, including GOProud. I couldn’t care less if others accept the support or reject the support.”

LaSilvia also said:

“Our mission is to represent gay conservatives and our allies. The traditional “gay agenda” has been defined by the left and treated as if it’s the top priority for all gay people. We work on a much broader agenda and that conservative policies are good for all Americans, but especially gay and lesbian Americans.”

Potential gay GOP presential contender Fred Karger, who founded Californians Against Hate – which just changed its name to Rights Equal Rights – thinks that’s just spin:

“GOProud should not even be considered a gay Republican group, and should not be called so. They are a Republican ultra conservative group, apparently made up of only a handful of members. They don’t even support pro gay Republicans. In California last month they endorsed the same candidate in the U. S. Senate race as the most anti-gay organization in the country, the dreaded National Organization for Marriage, against former Republican Congressman Tom Campbell, who supports full LGBT equality.

They instead should be called GOEmbarrassment.”

Karger notes that while the California Republican Party is holding its semi-annual convention at the Hyatt the end of August, “California Log Cabin is for the first time not holding their reception at the host hotel, but has moved it to another property in San Diego, and thus honoring the boycott. They of course endorsed [pro-gay US Senate candidate]Tom Campbell and gave him money, I believe.”

Karger helped organize the boycott:

“The Boycott Manchester Hotels, organized 2 years ago by numerous LGBT groups and our labor allies, has been so successful, that Manchester’s own estimates are that it is costing his Manchester Grand Hyatt property alone $1 million per month in lost business. All real LGBT organizations including HRC and Equality California have turned down any money from Manchester, and many other LGBT and allied organizations have endorsed the boycott including the Courage Campaign and the Equality Federation.”

So why break the boycott? While everyone is focusing on the rivalry between GOProud and LCR, I started thinking about openly gay radio talk show host and author Tammy Bruce, who chairs GOProud’s Advisory Council. My hunch is that this stunt is a way for GOProud to prove to the Tea Party and other ultra-conservatives that they are more Republican than gay.

Tammy Bruce is something of a star on the conservative right wing C-List, introducing herself as a gay, gun-owning former liberal Democrat who bucked the oppressive liberal political correctness and now makes money talking about it. Judging from her website, she’s also a big Sarah Palin fan.

Tammy used to be the head of the NOW chapter in Los Angeles in 1989/early 1990s, when she worked in coalition with progressive LGBT groups. I covered her at that time and watched as she used her celebrity status as a local radio show host to help raise money for HIV/AIDS organizations and other causes.

But by the mid-90s, she had become a controversial lightening rod. In 1995, NOW President Patricia Ireland condemned Tammy at a news conference for making insensitive remarks during the OJ Simpson trial. Tammy said she was trying to keep domestic violence instead of race in the spotlight. Marc Lacey reported in the LA Times Dec. 7, 1995:

“Bruce was quoted in an Associated Press report as saying she did not want to discuss the O.J. Simpson case on a TV program because she did not want “to argue with a bunch of black women.” Bruce later said she had been misquoted on the matter.

Ireland said the comments caused grave concerns among many black women in the organization and raised the false impression that NOW does not regard racism as a problem.

As a sign of how the comments were received, Ireland said leading national civil rights leaders contacted her to complain about Bruce’s outspoken views, while white supremacist groups praised the comments in calls to NOW leaders in one rural state.”

Tammy fought back:

“There is nothing to retract. I have made it clear that this issue affects all women, including women of color. Of course, this issue is colorblind.”

Tammy’s biggest contretemps with the liberal and African American communities came in 1998 when she was fired from her radio gig at KFI for making racially insensitive remarks about Bill and Camille Cosby. On July 8, the day after a 19 year old Ukrainian immigrant had been found guilty of murdering Ennis Cosby, USA Today published an op-ed by Camille Cosby entitled “Camille Cosby: America Taught My Son’s Killer To Hate Blacks.” In it she wrote: “After Mikail Markhasev killed Ennis William Cosby on Jan. 16, 1997, he said to his friends, `I shot a nigger. It’s all over the news.’”

Though many of us missed what Tammy actually said, some of the offensive remarks came to light during KFI program director David G. Hall’s profuse apology (using the royal “we”) for what the usually very smart Tammy said in response to the op-ed. This is from the LA Times:

“Noting that Bruce’s opinions began to “overtake the facts,” Hall called various comments by the KFI host “unfounded, mean-spirited and simply inappropriate.”
[cut]
“Specifically,” Hall said, “Mrs. Cosby was characterized as ‘incredibly unstable, crazy, paranoid, delusional, just nuts’ and the like. It was suggested that Mrs. Cosby seek therapy. We had no information about Mrs. Cosby’s mental health. . . . We wish to apologize.
[cut]
“Similarly, in challenging Mrs. Cosby’s assertion that her son’s killing was racially motivated, we suggested that Mrs. Cosby caused her son’s death by giving him access to an expensive car. Those comments were remarkably insensitive. . . . Ours were cruel statements to make to parents whose son had recently been murdered.”

Hall said Tammy’s statements about Bill Cosby were “false, offensive and unnecessarily hurtful. And they too need to be retracted.” Hall cited “our statements” that Cosby had “multiple illegitimate children as a result of multiple extramarital affairs with white women,” and another that he “secretly funded the criminal defense of O.J. Simpson.”

(In 1997, Cosby admitted to one extra-martial affair after a woman tried to extort him for money.)

But as the Daily Howler reported in late 2003, Tammy was out. She re-emerge in 2001 The New Thought Police in which she wrote that Rosa Parks had “pushed us into the maze of Thought Police totalitarianism that we face today.”

In The Death of Right and Wrong, Tammy writes that Bill Cosby and Kweisi Mfume are Black Elitists —people who are “motivated, whether consciously or unconsciously, by a deep-rooted hatred for their country and themselves, which leads them to attempt to destroy the future of their own people and, indeed, everyone else.”

You get the gist. After her run-ins with Patricia Ireland and being called a racist by the Cosbys (a charge with which I publically disagreed-thinking Tammy insensitive but not a racist) – Tammy launched a new lucrative career as a conservative darling.

I asked LaSalvia to put me in touch with Tammy to ask why she was breaking the boycott – but she never contacted me.

So standing back to look at the two organizations – GOProud made headlines at the recent CPAC convention, may make headlines breaking the boycott and is now associated with the policy leadership of Tammy Bruce. LCR, on the other hand, has a new executive director, former diplomat and soldier R. Clarke Cooper, who expressly wants to reconnect with the National Republican Committee. Along those lines, LCR announced that conservative Texas GOP Sen. John Cornyn is attending the LCR PAC reception prior to their big dinner in September. Cooper himself outlined the distinctions last June:

“LCR has a political action committee (PAC) to support Republican candidates. GoProud does not have a PAC. LCR has member-run chapters throughout the United States. GoProud does not have a membership base. LCR has an office with full time staff. GoProud does not have a fixed address. LCR has in-house registered lobbyists with Hill experience. GoProud does not have any presence on Capitol Hill. Finally, LCR has active litigation challenging the Obama Administration to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”. GoProud does not have a presence in the courts.
[cut]
“By virtue of our lobbying activity, growing relationship with the RNC, and regular contributions from our PAC, LCR is the influential entity on the Hill.”

Charles Moran, Vice-Chairman, Log Cabin California, was less diplomatic:

Log Cabin Republicans was asked to apply for some of the food & beverage credit being offered by Mr. Manchester’s hotel. Log Cabin Republicans declined the invitation to apply. Log Cabin Republicans understands the profound impact that Mr. Manchester’s financial contribution made to the Prop 8 campaign. Mr. Manchester’s right to make that contribution is just as valid as our decision to not patronize his hotel and encourage our members to make the similar decision. As good Republicans, we financially support those who support us.

GOProud is its own organization with its own set of goals and values.

Given that they openly support and endorse candidates who support criminalization of sodomy and believe banning gays and lesbians from teaching in public schools, their decision to take Mr. Manchester’s money
comes as no surprise.”

We’ll see what happens. Just as with the Democratic political and lobbying groups – the proof is in what is accomplished. Which raises the question: what, exactly, does breaking the boycott accomplish?

California-based, pro-marriage group goes national

If marriage equality activist and potential presidential candidate Fred Karger has his way, Lieutenant Dan Choi will be the country’s first out gay chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Karger, who’s set to explore a 2012 presidential bid, quipped that’s what he told Choi he’d like to see when he ran into him at New York City’s recent Pride parade.

Choi has become the public face of the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” ban on gays serving openly in the armed forces. Karger didn’t say what Choi’s response was.

Before he makes any move toward the White House, though, Karger has plenty to do.

The man behind the anti-Prop 8 group Californians Against Hate, announced recently that the group’s name is changing to Rights Equal Rights.

Some, including Geoff Kors, the executive director of Equality California, have suggested using the word “hate” to fight for same-sex marriage could be counterproductive.

Karger, 60, said including the word in the original name of his group had “served its purpose very well.”

“When I started this effort, I wanted to let people know I was going to be aggressive, and unfortunately there’s still many people who don’t like the LGBT community,” he said. “But I wanted to take a more positive tone. That’s kind of the direction I’m heading, personally, and I think Californians Against Hate has been hugely successful in slowing down our opponents.”

Karger spoke with the Bay Area Reporter on Friday, July 16, which was the two-year anniversary of the beginning of the boycott he helped launch against hotelier Doug Manchester in San Diego.

Fred Karger has changed the name of his Californians Against Hate to Rights Equal Rights as a nod to the broader work he has been doing. Photo: Courtesy Fred Karger

The Californians Against Hate site featured a “dishonor roll” of Prop 8 contributors, and was launched around the same time that Karger called for the Manchester boycott.

Manchester, whose properties include the Grand Hyatt in San Diego, gave $125,000 to support what eventually became Prop 8, which California voters passed in November 2008 to constitutionally ban same-sex marriage. The boycott reportedly resulted in millions of dollars in lost revenue.

The mission of Rights Equal Rights will include “keeping an eye on the major opponents of equality,” with the National Organization for Marriage and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints being at the top of the list, said Karger. Members of both groups were among Prop 8′s biggest backers.

Karger prompted the state of Maine to investigate NOM when he filed a complaint on its reporting practices. The anti-gay organization worked to support the same-sex marriage ban in that state, which ultimately passed in November 2009.

Most recently, California’s Fair Political Practices Commission fined the Mormon Church $5,339 after Karger complained about the church’s late reporting of contributions that were supportive of Prop 8.

“We’ll continue to speak out when I see questionable activities on their behalf,” said Karger of anti-marriage equality organizations.

He said, “I realized the name of my organization had grown beyond Californians Against Hate and it was time to adjust that” when he filed the complaint in Maine.

Karger said when the Manchester boycott started two years ago, he had originally thought it would last just four and a half months.

“I had no idea this would go on, so I have to make a few adjustments to change,” said Karger.

He said the Manchester and similar boycotts have sent “a clear message to the big donors that if they want to contribute six-figure sums in these elections when it’s public, we might not want to patronize their businesses.”

When a ballot measure to repeal Prop 8 comes, said Karger, “It will be a very different situation” than what occurred in 2008, when Prop 8′s backers raised more than $40 million to push their measure. Prop 8 opponents raised similar amounts.

“The other side will have to do major money laundering if they’re going to try to keep marriage away from us,” he said.

Karger, a Republican, is in the process of establishing an exploratory committee for a 2012 presidential bid. He said couldn’t yet affirmatively announce a bid because that would mean he’d have to start filing campaign finance reports.

However, Karger said he is developing a commercial called “Good Morning, New Hampshire.”

“It’s going to be a fun biographical piece to introduce New Hampshire to Fred Karger,” he said. Karger, who said he hasn’t yet raised any money for a presidential bid, plans to rent a house and get a car in the state. New Hampshire is the first state where presidential primaries are held.

Karger said he’d pattern himself after another GOP member – the late former President Ronald Regan.

Karger said that like himself, Reagan was “always upbeat.” He expressed confidence.

“I’m not going to be raising hundreds of millions of dollars, unlike some of my potential opponents,” he said, but added that he’d be participating in many of the presidential debates that will come.

He said if he does make an announcement to run for president, it would probably be sometime next year.

For more information on Karger’s work to support marriage equality, visit www.rightsequalrights.com.

It’s been just two years since a small group of friends and I started Californians Against Hate to draw attention to the mega-donors to California’s Proposition 8 campaign. It’s been a busy 23 months.

We began on July 18, 2008 by helping to assemble a coalition of LGBT organizations and labor in San Diego to boycott Doug Manchester’s three hotels. Doug Manchester had contributed $125,000 in very early money to quality and pass Proposition 8, which took marriage rights away from millions of Californians. Why should we support his three hotels, only to have that money used against us?

The Manchester Hotels boycott exceeded our wildest expectations. According to their own admission, the boycott is costing the Manchester Grand Hyatt Hotel alone approximately $1 million per month. This is due to dozens of canceled large meetings and conventions at Manchester’s flagship property, and thousands of individuals and businesses who refuse to cross our picket line.

Manchester also sold his Idaho hotel, and now rumors abound that his brand new $400 million Grand del Mar Resort in San Diego is in receivership. It has recently been reported that Global Hyatt Corporation may be buying a majority interest in his Manchester Grand Hyatt. The sale was just approved by the San Diego Port Commission.

We have led three other boycotts against the biggest donors to Proposition 8. We have settled two; one against Bolthouse Farms and another against Garff Automotive Group. Both had family members who contributed $100,000 to pass Prop 8. Now both companies are generous supporters of a variety of LGBT organizations.

Our one remaining boycott is against Terry Caster’s A-1 Self Storage Company. Terry Caster and his family gave a whopping $693,000 to Prop 8. Caster was even quoted in the San Diego Union-Tribune saying that gay marriage “would create a sick society.”

During the summer of 2008, we discovered the active involvement of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon Church) in Prop 8. The Mormon Church had taken over virtually every aspect of the Yes on 8 campaign.

Mormon families contributed approximately $30 million of the $40 million raised, the Church produced 27 slick commercials, put up an expensive web site, bussed in thousands of volunteers from Utah, had massive phone banks yet only reported a mere $2078 in non-monetary contributions three days before the election. Two weeks later I filed a sworn complaint with the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) against the Mormon Church for not reporting its vast financial involvement in the campaign.

The Commission prosecuted the case, and conducted an unprecedented 19 month investigation of the Salt Lake City based Church’s finances. Three weeks ago the FPPC found the Mormon Church guilty of 13 counts of late reporting and they were fined $5539. That was the first time a religion was found guilty of election irregularities in the 36 year history of the FPPC.

I also have done battle with the Mormon Church’s front group, the infamous National Organization for Marriage (NOM). I have challenged all of their false and misleading actions for the last two years. It was all of their arrogant and illegal campaign activities last fall in Maine that was the final straw.

NOM contributed over $1.9 million to take away that state’s recently passed right to marry for all, and completely disregarded Maine’s long-standing election law in the process. NOM was required to report all its contributor names of $100 and more to election officials. NOM refused, and continues to refuse to turn over their records, even after being ordered to do so by three federal judges and the Attorney General of Maine. I have attended three separate Commission meetings in Maine to make sure they comply with the Maine election law.

As a result of all my efforts, I was subpoenaed by the National Organization for Marriage last September as part of their federal law suit, ProtectMarriage.com v. Bowen. That law suit was filed in California by the official Yes on Prop 8 committee and NOM to invalidate all campaign reporting laws in California. They subpoenaed me strictly to harass me and make me spend a lot of money. Thanks to the generous support of so many of you who contributed to my legal defense fund, Five for Fred, most all of the legal costs have been covered.

Now as we take on new challenges and go in new directions, we have passed a Board resolution to officially change our name. From this day forward, Californians Against Hate will be known as Rights Equal Rights.

Our new name reflects our new direction and makes us more national in scope.

Rest assured, that I have never been more determined and motivated to help lead the LGBTQ community in our fight for full equal rights in this country.

Younger people who begin to realize that they might be lesbian, gay, bi-sexual transgender or queer will soon be afforded all the same rights as their brothers, sisters friends and neighbors.

That is what our founding fathers had in mind when they wrote in the Declaration of Independence, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.”

We will settle for nothing less.

Best regards,

Fred Karger
www.RightsEqualRights.com

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, Tuesday, June 8, 2010

Fines Proposed Against Mormon Church for Prop 8 Campaign Finance Violations

WASHINGTON – The Human Rights Campaign today hailed a proposal by the California Fair Political Practices Committee (FPPC) that would fine The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS) for failing to report all of its late non-monetary contributions in its efforts to pass Proposition 8 in California in 2008. While the recommended fine of just more than $5,500 for the unreported late contributions of $36,968 to the Yes on 8 campaign may seem inconsequential, it represents a pattern of blatant disregard for California election laws and provides ongoing evidence that the Mormon Church was a significant leader in the campaign to repeal marriage equality, even while it evaded standard reporting requirements and denied its involvement.

HRC President Joe Solmonese also commended the efforts of Fred Karger of Californians Against Hate, for filing the initial FPPC complaint that has shed light on the anti-equality activities of the Mormon Church. The issue, scheduled to be discussed at its June 10th meeting, follows the January 2009 admission by the Mormon Church to the FPPC that it failed to report in-kind contributions to the Yes on 8 campaign of $190,000. Previously the Mormon Church had failed to disclose its real involvement in the Proposition 8 campaign, as California law required it to do.

“Thanks to Fred Karger’s dogged pursuit of the truth, we now know the Mormon Church not only violated the law in its election work to pass Prop 8, it most likely did so purposely” said Solmonese. “It’s just not credible that a multi-billion dollar, sophisticated organization like the LDS Church didn’t know or understand the election law requirements. California requires early disclosure so voters know who’s behind these referendum fights and clearly, the Mormon Church worked overtime to keep their full involvement hidden from the people of California.”

A copy of the FPPC complaint is available at the link.