Posted: 5/12/2007 7:37:56 PM EDT
|
Below is a reply from me to FMD about WGO. Rather than dilute the topic of that thread, I thought I'd just start a new one here. I'd very much welcome any replies. ******* FMD, I won't get into arguments over whether Jim is right or wrong about SB104. As far as Corey Graff/WGO goes, though, I've long believed that he's either a shill for the anti-gun movement, or a shill for anti-gun Democrats. Please hear me out on this. In 2005, WGO reported spending $84,000 on lobbying expenses, while the NRA reported spending $77,000. 2005 was probably the most active year for lobbying on the CCW bill. Last year, WGO reported spending $63,000 on lobbying expenses, even though the CCW bill died in February of last year. WGO reported 13 hours of contact with legislators for 2005, while the NRA had its lobbyist living in Madison almost full-time in a rented apartment for the year. Plus, the lobbyist--Darren LaSorte--had staff. As a board member of the WRPA, as well as the treasurer for the Wisconsin Concealed Carry Movement political action committee, and the founder of the WCCA (now the WCPS), I can tell you that $84,000 is a lot of money to raise. I can't think of any state level gun group that raises that kind of money, except perhaps the Safari Club. How many people do you know who are WGO members? I've encountered only a couple. So, where does WGO's vast amount of cash come from? Is it conceivable that WGO is getting money from larger groups? Maybe the Joyce Foundation, or even from some groups associated with Doyle? Everything is "conceivable," especially when Corey Graff doesn't disclose anything financially. Corey even created a company--Graff Communications--which bills WGO for all sorts of expenses. It's a sole proprietorship owned by Corey Graff. Why? Why wouldn't he just disclose on WGO's IRS form 990 that he receives X number of dollars as a director? Why the need for a separate company? There's a lot of money moving around here, and I find that very suspicious. Last July, Corey Graff announced the formation of a political action committee, WGO-PAC. On the WGO's website, Corey said that the PAC would be devoted to supporting pro-gun candidates. Months later, Corey changed the status of the PAC to an Independent Expenditure Group. IEG's are groups that spend money supporting or attacking a particular candidate. An IEG must state in its filing which candidates the group is going to attack or support. In WGO's case, Corey filed to oppose Jim Doyle, Dave Zien, and Scott Gunderson. By law, the IEG must spend some of its money on every candidate it has registered to support or attack. In WGO's case, Corey spent a few dollars for a cartoon attacking Jim Doyle on WGO's website and in its newsletter. The rest of the money was spent on attacking Zien and Gunderson, with the majority of the money used for radio ads in Zien's district attacking him. I have every piece of information that's publicly available on WGO: tax returns, ethics board filings, election board reports, and more. When I got the report from the elections board for WGO's IED, I contacted some people who had contributed $100 or more to ask them why they contributed money to be used to attack Dave Zien. They didn't know that was what their money was being used for. Corey didn't tell anybody that he had switched the status from PAC to IEG. I never saw any announcement on WGO's website. Did you or anyone else see such an announcement? And, if not, why not? Ask yourself this: why would a group that claims to be pro-gun go after the most pro-gun member of the state senate? Zien was already having a difficult re-election campaign, and WGO helped his opponent. WGO in Corey's own small way helped turn control of the state senate over to one of the most anti-gun members of the state legislature, Senate Majority Leader Judy Robson (D-Beloit). Why? Instead of having a chance of getting a concealed carry bill passed, we're now in the situation where we will likely see passage of a bill banning the private sales of firearms in Milwaukee county, a ban that will go statewide. While the Castle Doctrine bill passed the assembly the other day, it won't survive in the senate. Judy Robson will never allow it out of committee. What kind of "pro-gun" group works to hand control of the state senate over to the anti-gunners? I've thought about this over and over and over, and I can't reach any conclusion except that WGO is working for the anti-gun side. If anyone has another explanation, I'm all ears. |
|
Reposted because I want to be sure I'm hearing this right. ----- Okay, so we've got a few facts. Work with me here... 1. Corey Graf/WGO had $84,000 in lobbying expenses in 2005. Nothing to sneeze at, especially when the NRA itself spent only $77,000. Corey Graf/WGO only had 13 hours of lobbying while the NRA needed to obtain an apartment for their lobbyist because that lobbyist was working full time. Furthermore, the NRA's Lobbyist needed staff due to the number of hours worked. Question: Does this disparity seem odd to anybody? 2. Corey Graf/WGO spent $63,000 on lobbying in 2006. Oddly, the CCW bill died in February 2006. Question: Where did that money go the other 10 months out of the year? 3. Okay, so Corey Graf spent nearly $150,000 in 2005 and 2006. Where did these funds come from? Donors? Sale of goods (bumperstickers, t-shirts, mags, ammo...)? Grants? Gifts from Foundations? I'm not going to speculate that they came from anti or pro gun folks, but it'd be nice to know where and how Corey Graf/WGO gets its funding. Question: Where is that funding come from? 4. Let's talk about transparency. Transparency is all about being able to see the workings of a business or other entity to be sure there's no funny business or fraud. That's sort of hard to do with Corey Graf/WGO because Corey Graf's own company, Graff Communications, gets all sorts of money from WGO for a multitude of expenses. Question: How does anybody know that these expenses are legitimate? Does Graf Communications provide products and/or services at a better rate than other providers? Or, is Graf using gun rights in Wisconsin as an excuse to line his own pockets? Let us remember that a shell business is a great way to hide a ridiculous salary. Furthermore, Graf Communications isn't even a corporation; it's a sole proprietorship. In plain English, Graf Communications is Corey Graf- and WGO is paying Corey Graf directly for unknown good(s) and/or service(s). Question: Does this sound like funny business, or at the very least highly questionable? 5. Let's talk about doing what you said that you're going to do. In July 2006, Corey Graff announced the formation of a political action committee, WGO-PAC. On the WGO's website, Corey said that the PAC would be devoted to supporting pro-gun candidates. However, Corey later changed the WGO-PAC to an Independent Expenditure Group. IEG's are groups that spend money supporting or attacking a particular candidate. An IEG must state in its filing which candidates the group is going to attack or support. In WGO's case, Corey filed to oppose Jim Doyle, Dave Zien, and Scott Gunderson. Question: Is it proper to solicit donations saying that you're going to do x when you are really going to do y? There's also the question of why Corey Graf/WGO never made this change public. 6. So how was this money spent? Sure, Corey Graf spent some money for a cartoon attacking Jim Doyle on WGO's website and in its newsletter. The rest of the money was spent on attacking Zien and Gunderson with the majority of the money used for radio ads in Zien's district attacking him. Question: Does it sound odd to anybody that Corey Graf/WGO would use the majority of the money to attack some of our best friends in office? 7. Individuals who donated $100.00 or more were contacted and asked if they donated to Corey Graf/WGO to defeat Zien and Gunderson. They had no idea their money would be used in that fashion, much less that the PAC they donated to became an IEG. Question: Does this sound right? ----- We've got a group that raised more money than the NRA but we don't know how, outspent the NRA on lobbying but hardly lobbied at all, spent money on the director's own outside business, raisded money as a PAC but quietly changed to an IEG, used that IEG to work against some of our best friends in office, and those that were found who donated money to Corey Graf/WGO had no idea their money was being used like this. The big question: Does ANY of this sound right? |
|
Split these responses off from the other thread.... WGO/Corey Graff may be an idiot, but I don't think they/he is an anti-gun organization plant. The "no compromise" stance on CCW is actually one I admire. If only he were willing to put his money towards a legal defense fund instead of spending money to unseat pols that "compromise" (which one's don't?), I could almost get on board. Even I'm not that staunch of an idealist, and that's saying a lot. ========================================= 
Dick, the only thing I've ever personally seen from WGO was that alarmist piece after the door-to-door gun confiscation in Oshkosh a few years back. Their position was pretty much the same thing that was coming out of GOA and JPFO at the time, and I couldn't really disagree with it (although my tinfoil hat wasn't on tight enough for me to get really worried). Remember also that I substantially agree with their public position that CCW is a right, and should be treated by Wisconsin as such. Hear me out...  I'm not a moron. I know that while Vermont-style carry should be the law here, it's not for a variety of reasons...the least of which is the support of the WGO. To be honest, even if WGO is some sort of "plant" group, they're NOT getting our money, or at least not a substantial amount of it (thanks in part to Mr. Fendry running on about them every time he makes a statement). If everything above is accurate, Corey Graff is running a front group to line his own pockets. It's possible his mystery donors are Dems seeking to split us, and he's okay with that as long as he earns a buck - I don't know, nor do I really care at this point. I guess the bottom line is that we (that's a collective "we") have bigger fish to fry. ========================================
The question I have is "Whose money?" I have serious doubts that WGO raised more money from actual Wisconsin gun owners than the NRA did. Just sayin...
If he's a misguided ally, then Jim's pot is calling Corey's kettle "black". |
|
FMD, with all of the quotes from this or that person, it's very hard to tell who's saying what. So let me state my point again: WGO reported spending $84,000 on lobbying in 2005, a good chunk of which was sent to Graff Communications. WGO reported spending roughly $63,000 last year. It will be a couple of months before I'll see the breakdown in the IRS form 990 as to how much was paid to Graff Communications. Even with that report, though, it will be hard to tell what Corey Graff was actually paid. More problematic, though, is the question of where that money came from. There's no way to find out. The Wisconsin Pro-Gun Movement has never taken in that kind of money, even in the group's best years. The Wisconsin Rifle and Pistol Association has never taken in that kind of money. I have yet to find a statewide gun group that can raise that kind of money. Doesn't that make you wonder if the money isn't coming from larger donors, groups with oodles of George Soros' money to spend? At $20 per member, WGO would need 7,000 paying members a year to spend that kind of money. Given that WGO is regarded at best as a fringe group or, at worst, an enemy, what are the odds that Corey could get 7,000 people to give him $20 a year? That kind of money is NOT coming from gun owners in Wisconsin. I know that like I know my own name. WGO's money is coming from much larger groups. Given what Corey has done, I don't think it's much of a stretch of the imagination to figure out what sort of groups those might be. |
Monkeyleg, you're the one that split this topic off... I just copied nd pasted my replys from the other thread. Look for the "Originally posted by:" header in the quotes to see whose point I was addressing. If there is no "Originally posted by", it's a split from the previous quote, e.g.:
...would be attributable to you, as the previous quote has the "Originally posted by Monkeyleg". This is pretty much the standard of organization when addressing a previous post point by point.
It does. Please re-read what I've written. In essence, I've agreed with your position that WGO is bad. HOWEVER, I belive that complaining about them every chance we get is kind of silly. Adressing points of contention individually (let's say like the NRA does with HCI) is fine, but we're preaching to the choir otherwise. |
I was certainly unaware of all the details of WGO's activities, dollars spent, and their work to unseat Zein. (I might have been late to rehearsal.)
|
LOL. It's quite possible. RCLRC seems to benefit from Jim's presence and awful lot (he shows up at least once a year to collect a check). ETA: FWIW, some of this info (the details) are new to me as well. I guess I just have a slightly different take on it. |
|
FMD, in commenting about the various quotes I was just saying that your post was hard for me to read after a while. Nothing more. While you may know most or even all of what's known about WGO, many people--like glenn_r--don't. That's why I keep posting these details on various forums. There are people I know (even some WCCA/WCPS volunteers) who have given money to WGO because they thought it was a pro-gun group. There were also people who gave money to WGO-PAC because they thought the money would be used to support pro-gun candidates. One of our volunteers gave them $200. He didn't know what Corey was doing with the money. Here's another thing to noodle on: The WCCA never brought in much money. We got enough in contributions to cover our expenses. It was our PAC, the WCCM, that got the large dollars, because people wanted to help pro-gun candidates. The opposite is true of WGO. WGO-PAC raised very little money, while WGO raises a lot of money. My guess is that WGO-PAC didn't raise much money because every person who contributes must be reported on the Elections Board forms. Meanwhile, there's no public disclosure of sources of money going to WGO. This is just one more reason for me to believe that WGO is being funded by groups that aren't friendly to us. If WGO was getting the majority of its money from gun owners, wouldn't it stand to reason that WGO-PAC would have raised a lot more than $5000 or so? The problem for those of us who are concerned about what WGO is doing is that there's absolutely no way to find out where those vast amounts of money are coming from. |