Graphic for HRC's campaign

The Human Rights Campaign pledged Friday to donate $150,000 to political causes in Minnesota to offset a donation by retail giant Target to MN Forward, a political group backing GOP gubernatorial candidate Tom Emmer. HRC will be donating $100,000 to WIN Minnesota, $30,000 to candidates (including Emmer’s DFL opponent Mark Dayton) and $20,000 to OutFront Minnesota. The group also said it will be ramping up its political efforts in the state because Minnesota could be the next state to allow gay marriage.

Target took considerable heat from LGBT advocates for its donation to MN Forward and, by extension, Emmer, who activists say is anti-gay. HRC asked Target to also donate to pro-LGBT causes to balance the donation but Target refused.

HRC says that its new political donations in Minnesota are as much about Target as they are about winning gay marriage in the state.

“We’ve understood long before the Target situation that Minnesota was poised, as is New York, to be the next state to win marriage equality,” HRC president Joe Solmonese told the Associated Press.

USNVA is under investigation in Ohio, Florida, Hawaii, Virginia, Missouri and New Mexico for allegedly defrauding donors, and two weeks ago, Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray was granted an emergency court order to shut down USNVA and prevent it from taking any more donations in the state.

“The closer we look at this organization, the more outrageous its conduct appears,” Cordray said at the time. “While very little concrete evidence is available how those funds were spent helping vets or their families, a great deal of information is available about political contributions made by Thompson personally to candidates or through the political action committee he created and to which he was the sole contributor, NAVPAC.”

At least $35,000 of donations from the group or its founder went to Minnesota politicians and entities, according to an investigation by the St. Petersburg Times (Fla.). In multiple gifts over several years, former Sen. Coleman took in $21,500, while Rep. Bachmann received the most recent contribution, $10,000 donated in April. The Republican Party of Minnesota received $2,000; the Minnesota House Republican Campaign Committee got $5,000, and Republican state House candidate David Carlson took in $500. Carlson, a candidate for state Senate, had listed his membership with the USNVA on his campaign website; the site was recently taken down.

In Virginia, nearly a dozen candidates responded to the controversy by donating contributions from Thompson or the USNVA to charity. Here in Minnesota, it’s unclear whether USNVA gifts have been returned or redirected to other charities. None of the Minnesota groups or candidates have responded to the Minnesota Independent’s query about their actions or plans related to these contributions.

Thompson and USNVA expended great effort in lobbying legislators in Virginia to make the group exempt from nonprofit disclosure laws. One of the lobbyists brought to Virginia by USNVA is Edwin Cain, a Minnesotan who’s done lobbying for the communities of Granite Falls, Stillwater and Marshall, as well as for the Marshall Area Chamber of Commerce. Cain could not be reached for comment.

USNVA’s board lists two Minnesotans among its ranks, Commander John Clinton or a Lt. Commander Reint Reinders, but the Minnesota Independent couldn’t verify their residency in the state. Similarly, the group lists several officers on its 990s — or nonprofit disclosure forms — but a report by the St. Petersburg Times says they do not exist.

Also missing: USNVA’s legal team: On Wednesday, attorneys representing the group abruptly withdrew as USNVA’s legal counsel, citing an inability to contact USNVA head Thompson. The lawyers were defending against attempts by the state of Ohio to seize all of USNVA’s records.

USNVA has raised more than $99 million since its founding in 2002. The following is a list of contributions made by the USNVA or Bobby Thompson to Minnesota campaigns or committees (PDF):

12/9/2006   Coleman for U.S. Senate, Minnesota $1,250
3/28/2007   Coleman for U.S. Senate, Minnesota $1,050
8/15/2007   Minnesota-Coleman Victory Committee $14,600
12/31/2007 Coleman for U.S. Senate, Minnesota $2,300
1/4/2008    Republican Party of Minnesota $1,000
1/4/2008    Republican Party of Minnesota $1,000
1/15/2008   Coleman for U.S. Senate, Minnesota $2,300
8/25/2008   Minnesota House Repub. Campaign Com. $5,000
9/4/2008   David J. Carlson for Minnesota House $500
4/7/2010   Minnesota-Bachmann Victory Committee $10,000

Campaign contributions from Goldman have become toxic in a contentious campaign cycle that focuses on Wall Street and bailouts.

Since news of the fraud charges last week, Republican Rep. Mark Kirk of Illinois has returned $20,000 he received from the financial company, and Democratic Sen. Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas has vowed not to take any more contributions. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell have attacked each other for close relationships with Goldman, and Republicans have criticized the nearly $1 million that President Obama accepted while he was a candidate for president.

In Minnesota, Paulsen took $2,000 so far this campaign cycle and Klobuchar has taken $1,000, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Ellison and Franken have taken a bit less, at $500 and $250, respectively. In the 2008 cycle, former Sen. Norm Coleman was by far the biggest beneficiary, taking in $19,200. That cycle Rep. Collin Peterson took $5,000, Franken took $2,800 and Rep. Michele Bachmann took $500.

The Lewin Group is owned by Ingenix, a subsidiary of UnitedHealth, which posted hefty profits for the first half of this year, thanks in part to a federal subsidy called Medicare Advantage. Despite the profit from public programs, UnitedHealth has been actively working against a public option as part of Congress’ health reform package.

Lewin Group’s close ties to one of the world’s largest health insurers has been lost on the media and many members of Congress. Reps. Michele Bachmann and John Kline, and Gov. Tim Pawlenty have called the group “non-partisan” and “independent” in arguments against the creation of a public health insurance option for the uninsured and underinsured (Bachmann and Kline were also the recipients of $2,000 each in campaign contributions from UnitedHealth).

On his blog, Kline wrote, “114 million — Number of individuals who could lose their current coverage under the bill, according to non-partisan actuaries at the Lewin Group.” And in a column at the conservative website Townhall, he reiterated the figure: “A June study by the independent Lewin Group found that 114 million Americans would be forced out of their current private health coverage under the House Democratic plan.”

Bachmann at her blog at Townhall wrote, “Furthermore, an independent analysis by the non-partisan Lewin Group found that 114 million Americans would lose their current health insurance.”

Pawlenty, in a report (PDF) with Rep. John Boehner, said, “A June 2009 study by the Lewin Group, an independent research organization, projects that the government-run insurance plan proposed by House Democrats will force two out of every three Americans to lose their current health coverage.”

Despite all the rhetoric about workers being “forced” into government plans, Kline, Bachmann and Pawlenty conveniently leave out the Lewin Group’s other finding: a public option would be 30 to 40 percent cheaper than private options.

Ellison’s office said the characterization of his contributions was “shameful” and shouldn’t be seen as an indicator of support in the district.

The article, researched and written by Eric Ostermeier, suggested that Ellison’s out-of-state contributions came from Muslims and asked, “Who does Keith Ellison represent?”

“Ellison’s Page 1 story in becoming the first Muslim elected to Congress has coincided with a surge in campaign contributions from out-of-state, particularly in states with some of the largest numbers of Muslim-American residents (e.g. California, Illinois, New Jersey, Michigan),” wrote Ostermeier. ”

“Our campaign staff and volunteers reflect the community Keith represents. I don’t feel that was reflected [in the report],” said Ellison’s communications director Rick Jauert.

Jauert didn’t dispute that Ellison’s religion was a factor in the campaign contributions and asked, “Why does it matter?”

“I take offense at the notion that there’s a significance that out-of-state contributions were from Muslims. We wouldn’t do the same analysis of evangelical Christian contributions or other religions,” he said. “Why should we let religion get injected into this? This is 2009.”

Jauert said Ellison works on issues that impact everyone in the district. “The economy doesn’t care what religion you are,” he said.

Ostermeier defended his report, saying he made no explicit connections between Ellison’s religion and his funding base.

“The analysis in no place discusses the religious background of Ellison’s actual contributors,” he told the Independent. “Congressman Ellison is the one who connects those dots with his rejoinder. The analysis offers a descriptive account of the demographics of some of the states from which the Congressman is raising such a large percentage of campaign funds.”

The article raises the question of whether it’s important to constituents where a legislator receives financial support. A recent report found that 97 percent of House members raised more than half of their campaign war chests from outside their districts. That report includes political action committee money, which the Smart Politics report did not.

Smart Politics put an emphasis on the first quarter of 2009, when most of Ellison’s contributions came from a fundraiser in Michigan, the state he grew up in. Around 45 people have contributed so far this year, several of whom are members of Ellison’s family in Michigan. Ostermeier’s conclusions are based on $26,000 in quarterly contributions, far less than the $300,000 Rep. Michele Bachmann pulled in.

Despite that, as Smart Politics notes, Ellison has received a higher percentage of individual campaign contributions from out-of-state since his election in 2006 than other members of Minnesota’s delegation.

The recent emphasis on campaign contributions notwithstanding, the people of the Ellison’s district sent him back to Washington with the highest margin of victory in a contested congressional election in state history. As Ostermeier noted in January, “[I]n 2008 Ellison registered the single largest contested victory for a 1-term U.S. House incumbent in the history of the Gopher State – dating back over 150 years.”

Jauert agreed. “He had one the the highest, if not the highest, margins of victory in his class so he must be doing something right.”

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Coleman ranks second, right behind John McCain, in contributions received from business associations this election cycle. Why so much money for an incumbent candidate like Coleman? The chamber is concentrating its efforts on  particularly tight Senate races in Minnesota and Mississippi, L.A. Times notes, because a Democratic win might lead to, among other things, legislation that makes it easier for unions to organize workers.

But an even bigger concern for the chamber’s numerous members is maintaining the lax oversight of the banking and financial industries. As those sectors are taking a $700 billion bailout package, they’re forking over millions to candidates to fight legislation that would result in more oversight or, more accurately, to ensure the lax oversight that resulted in the mortgage crisis continues. This month the chamber swarmed capitol hill with lobbyists calling for a swift passage of the bailout package while at the same time fighting against amendments that would make it easier to file lawsuits against banks receiving federal aid.

Norm Coleman, who favored the bailout package, is no stranger to the finance, real estate, and insurance sectors. Coleman has received more than $2.5 million from those influential industries this election cycle. Since May of this year alone, Coleman has received more than $300,000 from the beleagured mortgage industry.

Republican Congresswoman Michele Bachmann was quick to try to distance herself from ex-con campaign contributor Frank Vennes Jr. when his alleged involvement in the multibillion-dollar Tom Petters financial fraud scandal became public recently. But she showed little hesitation in showering praise on the convicted money-launderer and cocaine-and-gun trafficker a year ago in her letter of recommendation to grant Vennes–who, along with his wife, is among the most generous individual donors to Bachmann’s campaigns–a presidential pardon.

In a letter to the Office of Pardon Attorney dated Dec. 10, 2007, that I obtained yesterday (PDF), Bachmann declared that “granting a pardon to Mr. Vennes is good for society. Mr. Vennes is truly a unique man in that he is not asking for a pardon that he may achieve personal success. By the grace of God, that has been done.”

God, however, may have had a little help from Petters. According to a federal search warrant affidavit used to search Vennes’ Minnetonka home Sept. 24, Vennes hauled in more than $28 million in commissions for his alleged role in luring five investors to pony up $1.2 billion in Petters’ alleged giant Ponzi scheme. Vennes has not yet been charged in the alleged caper.

Bachmann cited Vennes’ reported work with charitable organizations as justification for a pardon for the crimes he committed. Vennes pleaded guilty and no contest in 1987 to federal charges of money laundering, cocaine distribution and illegal firearms sales. He was sentenced to five years in prison, which he served at Sandstone Federal Correctional Institution in Sandstone, Minn.

Bachmann wrote:

“As a U.S. Representative, I am confident of Mr. Vennes’ successful rehabilitation and that a pardon will be good for the neediest of society. Mr. Vennes is seeking a pardon so that he may be further used to help others. As I know from personal experience, Mr. Vennes has used his business position and success to fund hundreds of nonprofit organizations dedicated to helping the neediest in our society. The Fidelis Foundation, backed by Mr. Vennes, has directed over $10.7 million in total gifts in the last three years, and the Fidelis Foundation has ranked #6, #9 and #7 as the largest grant-making foundation in Minnesota over the past three years.”

The Fidelis Foundation is a Plymouth, Minn.-based nonprofit organization “organized to assist Christians in discerning, clarifying and implementing God’s call and direction in their life,” according to the group’s tax filings. Its chairman is G. Craig Howse, Vennes’ lawyer, and the organization leases office space from Howse for $1,300 a month.

Howse has donated $5,000 to Bachmann’s campaign committee since 2007.

Bachmann notes in her letter that Vennes needs a pardon “so he can help more people than he does. Despite his success, Mr. Vennes still encounters the barriers of his past and especially in the area of finance loan documents. This hinders his ability to expand his business which places limits on the support to the neediest in society … a pardon would release the weights of the past that serve no purpose, as Mr. Vennes has stated his desire to help so many more.”

It’s still not clear why Bachmann used her congressional status to try to leverage a presidential pardon for someone who does not even live in her congressional district. At this point, the only apparent connection between Vennes and Bachmann as a congressperson is the $27,400 Vennes and his wife, Kimberly, have donated to Bachmann’s campaign funds since 2005, making the couple among Bachmann’s largest individual contributors. Vennes’ brother and his wife, Greg and Stephanie Vennes, have donated an additional $8,400 to Bachmann since 2005.

It’s also not known whether Bachmann intends to return or donate to charity any or all of the campaign contributions received from the Vennes. Other politicians or candidates who have received campaign donations tainted by the Petters scandal — including Bachmann’s 6th District Democratic opponent, Elwyn Tinklenberg — have done so.

Further clarification on these and other points regarding Bachmann’s relationship with Frank Vennes Jr. has been requested from the congresswoman’s office.

Vennes served time in the 1980s for illegally selling a firearm, cocaine distribution and money laundering. While in prison, he became a devout Christian, and after his release he became a devout Bachmann campaign contributor. Prior to Bachmann’s election (and letter writing), Vennes contributed $14,200 to her campaign; in 2008, he has contributed $4,600. Vennes’ wife Kimberly, who uses the same P.O. box number as Vennes, has contributed another $8,800 over the last three years.

Vennes is a businessman in Excelsior and maintains a residence in Shorewood. Neither location is in the 6th Congressional District.

Petters and a number of his business associates have been raided and/or arrested in connection with what authorities are calling a scheme to make money by defrauding investors. Federal officials say Petters and company collected money from investors to put into electronics that didn’t exist.

The Sunlight Foundation has put together a fascinating animated graph that tracks the political donations from the finance, insurance and real estate sectors and to which party the money has gone. Utilizing Google Motion Chart and 20 years worth of data gathered by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, the chart seeks to demonstrate how Wall Street came to carry such influence in our government.

More: Explore the Google Motion Chart

“The answer is revealed by the fact that the finance, insurance and real estate (FIRE) industries that collectively are at the center of the current crisis are the single-largest sector by far of all the major economic and interest groupings that give campaign contributions to federal politicians,” Ellen Miller of the Sunlight Foundation explains.

Lawyers and law firms make up Obama’s main source for bundlers. His number one bundling buddy is Goldman Sachs, while executives at Lehman Bros and Credit Suisse also have handed over bundles to his campaign.

Who says Washington–and and lack of transparency–can’t be bought?