A national nonprofit that’s drawn criticism for allowing corporations to write legislation directly with state lawmakers can be traced to bills introduced in Minnesota last session, including language that would shield large corporations from consumer lawsuits and undermine greenhouse gas reduction goals.

The bills were revealed as Common Cause released a report on the influence of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), which is financially supported by corporations like Koch Industries and Wal-Mart. At regular conferences, including one going on in New Orleans right now, these corporations draft corporate-friendly legislation that is approved by state legislators on legislative task forces and then introduced at state capitols across the country without disclosure that the business interests wrote them.

“The work of ALEC shows how the Minnesota capitol is governed by corporate lobbyists instead of main street voters,” said Mike Dean, executive director of Common Cause Minnesota. “Dozens of corporations are investing millions of dollars to write business-friendly legislation that is being passed into law without public knowledge and often at the expense of the public interest.”

Common Cause Minnesota found a number of recent Minnesota bills that mirrored ALEC counterparts:

• Voter Restrictions: (HF 89, SF 479) Bill that critics say would suppress voter turnout. ALEC legislation.
• Taxation of Moist Snuff Tobacco: (HF 1079) This bill, created by tobacco companies, would create a tax break for moist tobacco. ALEC legislation.
• Cheeseburger Bill: (HF 264, SF 160) This bill partially shields large food companies from consumer lawsuits. ALEC connection from Inside ALEC magazine.
• End Greenhouse Gas Emission Goals (HF 509) This bill opposes efforts to restrict the emission of greenhouse gases. ALEC legislation.

The ALEC conference in New Orleans this week includes workshops about pension reform, privatization of Medicaid and the benefits of C02 (in a global warming context).

ALEC documents and draft bills were recently leaked to the Center for Media and Democracy by a whistleblower. The leak includes more than 800 ALEC draft bills on corporate-friendly issues. The leak led to a series of articles in The Nation magazine and Pro Publica detailing a relationship that critics say allows corporate lobbying without disclosure, as well as rampant corporate influence in the drafting of legislation.

Common Cause is currently challenging ALEC’s nonprofit status. Common Cause President Bob Edgar summed up criticism of ALEC to the Los Angeles Times: ”Dozens of corporations are paying millions of dollars a year to write business-friendly legislation that is becoming law in statehouses from coast to coast.”

The report found that the 22 known ALEC-affiliated companies had directly donated $141 million to campaigns and candidates since 2001. Minnesota’s campaign finance laws limited the financial donations in the state to $151,000, with large amounts coming from Flint Hills Resources, which is affiliated with Koch Industries, and State Farm Insurance.

The Minnesota Independent previously linked U.S. Rep. Erik Paulsen to the organization as a member of the federal affairs arm.

Related:

Kiffmeyer: 30 Minnesota legislators are ALEC members

Minnesota Reps. Kiffmeyer, Shimanski attend ALEC conference in New Orleans

Are you a member of the legislature or legislative staff with knowledge of ALEC’s doings in Minnesota? Send us an email: jcollins@minnesotaindependent.com.

As Minnesota heads into a contentious campaign season where the state is expected to be flooded with outside donations, the state agency responsible for documenting campaign contributions and lobbying disclosures is shuttered along with the rest of state government.

The Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board was one of the state agencies deemed not to be essential by the state in the shutdown, which started July 1. The board collects records and makes judgments on campaign finance cases. All records are typically available to the public through the board’s website, which is also closed.

Mike Dean, executive director of Common Cause Minnesota, told the Minnesota Independent that the impact now is small, but that an extended shutdown could be a “serious issue” for the state. The board is already expected to take another cut in next year’s budget.

“The campaign finance board has been so underfunded over the last five years that they’re barely able to keep up with the problems that exist out there when it comes to enforcing Minnesota’s campaign finance laws,” Dean said. “They’re already understaffed, and now you’re going to take this period of time away from them — maybe it’s a week, maybe it’s two — but if it’s six or eight weeks, there’s going to be a significant backlog.”

Fundraising for the controversial vote on a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage has already begun, and the board ruled the last day before shutdown that groups involved in this issue do need to disclose donors.

“The one area I’m most concerned about though is that many of our campaign finance laws now are not being enforced,” Dean said. “You don’t have the watchdog, which is basically the campaign finance board, out there monitoring campaign activity, then identifying possible violations, then prosecuting those violations.”

“It’s basically the Wild West right now of campaign finance laws,” Dean said.

Minneapolis-based retailer Target told investors on Wednesday that the company will not be taking sides on the anti–gay marriage amendment slated for the 2012 ballot. The shareholders meeting in Pittsburgh, the first held since a nationwide boycott targeted the stores last fall over its corporate contributions to Republican gubernatorial candidate Tom Emmer, drew protesters critical of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision and members of the LGBT community. Target’s announcement comes as Twin Cities LGBT Pride festivities get under way — an event for which Target is a major sponsor.

The Minnesota Legislature passed an amendment last month that would let voters decide whether to codify a ban on same-sex marriage in the Minnesota Constitution. State voters will decide that issue in 2012, though same-sex marriage is currently illegal in Minnesota.

“Our position at this particular time is that we are going to be neutral on that particular issue, as we would be on other social issues that have polarizing points of view,” CEO Gregg Steinhafel told shareholders. “We’re a retail store, we welcome everybody,” he added. “We have a broad team-member base, every shape and size and color. And so we are a very inclusive organization… We’re going to continue to monitor, we’re going to continue to assess, and see how that develops.”

Target took heat last fall when campaign finance reports showed Target giving $150,000 to MN Forward, an independent expenditure committee that produced ads in support of Emmer who has been a staunch opponent of rights for LGBT Minnesotans. The revelation sparked a nationwide boycott.

And at Wednesdays’ shareholders meeting the issue came up again and again. Nearly a dozen shareholders grilled Steinhafel on Target’s political giving, according to the Pioneer Press.

Target made some changes to its corporate political expenditures in February but, as the Minnesota Independent reported at the time, it was not enough to dissuade those critical of Target’s donation to Emmer.

Thomas Waters, advocacy chair of the Delta Foundation, an LGBT group in Pennsylvania, also attended the protest and noted that it’s incorrect to label Target as homophobic.

“One problem with that boycott effort was that Target got painted as being ‘homophobic.’ This isn’t really accurate,” he said. “Target, the corporation, has had business values of respecting everyone and being pro-gay in the sense of being welcoming and supporting of the LGBT community. That was still true, even while, as a corporation, they were giving vast sums of money, which was knowingly going to anti-gay politicians.”

He said that corporate giving to politicians that oppose rights for LGBT people was not in line with Target’s typical policies on inclusion.

“They acted in a way that was not aligned with their corporate values. That doesn’t make them homophobes, but it does call into question their value system,” he said. “Is their support for the LGBT community real? More likely, it is real, but there is a problem in the way the corporation acts and makes decisions regarding how they will use profits.”

Target has in the past been a major sponsor of Twin Cities LGBT Pride, where Target temporary tattoos and tchotchkes are ubiquitous. And the retailer will again be one of the prime sponsors of the monthlong series of events.

But on a larger scale, protesters at Wednesday’s shareholder meeting are concerned about unbridled corporate spending in political campaigns.

Mike Dean, executive director of Common Cause Minnesota, a group that works for more transparency in politics, attended the demonstration at the shareholders meeting in Pittsburgh.

“Target should stick to business and stop meddling in our democracy,” he said. “Target Corporation has failed to learn from the controversy last year by continuing to make corporate political donations.”

The National Organization for Marriage and the Minnesota Family Council have registered with the state campaign finance board to actively encourage voters to support an anti–gay marriage amendment on the 2012 ballot. The organizations are the target of an investigation by the Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board following a complaint that both groups failed to disclose lobbying efforts in the 2010 election.

MFC and NOM created Minnesota for Marriage and registered it as a ballot question committee late last week, a designation that will allow it to begin fundraising. John Helmberger, CEO of the Family Council, is listed as the chair of Minnesota for Marriage as well as its treasurer.

Brian Brown, head of the National Organization for Marriage, registered as a lobbyist with the campaign finance board in early May, less than two weeks after the Minnesota Independent reporting on a pending investigation with the board over alleged lobbying violations.

Common Cause Minnesota filed a complaint with that board this spring alleging that a series of ads put out by MFC and NOM violated lobbying rules. The MFC allegedly violated the rules by failing to disclose spending on ads that urged constituents to contact their legislators in an effort to get an anti–gay marriage amendment on the ballot in 2012. Common Cause also alleged that NOM should have been registered as a lobbyist when it ran ads along with MFC.

And on May 6, Brown registered as a lobbyist in Minnesota.

The Associated Press also notes that the Minnesota Catholic Conference, the policy wing of the Roman Catholic church in Minnesota, is also involved in the Minnesota for Marriage effort.

Minnesotans United for All Families, the coalition of organizations that oppose the amendment, has not registered with the board, but OutFront Minnesota, the lead group in that coalition has registered as a ballot question committee.

The Republican Governors Association (RGA) donated another $400,000 to Minnesota’s Future LLC on September 21, bringing the total amount of RGA contributions to the group this election cycle at $830,000, according to an IRS quarterly report released Friday.

Unlike the RGA, Minnesota’s Future files campaign finance reports with the Minnesota state government. Their last disclosure only included donations up to Sept. 15. Aside from the $830,000 from the RGA, the group’s only other contribution was $1,500 from the group’s registered agent, Jeff Larson.

The IRS report shows $779,500 sent from an Oakdale address registered with the IRS as “Minnesota’s Future LLC” to an independent expenditure committee of the same name in Circle Pines.

Common Cause Minnesota previously filed a complaint against the RGA, Minnesota’s Future and Minnesota’s Future LLC, alleging that the groups coordinated to funnel money without disclosing required donor information.

The Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board could fine each of the groups up to $1.7 million. The board meets on November 1 and is expected to make a decision on the complaint shortly after.

Minnesota’s Future has funded attack ads against Democratic candidate for governor Mark Dayton.

A call to the group requesting comment was not returned.

Patrick Caldwell contributed to this article.

A government watchdog group said in a complaint filed with the campaign finance board Thursday that a trio of Republican groups conspired to conceal important campaign finance information. Common Cause Minnesota said the “scheme” was developed to avoid aspects of Minnesota’s campaign finance disclosure laws.

The group alleges that the Republican Governor’s Association funneled money through Minnesota’s Future LLC to Minnesota’s Future, an independent expenditure committee with the same name. Mike Dean, Common Cause Minnesota’s executive director said the violation could result in $5.1 million in fines. Minnesota’s Future has produced two ads attacking DFL gubernatorial candidate Mark Dayton. The Minnesota Independent reported on the funneling of money to the group last week.

“Common Cause has uncovered a scheme by Minnesota’s Future Political Fund to avoid key aspects of Minnesota’s disclosure law by funneling a $428,000 contribution through a shell corporation,” Dean told reporters at a press conference on Thursday.

Dean said that Minnesota’s Future LLC was set up just weeks before $428,000 was was funneled through it by the Republican Governor’s Association (RGA) to Minnesota’s Future Political Fund. About $390,000 went to the political fund. He said the LLC acted as an intermediary between the RGA and the political fund, and was able to bypass certain reporting requirements.

“The three groups together violated numerous state statutes,” he said. He said the violations could result in a fine as high as 5.1 million civil penalty and could also result in criminal prosecution. “So this is extremely serious violation,” he added.

“The scheme that was created was a clear and deliberate attempt by Minnesota’s Future and Republican Governor’s Association to avoid source disclosure law,” said Dean.

He said there were four laws that the LLC broke. They failed to register as a political committee, failed to report receipts and expenditures, failed to fill out a 42-day pre-general election report, and failed to fill out a source disclosure form.

He said the political committee broke the law when it accepted the $390,000 and that it filed a false statement with the finance board.

He added that the RGA circumvented the law by not filing a source disclosure form.

Common Cause is asking the campaign finance board to move this complaint through an expedited process.

Dean explained the difference between this case and the activities of left-leaning groups such as WIN Minnesota which passed through money from the Democratic Governor’s Association to groups that support DFL candidates. WIN Minnesota is a different type of organization, a 501(c)4, and followed the law, he said. “We may not like it, but they did it the right way,” he said.

The LLC had no other activity than the direct pass through of funds.

He said that all the RGA had to do was give the funds directly to the political fund instead of funneling it through the LLC.

“That’s all they had to do. That would have been the easiest thing.”

He said that protests earlier this summer over Target’s contributions to Minnesota Forward, a group that spent those contributions on ads supporting GOP gubernatorial candidate Tom Emmer might have prompted the groups to try and hide the donations.

“I think this came off of the Target backlash where we saw immense public pressure bring put on corporations who were involved in politics,” he said. “They saw what happened with Target and were looking for ways to hide those contributions.”

Here’s video of the press conference courtesy of TheUptake:

Gregg Steinhafel, Photo: Target Corporation

After weeks of controversy, Target CEO Gregg Steinhafel sent employees a letter apologizing for the company’s $150,000 donation to MN Forward, a group backing Republican candidate Tom Emmer, which drew fire from gay rights supporters due to anti-gay stances.

Steinhafel wrote that the company was sorry for unintended impacts the donations might have had on people. He said the company will conduct a “strategic review and analysis of our decision-making process for financial contributions in the public policy arena.”

“The intent of our political contribution to MN Forward was to support economic growth and job creation. While I firmly believe that a business climate conducive to growth is critical to our future, I realize our decision affected many of you in a way I did not anticipate, and for that I am genuinely sorry.”

The apology comes after weeks of criticism for the company, including threats to boycott, and growing opposition from other Emmer opponents.

Common Cause of Minnesota, a group that just last week pushed companies to make commitments that they wouldn’t meddle in elections, renewed their focus on the company, with Common Cause Executive Director Mike Dean urging Target to commit to the organization’s clean election pledge:

“Target’s apology is a good first step, but it needs to commit to not making future political expenditures…As a good corporate citizen, Target should invest in our community rather than the politics that divide it.”

The apology wasn’t enough for the group Boycott Arizona Minnesota (BAM!), which is sticking with its plans to protest a South Minneapolis Target store this afternoon. “Sorry doesn’t cut it! We want action,” the group wrote on its Facebook page. “[N]o real steps to correct the situation have taken place. It’s not out of the ordinary for a political [contributor] to ask for a contribution to be returned.”

State Capitol. Photo: Wikipedia

When a stubborn government official refuses to release public information as required under Minnesota law, a costly and lengthy lawsuit is often a citizen’s only recourse.

But state Rep. Gene Pelowski, DFL-Winona, has authored a bill that will simplify, cheapen and shorten the process used by citizens and the media to gain access to public government information.

“In the transformation to the age of information, we should not only be able to see that public data is there, we should have access to it in a timely manner, Pelowski said. “We shouldn’t have anyone who is in possession of public data being able to say, ‘I’ll give it to you when I damn well please, or take me to court.’”

The reforms are an attempt to embrace the spirit of Minnesota’s data practice laws, which presumes that all government data is public and sets general standards for how to respond to data requests.

The bill’s the first major step in a series of open government reforms spurred by the Minnesota Newspaper Association (MNA).

The increasing complexity of Minnesota’s data practice law is an obstacle to citizen access, said MNA lawyer Mark Anfinson. The law has grown to about 115 pages in the last 25 years, so it’s often seen as simpler for officials to err on the side of withholding information than releasing it.

“It doesn’t just undermine the spirit [of the law], it fundamentally undermines the whole effective operation of the statute,” Anfinson said.

The news media once led the way in pushing government to disclose public data through lawsuits, Anfinson said, but that pressure to allow access has largely disappeared as the newspaper industry’s health deteriorated. Court cases can last up to a year and typically cost between $7,000 and $20,000 in legal fees.

“With their diminished resources they’re less likely to spend the money, which is harder to come by, on these sort of lawsuits,” Anfinson said. “If some people in government realize the great majority of folks concerned with information and the law aren’t going to sue them — it obviously dilutes the incentive to comply with the law.”

Instead of forcing citizens to take government to district court, the cases would be heard by administrative judges in the Minnesota Department of Administration, which volunteered to take the court cases from the overburdened circuit courts and has helped shape the bill over the last few months.

Holding hearings with administrative judges would allow the cases to be decided within six weeks, rather than the six months to a year typical of district court cases.

“That process will be much quicker, much cheaper and probably more reliable over all,” Anfinson said. “It will be more consistent in how the law is interpreted because you’ll have a small group of judges who over time will become more familiar with the law.”

Rep. Gene Pelowski

The high cost connected to circuit court cases would be replaced with a $1,000 fee, which would be refunded if the citizen wins the case against the government, along with up to $5,000 in lawyers fees.

“Virtually every case that’s ever been litigated in district court involving the data practice act is an exhibit in favor of this reform,” Anfinson said. “The present enforcement mechanism is basically broken.”

Although there’s been a lot of careful clarification of the bill’s language, it hasn’t run into much actual opposition, mostly because in addition to helping citizens and the media, it also benefits government bodies.

“Keeping the process simpler will cost them much less in legal fees when they’re defending cases and will knock out frivolous requests more effectively,” Anfinson said. “It will just clarify things in a way that will save the government a ton of money over time.”

Pelowski said the bill, which has bipartisan support, will likely be heard in the House Civil Justice committee this coming week. A companion bill sponsored by Sen. Don Betzold, DFL-Fridley, is also moving through the state Senate and will be heard next in the Senate Judiciary committee.

The state Information Policy and Analysis Division (IPAD) offers citizens and government bodies education on data practice issues. People who’d like to challenge a government body’s decision on a data practice request can contact the agency for a free, non-binding advisory opinion (pdf).

Under the current system, there’s a strong reluctance in government to release information that is rightly the public’s, said Minnesota Common Cause Executive Director Mike Dean.

Increased access to public information would allow citizens to hold their government accountable, he said.

“By shining a bright light on these things, you’ll tend to see less corruption, you’ll tend to see less problems within government,” Dean said. “The best disinfectant is sunlight.”

Ramsey County District Judge Kathleen Gearin didn’t buy plaintiff Robert Carney’s argument that the state’s Political Contribution Refund (PRF) program was a tax refund and not the kind of spending program that is vulnerable to gubernatorial unallotment (pdf).

Common Cause didn’t buy it either, and for that reason didn’t join the suit brought by Carney (who announced his candidacy for governor this week). But the group has been threatening since last summer to go to court on behalf of the PRF, which reimburses Minnesotans who make small political donations. And now they really might, said Mike Dean, the group’s executive director, in a statement.

Gearin’s ruling against Pawlenty’s use of unallotment in the earlier Brayton case “places a powerful check on the power of the state’s executive branch,” said Dean, “and the unallotment of the PCR should be viewed in that light.”

Day, who served as Senate Minority leader from 1997 to 2007, tells the Strib that racinos could help fund a new stadium, bringing in $125 million a year.

According to the Savage Pacer, he sees such racetrack/casinos as an answer to the state’s budget problems as well.

“Racinos will bring thousands of jobs and $250 million a biennium in revenue to our state,” he said. “The money could be used for programs such as education, transportation, health care or to fund a stadium. With the recent news of a $1.2 billion budget shortfall, it’s clear we need racino now.”

Common Cause Minnesota reacted quickly with a statement, noting that Day’s immediate registration as a lobbyist suggests the state should implement a two-year waiting period before departing legislators register as lobbyists. Day is the second Minnesota legislator in as many years to leave office for such a reason; in June 2008, DFL Sen. Dan Larson stepped down to join a law and lobbying firm in Minneapolis.

“When a legislator leaves office to become a lobbyists it only further erodes the public’s trust in their elected officials,” said Mike Dean, Common Cause Minnesota’s executive director. “The public is growing suspicious of elected officials who may use his or her government position to line up a future job by currying favor with special interests. The mere perception of impropriety underlying this type of behavior is detrimental to the public’s faith in government.”

Day’s resignation takes effect on Jan. 8.

Update: Sen. John Marty, who authored the Senate’s “Revolving Door” legislation, issued a statement Tuesday. “Most states recognize this conflict of interest and its potential to further erode public trust, and have already shut the revolving door,” the Roseville DFLer said. “It is time for Minnesota to do the same.”