For as long as National Organization for Marriage and Brian S. Brown cause disquiet in our community, they shall have no peace. Because NOM is essentially a proxy for the Catholic Church and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops Mr. Brown is wed to the notions that a) NOM’s integrity is unassailable and; b) that the rules that apply to everyone else do not apply to them. Brown and his lot are wrong on both counts.

Moreover, the fact that the Church disapproves of gay people makes its bishops collectively intellectual antiques. They cannot get away with torturing and burning suspected witches anymore so LGBT people fill the void for supposed perpetrators of evil.

My readers deserve a first look. Here is a portion of the referral that is going out this evening (I am still futzing and proofing):

to Internal Revenue Service regulations:

IRC 501(c)(3) organization may not subsidize any political
intervention activity or substantial lobbying activity of an
affiliated IRC 501(c)4 organization in any manner. The Service has
ruled that a subsidy can take several forms:

  1. Direct
    transfer of funds from the 501(c)3 entity to the other organization.

  2. Paying
    expenses of the other organization.

  3. Non-arm’s-length
    dealing for shared facilities or employees.

  4. Use
    of the IRC 501(c)(3) mailing list on a preferential or non-arm’s
    length basis.

is my considered opinion that National Organization for Marriage
Education Fund (“NOM-Ed”), a 501(c)3 is subsiding National
Organization for Marriage (“NOM”), a 501(c)4 organization. This
calls into question not only the legitimacy of the 501(c)3 but
whether or not contributions for 2015 qualified as tax deductible.

  • At
    the end of 2013 NOM-Ed was owed $1.9 million by NOM. Without those
    loans, NOM would not have been solvent. (It remains technically insolvent.) Management claimed at the
    time that this was an advance of management fees. However, economic
    logic does not support this hypothesis; not in the size of the fess
    and not through liquidation of the debt to date. It would appear
    that the management fee was set arbitrarily to conform to the cash
    requirements of NOM.

  • At
    the end of 2015 NOM owed NOM-Ed $628,000. The reduction in debt
    appears to be a journalized adjustment rather than an actual
    transfer of funds.

  • During
    2015, NOM-Ed’s accounts payable swelled from $139,540 to $593,709
    without any appreciable activity to support funds due vendors.
    Indeed, reviewing program expenditures, there is no apparent justification for these sums other than the activities of NOM, the 501(c)4.

  • Without
    appreciable activity, NOM-Ed claims to have expended $270,000 for
    conferences and conventions and $620,000 in shared costs. An audit
    will most likely confirm that NOM-Ed is paying a substantial amount
    of NOM’s bills. Moreover, is unlikely that shared facilities and
    employees are on an arms-length basis.

  • I
    can confirm, for a fact, that the two organizations are using a
    shared mailing (email) list, again, not on an arms-length basis.

financial desperation causes organizations to violate the rules but
financial desperation does not excuse those violations.

The objective is to cause the organizations to be audited. I am reasonably certain that an audit will confirm the regulatory irregularities. However, the Service is underfunded and understaffed — by GOP design.

By David Cary Hart

Retired CEO. Formerly a W.E. Deming-trained quality-management consultant. Now just a cranky Jewish queer. Gay cis. He/Him/His.