ShareThis Page

This is grass-roots?

| Friday, May 9, 2008

For an organization that claims "We are grassroots to the core," acts as if it is hiding a lot of AstroTurf.

The politically conservative nonprofit is happy to talk about its worthy online petition campaigns, such as the recent one claiming more than 100,000 signatures to oppose an Al Gore-inspired carbon-tax scheme that supposedly would cost taxpayers $1.2 trillion. But is very tight-lipped about talking about itself.

Odd indeed for a truly grassroots movement.

Of course, is free to be as forthcoming or as deceptive about its roots as it wants. However, when it claims that its leadership team "holds a strong and unwavering commitment to conservative, pro-family and pro-faith values ... (that) guide our decision-making process," it might want to consider practicing what it preaches.

The telephone interview with President Steve Elliott this week did not go well. It was going to be your basic who, what, when, where, why and how type of "phoner." But after responding to a few basic questions about (since I never heard of it until its news release hit my desk), Mr. Elliott said that he would speak with me only about his petition drive and that any background questions should be handled by spokesman Ron De Jong.

Elliott then hung up.

Make that "who, what ... and huh?"

The Maxwell, Iowa, address for donations to the grassroots organization is clearly displayed on its Web site. But its 2006 IRS 990 form states its address is Bethesda, Md., near Washington, D.C. tells visitors to its Web site that it has "prepared this special page to provide friends like you with answers to some of the most frequently asked questions we receive."

Presumably, some of the questions not asked frequently include the size of the budget and staff, the availability of the most recent 990 filing and the group's association with a (depending on your politics) famous or infamous public relations firm.

A principal of a slick Washington-area PR firm, Shirley & Banister Public Affairs, was involved in producing the Willie Horton TV spot in 1988 that helped seal the fate of Democrat presidential candidate Michael Dukakis. The following is from , which monitors PR professionals engaged in politics and public policy issues:

Those nice folks over at (Craig) Shirley & (Diana) Banister Public Affairs have let us know of a new ad from an organization called, touted as a "conservative online political activist group" aimed to counter the power of the "radical Left" and

Hiring a slick PR firm doesn't sound very grassroots-ish.

Mr. De Jong said it was a short-term relationship, maybe a few months in 2006.

Diana Banister said there had been no connection with in the last five years.

When asked a few times about the organization's finances, Mr. De Jong first said he didn't know the size of the organization that he speaks for. He also said he "could ask around" about that 990 form. When I offered to ask the bookkeeper for him, De Jong said, "She will call, dude. Relax. I'll take care of it for you. I am a man of my word."

As of Thursday noon, no one had called this dude.

The petition drives of no doubt help hold government accountable. And that is commendable. If only would just act more accountable.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.