Politicizing the Arts Community: What Did the White House Do Wrong?

The allegations raised in “White House Creates ACORN for the Arts” and prior stories about the NEA enlisting artists who receive government grants to support President Obama’s political goals certainly raise a number of issues.  Foremost among them is whether such actions violate White House policy and potentially federal law.  The White House Counsel was concerned enough about the conference call that it was compelled to issue new guidelines for public outreach meetings, noting that some of the comments on the call may have been “misunderstood as seeking to inappropriately politicize activities of the NEA.”  But beyond violating these White House guidelines, which could result in further forced resignations but little else, what is really at issue with the alleged conduct?

By seeking to enlist the private sector in lobbying for the President’s agenda, the alleged conduct may have violated the Anti-Lobbying Act (18 U.S.C. §1913), which as Ben Shapiro pointed out in a previous piece, explicitly provides:

No part of the money appropriated by any enactment of Congress shall, in the absence of express authorization by Congress, be used directly or indirectly to pay for any personal service, advertisement, telegram, telephone, letter, printed or written matter, or other device, intended or designed to influence in any manner a Member of Congress, a jurisdiction, or an official of any government, to favor, adopt, or oppose by vote or otherwise, any legislation, law, ratification, policy, or appropriation, whether before or after the introduction of any bill, measure or resolution proposing such legislation, law, ratification, policy or appropriation.

The Anti-Lobbying Act, according to government handbooks, prevents government employees from engaging in “substantial ‘grass roots’ lobbying campaigns … expressly urging individuals to contact government officials in support of or opposition to legislation …. Provid[ing] administrative support for lobbing activities of private organizations”

(more…)

Email this to a friend | Print | Share on Facebook | Tweet this |

Tags: Anti-Lobbying Act, Ben Shapiro, Buffy Wicks, Hatch Act, henry waxman
Posted Oct 8th 2009 at 10:01 am in Art, Politics | 243346No Commentshttp://bighollywood.breitbart.com/spakovskyberke/2009/10/08/politicizing-the-arts-community-what-did-the-white-house-do-wrong/Politicizing+the+Arts+Community%3A+What+Did+the+White+House+Do+Wrong%3F2009-10-08+17%3A01%3A06Hans+von+Spakovsky+and+Elliot+S.+Berke

At Least 6 Federal Laws and Regulations Violated By the NEA Conference Call

Yesterday, I posted about the NEA conference call’s clear and obvious violations of the Anti-Lobbying Act (19 U.S. Code §1913), which explicitly provides: “No part of the money appropriated by any enactment of Congress shall, in the absence of express authorization by Congress, be used directly or indirectly to pay for any personal service, advertisement, telegram, telephone, letter, printed or written matter, or other device, intended or designed to influence in any manner a Member of Congress, a jurisdiction, or an official of any government, to favor, adopt, or oppose by vote or otherwise, any legislation, law, ratification, policy, or appropriation, whether before or after the introduction of any bill, measure or resolution proposing such legislation, law, ratification, policy or appropriation …”  The Anti-Lobbying Act, according to government handbooks, prevents government employees from engaging in “substantial ‘grass roots’ lobbying campaigns … expressly urging individuals to contact government officials in support of or opposition to legislation …. Provid[ing] administrative support for lobbing activities of private organizations …”  

Violation of this law, in turn, violates 31 U.S. Code §1352, which, if read broadly, bans the use of federal funds for lobbying by the recipients: “funds appropriated by any Act [may not be] expended by the recipient of a Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement to pay any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with any Federal action …”   (more…)

Email this to a friend | Print | Share on Facebook | Tweet this |

Tags: 501(c)(4), Americans for the Arts, Congress, Hatch Act, nea
Posted Sep 22nd 2009 at 12:24 pm in Art, Law, Politics | 23205491 Commentshttp://bighollywood.breitbart.com/bshapiro/2009/09/22/at-least-6-federal-laws-and-regulations-violated-by-the-nea-conference-call/At+Least+6+Federal+Laws+and+Regulations+Violated+By+the+NEA+Conference+Call2009-09-22+19%3A24%3A01Ben+Shapiro