Secretary of State Using His Office to Silence Debate?

The Massachusetts Citizens Alliance (MCA) is coming under fire from the Secretary of State's office of William Galvin.

"We must be making progress in protecting marriage," said Executive Director Bryan G. Rudnick, "or they wouldn't be harassing us."

He has been told that an audit of his organization is in progress.

Rudnick says it reminds him of the harassment of most conservative organizations by the IRS during Bill Clinton's term.

Began in March

Since the beginning of the legislative session in January, MCA has been lobbying legislators on Beacon Hill to pass the Protection of Marriage Bill (H3375) and defeat the Domestic Partnership Bill. They had originally been met with mixed emotions but due to their efforts over the last few months, support has rapidly been increasing both in and out of the Statehouse.

As some liberals began noticing their efforts, they began harassing the staff of MCA with hateful phone calls, e-mails and letters filled with pejoratives. Some legislators even encouraged the Secretary of State to harass and investigate the organization.

The aggravation began on Friday, March 2, 2001, when Rudnick received a call from an attorney from the Secretary's office claiming that a complaint had been filed after the MCA sent out solicitation letters to raise $1.3 million for lobbying and grassroots efforts. According to Rudnick, the attorney was rude and unprofessional, insisting that MCA was in violation of state laws.

The attorney informed Rudnick that the complaint had been filed by an anonymous State Representative directly to the Secretary of State. The attorney accused MCA of not being registered with the Office of Campaign and Political Finance (OCPF), and he accused Rudnick of not being properly registered as a lobbyist with the Lobbying Division. Both of these offices are in the Secretary of State's office. The lawyer said this even though records indicate Rudnick had been registered since January 3, 2001.

According to Rudnick, the attorney was quite persistent and condescending about these alleged violations. "I explained to him that we have both a political action committee which is registered with the OCPF and a separate advocacy group that handles lobbying and is also registered with the Commonwealth in accordance with state laws."

But the attorney said he had no records of MCA or Rudnick ever filing with his office. Rudnick then offered proof several times saying, "I can read to you the Agent ID number on the lobbyist card I received from your office, if you like." The attorney appeared surprised to hear that Rudnick had proof of their legitimacy. He admitted not adequately researching the facts prior to making his harassing call.

"As far as I was concerned the issue was over and I went back to work without giving the call another thought," Rudnick said. The following day, however, two separate letters were received from the OCPF regarding another complaint about the PAC's name as well as notice of an audit.

Threatening Letters Begin

In the letter from OCPF Legal Counsel Barbara Petersen dated March 2, 2001, she said that another complaint had been filed against them because their organization's name was "not being descriptive for its purpose." Her letter said, "[This] complaint asserts that the name [Massachusetts Citizens Alliance State PAC] does not comply with the campaign finance law, which requires a political action committee to use name [sic] that 'clearly identifies the economic or special interest, if identifiable, of a majority of its contributors.'"

On March 12, 2001, lawyers representing MCA sent a letter to the OCPF stating that the name of the organization was not in violation of any statute stating, "[This] committee seeks out the issues which most concern Massachusetts citizens, and then works towards promulgating programs which address these issues. The citizens of Massachusetts determine which issues this Committee strives to advance in whatever means is appropriate to the individual issues at hand. In this respect, there is no single economic or special interest, which could clearly be identified in the P.A.C name."

The Massachusetts Citizens Alliance State PAC told the OCPF that it has been in existence for over a year and its purpose was available to the public since that time without questions or concerns from anyone. The issue of forcing the organization to change its name was closed by the OCPF the next day.

Yet another letter was sent to MCA also dated March 2, 2001 from OCPF Auditor Patricia Moore announcing that an audit of the finances were now underway. The OCPF ordered the organization to turn over to the state certain financial records such as copies of canceled checks and information concerning their political activity.

"This audit is a waste of the taxpayers time and money, especially since all PACs are already required to disclose their finances," Rudnick told MassNews.

Supported By Many

House Ways and Means Chairman John Rogers (D-Norwood), the second most powerful legislator in the House, and House Minority Leader Francis Marini (R-Hanson), are the lead sponsors of The Protection of Marriage Bill (H 3375). This bi-partisan bill seeks to codify marriage as "the union between one man and one woman," and would also prevent the creation or recognition of Vermont-like civil unions and domestic partnership benefits for unmarried couples in Massachusetts.

House and Senate members such as Representatives Liz Malia (D-Jamaica Plain), Alice Wolf (D-Cambridge), Paul Demakis (D-Brookline) as well as Senators Cheryl Jacques (D-Needham) and Susan Fargo (D-Waltham) among others, are sponsoring a Domestic Partnership Bill. This bill attempts to redefine the family and give benefits to unmarried heterosexual and homosexual partners of state employees.

For more information, contact the Massachusetts Citizens Alliance at (781) 647-1942 or www.masscitizens.com. Their petition can also be signed online.

Copyright ©2001 Massachusetts News, Inc. Photocopying and data processing storage of all or any part of this issue may not be made without prior written consent.