Lawsuit Funding
On the previous thread, Anomymous 2/26/08 10:20 a.m. asked that either David Spalding or I reveal what Tim Dreisbach made known in our AOA EC meeting of 1/24/08 regarding the identity of who is funding the Association's lawsuit against the Trustees. The minutes of the 1/24/08 meeting were approved just this afternoon. The following is an excerpt from those minutes:
"Frank wants it again to be clear that there is no sponsor of the lawsuit. Frank said we all know who is raising money for this, but there’s no need to continue discussing this.
Tim learned one of the people writing the checks. He stated that people have been using the fact that we have not been open about this, for whatever reason, to undermine our efforts. He introduced the following message from John MacGovern, president of the Hanover Institute:
'(1) The Hanover Institute is publicly raising money for the lawsuit.
(2) The money so raised by the Institute has been sent to the law firm.
(3) There may be others doing the same.
Cheers,
John MacGovern'
Tim asked the committee’s help with how to get this information out in the right context.... Tim made it very clear that this disclosure should not be taken as any indication that the Hanover Institute is guiding the lawsuit. Bill asked about the Donors Trust. Tim knows nothing about them. Frank was approached by Fred Franzen, of Donors Trust, a year ago at an ACTA meeting telling him Donors Trust was at his disposal. Frank told Fred it was premature at that time, and he has not spoken to him since Frank stated that someone, not related to the Hanover Institute, got Donors Trust working on raising funds for this after the trustees’ decision. He has been told that Donors Trust has not given any funds to the Hanover Institute. He has asked Williams & Connolly to ensure that any funds from Donors Trust are handled properly. Frank wanted to ensure that if Donors Trust is raising money for the lawsuit that it is being used for those purposes. Bill asked if donors are in direct contact with Williams & Connolly. Frank said no, it’s only the conduits raising money that are in contact with Williams & Connolly. Williams & Connolly has received funds from the Hanover Institute. As far as Frank knows, no other group is raising money for the lawsuit or writing checks to Williams & Connolly. Frank has received inquiries from alumni about how to contribute to the lawsuit and he has referred them to the group publicly raising funds."
"Frank wants it again to be clear that there is no sponsor of the lawsuit. Frank said we all know who is raising money for this, but there’s no need to continue discussing this.
Tim learned one of the people writing the checks. He stated that people have been using the fact that we have not been open about this, for whatever reason, to undermine our efforts. He introduced the following message from John MacGovern, president of the Hanover Institute:
'(1) The Hanover Institute is publicly raising money for the lawsuit.
(2) The money so raised by the Institute has been sent to the law firm.
(3) There may be others doing the same.
Cheers,
John MacGovern'
Tim asked the committee’s help with how to get this information out in the right context.... Tim made it very clear that this disclosure should not be taken as any indication that the Hanover Institute is guiding the lawsuit. Bill asked about the Donors Trust. Tim knows nothing about them. Frank was approached by Fred Franzen, of Donors Trust, a year ago at an ACTA meeting telling him Donors Trust was at his disposal. Frank told Fred it was premature at that time, and he has not spoken to him since Frank stated that someone, not related to the Hanover Institute, got Donors Trust working on raising funds for this after the trustees’ decision. He has been told that Donors Trust has not given any funds to the Hanover Institute. He has asked Williams & Connolly to ensure that any funds from Donors Trust are handled properly. Frank wanted to ensure that if Donors Trust is raising money for the lawsuit that it is being used for those purposes. Bill asked if donors are in direct contact with Williams & Connolly. Frank said no, it’s only the conduits raising money that are in contact with Williams & Connolly. Williams & Connolly has received funds from the Hanover Institute. As far as Frank knows, no other group is raising money for the lawsuit or writing checks to Williams & Connolly. Frank has received inquiries from alumni about how to contribute to the lawsuit and he has referred them to the group publicly raising funds."
posted by Bill Hutchinson at
2/28/2008 03:47:00 PM
22 Comments:
This doesn't tell us anything new. We've always known the money was going through the Hanover Institute. What we want to know is who is giving. Are they accepting money from people outside the alumni body?
John Fitzpatrick '65
By
Anonymous, at 2/28/2008 4:30 PM
Donors trust appears to be a donor advised fund similar to Fidelity and others, but with an idealogical bent.
I find it interesting that they contacted Frank and offered to be of help. I suspect that few, if any, of their donor advised funds were set up by Dartmouth alumni.Most ofthe hanover Institute's funding appears to have come from conservative foundations and groups not connected with the college.
Their mission statement reads:
"It is all too common for philanthropic capital (especially from foundations) to stray from the original donor's wishes and the free market principles that made their philanthropy possible in the first place. As an antidote to this drift, DonorsTrust was established as a 501(c)(3) public charity to ensure the intent of donors who are dedicated to the ideals of limited government, personal responsibility, and free enterprise. As such, DonorsTrust provides an innovative charitable vehicle for donors who wish to safeguard their charitable intent to fund organizations that undergird America's founding principles.
Explicitly devoted to supporting organizations that promote liberty, DonorsTrust alone can commit to honor and defend the charitable intent of donors who share in our mission. The Trust is working to help alleviate, through education, research, and private initiative, society's most pervasive and radical needs, including those relating to social welfare, health, the environment, economics, governance, foreign relations, and arts and culture; and to encourage philanthropy and individual giving and responsibility, as opposed to governmental involvement, as an answer to society's needs."
By
Andrew E. Lewin '81, at 2/28/2008 4:55 PM
I think what MacGovern is trying to avoid saying is that the Hanover Institute also privately raised or sent money before it publicly announced its fund drive.
It is news if the HI funded the suit from the beginning.
By
Anonymous, at 2/28/2008 6:09 PM
The minutes are mistaken in their reference to "Fred Franzen, of Donors Trust."
Fred Franzen is the intriguing figure behind the Center for Excellence in Higher Education. His (dubiously legal) fundraising email for this lawsuit has already been discussed.
Donors Trust is a different outfit and actually bothered to register in N.H.
By
Anonymous, at 2/28/2008 6:12 PM
Of course "Tim made it very clear that this disclosure should not be taken as any indication that the Hanover Institute is guiding the lawsuit." It's the Hanover Institute's Secretary that is guiding the lawsuit.
By
Anonymous, at 2/28/2008 6:25 PM
The last sentence of the excerpt is weird:
"Frank has received inquiries from alumni about how to contribute to the lawsuit and he has referred them to the group publicly raising funds."
The group publicly raising funds? Everyone in the sentences preceding this one was talking about the HI and DT by name. Did Frank really refer to "the group publicly raising funds"? Was this his way of trying not to know which groups are sending funds ("As far as Frank knows...").
By
Anonymous, at 2/28/2008 6:44 PM
"Frank stated that someone, not related to the Hanover Institute, got Donors Trust working on raising funds for this after the trustees’ decision." How would he know this person is not related? Did John MacGovern tell him?
"He has been told that Donors Trust has not given any funds to the Hanover Institute." Told by whom? John MacGovern?
This kind of incest is a good reason why interlocking directorates are frowned upon.
By
Anonymous, at 2/28/2008 6:48 PM
John Fitzpatrick (and others):
You have criticised the Association leadership for not identifying where they have gotten their funding. Now they have done so.
You now ask where the Hanover Institute is getting its funding. The Association officers have no obligation to answer that, and in fact would be out of line to say even if they knew. You must take that question to the Hanover Institute.
I see no reason why the HI has any obligation to answer you, and guess many of their donors, most in fact, are Dartmouth alumni who wish to remain anonymous. But if the Hanover Institute did in fact reveal such names, would you then feel an obligation for those parties to state where their money came from? How many levels of disclosure do you want?
Do you feel an obligation when you make a donation to Dartmouth to say if the money came from your employer or from your Great Aunt? Does Dartmouth have a right to ask you that question, and an obligation to disclose your answer?
By
Anonymous, at 2/28/2008 11:26 PM
"Now they have done so."
Has the Association really identified where its funds are coming from? We asked for transparency well before the Hanover Institute began its public campaign. MacGovern's cheeky statement only refers to that public campaign. Where was the money coming from before then?
"The Association officers have no obligation to answer [where the HI gets its money], and in fact would be out of line to say even if they knew."
I'm not so sure they have no obligation, and they clearly would not be out of line. Frank Gado regularly provides internal HI information to the EC, and we can assume he also provides internal EC information to the HI. It would be appropriate for him to tell what he knows as Secretary of the HI about who's sending checks.
"How many levels of disclosure do you want?" That depends on how many levels of secrecy the EC is relying on to keep its funding from becoming transparent.
By
Anonymous, at 2/29/2008 9:13 AM
From the minutes we learn that "Frank was approached by Fred Franzen, of Donors Trust [sic], a year ago at an ACTA meeting."
Who knows whether that was the Oct. 6, 2006 Athena Roundtable that people blogged about here earlier... with a guest list that included Frederic Fransen, Frank Gado, John MacGovern, Joe Malchow,
William Modahl, and William Tell, the unelected ACTA Trustee.
The real question is why wasn't Tim there? Or was he disguised as a Bush bioethics advisor?
By
Anonymous, at 2/29/2008 9:17 AM
Does anyone know if the petitions have been delivered?
By
Anonymous, at 2/29/2008 2:53 PM
Maybe Joe Ashe got stuck in a snow bank
By
Anonymous, at 2/29/2008 2:54 PM
The sheer weight of the petitions in his trunk would not allow him to get stuck-
May the games begin!
By
Anonymous, at 2/29/2008 3:37 PM
Blunt must be closed now for the weekend. Do we know if Joel ever made it?
By
Anonymous, at 2/29/2008 4:41 PM
Blunt must be closed now for the weekend. Do we know if Joe ever made it?
By
Anonymous, at 2/29/2008 4:44 PM
Was Frank led to believe that Fred Fransen represents Donors Trust, or was that a mistake in Frank's recollection at the meeting?
Frank might want to clarify the record at the next meeting.
By
Anonymous, at 3/03/2008 6:40 AM
Fred Fransen of CEHE has issued a press release regarding Wright's retirement, for some reason. What interest does this person have in the vagaries of Dartmouth politics?
By
Anonymous, at 3/03/2008 11:55 AM
The answer is obvious: CEHE has an interest in the Goveranance of Dartmouth-
Funding the lawsuit, Wright's retirement, eventual take over of the Board by a bunch of extreme conservative Neanderthals.
Gee thanks, Gang of Six/Four, for letting them in!
By
Anonymous, at 3/03/2008 12:05 PM
How exactly does one conclude that the CEHE is composed of neanderthals?
I went to their organization's website, and see little that is objectionable. In fact, it makes some sense. Why is this organization and their stated goals so objectionable, or a problem for Dartmouth?
http://www.cehe.org/index.html
By
Anonymous, at 3/03/2008 3:37 PM
No, s/he said the future trustees would be neanderthals. Supported by CEHE.
It's not CEHE per se that's objectionable, it's the group's meddling (for its own ends, not for Dartmouth's benefit) inside the College.
Fred Fransen and CEHE (or Donors Trust, or whomever you represent), stop meddling where you don't belong. Alumni trustee nominations are the business of Dartmouth alumni and nobody else. Butt out.
By
Anonymous, at 3/03/2008 4:38 PM
Anon 4:38 has it right.
Another way to think of it-
The CEHE is not per se objectionable. Does Fred Franzen know that the Gang did not have a mandate to sue? (please, don't go there with last summer's ridiculous, unrepresentative survey)
Who is using who?
Maybe some sane people should have a chat with Franzen/CEHE/Donor's Trust. The HI may then be left holding the bag alone.
By
Anonymous, at 3/03/2008 5:39 PM
It sounds like Frank or John or someone in the Gang of Six specifically asked Fransen to step in. So of course he would say he's working for alumni democracy at the request of alumni leaders. Out of the goodness of his heart. Raising money so complete strangers can sue a private college whose governance is imitated by nobody.
By
Anonymous, at 3/04/2008 9:31 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home