Jackson Jambalaya

I didn't think this was legal?

It is hard to argue you're doing issue advocacy when your name identifies a candidate you're trying to elect. It is also hard to believe it would be uncoordinated when her husband runs it.

It is legal, the Secretary of State does not require a political candidate to be incorporated to run for office.

Some blogs are non-profits yet they are 'doing issue advocacy'.

This is definitely illegal. No wonder they haven't filed a finance report. The lawyer who doesn't know the law. This could get really bad for Quinn.

Ok Anonymous show us the Carfax or in this case the law that says the non profit is illegal in this case.
As a non profit any funds not used are required to be given only to another non profit.
Quinn unlike the other candidates will not profit from her mayoral bid.
I would ask the other candidates if they would pledge to donate their remaining funds to the betterment of Jackson and not pocket it for their personal use.
Any takers???
Crickets.....

None of you are correct - or incorrect. At least, based on the limited facts known from this post. The SOS does not require a campaign to be incorporated 11:42 - in fact doesn't expect one to be. However a campaign committee or candidate, while not an incorporated entity is also not a non-profit organization. However, a non-profit cannot engage in political activity Kim, and this one certainly seems to be more than an issue-advocacy group. Looks to me more like someone outsmarting themselves trying to set up an organization to beat campaign finance limits.


BTW, Kim, your challenge is meaningless unless we know what the non-profit used the funds for - just like any other non-profit, if 'administrative costs' (salaries, i.e.) eat up all the money then there is nothing to pass on to another non-profit.

If the non-profit were set up to take campaign contributions and is substituting for a campaign committee, has it filed campaign finance reports? Has it spent money on behalf of the candidate? Has the campaign set up a campaign committee in addition to this non-profit? Answer these (and other) questions - then we decide which of you six mouth-breathers, all with an opinion and none with the fact - happened to be lucky and get the right answer.

I believe there are non profits that can engage in political activity. When we were setting up the Tea Party this came up. There are some...
But the suggestion was there illegality.
You have offered no more light then the rest of us...

Kim, I certainly didn't offer any more light. Because I don't have any of the facts, other than the fact that there was a nonprofit established and that it supports Quinn. What I said was that various people said this was legal, and others said it was illegal. Based on the limited facts given so far, it is my opinion that nobody knows but many think they "know". Imagine that!

Kim, your example of the Tea Party is interesting. I don't know which IRS code section the TP is organized under, but I do know that once the CMTP decided to "support candidates" it formed a Political Action Committee (PAC). Basically, a (federal tax exempt) non-profit can engage in supporting "causes" but not candidates. In the beginning, that is what the TP did - might raise a question as to whether that still fits.

The interesting question about the post here is whether the non-profit supporting Quinn is a "federally registered tax exempt" non-profit, or whether they just filed the paperwork with the MS SOS to incorporate. Nothing indicates any federal (501c[3], i.e.) tax relationship.

I agree with the previous postings - there is not enough information here to tell whether this is "legal", "illegal", an attempt to avoid some campaign laws, or just ignorance.

Interesting questions - too bad none of us have the info to know the answers.

3:46; You're post was interesting and informative until you accused all others of being 'mouth breathers', and then, you morphed into a turd.

I especially like the unnecessary use of quotes in the filing: "Jackson United" to Elect Regina Quinn. As in, we don't actually think Jackson is literally united for this purpose. Jesus, her campaign is turning into a clusterfuck.

Jesus, her campaign is turning into a clusterfuck.

Really? Compared to what?

7:40 - sorry I insulted you with my terminology. I apologize. Happy now?

My point was that people that immediately comment that this is "illegal" or that this is "legal" without knowing any of the underlying facts - only see a post that raises interesting questions - need to drop back and take a break. Shooting off from their mouth (fingers?) with their personal opinion, probably based on the candidate not the issue of the post, might have a better term than 'mouth breathers' but I couldn't come up with it at the time.

@9:07 having to spin unpaid taxes and two bankruptcies, then not filing a campaign finance report on time and now having to answer questions about this non profit...clusterfuckery if you ask me. I don't think I can vote for someone who has a track record of fiscal irresponsibility failing to meet legal obligations and known deadlines.

Well Im sure you all keep up with the media and JfP news blogs so I know you have all heard MS SOS and AG office say that everything the Quinn campaign has done as far campaign incorporation is legal!! It's very quiet on this blog now.

What is sad is it took a Republican party chairman to explain how it was all fine and kosher and do a better job explaining it better than anyone on the Quinn campaign. Y'all owe him a fee.

And the SOS didn't say anything I didn't above. I pointed out the law on corporate donations. I also did not say it was illegal. Just thought it was interesting.

Kingfish, Im not on her camoaign staff I was speaking as a supporter. I was just basically pointing that out to those who said it was illegal. I dont think the staff really needed to address or explain the issue, it was self explanatory. Kim was helping those who were saying it was illegal understand why it wasnt.