Following heavy public backlash toward Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law, several major corporations have severed ties with the under-the-radar non-profit the American Legislative Exchange Council.
In light of the nationally publicized Trayvon Martin case, advocacy groups have called for corporations to cut ties with ALEC, which many say is responsible for the bill keeping Martin’s killer out of jail.
ALEC is a self-described conservative political organization that promotes “limited government, free markets, federalism and individual liberty,” according to its website.
ALEC pushes its agenda and sponsors legislature nationwide, including in Missouri.
Within the last several months, many of ALEC’s biggest donors have withdrawn support, including Coca Cola, Kraft, Pepsi and McDonald’s. One of the most recent corporations to cut ties with the organization is Yum! Brands, which includes fast-food giants Pizza Hut, Taco Bell and KFC.
Many progressive and liberal groups have applauded decisions like these. On April 19, advocacy group Color of Change released a statement praising Yum! Brands’ decision.
“Today, employees in Yum! Brands’ corporate headquarters have dropped ALEC,” Color of Change Executive Director Rashad Robinson said. “In doing so, the operator of KFC, Pizza Hut and Taco Bell has restored its belief that it stands in favor of crafting legislation in view of the public, rather than behind closed doors.”
Founded in Chicago in 1973 by two conservative politicians and business owners, ALEC has grown to have more than 2,000 members nationwide. Headquartered in Washington, D.C., ALEC has ties to numerous companies including Wal-Mart, Pfizer and Kraft foods, according to its website.
“The main thing ALEC does is vent ideas that come to them on a national basis,” said Gary Burton, former Missouri state chairman of ALEC. “They get input from legislators and corporations all over the country, and when an idea gets passed by the legislative members and business members, the idea moves forward nationally.”
Although this might be the most public scrutiny ALEC has experienced, some argue that the organization has always been extreme. Liberal watchdog website ThinkProgress.org accuses ALEC of “hindering democracy,” and says it is committed to “a regressive economic agenda that includes union-busting, repealing the minimum wage and, of course, cutting taxes on the very rich.”
ALEC operates in a very simple way. Each of the 50 states has legislators who pay dues to be members of ALEC. When businesses, legislators, citizens or committees want to further a legislative plan, they can ask for input from ALEC.
What the organization does from this point is what some people find problematic. ALEC takes an idea, and with collaboration from various political organizations and businesses, then drafts model legislation from that idea, Burton said.
The organization then gets approvals from the corporations and legislators it represents. The legislative ideas are next made available to its members across the U.S. From that point, any legislators in the country can pull model legislation from ALEC’s national chapter and push that agenda in their home states.
Legislators involved in ALEC as well as legislation ALEC pushes are secret, which raises concerns for some, Progress Missouri Executive Director Sean Soendker Nicholson said.
“They do not disclose their donors or the process by which they create legislation,” Soendker Nicholson said. “They don’t register as a lobby organization. The bills just pop up in the state legislature, but they’re actually written by and largely for corporations.”
An example of an ALEC-modeled bill is the previously-mentioned “Stand Your Ground” law, which helped experienced massive national scrutiny following the Trayvon Martin shooting in Florida. The law states that if individuals feel they are in direct danger, they have legal protection to defend themselves, even through deadly force.
“The Florida law expands an existing and already sufficient law of self-defense,” Soendker Nicholson said. “It is a legal precedent that if you’re being threatened, you can defend yourself. This is common sense.”
Authorities have attributed the Florida law to the delayed arrest of George Zimmerman, since he is claiming self-defense during his encounter with Martin.
“The ‘Stand Your Ground’ law makes the Trayvon case almost impossible to prosecute,” Soendker Nicholson said. “Curiously, the bill was a direct ALEC bill and the National Rifle Association was a member of the ALEC board at the time it was actively promoted.”
Similar legislation was pushed in Missouri in 2007 but did not pass, according to a Progress Missouri report.
In Missouri, the recent voter identification legislation is at the heart of an ALEC-sponsored bill. The Supreme Court struck down legislation in 2006 that would have required voters to have photo identification to vote. The court ruled it created a “heavy and substantial burden on Missourians’ free exercise of the right of suffrage,” according to the court’s published opinion.
Critics argue the proposed amendment would disenfranchise voters who are poor, elderly and disabled. Proponents argue the bill is aimed at preventing voter fraud in Missouri. What is not disputed, however, is that the bill is an ALEC model.
“This is not about putting up barriers for people who want to vote,” Sen. Bill Stouffer, R-District 21, said in a news release. “We’re just trying to make sure our elections are secure and fair. Missouri always has very narrowly decided elections, where one vote can change the outcome.”
Critics like Soendker Nicholson say it unfairly alienates some voters and stops various minorities from voting.
“There is very little evidence to support the voter ID fraud argument,” Soendker Nicholson said. “In Missouri there are no documented cases of voter ID fraud. ALEC and its conservative counterparts are manufacturing a problem that doesn’t exist, and if these new restrictions pass, thousands of hardworking Missouri residents will be unable to vote.”
ALEC fits into the spectrum of public debate when discussing the issue of the democratic process. Its secret legislative agendas are only made available to members, and the public has no involvement in the formulation of any laws until they are finalized and on the ballot, Burton said.
“Voters aren’t part of ALEC,” Burton said. “It is in fact a private organization, but we do represent the private sector, which is made up of all kinds of people, including voters. As far as pushing an agenda, we have never done that. The model bills have to be at the direction of a legislator.”
This process is why ALEC benefits society, Burton said. When local legislators in North Dakota or Louisiana, for example, has access to successful ideas from other parts of the country, they are better able to serve their local constituents.
“We publish sample bills and make them available for anyone who likes to pick them up,” Burton said. “They still go before the public and the public has their say through a ballot vote. When a legislator pushes a bill alone and without assistance, it frequently doesn’t have much input, but when they push ALEC-modeled legislation, that bill has gone through many arenas and is typically polished.”
Regardless of the issue, citizens appear to be heavily divided on whether ALEC serves as a benefit or hindrance to the democratic process. Although the Supreme Court ultimately squashed the Missouri voter identification law, ALEC continues to craft similar legislation across the country.
“If ALEC was just some transparent conservative charity, then their model bills wouldn’t be so secretive,” Soendker Nicholson said. “If they are here to help the average citizen, why are dozens of major corporations severing ties with them? If their right-wing agendas are too extreme for corporate America, they’re too extreme for Missouri and we need to return the voice to the people.”