Further debating the issue of political action committees

AORN Journal, August, 2001 by Frederick P. Franko

For several years, AORN members have debated whether the Association should form a political action committee (PAC) as another way to advance perioperative issues at the federal level. A General Session at the 48th annual AORN Congress in Dallas featured citizen activist and former presidential candidate Ralph Nader and grassroots lobbyist and author Joel Blackwell debating the pros and cons of PACs. This article will highlight that debate and spur further discussion of this political topic.

BACKGROUND

Associations can use several tools or mechanisms to effect political change, including creating a grassroots effort of volunteers, establishing a government affairs department dedicated to legislative and regulatory issues, hiring lobbyists to promote legislation and influence legislators, and forming a PAC. A PAC is a group that is formed by an industry or an issue-oriented organization to raise and contribute money to the campaigns of political candidates who likely can advance their issue.

Political action committees have been in existence in the United States, in some form, since the mid-1940s.(1) The Congress of Industrial Organizations formed a PAC in 1944 in support of president Franklin D. Roosevelt. The US Congress began regulating campaign financing in the 1970s, thus spurring an increase in the number of PACs.(2)

The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 USC [sections] 441b[a]) prohibits labor organizations and corporations--including incorporated associations such as AORN--from using their general treasury funds to make contributions or expenditures in connection with federal elections. The act, however, does permit labor organizations and corporations to establish political committees, which make contributions to and expenditures on behalf of federal candidates and other committees. The act uses the term separate segregated funds for the more common term political action committee. The act stipulates that PAC funds must be maintained in a separate account from the general funds of the organization.(3) In addition, PACs cannot be funded from associations' general membership dues.

A PAC can donate up to $5,000 per candidate per election. This includes primary, general, and special elections. A PAC also can contribute up to $15,000 per year to a national party committee.(4)

The rise in the number of PACs since 1971 has been steady. Between 1974 and 1982, the number of PACs organized by business and labor unions increased from 608 to 2,601.(5) In 1992, the number of PACs peaked at 4,195. To put this in context, in 1992, only 4% of the adult population contributed to candidates at the local, state, and federal levels, whereas, 80% of all funds to congressional campaigns came from PACs, individuals contributing $200 or more, or candidates themselves. Presently, PACs are part of the fabric of American politics.(6)

AORN'S POSITION

The AORN House of Delegates at the 1998 Congress in Orlando, Fla, voted to have AORN investigate the development of a PAC and report its findings at the 1999 AORN Congress in San Francisco.(7) It was announced at the 1999 Congress that the Board of Directors recognized the importance of member support in the decision to create a viable PAC. As a result, the Board determined that it would not make a decision for members regarding a PAC, rather it would leave the decision to the House of Delegates.(8)

The decision to create a PAC should be made after considerable thought and discussion. AORN must consider a number of issues, including the following questions.

* Does AORN's agenda of federal issues warrant the money and effort needed to form a PAC?

* How can the goals of the Association best be accomplished?

* What resources does AORN need to accomplish these goals?

IN FAVOR OF POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEES

As witnessed in the General Session at the AORN Congress in Dallas, Joel Blackwell and Ralph Nader approach PACs from different philosophies. Blackwell's premise is that money is the language of politics. He contends that associations should allocate money in the areas of their interests. Political action committees can provide associations access to politicians, thus allowing them another way to advocate for their issues.

In a representative democracy, citizens have access to their elected officials; however, for most citizens, it often takes tremendous effort and time to make that connection because of the time pressures and schedules of politicians. Political action committees offer another way of connecting with elected officials by bringing the power of like-minded people together.

Blackwell contends that PACs can be the most effective tool for educating legislators about associations and their issues of greatest concern. Political action committees are ready-made tools for monitoring the actions of a candidate or legislator all year. They are available to take action at any time, not just during elections. Political action committees also provide associations access to events attended by political decision makers--access that provides another opportunity to advance associations' political agendas.