The Franklin Center is a 501(c)(3) non-profit and like all non-profits discloses certain expenditures but not contributors. GuideStar.org provides IRS 990s for such info about non-profits. You don't need a FOIA, but we've only been in existence a few months.

The Franklin Center works with, but is independent of, the non-partisan, non-profit Kansas Policy Institute, that also publishes on the Watchdog site.

As a Forward Kansas author I welcome your comments and criticism in your postings if we don't live up to the highest of journalism standards. I hope you don't mind that I try to encourage a more civil tone with more hard facts in online discussions through my personal postings to blogs, like Forward Kansas.

BTW, after being unemployed for three months earlier this year I am quite happy to receive a pay check again. I blogged as the Kansas Meadowlark for about 5 years — often about political money matters the press would not report — and never received any compensation. I did that work outside a full-time research “day” job and worked many evenings, early mornings, and weekends on those Meadowlark research projects. My motivation was to dig up facts and to publish information that the public had the right to know.

I would love to continue with research and scientific computing work, but such jobs are hard to find in Kansas even during good times. I am lucky and thankful to be employed now, and know some from job clubs a year ago who are still looking for work. My “hobby” became my job, but I do miss scientific research and computing.

Who's paying the bills at the Franklin Center and Kansas Watchdog? As it takes time for FOIAs to get back, why don't you save us the trouble and tell us your top 5 contributors.

Levi

Even exact counts of 100-200 are harder than you'd think since they are functions of time as people come and go. The people are moving all the time.

What's the deal with the “teabagger” pejorative? If a right-leaning group insulted a left-leaning group that way, such name calling might be called a hate crime. Why is there such little respect for those you disagree with? Where's the civil discourse? (Related: President of liberal advocacy group “People for the American Way” uses vulgar sexual term to slur GOP voters
http://cancelthebee.blogspot.com/2009/11/presid... )

Many who use the term “astroturf” show they have not attended the Tea Parties and 9-12 events and don't understand what is happening. There are many people who are furious about wasteful government spending and come to events to try to make a difference. Again, why the pejorative term, instead of civil discourse about real disagreements and discussion over policy? “astroturf” insults a number of hard-working Americans.

I can't speak for the Wichita area, but in the Kansas City area there are multiple Tea Party/9-12 groups on both sides of the state line. Some cooperate with other groups, and some do their own thing. A “coalition” group has even popped up to coordinate activities among some of the groups. There are numerous mailing lists, ning and Facebook groups. It's hard to keep track of all these groups even when I try!

AFP attended several events in our area, but even people who have never been involved in politics before are finding these events without any help (or payment) from AFP. There is a growing number of people upset with the wasteful government spending and the growth and control of government. At least in the KC area, most of these rallies are scheduled without any input from AFP. AFP may be invited and may attend, but they don't organize most of the rallies in the KC area.

Your article tried to link Koch Industries and AFP. You try to embarrass a Koch spokesperson by publishing an E-mail instead of having a civil discourse and discussion of facts with their spokesperson via E-mail? Why not honestly answer the question and engage in civil discourse, instead of trying to embarrass the person? “Forward Kansas” claims it's about “Kansas Politics, Without the Crazy”. But does that give you the right to insult others, have no manners, and to not cite facts?

If what you say is “a commonly known fact” and “widely reported by traditional and non-traditional press” where are your hard facts and evidence? If there is non-profit money involved, cite the IRS 990 forms. If there is a 527 involved, cite the IRS 8872 forms. If there is a federal PAC involved, cite the FEC report. If there is a state PAC involved, cite the KS Govt Ethics report.

Your quotation above cites Koch Industries as a funding source for AFP “before 2003″. How is that relevant now? The article you cite gives no evidence for any Koch Industries involvement in AFP from 2004-2006. Your SourceWatch citation talks about AFP money in 2007 but shows no connection to Koch Industries. The Desmogblog citation gives numbers but does not cite government documents for its figures. So what is your point in trying to connect the Koch Industries, AFP and healthcare? And what's the connection to any Kansas event?

I challenge you to find anyone at Tea Parties (other than a few AFP employees) who have received any money to attend Tea Parties from AFP — or any other group. AFP may pass out literature at these events, collect names, sometimes provide speakers, but that's it. Why is it so hard to understand that so many are self-motivated to attend these events?

(I attended the AFP event in Wichita in January 2009 when I was unemployed and I had to pay my own way. I used the event for a job networking opportunity and to blog. A certain left-leaning popular blog at that time then insulted those at the event who were blogging. Why not promote civil discourse about issues?)

Why not pick 5 or 10 people (or even one or two) with signs at the Tea Parties and ask them why they came to the event, why they feel their sign is important, and what changes they want for America? Why do you denigrate these good people?

Make your Forward Kansas slogan “without the crazy” more meaningful by being more respectful of others, less insulting, and by citing hard facts in your articles.