Kate Sheppard

Kate Sheppard

Reporter

Kate Sheppard is a staff reporter in Mother Jones' Washington bureau. She was previously the political reporter for Grist and a writing fellow at The American Prospect. She can be reached by email at ksheppard (at) motherjones (dot) com.

Full Bio | Get my RSS |

Her work has also been featured in the New York Times' Room for Debate blog, the Guardian's Comment Is Free, Foreign Policy, High Country News, The Center for Public Integrity, the Washington Independent, Washington Spectator, Who Runs Gov, In These Times, and Bitch. She was raised on a vegetable farm in southern New Jersey (yes, they do exist), but has adapted well to life in the nation's capital. She misses trees and having a congressional representative with voting power, but thinks DC is pretty great anyway.

Donor Advisory Group Flags Berman Nonprofits

| Fri Apr. 5, 2013 6:59 AM PDT

Charity Navigator, a nonprofit that aims to provide donors with information about the accountability and transparency of other nonprofits, has issued "donor advisory" notices for five different groups run by the notorious DC-based PR firm Berman and Company.

The company, run by Richard Berman, runs a number of non-profits backed by business interests. Here's how our own Daniel Schulman described Berman's work in a 2009 piece:

Nicknamed Dr. Evil—a moniker he embraces—he's the force behind several industry-backed nonprofits that share staff and office space with his very for-profit communications and advertising firm, Berman and Company. The firm promises clients it will not "just change the debate" but "start" one, and a range of companies, from Anheuser-Busch to Philip Morris to the casino chain Harrah's, have signed up for Berman's "aggressive" and "hard-hitting" advocacy. Some clients pay Berman and Co. directly, while others donate to his nonprofits—but much of the cash winds up in the same place, via hefty management fees the front groups pay to Berman's company.

Charity Navigator has posted advisories for five Berman projects: the Center for Consumer Freedom, which opposes regulation of the food and beverage industry; the American Beverage Institute, another beverage industry group; the Center for Union Facts, which targets unions; the Employment Policies Institute Foundation, which campaigns against minimum wage increases; and the Enterprise Freedom Action Committee, a political action committee targeting Democratic candidates.

In its advisories, Charity Navigator cites the fact that the majority of the expenses for these groups are in fact payments to Berman and Company. For the Center for Consumer Freedom, it notes that their 2010 tax forms indicate that $1.7 million of the $2.4 million in total program expenses went directly to Berman and Company. On the American Beverage Institute advisory, it notes that $1.3 million of the total $1.7 million spent in 2011 went to Berman's for-profit company.

Some of the other non-profit groups that Berman and Company has attacked have asked the IRS to review the tax-exempt status of the 501(c)3s, claiming that they should not qualify as charitable organizations. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, which runs the website Berman Exposed, has also filed a complaint with the IRS raising questions about the tax status of the Center for Consumer Freedom specifically. The IRS has declined to say whether it is pursuing an investigation.

The irony of this is that the Center for Consumer Freedom previously crowed when Charity Navigator downgraded the rating of the Humane Society of the United States, one of the main organizations its efforts have targeted. (The HSUS rating has gone back up to four stars since then, however.)

Advertise on MotherJones.com

More on Cuccinelli's Defense of Virginia's Anti-Sodomy Law

| Thu Apr. 4, 2013 12:38 PM PDT

I should elaborate a bit on yesterday's story about Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli's request for a rehearing on the state's anti-sodomy law, which has gotten a lot of attention online. A three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit ruled that the state's "Crimes Against Nature" law, which forbids anal and oral sex, whether practiced by straight or gay people, is unconstitutional. But the AG wants the full 15-judge appeals court to hear the case again.

Cuccinelli's spokeswoman said Wednesday that the case "is not about sexual orientation," but about "using current law to protect a 17 year-old girl from a 47 year-old sexual predator."

This specific case deals with a man who was prosecuted under the "Crimes Against Nature" statute for having had oral sex with women, a felony offense under that law. The man in the case, William MacDonald, was in his late 40s when he was charged with having consensual oral sex with two young women who were, at the time, ages 16 and 17. While that might be seen as creepy, in Virginia, the age of consent is 15 years old. It is considered statutory rape—a felony offense—to have sex with anyone under that age. Under state law, an adult can be prosecuted for "causing" delinquency by having sex with someone between the ages of 15 and 18, but that is only a misdemeanor. MacDonald was convicted of such a misdemeanor, and his lawyers aren't challenging that conviction. But they have challenged—so far, successfully—the state's attempt to prosecute him for violating the "Crimes Against Nature" law.

Because Virginia still has this anti-sodomy law on the books, the state wants to use it against MacDonald and win a felony conviction. The state, however, couldn't prosecute him under this statute if he had engaged in vaginal sex. That is, the state is trying to use a loophole in the law that makes oral, but not vaginal, sex a felony in order to go after this guy. The court of appeals determined that MacDonald could not be prosecuted under this law because the US Supreme Court ruled in 2003 that such laws are an unconstitutional "intrusion into the personal and private life of the individual."

If Cuccinelli's concern is sex with minors, he should focus on changing Virginia's age of consent rules, not defending a law that the Supreme Court has said is indefensible. But in 2004, when a bipartisan group of Virginia legislators tried to change the law so that it would only apply to public sex, sex with minors, and prostitution, Cuccinelli opposed the bill. "My view is that homosexual acts, not homosexuality, but homosexual acts are wrong," he told a local paper in 2009. "They’re intrinsically wrong. And I think in a natural law based country it’s appropriate to have policies that reflect that. … They don’t comport with natural law."

My colleague Adam Serwer has more on Cuccinelli and the crimes against nature law.

Bush Lying About WMD Is a Conspiracy Theory?!?

| Wed Apr. 3, 2013 1:34 PM PDT

People believe crazy things.The lunar landing was faked; a secret band of "lizard people" controls our society. New survey data from Public Policy Polling released on Tuesday shows notable percentages of Americans embrace a wide variety of conspiracy theories, from Bigfoot to the CIA creating the crack epidemic.

PPP found that:

  • 37 percent of voters believe global warming is a hoax
  • 6 percent of voters don't believe that Osama bin Laden is dead
  • 28 percent of voters believe "secretive power elite with a globalist agenda is conspiring to eventually rule the world through an authoritarian world government, or New World Order"
  • 7 percent of voters think man did not actually walk on the moon
  • 13 percent of voters think President Obama is the anti-Christ
  • 14 percent of voters believe in Bigfoot
  • 44 percent believe George W. Bush intentionally misled the US about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq

Screeeeech. Stop the crazy train. What? Bush did lie about WMD. That's not a wacky conspiracy theory; it is quite well documented at this point. That's a topic for another poll.

Virginia Gov. Candidate Cuccinelli Defending Law That Forbids Oral Sex

| Wed Apr. 3, 2013 10:13 AM PDT
Ken Cuccinelli

Last month, three judges on the US Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit deemed a Virginia anti-sodomy law unconstitutional. The provision, part of the state's "Crimes Against Nature" law, has been moot since the 2003 US Supreme Court decision overruled state laws barring consensual gay sex, but Virginia has kept the prohibition on the books.

Now Virginia attorney general and Republican gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli is asking the full 4th Circuit to reconsider the case. Cuccinelli wants the court to revive the prohibition on consensual anal and oral sex, for both gay and straight people. (The case at hand involves consensual, heterosexual oral sex, but, as the New York Times explained in 2011, it's "icky": The sex was between a 47-year-old man and two teenagers above Virginia's age of consent.)*

 Here's more from the Washington Blade:

Virginia Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli has filed a petition with the 4th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Richmond asking the full 15-judge court to reconsider a decision by a three-judge panel last month that overturned the state’s sodomy law.
The three-judge panel ruled 2-1 on March 12 that a section of Virginia’s "Crimes Against Nature" statute that outlaws sodomy between consenting adults, gay or straight, is unconstitutional based on a U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2003 known as Lawrence v. Texas.
A clerk with the 4th Circuit appeals court said a representative of the Virginia Attorney General's office filed the petition on Cuccinelli's behalf on March 26. The petition requests what is known as an en banc hearing before the full 15 judges to reconsider the earlier ruling by the three-judge panel.

Mother Jones confirmed that Cuccinelli had filed the request with the court as well. Given that the Supreme Court has already ruled that gay sex is okay and moved on to the question of gay marriage, I wouldn't expect his appeal to go very far.

This post has been updated to include more details about the case in question.

Wed Jul. 11, 2012 10:50 AM PDT
Mon Jul. 9, 2012 3:00 AM PDT
Fri Jul. 6, 2012 9:13 AM PDT
Fri Jul. 6, 2012 8:57 AM PDT
Fri Jun. 29, 2012 12:41 PM PDT
Tue Jun. 26, 2012 2:10 PM PDT
Fri Jun. 1, 2012 1:36 PM PDT
Fri Jun. 1, 2012 9:50 AM PDT
Fri Jun. 1, 2012 3:00 AM PDT
Thu May. 31, 2012 9:57 AM PDT
Fri May. 25, 2012 12:00 PM PDT
Fri May. 25, 2012 3:00 AM PDT
Thu May. 24, 2012 11:49 AM PDT
Thu May. 24, 2012 3:00 AM PDT
Mon May. 21, 2012 12:33 PM PDT
Fri May. 18, 2012 1:19 PM PDT
Tue May. 15, 2012 9:33 AM PDT
Tue May. 15, 2012 7:02 AM PDT
Mon May. 14, 2012 11:20 AM PDT
Mon May. 14, 2012 10:22 AM PDT
Fri May. 11, 2012 11:23 AM PDT
Thu May. 10, 2012 12:51 PM PDT
Wed May. 9, 2012 12:10 PM PDT
Wed May. 9, 2012 8:59 AM PDT
Mon May. 7, 2012 10:32 AM PDT