Because ASUO Senate approved including OSPIRG in the Athletics and Contracts Finance Committee’s benchmark, or projected growth, University discussion about the use of student dollars has been renewed.
Though OSPIRG’s opponents often argue against the use of mandatory student fees for lobbying politicians, OSPIRG says the group is not using student fees to lobby, but to advocate.
University OSPIRG Chair Charles Denson said advocacy is essentially talking to legislators about an issue when there is not a bill on the table, whereas lobbying would be defined as talking to a public official to pass legislation.
“On something like high speed rail, if there aren’t any bills on the issue, we are able to talk to elected officials,” Denson said.
Because the group is listed as a 501(c)(3) non-profit, funding the group receives cannot be used to lobby for policy.
Lobbying means something very specific to the Internal Revenue Service, which defines it as working with specific laws or political campaigns.
“(A 501(c)(3)) may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates,” according to the IRS exemption requirements.
Additionally, there is a specific law in Oregon that dictates against student fees going to lobby for issues that don’t have to do with higher education issues.
But the Oregon State PIRG is a 501(c)(4) non-profit, which does not carry the same restrictions on lobbying.
The student group’s representatives said that the State PIRG and the Student PIRG share advocates, but the State PIRG funds the lobbying they do, while the Student PIRG’s budget pays for other tasks, including research and advocacy.
On the budget that the student group lists on its website, there is funding listed for the organizers and advocates for various campaigns the group works on. For example, the health care advocate is allocated $5,480.
The student group gives that person those funds to do the tasks they are allowed to do under their tax status.
Meanwhile, advocates receive other designated money from the State PIRG to do actual lobbying on bills in the state legislature.
The group has a campus organizer for each campus where there is an OSPIRG chapter.
Currently, only Southern Oregon University and Lane Community College have dedicated, student-funded Student PIRG chapters.
For the past few years, when the University’s chapter was denied funds by ASUO’s ACFC, Denson said, the State PIRG decided to pay for the campus organizer out of its budget.
On the proposed budget for the 2010-11 fiscal year, OSPIRG listed a request for $19,163 for the University campus organizer.
This person, who is not a student, would work a full-time position with students, organizing the campus direction for the group. The current University campus organizer is Arianna Koudounas.
All campus organizers are overseen by a campus organizing director, who is allocated a $20,475 salary.
The director works with all chapters in both Oregon and Washington. The current director is Sasha Rosen.
Denson said when the group works with the State PIRG, it makes their actions more effective.
He said both groups share an executive director and that, if they share staff, they would be able to work on more issues.
[email protected]