Campaign Finance Controversy in Alabama
On June 30, a nonprofit called First Principles Action Inc. made headlines by donating $1 million to Katherine Robertson, who is set to become Alabama’s next attorney general. This donation marks a significant moment in Alabama’s political funding landscape.
First Principles Action was founded in December 2024 as part of a larger network of organizations, known as First Principles. Its headquarters are in a Nashville office shared with various companies, including law firms and Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Tennessee.
The organization was started by Peter Bisbee, who was previously the executive director of the Republican Prosecutors’ General Association. However, details about First Principles remain limited, with no available tax returns or documentation revealing information about its board or employees. Currently, there’s no clarity on where the funding for First Principles Action originated or how it fits into the election cycle’s larger picture.
This $1 million gift is considered “dark money” because its origins are obscured, yet it operates within legal boundaries.
Officials, who requested anonymity, expressed frustration about Robertson’s legal acceptance of this funding. They pointed out that while it’s within the law, it sidesteps Alabama’s rules regarding disclosure of donation sources. They added that people might want to obscure their funding for various reasons, which doesn’t necessarily imply malicious intent.
The trick to navigating this issue seems to be establishing a 501(c)(4) organization—which ostensibly has non-political aims—before channeling donations through it. These nonprofit entities, often criticized for lack of transparency, can engage in political activities, support candidates, and contribute to campaigns in some states while evading rigorous reporting requirements.
In Alabama, there are no regulations barring 501(c)(4) entities from contributing to political candidates. This allows politically motivated organizations to create these nonprofits under the guise of “educational” outreach, which can, in theory, conceal the true sources of money.
While other states have taken steps to prevent such direct contributions from 501(c)(4)s, Alabama remains one of the few states without such restrictions. There’s a sentiment that this kind of legal maneuvering undermines efforts for transparent political campaigns, particularly in the race for the chief law enforcement position.
The Alabama Political Report (APR) reached out to Robertson’s campaign with questions about the funding and her stance regarding such donations. They inquired specifically about whether she would disclose the original source of the substantial gift.
In response, the campaign suggested speaking with Peter Bisbee for more details, mentioning that neither Robertson nor her team wanted to make assumptions.
When asked if the campaign felt this type of donation violated the spirit of Alabama’s laws designed for transparency, Robertson’s team noted that the Fair Campaign Practices Act does not bar contributions from 501(c)(4)s. They asserted that many candidates and officials have accepted similar funding without issue.
Inquiry about Robertson’s relationship with Bisbee yielded a response indicating familiarity, as they both have worked within political spheres, particularly when Bisbee served with the AG’s office.
APR highlighted that Alabama’s current AG, Steve Marshall, had faced scrutiny in the past over ethical issues related to campaign funding from questionable sources. This prompted further questions regarding whether donations linked to Bisbee could represent a similar concern.
Robertson’s campaign reiterated that First Principles Action is not a political action committee (PAC) but a 501(c)(4), which is permitted to make such contributions. They maintained that similar practices are commonplace among current and former officials.
Attempts to contact Bisbee for clarification on the donation’s origin were unsuccessful, but Robertson’s campaign did provide a statement from him expressing support for her candidacy and emphasizing her commitment to the law.
Observers note that the dynamics at play are complex, with Bisbee and other supporters of the right-leaning agenda in Alabama potentially aiming to leverage their influence in the AG race. Over the years, the Republican Attorneys General Association (RAGA), which Bisbee has ties to, has been financed significantly by donors like billionaire Leonard Leo, who is known for his impact on the judiciary.
Marshall has actively participated in RAGA initiatives and has been involved in controversial lawsuits that often support extreme right-wing causes. This trend in Alabama politics, especially under Marshall’s leadership, has raised concerns that decisions aren’t always made in the state’s best interest but rather serve the agenda of influential donors.
As Marshall has pursued aggressive litigation against various federal policies, the ramifications of this strategy are becoming apparent. Issues regarding voting rights and race have surfaced, highlighting the potential consequences of prioritizing partisan agendas over the needs of the state.
Robertson’s campaign seems to signal a continuation of these practices, raising questions about the state of campaign finance in Alabama. The significant contributions received may suggest a need for a reevaluation of Alabama’s Campaign Finance Act to enhance transparency moving forward.
