NOM in Iowa -- big bus, big bucks, but no guts

Perhaps you've heard of the National Organization for Marriage, or NOM, a group that has spent considerable money and time here in Iowa trying to convince Iowans that we should jump into the way-back machine and deny marriage equality to same-sex couples.

In 2010, NOM had a big "judge bus" that rolled across Iowa gunning for the hides of three Iowa Supreme Court Justices who joined four others in unanimously striking down Iowa's ban on same-sex marriages. That effort succeeded.

In 2012, between the end of September and the beginning of November, NOM spent just more than $148,000 on an effort to oust Justice David Wiggins, including $138,000 for television ads and roughly $8,700 for robocalls. The bus rolled again, but the effort failed. Wiggins kept his seat. Oh, and same-sex marriage remains the law of the land.

You observant Iowans out there may have seen the bus, or the TV ads, or maybe even received a charming robocall. But one thing you can't see is who gave NOM the money to bring its anti-civil-rights message to your town, living room and telephone. Unlike other groups who made independent expenditures on the Wiggins battle last year, including Bob Vander Plaats' Iowans for Freedom and the pro-judge Justice Not Politics, NOM didn't disclose its donors.

And under Iowa law, that just might be a problem. From The Gazette:

 NOM calls the allegations "baseless," while calling Karger a "delusional homosexual activist." Karger, who ran a quixotic campaign for the GOP presidential nomination, called NOM "duplicitous" and "bullies." So everybody's familiar with the fine art of verbal combat.

But what about the law? From the The Register:

Absolutely wrong? Doesn't sound good. It seems like this could all be cleared up if NOM would simply disclose its donors.

But in an email statement, the group says no way:

Actually, I'd just like to know who is paying for NOM to parachute into my home state as part of an effort to undermine its historic commitment to civil rights and equal protection under the law through a divisive campaign based largely on misinformation and blatant falsehoods. I'm funny that way. Other Iowans also are funny.

Don't roll into to our state to clean out our courts and amend our constitution, then try to cower behind some weak technicality when it comes time to come clean.

This case happens to be about the marriage issue. But I don't care which side of which campaign or issue you're on, the notion that you should be able to secretly bankroll a campaign squarely aimed at influencing public offices and public policies makes absolutely no sense to me. Naturally, as someone who has to put his name on his opinions, no matter how cockamamie, I have very little sympathy for those who are scared to death that people might find out what sort of views they hold and candidates they support.

If you can't stand the heat, don't bankroll the bus.