renta- orgs
new 1019 inspired by turbotax scam<div>
</div><div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><a href="https://www.techdirt.com/2014/07/25/net-neutrality-astroturfing-stirs-up-conflict-between-latinominority-groups/">https://www.techdirt.com/2014/07/25/net-neutrality-astroturfing-stirs-up-conflict-between-latinominority-groups/</a></font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">no lnx</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Net Neutrality Astroturfing Stirs Up Conflict Between Latino/Minority Groups</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Politics</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Fri, Jul 25th<b> 2014 </b>- Mike Masnick</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b>We’ve written a few times about the highly cynical astroturfing practice in Washington DC, in which certain lobbyist groups basically have “deals” with certain public interest groups. </b>The basic deal is that the lobbyists guarantee big cash donations from their big company clients, and then the lobbyists get to write letters “on behalf of” those organizations for whatever policy they want enacted (or blocked). We quoted a story from Declan McCullagh in 2008 which included this classic line from a<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> lobbyist who worked in one of these shops:</span></font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“You go down the Latino people, the deaf people, the farmers, and choose them…. You say, ‘I can’t use this one–I already used them last time…’ We had their letterhead. We’d just write the letter. We’d fax it to them and tell them, ‘You’re in favor of this.'”</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">That first option, “the Latino people” turned out to be rather prescient. During the last net neutrality fight, in 2009, it was revealed that a bunch of Latino groups magically supported the telco position — leaving out the bit about how they were funded by the telcos. Here’s Matthew Lasar, back in 2009, revealing some details:</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b>Take the go-slow on net neutrality commentary filed in late September by the Hispanic Technology and Telecommunications Partnership (HTTP) and 19 other civil rights group</b>s. Their statement warns that net neutrality policies could inhibit investment and “leave disenfranchised communities further behind.” The coalition describes themselves as having a common purpose, serving communities “that are among the most severely impacted by a lack of access to technology.” And indeed the list includes signers from venerable organizations like the<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the<b> League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC).</b></span></font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b>But the groups signing the letter have something else in common: financial support from AT&T (and sometimes Verizon and Comcast). </b>These advocates don’t hide this. For example, the website of one of the signers, the Japanese American Citizens League, says “Website made possible by the generous sponsorship of AT&T.” <b>100 Black Men</b> lists AT&T as a “partner” and “sponsor” of the group. AT&T Foundation’s 2007 tax returns show that 100 Black Men received $100,000 that year and $75,000 in 2006.</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b>Similarly, the NAACP, which also signed the statement, lists AT&T and Verizon on its Centennial Event sponsors page</b>. LULAC’s website indicates that it received a $1.5 million Technology Access Grant from AT&T. Comcast Foundation’s records indicate that it gave the LULAC Institute $60,000 in 2007. And in 2006 the AT&T Foundation gave LULAC numerous grants to support computer education centers across the United States.</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">And some of these groups have even more direct ties to the telcos. The Asian American Justice Center’s Advisory Council includes Anne H. Chow, listed as “AT&T Chair” on the group’s website. In 2006, AT&T identified her as a senior vice president for the company. Her AAJC bio says that Chow “played a key role in the AT&T/SBC merger with overall responsibility for the Sales and Marketing integration planning effort.”</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">And then, jump forward to 2011, when AT&T was trying to buy T-Mobile. The merger received some unexpected support:</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b>The Hispanic Institute and the Latino Coaltion have decided that supporting the merger of AT&T with T-Mobile is of utmost importance to them</b>.</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">A further report noted:</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">One DC insider informs us that rumblings on K Street suggest AT&T had called every civil rights group in the United States for support within fifteen minutes of the deal being announced</span>. Fearful of losing AT&T donations — most of these groups quickly got to parroting prepared AT&T statements, unconcerned about the actual impact of a T-Mobile deal. Getting funding for a new events center apparently dulls any ethical pangs felt using your organization as a hired stage prop.</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Then, last year, the <b>Center for Public Integrity</b> decided to explore the nature of these various “civil rights groups” and their ties to the big broadband players, and found the situation to be quite suspect, especially with regards to the<b> Minority Media and Telecommunications Council (MMTC</b>), which helps coordinate many of these filings for the FCC:</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">From 2009 through 2011 MMTC received at least $725,000 in contributions and sponsorships from network neutrality foes including Verizon, Time Warner, and the National Cable and Telecommunications Association, according to MMTC tax filings and sponsorship lists.</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">MMTC?s relationship with Verizon demonstrates the group's various methods of obtaining industry revenue. In 2009, at the height of the net neutrality debate, Verizon made a direct $40,000 contribution to MMTC. From 2010 to 2013, MMTC documents list Verizon as funding at least $160,000 in MMTC conference sponsorships.</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Additionally, MMTC worked with Verizon on a $189 million sale of wireless spectrum licenses to minority-owned Grain Management this year ? a deal announced in conjunction with a larger $1.9 billion license sale to AT&T. A spokesman for Verizon says money paid to MMTC wasn?t intended to influence its policies but to support its mission of promoting inclusion in the industry.</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">So it should come as little to no surprise that a bunch of these same groups, once again, filed a pro-telco comment with the FCC, arguing that reclassifying broadband under Title II would somehow be harmful to minorities. Note that the filing was coordinated by HTTP and MMTC — both groups discussed above as taking money from the big broadband guys. The argument they’re presenting makes absolutely no sense, but no one cares how sensible the argument is.</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">HTTP partnered with the Minority Media and Telecommunications Council (MMTC) and 35 other national minority organizations to file comments in the FCC?s proceeding to protect and promote the open Internet. The group urged the Commission to focus its broadband policies on promoting adoption, engagement, and informed broadband use by minorities, and to exercise its Section 706 authority to protect all consumers? rights to an open Internet. In the filing, the organizations opposed Title II reclassification of the Internet under the 1934 Telecommunications Act, arguing that it would stifle broadband adoption among vulnerable populations, and would limit investment and innovation that have benefitted its constituents. Six HTTP member organizations also joined independently in the filing: Dialogue on Diversity; LISTA; MANA: A National Latina Organization; the National Puerto Rican Coalition; SER Jobs for Progress; and The Latino Coalition.</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">The difference this time, however, is that other groups, representing Latinos, Hispanics and other minority groups who are not funded by the big broadband guys, are now paying attention. And they filed their own FCC comments supporting Title II reclassification:</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">On Friday, the Voices for Internet Freedom coalition filed comments with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) on behalf of more than 50 civil rights, human rights, community-based and media organizations in support of strong Net Neutrality rules that protect the digital rights of communities of color.</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">In the filing, the groups called on the FCC to treat Internet Service Providers (ISPs) as common carriers, which would allow the Commission to reestablish its legal authority to adopt Net Neutrality rules that prevent telecommunications companies from blocking, discriminating against and interfering with Web traffic. The coalition also called on the agency to ensure Net Neutrality protections are applied equally to both wireline and wireless Internet access.</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">The group opposes the framework for FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler's proposed rules, which would allow ISPs to discriminate by creating fast and slow lanes online….</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b>Voices for Internet Freedom is a coalition of nearly 30 organizations advocating for communities of color in the fight to protect Internet freedom from corporate and government discrimination.</b> The coalition is led by the National Hispanic Media Coalition, the Center for Media Justice, Free Press and<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> ColorOfChange.</span></font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">And now the fight seems to be getting personal. Alex Nogales, the head of the National Hispanic Media Coalition, called out the Congressional Hispanic Leadership (which has come out in support of the broadband company’s plan to kill net neutrality) by pointing out that they held a briefing that was sponsored by the telcos and totally one-sided. The event was so over-the-top biased that even some in the mainstream media highlighted how ridiculous it was.</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Martin Chavez, from the telco-supported Hispanic Technology & Telecommunications Partnership, posted a blog post that purports to be a “can’t we all just get along” type post, but which really personally slams Alex Nogales for what Chavez claims was an “angry outburst and lapse of judgment.” Nogales isn’t taking that sitting down and responded by pointing out that Chavez seems to conveniently leave out who pays his salary:</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">What is most interesting about Marty?s statement is what it doesn?t say. Notably, he did not address his employment with Ibarra Strategy Group, a lobbying firm whose clients include Verizon ? the main opponent to strong and enforceable Open Internet rules. One would think that a person with such an egregious conflict of interest would, at least, disclose it in his public statements. Marty, unfortunately, does not.</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Regrettably, what Marty did say in his statement is just as deceptive as what he conveniently left out. Of the many fabrications, Marty said that ?most Latino organizations? oppose the FCC using the sound legal authority found in Title II of the Communications Act to restrict blocking or discrimination online. This is patently false. A number of highly respected Latino organizations have sided with the community and come out in favor of strong Open Internet rules based on Title II authority, including: the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities (HACU), LatinoJustice PRLDEF, the National Association of Latino Independent Producers (NALIP), the National Association of Hispanic Journalists (NAHJ), the Mexican American Opportunity Foundation (MAOF), Presente.org, the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health, the National Institute for Latino Policy, News Taco, Latino Rebels, and more.</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">It certainly is disappointing to see groups like this fight, but it’s worth noting that there certainly does seem to be a clear pattern, as noted years ago, that the groups with funding from the broadband guys magically support the broadband players’ position, while the ones who are not funded that way actually seem to recognize the importance of not giving in to the broadband guys’ plans to kill net neutrality.</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Filed Under: astroturfing, fcc, latino groups, lobbying, minority groups, net neutrality, open internet, title ii</font></p><p style="font-size: medium;" /><p style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Companies: at&t, comcast, hhtp, hispanic institute, latino coalition,<b> lulac,</b> mmtc, naacp, nhmc, t-mobile, verizon, voices for internet freedom</font></p><div style="font-size: medium;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div style="font-size: medium;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div style="font-size: medium;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="font-size: medium;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">JUNE 22, 2018</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">UPDATED 3 YEARS AGO</font></font></font></div><div>Big Oil eyes U.S. minority groups to build offshore drilling support</div><div>By Valerie Volcovici</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The largest U.S. oil and gas lobby group is seeking to convince Hispanic and black communities to support the Trump administration’s proposed expansion of offshore drilling, arguing it would create high paying jobs, including for storm-displaced Puerto Ricans.</div><div>
</div><div>The American Petroleum Institute (API) launched its “Explore Offshore” campaign earlier this month to counter offshore drilling foes in coastal southeast states from Virginia to Florida, where lawmakers and governors on both sides of the aisle have expressed fear an oil spill could ruin tourism.</div><div>
</div><div>“We want to build support in minority communities because the message that increasing the supply of affordable energy and good paying jobs will resonate,” said Erik Milito, API’s director of Upstream and Industry Operations.</div><div>
</div><div>As part of the campaign, API has partnered with a number of black and Hispanic business groups, including the Virginia, Florida and North Carolina Hispanic Chambers of Commerce and the Florida Black Chamber of Commerce and <b>South Carolina African American Chamber of Commerce.</b></div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 51);">A Pew Research poll published in January showed that 56 percent of Hispanics and 54 percent of blacks opposed offshore drilling, compared to 48 percent of white people.</span></div><div>
</div><div><b>The Interior Department in January announced a proposal to open up nearly all U.S. offshore waters to drilling, triggering a backlash from coastal states that rely on tourism.</b></div><div>
</div><div><b>Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke told a Senate panel in April that he is likely to scale back the proposal following meetings with coastal governors. Shortly after he unveiled his offshore drilling proposal, Zinke offered an exemption for Florida after he held a private meeting with Republican Governor Rick Scott.</b></div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 51);">The oil and gas industry is keen to pursue seismic testing in areas they believe hold the largest reserves along the southern Atlantic coast and to Florida’s eastern Gulf shorelines.</span></div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The API campaign published op-eds in local newspapers this week, including one by Stephen Gilchrist, chair of South Carolina’s African American Chamber of Commerce. In it he touts <b>API’s major talking point</b> that <b>oil and gas exploration jobs offer locals an average salary of $116,000 without requiring a college degree.</b></span></div><div>
</div><div>“It’s a myth that communities of color are not interested in supporting offshore exploration,” he wrote in South Carolina’s Post and Courier. “I’ve personally attended town hall meetings up and down South Carolina’s coast where there has been significant support for the economic opportunity offshore exploration holds - especially in communities that have been historically disenfranchised.”</div><div>
</div><div>JOBS OUTWEIGH ENVIRONMENT</div><div>
</div><div>API, however, acknowledged it needs to hold community meetings and improve local outreach to sway minority communities that have been inclined to oppose offshore drilling.</div><div>
</div><div><b>Miriam Ramirez, a co-chair of the API’s Florida campaign and a former Puerto Rico state senator</b> said she thinks the lure of higher-paying jobs, especially for victims of 2017’s Hurricane Maria, would create economic opportunities that outweigh environmental concerns.</div><div>
</div><div>“We have an influx of thousands of Puerto Ricans in Florida, including doctors and engineers who plan to relocate permanently,” Ramirez said.</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">A study released in March by Oceana, an Ocean conservancy group, found Interior’s offshore drilling plan would put more than 2.6 million jobs and nearly $180 billion in gross domestic product at risk for only two year’s-worth of oil and just over one year’s-worth of gas at current consumption.</span></div><div>
</div><div>“Jobs that come from offshore drilling do not guarantee local good paying jobs compared to the tourism industry, which can keep jobs local,” said Pricey Harrison, a North Carolina state representative and president of the National Caucus of Environmental Legislators.</div><div>
</div><div>Julio Fuentes, president of Florida’s Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, said he is reaching out to new Puerto Rican evacuees, as well as existing local communities that are skeptical of offshore drilling, by hosting roundtables with business leaders and community organizations.</div><div>
</div><div>“I always like to talk about the safety aspect of it,” Fuentes said.</div><div>
</div><div><b>“Since the BP oil spill, there have been over 100 new industry standards put in place,” he said, referring to the devastating Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010 that caused tremendous damage to beaches and coastlines in Gulf coast states.</b></div><div>
</div><div>But environmental justice advocates counter that there is no way to guarantee safe offshore drilling.</div><div>
</div><div>Marce Gutierrez-Graudins, president of conservation group Azul, said it takes only one spill or accident to deprive lower-income Hispanic communities access to the shore, which she argues is an important form of escape from the stress of urban areas where many minorities live.</div><div>
</div><div>Reporting By Valerie Volcovici; Editing by Bill Berkrot</div><div>
</div><div>Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles</div></div><div style="font-size: medium;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="font-size: medium;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">...</font><span times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb">Again, Bernie McKay, the lobbyist who had joined Intuit in the late 1990s and outlasted multiple CEOs, led the company’s campaign. In response to the Obama threat, McKay and Intuit’s small army of outside lobbyists turned to Congress, where lawmakers friendly to the company introduced a series of bills that would elevate Free File from a temporary deal with the IRS to the law of the land.</span></div><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Republicans have historically been the company’s most reliable supporters, but some <b>Democrats joined them. Rep. Zoe Lofgren,</b> the California Democrat whose district includes part of Silicon Valley, has introduced or co-sponsored five bills over the years that would codify the Free File program, with names like the Free File Permanence Act. <span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Lofgren’s spokesperson told ProPublica that the congresswoman believes the IRS, because of its role as tax collector, should not also be the tax preparer.</span></font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Hedging its bets, the company also sought to make sure the IRS could not spend a single dollar creating a public filing system. One internal document says Intuit would “advance legislative language in House Appropriations for ‘No Funds’ restriction on IRS spending” on such a system. It worked. Within a few years, Congress passed a 3,000-page appropriations bill that included a single sentence crucial to Intuit’s financial future: “No funds,” the law decreed, could be used “to provide to any person a proposed final return or statement.”</font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Another important aspect of Intuit’s influence strategy during the Obama years was covertly enlisting minority and women’s groups to press its case.</font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The internal 2014-15 “encroachment strategy” document discloses plans to “leverage trade groups to support House/Senate Free File bills.” It goes on to list the groups Women Impacting Public Policy, The Latino Coalition and the National Black Chamber of Commerce.</font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Intuit has given money to all of those groups over the years. All have signed letters urging Congress to make the Free File deal permanent. “The Free File program has been a clear success,” said one letter signed by The Latino Coalition and the Hispanic Leadership Fund.</font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A spokesperson for Women Impacting Public Policy said it has received $70,000 from Intuit. The amounts given to the other groups are unknown, and they did not respond to requests for comment.</font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Company documents also outline plans to “mobilize” a “coalition” that included think tanks and academics, who published op-eds.</b></font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">Will Marshall, president of the pro-business Progressive Policy Institute,</b><b> opposed return-free filing in an op-ed in The Hill because doing one’s taxes is “a teachable moment [that] prompts us to review our financial circumstances.”</b></font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Anti-tax activist Grover Norquist, the most consistent champion of Intuit’s policy positions, warned that “b<b>ig spenders in Washington, D.C. want to socialize all tax preparation in America.”</b></font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It is unclear whether they were paid by Intuit or the Free File Alliance.<b> Norquist didn’t respond to a request for comment</b>, and a<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> <b>Progressive Policy Institute</b></span><b> </b>spokesman declined to say whether Intuit gave the group money.</font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Whatever external challenges to the status quo Intuit has faced, the company has been able to rely on the IRS’ continuing enthusiastic support of the Free File program. Every few years, the IRS and the industry got together to renew the deal....[long]</font></p><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">==</font></p></div></div>