Sutherland Institute's Funding System:

Image courtesy of Boaz Yiftach at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

INTRODUCTION:


Many have had questions about how the Sutherland Institute is funded.

While I don't have a complete answer, I do have some information that you may find quite interesting.

My purpose in putting forth this information is to help bring Sutherland's funding out of the shadows - so that people can judge what impact, if any, this information might have on their thinking about Sutherland or its policy positions.

A significant amount of Sutherland Institute's funding for the period 2003-2010 came from three foundations which are either currently or formerly associated with the Swim family.  Gaylord Swim was the founder of the Sutherland Institute in 1995 - so this funding makes sense.  The foundations are:

ALS Foundation
GFC Foundation
The Foundation for the American West

One of the foundations, ALS, merged with the GFC Foundation in 2006.

From a 2009 article about the GFC Foundation, the following gives us more information about the relationship of the Swim family and the ALS and GFC foundations:

"The 34-year-old president [Stan Swim] of GFC Foundation in Orem, Utah, comes from a long line of investment managers—four generations, actually. His grandfather Dudley was successful during the Great Depression and formed a charitable foundation in 1941, the Arthur L. Swim Foundation (later renamed ALS), named after his father. When Dudley passed away in 1972, his family continued the foundation’s work. Eventually Gaylord and his wife, Laurie, established GFC Foundation in 1994 with further funds from his parents’ estate. (The Swim family folded ALS into GFC in 2006 to minimize overhead costs.) Gaylord passed away in 2005."

The article, "The GFC Foundation Serving God, Family, and Country," by Michael Leaser, is available at:

http://www.philanthropyroundtable.org/topic/excellence_in_philanthropy/the_gfc_foundation_serving_god_family_and_country

An article which appeared in the Deseret News following Gaylord Swim's passing in 2005 tells us that Mr. Swim founded the Sutherland Institute in 1995. 

The same article also tells us that he established the Foundation for the American West (FAW). 

The article is available at:  http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1311390/Gaylord-Swim-dies-of-cancer.html?pg=all

The Foundation for the American West (FAW) does not appear to have had a Swim family member on its board for a number of years. 

Both the GFC Foundation and the Foundation for the American West remain key funding sources for the Sutherland Institute.

One interesting thing about the funding is the high level of support.

Another is how, in addition to direct grants from ALS and GFC to Sutherland, money also flowed from these two foundations to the Foundation for the American West.  The Foundation for the American West, in turn, has been a significant source of funds to Sutherland. 

It is difficult to determine whether the money going to FAW from ALS and GFC was sent to be primarily used for grants to Sutherland - with FAW acting as an intermediary in some fashion.  It could also be that the grants were going to FAW for some other purpose or purposes.  In this type of arrangement, the money to Sutherland may have been the result of the internal decision-making of FAW or by request of the donors.  If the money to Sutherland was going at the donors' request, then part of the money may have been dedicated to Sutherland and some dedicated to other purposes.  Some other arrangement may also exist that I have not outlined here.  I don't have a clear answer as to why the money flowed in this manner to Sutherland or how the arrangements were set up for the FAW grants to Sutherland (see Endnote #1). 

Another curiosity regarding this funding is the fact that Paul Mero was either on the board or held key positions in both Sutherland and GFC for much of the time considered here.

The close relationship between GFC and Sutherland will be considered in more detail in the "Informational Points" section below.

In addition to ALS, GFC and FAW, two other organizations have also become instrumental recently in the funding system of Sutherland:  Donors Trust, Inc. and Donors Capital Fund, Inc.

Donors Trust and Donors Capital Fund are very closely related organizations. 

For example, Whitney L. Ball has served both organizations for a number of years as the secretary/treasurer.  She is listed as the president and CEO of Donors Trust on its 2010 IRS Form 990 and as president of Donors Capital Fund on its 2010 IRS Form 990.  If you examine these 2010 IRS Form 990s, for instance, you will also see that they send significant amounts of money back and forth for different purposes and list the other as a related organization (see, for example,  Schedule R of each of the 2010 990s: http://990s.foundationcenter.org/990_pdf_archive/522/522166327/522166327_201012_990.pdf and http://990s.foundationcenter.org/990_pdf_archive/541/541934032/541934032_201012_990.pdf).  Whitney L. Ball is the person who signed the 2010 990s of both organizations.

There are also a number of other organizations which have made smaller grants to the Sutherland Institute over the years.  These have been left out of this presentation in order to focus on the primary funding system.  They have also been left out due to not having a complete picture of all the grants and amounts.  Locating all the grants is akin to hunting for a few needles in a haystack.

The five major donor sources identified here account for the majority of Sutherland's funding over an 8-year period (2003-2010).   

Even so, when examining the money from DT/DCF to Sutherland, the possibility of one or more significant donors working through those organizations is raised - although the grants come from DC/DCF to Sutherland.

In this presentation I will sometimes use abbreviations for the organizations being discussed.  The abbreviations are as follows:

SI     =  Sutherland Institute
ALS  =  ALS Foundation
GFC  =  GFC Foundation
FAW  =  Foundation for the American West
DT     =  Donors Trust, Inc.
DCF   =  Donors Capital Fund, Inc. 

At the outset, I want to state that I am only critical here of the work SI does regarding immigration, which I consider to be wrong-headed and counterproductive to a sound and reasonable set of policy initiatives that would serve the national interest rather than the more narrow political or financial interests of those who share Sutherland's views on this issue.  I have no comment on any other Sutherland project or of anyone's association with the institute.  I think that much of Sutherland's work and associated foundations and individuals is positive and worthy of support.

I have a significant difference of opinion, however, when it comes to the issue of illegal immigration and the approach promoted by the Sutherland Institute in Utah.  The institute played a key role in promoting a "comprehensive approach" to immigration law in Utah - which led to the odious and unworkable HB116, or the unconstitutional Utah-amnesty bill, being passed and signed into law in 2011.

Paul Mero (president and the most public face of the institute) has written a rather lengthy essay, "The Poison of Extremism." In this essay, Mr. Mero tends to portray those who disagree with certain views on illegal immigration as being immersed in extremist thinking:

http://www.sutherlandinstitute.org/uploaded_files/sdmc/The%20Poison%20of%20Extremism.pdf

The essay seems designed to marginalize opposition.  As such, it fails to provide much enlightenment about the principled opposition to the immigration views promoted by the institute.  His goal appears to be to not grant any credibility to his opposition, but merely to excommunicate their views from the public square.

In terms of funding the think-tank, therefore, it might be interesting to know how much money this organization has to fund its projects and where much of this money comes from.

The information outlined below is derived from IRS Form 990s available to the public at the Foundation Center website (http://foundationcenter.org/).  These 990s are linked at the end of this post.

In the presentation below, amounts will be listed according to the fiscal year or corresponding calendar year in which the reported amount occurs.  Different organizations file their reports according to one or the other format.

The ALS, GFC, and FAW, along with the Sutherland Institute, follow a fiscal year reporting.  Thus, amounts reported for 2004, which occur on the report for the period 7/1/03 - 6/30/04, will be listed as being for the year 2004.

Donors Trust and Donors Capital Fund report by calendar year and their information will be listed by calendar year in the discussion below.

Examining reports of both types together, however, creates a bit of a problem.  Because specific grant dates are unknown, a grant made in the second half of 2004, for instance, will be listed on a calendar year report for 2004 and will not appear on a fiscal year report of another organization until 2005.  Although this might cause some confusion when examining a specific year, this should not be too large of a problem for our purpose here, however, which is to primarily identify major sources of funding to the Sutherland Institute.  To mitigate the differences in reporting, therefore, I have aggregated the information for much of the discussion below into an 8-year block. 




INFORMATIONAL POINTS:


1.  The goal of the section:

The goal of this section is to provide the reader with a snapshot of various aspects of Sutherland Institute funding and related issues.

In order to give a good snapshot of the funding, the 8-year period for which IRS 990s are available for all the foundations and organizations involved will be examined as a whole.  A year-by-year breakdown is provided in the data section which follows.  The 8-year period covers 2003 - 2010.  Some information for 2002 and 2011 is also provided in the data section, but as not all 990s were available, it is incomplete for those years.


2.  Total Sutherland Grant Income:

Sutherland Institute, for the period 2003-2010, had a total income from grants, etc., of:  $7,086,678.00

This amount is a rather nice sum.  The interesting thing is how the amount increases each year:

2003 -    $315,956.00
2004 -    $685,970.00
2005 -    $717,375.00
2006 -    $721,453.00
2007 -    $942,846.00
2008 -  $1,056,774.00
2009 -  $1,310,315.00
2010 -  $1,335,989.00

The trend has continued into 2011, where the listed income is:  $1,453,942.00


3.  Grant totals to Sutherland from ALS and GFC:

Grants to Sutherland Institute from ALS for the period 2003-2010 totaled:  $550,000.00

Grants to Sutherland Institute from GFC for the period 2003-2010 totaled: $2,286,198.00

The totals of both ALS and GFC to Sutherland for the 8-year period totaled:  $2,836,198.00 or  40% of the total.


4.  Grant totals from ALS and GFC to the Foundation for the American West and FAW total grants to Sutherland:

Grants from ALS to the Foundation for the American West for the 8-year period:  $1,300,000.00

Grants from GFC to the Foundation for the American West for the 8-year period:  $1,396,356.00

Total of ALS and GFC grants to FAW for 2003-2010:  $2,696,356.00

Total of Grants from the FAW to Sutherland Institute for 2003-2010: $2,078,815.00 or 29% of the total.


5.  Grant totals of ALS, GFC, and FAW to Sutherland:

Combined total of ALS, GFC and FAW grants to Sutherland for 2003-2010:  $4,915,013.00 or 69% of the total.


6.  GFC Grants to Donors Trust, Inc.:

There were a number of grants from GFC to Donors Trust.  There does not appear to have been money going from ALS or FAW to Donors Trust.

The grants to Donors Trust are interesting.  In the beginning there were just a few and were relatively small grants.  They have grown in size in recent years:

2003 -     $10,000.00
2004  -                  0
2005  -      $5,000.00
2006  -                  0
2007  -      $5,000.00
2008  -  $189,394.00
2009  -  $250,000.00

2010  -  $175,000.00

The amount of money going to Donors Trust from GFC remained high for 2011:  $258,000.00

The grants have only gone to Donors Trust.  There are no grants directly to Donors Capital Fund from GFC.

After five years of small or no grants to Donors Trust, the amounts jump significantly for 2008-2010.

For the years 2003-2010, the totals of these grants is:  $634,394.00


7.  Grants from Donors Trust, Inc. (DT) and Donors Capital Fund, Inc. (DCF) to Sutherland:

One interesting thing is that grants to Sutherland come from both Donors Trust and Donors Capital Fund - even though money only goes from GFC to DT and not to DCF.   

Another is that the amounts coming to Sutherland exceed the amounts going to Donors Trust from GFC.

This may indicate another large funding source or sources working through the DT/DCF to send money to Sutherland or that the DT/DCF itself is funding Sutherland. 

As with the situation with the Foundation for the American West, it is unknown if the money from GFC is being sent to Donors Trust with the purpose of sending it to Sutherland (by using DT or DCF as an intermediary) or if the money is being sent to DT for a purpose unrelated to Sutherland and the grants to Sutherland are the result of internal decisions by DTDCF.  It is also possible that the money to Sutherland may have nothing to do with GFC and may come from other sources.  There is not enough public information to get a more clear picture of the arrangements that send money to Sutherland from DT/DCF (see Endnote #1).

A couple of the 990s had no grantee list included in the pdf at the Foundation Center.  In those cases, the grant is listed as "0" below. 

The grant totals to Sutherland from DT/DCF are:

Donors Trust, Inc. grants to Sutherland:

2003 -                 0
2004 -                 0
2005 -                 0
2006 -                 0
2007 - $187,500.00
2008 -                 0
2009 - $235,000.00
2010 - $405,000.00

Donors Capital Fund grants to Sutherland:

2003 -                 0
2004 -                 0
2005 -   $50,000.00
2006 -                 0 
2007 -   $20,000.00
2008 - $145,000.00
2009 - $100,000.00
2010 - $191,000.00

Total from Donors Trust to Sutherland for 2003-2010:  $827,500.00

Total from Donors Capital Fund to Sutherland for 2003-2010:  $506,000.00

Total for DT and DCF to Sutherland for 2003-2010:  $1,333,500.00

This amount far exceeds the money that went from GFC to Donors Trust ($634,394.00).

The total of $1,333,500.00 - $634,394 (GFC money to DT) = $699,106.00 (the difference in Sutherland's favor).

Even if we add in the 2011 grant from GFC to Donors Trust ($258,000.00), there is still a significant difference. 

This difference may indicate another large donor or donors in the recent background helping to fund SI (it could be DT/DCF itself or a third party or parties working through DT/DCF).


8.  Total amount of money to Sutherland from the five major sources:

At this point we are able to compute the total money to Sutherland from the five major identified sources (ALS, GFC, FAW, DT, and DCF):

From ALS:     $550,000.00
From GFC:  $2,286,198.00
From FAW:  $2,078,815.00
From DT:        $827,500.00
From DCF:     $506,000.00 

The total amount to Sutherland from these five organizations for 2003-2010:  $6,248,513.00 or 88% of Sutherland's total revenues from grants, etc.


9.  Overlap Between GFC Foundation and Sutherland Institute Boards/Staff

One issue only briefly mentioned so far is the close relationship between Sutherland and the GFC Foundation.

In addition to the fact that Paul Mero serves on the boards of both GFC and Sutherland, Stan Swim also has a role in both organizations.

Mr. Swim is on Sutherland's board and is listed as "Chairman" on Sutherland's "Board Members" page linked below.  The short profile there also states that Mr. Swim serves as president of the GFC Foundation.  From Sutherland's website: 

"Stanford D. Swim is the president of GFC Foundation, a Utah-based private foundation. Prior to taking his current post as a Trustee of the Sutherland Institute, he was senior analyst for Probity Advisors..."

(http://sutherlandinstitute.org/about/board-members/)

Although Stan Swim is not listed as a board member of GFC on its 2011 990, he is listed as "Executive" on the 990 and received $108,108.00 in compensation from GFC.  Paul Mero received $6,100.00 and Brent McKinley received $8,100.00 as compensation from GFC. 

The 2011 990 for GFC only lists three officers and/or board members and one staff member.  In the data section below, the officers and/or board members are listed from the GFC 990s.  If GFC has other officers or board members that do not appear in the 990s, they are not considered here.   

GFC's officers and/or board members listed on the 2011 990 are (Stan Swim is listed as an employee):

Lauralyn B. Swim

Paul T. Mero

Brent McKinley

Lauralyn Swim on the list may cause some confusion as it appears that she has a daughter by the same name.  Her daughter is most likely not the Lauralyn Swim listed on the 990s for GFC. 

Lauralyn (Laurie) Swim is the mother of Stan Swim and the widow of Gaylord Swim.  Together they (Gaylord and Lauralyn) established GFC (see:  http://www.philanthropyroundtable.org/topic/excellence_in_philanthropy/the_gfc_foundation_serving_god_family_and_country).  It is reasonable to conclude that the Lauralyn Swim on the 990s is the mother of the Swim children (Stan, Lyall, Lauralyn, and 2 others), the widow of Gaylord Swim, and established the GFC Foundation with her husband.  If by some slim chance it is her daughter who is listed on the 990s, Lauralyn (Laurie) Swim is still closely connected to GFC and through her family relationships to Sutherland (in addition to having Paul Mero on GFC's board).  Mrs. Swim is described as follows in a short notice from Southern Virginia University:

"She [Laurie Swim] is chairman of the board of the GFC Foundation—a charitable foundation dedicated to preserving and protecting faith, family and freedom."

(http://svu.edu/news/archives/2011/laurie-swim)

In addition, she is featured in a recent Sutherland Institute video tribute to Sutherland's founder, Gaylord Swim:

http://sutherlandinstitute.org/blog/videos/sutherland-institute-founder-gaylord-k-swim-a-giving-life/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahpO9ISW8DU&feature=player_embedded#!

Paul Mero is president of Sutherland and serves on the board of GFC.  Mr. Mero is compensated by Sutherland - $141,600.00 on the 2011 Sutherland 990.  He is also compensated by GFC for his work related to his board position:  $6,600.00 on the GFC 2011 990.

Three of four key board members or staff of GFC, therefore, have strong connections to Sutherland.  What about Brent McKinley? 

Brent McKinley is also listed on Sutherland's board page as a trustee:  http://sutherlandinstitute.org/about/board-members/

Mr. McKinley has been listed as a GFC officer and/or board member every year since 2005. His LinkedIn profile lists him as chairman of GFC and as trustee of Sutherland:

"Chairman, GFC Foundation - Public policy focus, Faith, Family, Freedom; Boy Scouts of America, Chairman, Advancement Committee, Counselor; Sutherland Institute, Trustee"

(http://www.linkedin.com/in/brentmckinley)

We now see that the four key officers/board members or staff of GFC, as listed on its 2011 990, are also closely tied to Sutherland. 

Below is a year-by-year list of Swim family members and Paul Mero and their organizational affiliates relevant to Sutherland for 2003-2011.  Generally, there were other board members listed for each year for each organization.  We are only interested here, however, in the overlap between Paul Mero, the Swim family and the foundations funding Sutherland.  If a foundation is listed for an individual, it means that that individual served as an officer/board member of the foundation and/or as staff member for that year.  For 2004 and 2005, Sutherland listed some spouses of board members as part of the board as well.  Officers/board members and/or relevant staff (to our discussion of Sutherland funding) who did not appear, if any, in the 990s are not considered here.   To see the exact listing, go to the corresponding 990 for the organization and year.  The following information is from the organizational 990s:

2003:

Paul Mero:  SI
Gaylord Swim:  SI, ALS, GFC, FAW
Lauralyn Swim:  GFC
Roger Swim:  ALS

2004:

Paul Mero:  SI
Sally Mero:  SI
Gaylord Swim:  SI, ALS, GFC, FAW
Lauralyn (Laurie) Swim:  SI, ALS
Roger Swim:  ALS
(Paul and Sally Mero are listed jointly)
(Gaylord and Laurie Swim are listed jointly)


2005:  

Paul Mero:  SI, ALS
Sally Mero:  SI
Lauralyn Swim:  ALS, GFC
Lyall Swim:  SI
Roger Swim:  ALS
(Paul and Sally Mero are listed jointly on the 990 pdf)
(Gaylord Swim died in February, 2005)
(No Swim family members on board of FAW beginning this year)

2006:

Paul Mero:  SI, ALS
Lauralyn Swim:  ALS, GFC
Lyall Swim:  SI
Roger Swim:  ALS
(ALS merged with GFC in 2006)

2007:   

Paul Mero:  SI, GFC
Lauralyn Swim:  GFC
Lyall Swim:  SI
Stan Swim:  SI, GFC
(Lyall Swim and Stan Swim are brothers)

2008:   

Paul Mero:  SI, GFC
Lauralyn Swim:  GFC
Lyall Swim:  SI
Stan Swim:  SI, GFC

2009:

Paul Mero:  SI, GFC
Lauralyn Swim:  GFC
Stan Swim:  SI, GFC

2010:

Paul Mero:  SI, GFC
Lauralyn Swim:  GFC
Stan Swim:  SI, GFC

2011:

Paul Mero:  SI, GFC
Lauralyn Swim:  GFC
Stan Swim:  SI, GFC


10.  Concluding Points: 

The relationship of Paul Mero and Stan Swim to both Sutherland and GFC indicates very strong ties between the two organizations.

Through its direct grants to Sutherland, GFC is a significant funder of the institute by itself.  This makes the relationship between Sutherland and GFC an especially important one.

Because more information is not currently public, I don't quite know what to make of how the money flows to Sutherland from FAW, DT and DCF.  It seems a bit odd.

Perhaps Paul Mero could issue a statement and clarify the relationships between these organizations and Sutherland Institute and explain why the money is set up in this fashion.

If I am correct in thinking there may be another major donor working through DT/DFC to send funds to Sutherland, perhaps Mr. Mero could clarify that as well and give us some information as to who this donor (or donors) is and what their interest may be in the Sutherland Institute.

These questions are important ones given Paul Mero's public persona as a spokesman for immigration issues.

Sutherland allows Paul Mero's voice to be amplified tremendously in the public sphere.  It would be nice, therefore, to have a more complete picture of how the funding system is set up and why.    




DATA SECTION:


The information below was pulled from the IRS 990s for each foundation or organization.  Links to these documents are provided in the "Source Links" section which follows. 

Officers, board members, trustees, etc. are listed in many of the 990s.  In order to simplify the presentation, the variety of foundation or organizational officers will be listed under the category of "Officers and/or board" - this category includes the variety of types that occur in the 990s, such as:  president, trustee, secretary, executive committee, board member, etc.  Officers and/or board members are listed only for SI, ALS, GFC and FAW because these are the organizations which are most relevant in this area for our discussion.  A few key staff members will also be listed.  If someone served as an officer and/or board member and was not listed on the 990, he or she will not be listed here. 



Prior to 2002:

The three amounts below are taken from Sutherland Institute's 2003 IRS Form 990 (for 7/1/02 - 6/30/03), where these amounts are reported:

1999 Sutherland Institute income from grants, etc.  -    $306,227.00
2000 Sutherland Institute income from grants, etc.  -    $369,816.00
2001 Sutherland Institute income from grants, etc.  -    $361,171.00


2002:

Some 990s not available for this year

Sutherland Institute:  990 not available for this year - but grants, etc., totaled $304,792.00 for the 2002 as reported on their 2003 990 form.

ALS Foundation:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $100,000.00
Foundation for the American West grant:  $300,000.00
Officers and/or board:  Katherine M. Swim, Gaylord K. Swim, Roger C. Swim

GFC Foundation:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $55,650.00
Donors Trust grant:  $10,000.00
Officers and/or board:  Gaylord Swim, Lauralyn B. Swim

Foundation for the American West:  990 not available for this year


2003:

Sutherland Institute:

Sutherland Institute income from grants, etc.:  $315,956.00
Paul T. Mero listed as Executive Director with a compensation of:  $106,000.00
Officers and/or board:  Gaylord K. Swim, Robert A. Alsop, Tim Bridgewater, Jaren L. Davis, Maury Giles, James W. Jenkins, Darren Mansell, Paul T. Mero, Maxwell A. Miller, Dan Witte.

ALS Foundation:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $100,000.00
Foundation for the American West grant:  $300,000.00
Officers and/or board:  Gaylord K. Swim, Roger C. Swim

GFC Foundation:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $50,000.00
Donors Trust grant:  $10,000.00
Officers and/or board:  Gaylord Swim, Lauralyn B. Swim

Foundation for the American West:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $69,000.00
Officers and/or board:  Gaylord K. Swim, Reino O. Kerttula, Charlotte A. Richards, Kevin L. Simister, McKay Marsden, John Valentine


2004:

Sutherland Institute:

Sutherland Institute income from grants, etc.:  $685,970.00
Paul T. Mero listed as Executive Director with a compensation of:  $106,000.00
Officers and/or board:  Bob/Jessica Alsop, Dan Witte, Darren/Shailane Mansell, Gaylord/Laurie Swim, Jaren/Kim Davis Jim/Connie Jenkins, Mary Ellen/Stan Smoot, Maury/Emily Giles, Max/Linda Miller, Paul/Sally Mero, Tim/Laura Bridgewater

ALS Foundation:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $300,000.00
Foundation for the American West grant:  $100,000.00
Officers and/or board:  Lauralyn B. Swim, Roger C. Swim, Victoria M.Rose, Gaylord K. Swim

GFC Foundation:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $200,000.00
Foundation for the American West grant:  $10,000.00
Officers and/or board:  Gaylord K. Swim

Foundation for the American West:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $103,500.00
Officers and/or board:  Gaylord K. Swim, O. Jeffery Wilde, Charlotte A. Richards, Kevin Simister, Reino O. Kerttula, McKay Marsden, John Valentine                        
(2004 is the last year a Swim family member is listed as an officer/board member of FAW)



2005:

Sutherland Institute:

Sutherland Institute income from grants, etc.:  $717,375.00
Paul T. Mero listed as Executive Director with a compensation of:  $126,000.00
Officers and/or board:  Bob/Jessica Alsop, Dan Witte, Debra Washburn, Curt Bramble, Jaren/Kim Davis, Lyall Swim, Mary Ellen/Stan Smoot, Maury/Emily Giles, Marty Stephens, Paul/Sally Mero

ALS Foundation:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $150,000.00
Foundation for the American West grant:  $900,000.00
Officers and/or board:  Roger C. Swim, Victoria M. Rose, Laurelyn [sic] Swim, Douglas W. Morrison, Paul Mero

GFC Foundation:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $300,000.00
Donors Trust grant:  $5,000.00
Officers and/or board:  Lauralyn B. Swim (0 compensation), Alan Funk ($2,150.00 compensation), Brent McKinley ($6,200.00 compensation)

Foundation for the American West:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $152,500.00

Donors Trust, Inc.:

Sutherland Institute grant:  no grant awarded for this year

Donors Capital Fund, Inc.:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $50,000.00


2006:

Sutherland Institute:

Sutherland Institute income from grants, etc.:  $721,453.00
Paul T. Mero listed as Executive Director with a compensation of:  $121,000.00
Officers and Board:  Bob Alsop, Dan Witte, Debra Washburn, Curt Bramble, Maury Giles, Paul T. Mero, Justin Reber, Lyall Swim

ALS Foundation:

Sutherland Institute grant:  no grant awarded for this year
Officers: and Board:  Roger C. Swim, Lauralyn Swim, Paul Mero
(The ALS Foundation transferred $25,726,299.00 to the GFC Foundation this year and merged with it.)

GFC Foundation:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $150,000.00
Officers:  Lauralyn B. Swim (0 compensation), Alan Funk ($2,150.00 compensation), Brent McKinley ($6,200.00 compensation)

Foundation for the American West:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $300,000.00

Donors Trust, Inc.:

Sutherland Institute grant:  no grant awarded for this year

Donors Capital Fund, Inc.:

Sutherland Institute grant:  no grant awarded for this year


2007:

The Sutherland Institute:

Sutherland Institute income from grants, etc.:  $942,846.00
Paul T. Mero listed as Executive Director with a compensation of:  $121,153.00
Officers and Board:  Bob Alsop, Dan Witte, Debra Washburn, Stan Swim, Lavar Christensen, Paul T. Mero, Justin Reber, Lyall Swim                                                
Stan Swim and Lyall Swim are brothers.
Lyall Swim is listed as Operations Director with compensation of:  $56,667.00.
Stan Swim is also Director of GFC Foundation.
Paul Mero is also on the board of GFC Foundaton. 

GFC Foundation:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $262,500.00
Foundation for the American West grant:  $375,000.00
Donors Trust grant:  $5,000.00
Officers:  Lauralyn B. Swim (0 compensation), Paul T. Mero ($7,200.00 compensation), Brent McKinley ($7,200.00 compensation)
Stanford Swim listed as "Executive" with a compensation of  $63,000.00.

Foundation for the American West:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $511,315.00

Donors Trust, Inc.:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $187,500.00

Donors Capital Fund, Inc.:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $20,000.00


2008:

Sutherland Institute:

Sutherland Institute income from grants, etc.:  $1,056,774.00
Paul T. Mero listed as Executive Director with a compensation of:  $126,650.00
Officers and Board:  Bob Alsop, Dan Witte, Cindy Kern, Stan Swim, Lavar Christensen, Paul T. Mero, Justin Reber, Lyall Swim, Debra Washburn
Lyall Swim is listed as Director of Operations with compensation of:  $84,150.00
Stan Swim and Lyall Swim are brothers.
Stan Swim is also Director of GFC Foundation.
Paul Mero is also a board member of the GFC Foundation.

GFC Foundation:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $437,198.00
Foundation for the American West grant #1:  $28,500.00
Donors Trust grant:  $189,394.00
Foundation for the American West grant #2:  $189,856.00
Officers:  Lauralyn B. Swim (0 compensation), Paul T. Mero ($7,200.00 compensation), Brent McKinley ($7,200.00 compensation)
Stanford Swim listed as "Executive" with a compensation of $114,188.00.

Foundation for the American West:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $187,500.00

Donors Trust, Inc.:

Sutherland Institute grant:  no grant for this year

Donors Capital Fund, Inc.:

Sutherland Institute grants:  $145,000.00


2009:

Sutherland Institute:

Sutherland Institute income from grants, etc.:  $1,310,315.00
Paul T. Mero listed as President and Board Member with a compensation of:  $126,602.00
Officers and Board:  Bob Alsop, Todd Reid, Cindy Kern, Stan Swim, Lavar Christensen, Paul T. Mero, Justin Reber

GFC Foundation:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $516,500.00
Foundation for the American West grant:  $415,000.00
Donors Trust grant:  $250,000.00
Officers:  Lauralyn B. Swim (0 compensation), Paul T. Mero ($7,200.00 compensation), Brent McKinley ($7,200.00 compensation), Stanford Swim ($106,376.00 compensation)

Foundation for the American West:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $250,000.00

Donors Trust, Inc.:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $235,000.00

Donors Capital Fund, Inc.:

Sutherland Institute grants:  $100,000.00


2010:

Sutherland Institute:

Sutherland Institute income from grants, etc.:  $1,335,989.00
Paul T. Mero listed as President and Board Member with a compensation of:  $128,776.00
Officers and Board:  Matt Barber, Todd Reid, Gail Berry, Stan Swim, Paul T. Mero, Justin Reber

GFC Foundation:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $370,000.00
Foundation for the American West grant:  $378,000.00
Donors Trust grant:  $175,000.00
Officers and Board:  Lauralyn B. Swim (0 compensation), Paul T. Mero ($7,200.00 compensation), Brent McKinley ($7,200.00 compensation), Stanford Swim ($108,108.00 compensation)

Foundation for the American West:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $505,000.00

Donors Trust, Inc.:

Sutherland Institute grants:  $405,000.00

Donors Capital Fund, Inc.:

Sutherland Institute grants:  $191,000.00


2011:

Some 990s not yet available for 2011

Sutherland Institute:

Sutherland Institute income from grants, etc.:   $1,453,942.00
Paul T. Mero listed as President and Board Member with a compensation of:  $141,600.00
Officers and Board:  Kyle Bateman, Todd Reid, Stan Swim, Paul T. Mero, Justin Reber

GFC Foundation:

Grant to Sutherland Institute:  $475,000.00
Grant to Foundation for the American West:  $368,000.00
Grant to Donors Trust:  $258,000.00
Officers and Board:  Lauralyn B. Swim (0 compensation), Paul T. Mero ($6,600.00 compensation), Brent McKinley ($8,100.00 compensation)
Note:  Stanford Swim is listed as "Executive" with the foundation and receives compensation of $108,108.00.

Foundation for the American West:

Sutherland Institute grant:  $328,000.00

Donors Trust, Inc.:  990 not yet available

Donors Capital Fund, Inc.:  990 not yet available



SOURCE LINKS:

Foundation Center website:  http://foundationcenter.org/

990 finder page at Foundation Center website: http://foundationcenter.org/findfunders/990finder/

Sutherland Institute 990s:

2011:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/870/870531727/870531727_201106_990.pdf
2010:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/870/870531727/870531727_201006_990.pdf
2009:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/870/870531727/870531727_200906_990.pdf
2008:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/870/870531727/870531727_200806_990.pdf
2007:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/870/870531727/870531727_200706_990.pdf
2006:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/870/870531727/870531727_200606_990.pdf
2005:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/870/870531727/870531727_200506_990.pdf
2004:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/870/870531727/870531727_200406_990.pdf
2003:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/870/870531727/870531727_200306_990.pdf

ALS Foundation 990s:

2006:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990pf_pdf_archive/870/870514581/870514581_200606_990PF.pdf
2005:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990pf_pdf_archive/870/870514581/870514581_200506_990PF.pdf
2004:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990pf_pdf_archive/870/870514581/870514581_200406_990PA.pdf
2003:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990pf_pdf_archive/870/870514581/870514581_200306_990PF.pdf
2002:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990pf_pdf_archive/870/870514581/870514581_200206_990PF.pdf

GFC Foundation 990s:

2011:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990pf_pdf_archive/870/870529248/870529248_201106_990PF.pdf
2010:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990pf_pdf_archive/870/870529248/870529248_201006_990PF.pdf
2009:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990pf_pdf_archive/870/870529248/870529248_200906_990PF.pdf
2008:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990pf_pdf_archive/870/870529248/870529248_200806_990PF.pdf
2007:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990pf_pdf_archive/870/870529248/870529248_200706_990PF.pdf
2006:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990pf_pdf_archive/870/870529248/870529248_200606_990PF.pdf
2005:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990pf_pdf_archive/870/870529248/870529248_200506_990PF.pdf
2004:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990pf_pdf_archive/870/870529248/870529248_200406_990PF.pdf
2003:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990pf_pdf_archive/870/870529248/870529248_200306_990PF.pdf
2002:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990pf_pdf_archive/870/870529248/870529248_200206_990PF.pdf

Foundation for the American West 990s:

2011:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/870/870550116/870550116_201106_990.pdf
2010:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/870/870550116/870550116_201006_990.pdf
2009:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/870/870550116/870550116_200906_990.pdf
2008:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/870/870550116/870550116_200806_990.pdf
2007:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/870/870550116/870550116_200706_990.pdf
2006:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/870/870550116/870550116_200606_990.pdf
2005:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/870/870550116/870550116_200506_990.pdf
2004:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/870/870550116/870550116_200406_990.pdf
2003:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/870/870550116/870550116_200306_990.pdf

Donors Trust, Inc. 990s:

2011:  not yet available
2010:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/522/522166327/522166327_201012_990.pdf
2009:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/522/522166327/522166327_200912_990.pdf
2008:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/522/522166327/522166327_200812_990.pdf
2007:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/522/522166327/522166327_200712_990.pdf
2006:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/522/522166327/522166327_200612_990.pdf
2005:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/522/522166327/522166327_200512_990.pdf
2004:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/522/522166327/522166327_200412_990.pdf
2003:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/522/522166327/522166327_200312_990.pdf
2002:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/522/522166327/522166327_200212_990.pdf

Donors Capital Fund, Inc. 990s:

2011:  not yet available
2010:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/541/541934032/541934032_201012_990.pdf
2009:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/541/541934032/541934032_200912_990.pdf
2008:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/541/541934032/541934032_200812_990.pdf
2007:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/541/541934032/541934032_200712_990.pdf
2006:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/541/541934032/541934032_200612_990.pdf
2005:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/541/541934032/541934032_200512_990.pdf
2004:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/541/541934032/541934032_200412_990.pdf
2003:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/541/541934032/541934032_200312_990.pdf
2002:  http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/541/541934032/541934032_200212_990.pdf

ENDNOTE #1:

Regarding the Foundation for the American West:

It does not appear that the Swim family currently has a role in the management of the Foundation for the American West.  The foundation does, however, appear to have an association with Riggs Capital Management, LLC.  The following from the Foundation for the American West website helps us to understand better how money may be set up in the foundation:

"The Foundation for the American West (FAW) is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt public community foundation that offers you the opportunity to effectively build the quality of life in your community while receiving the most favorable tax treatment for charitable giving.

When you open a charitable giving account at FAW, you make an irrevocable contribution of cash, securities or other assets (appreciated assets are an especially advantageous way to give because you avoid paying capital gains tax) and receive a tax deduction for the full market value.

The foundation holds your contribution in a fund that you name and invests your contribution in your choice of four investment pools managed by Riggs Capital Management, LLC. Your contribution has the potential to grow tax-free, thereby increasing the amount available for future giving.

An account with FAW is much like having your own private foundation only you receive better tax treatment and you avoid the start-up costs, tax returns and minimum gifting requirements.  In addition, you have the option of choosing to make a grant from your account anonymously."

(http://www.fawdonor.org/)

When we observe money going from either ALS or GFC to FAW, it would be reasonable to assume there is a relationship between this money and the money being sent to SI from FAW.  Such an assumption may be accurate, but without more information, it cannot be determined with certainty.  For example, an account could exist, if I understand how the FAW works, with assets dedicated to funding SI separate from the money going into FAW from ALS or GFC.  The money could also be coming from another source or sources to such an account.  It could also be that some of the money, but not all of it, may be dedicated to SI per donor instructions or that such amounts may be variable according to donor instructions.  To determine the exact set-up is not possible given the currently available public information.  At this point, we will have to be content with just stating that the money is coming from FAW to SI and the precise source or sources of that money is not currently available to the public. 

  

Regarding Donors Trust, Inc. and Donors Capital Fund, Inc.:

Keeping the situation of FAW in mind, we can see something similar operating with money going from GFC to Donors Trust, Inc.  Money may go from GFC to DT and be distributed in one or more of the following ways:

1.  directly to SI with DT/DCF as intermediaries

2.  provide general funds for DT and then DT/DCF provides funds to SI as part of its own decision-making

3.  fund one or more "donar advised funds" within the DT/DCF and then DT/DCF funds SI from funds coming into it from other sources in addition to GFC

4.  some other unknown possible set-up

5.  a combination of the above

From the 2010 990 for DT (page 2 of the pdf):

"DAF PROGRAM - A DONOR ADVISED FUND (DAF) PROGRAM ALLOWING DAF CONTRIBUTORS TO ADVISE GRANTS THAT SUPPORT CHARITIES WHICH ALLEVIATE, THROUGH EDUCATION, RESEARCH AND PRIVATE INITIATIVES, SOCIETY'S MOST PERVASIVE AND RADICAL NEEDS, INCLUDING THOSE RELATING TO SOCIAL WELFARE, HEALTH, ENVIRONMENT, ECONOMICS, GOVERNANCE, FOREIGN RELATIONS AND ARTS AND CULTURE; AND WHICH ENCOURAGE PRIVATE PHILANTHROPY AND INDIVIDUAL GIVING AND RESPONSIBILITY AS AN ANSWER TO SOCIETY'S NEEDS, AS OPPOSED TO GOVERNMENTAL INVOLVEMENT."

The following is from the 2003 990 for DT and may make the idea of a donor advised fund a bit more clear (see page 16 of the pdf):

"ANY PERSON, CORPORATION OR FOUNDATION MAY ESTABLISH A DONOR ADVISED FUND TO ENGAGE IN ACTIVITIES CONSISTENT WITH DONORS TRUST'S CHARITABLE PURPOSES. DONORS CAN MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS CONCERNING GRANTS FROM DONOR-ADVISED ACCOUNTS ; HOWEVER, THE ORGANIZATION'S BOARD OF DIRECTORS IS LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING ALL GRANTS."

My understanding of how a donor advised fund works is that an organization would donate money to DT through a donor agreement or understanding that the money would then be distributed according to instructions from the donor to specific organizations.  The final decision as to how to distribute the money, however, is up to Donors Trust. 

Money is also coming out of DT/DCF to Sutherland that exceeds the money going to DT/DCF from GFC.  The source or sources of this money is not publicly known, but the set-up within DT/DCF may fit one of the alternatives outlined in 1-5 above for the GFC money to DT/DCF.

Ali Noorani Lets Loose His "Inner Radical":

It would be interesting to explore in detail the links between Luz Robles and the National Immigration Forum.

For now, I will just comment a bit about the leader of the NIF, Mr. Ali Noorani:

Mr. Noorani is the Executive Director of the National Immigration Forum - the key organization in promoting the Utah Compact and the force behind making Mark Shurtleff a public face for "conservatives" for amnesty.

Mr. Noorani is generally soft-spoken as he promotes amnesty through various forums and conferences, but on May 1, 2010 he decided to let loose his "inner radical" and get arrested for taking part in a protest in front of the White House.

Notice the collection of far-left fanatics he hangs out with in this passage from the NY Times article. Mr. Gutierrez mentioned below is the pro-amnesty fanatic congressman from Illinois:

"Mr. Gutierrez was handcuffed behind his back with plastic cuffs by the Park Police, and he walked in silence when an officer led him away along the black wrought-iron fence in front of the White House. Among others arrested with him were Jaime Contreras, director for Washington, D.C., of the Service Employees International Union; Joshua Hoyt, Ali Noorani, Deepak Bhargava, and Gustavo Torres, leaders of immigrant advocate organizations; and Gregory Cendana, president of the United States Student Association. "

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/02/us/02immig.html?pagewanted=all 

Is Luz Robles Planning to Run for Congress...in Mexico?:

Mexican Flag Image courtesy of Salvatore Vuono / FreeDigitalPhotos.net

April 2009.

Luz Robles is already a Utah state senator, having taken office in January.

Her three-year term with the CCIME had ended at the end of December 2008.

Yet in April, now Senator Robles is again in attendance at a CCIME conference in Mexico City.

We now have a bit of a mystery.

If Luz Robles was no longer an advisor in the CCIME and had already become a Utah state senator, why was she attending the April 2009 CCIME conference in Mexico?

One speaker was so pleased to see her that he announced her presence with great exuberance.

Efraín Jiménez, the speaker, acknowledges the dignitaries sitting in front, the assembled CCIME members, and then gushes about Luz Robles:

"Very distinguished colleague and pride of many Mexicans who are abroad, Luz Robles, elected senator by the state of Utah."

("Muy distinguida compañera y orgullo de muchos mexicanos que estamos en el exterior, Luz Robles, senadora electa por el estado de Utah.")

Senator Robles then receives a very warm round of applause from the assembled council.

There is a video of this speech and the part just described on youtube.com.  The acknowledgment occurs at the beginning of the video.  It is difficult to pinpoint Luz Robles in the group in the video, but it pans to the right after the acknowledgment as if the camera-person was trying to get a shot of her.  It is an interesting video because it shows how the meetings for the entire group took place and indicates the chance the advisors had for rubbing elbows, so to speak, with high-level Mexican government officials. 

The video is at:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g463TvrMuaw

The speech by Efraín Jiménez is available at:

http://www.ime.gob.mx/ime2/images/ccime/discursos/13_dis_ej.pdf

Senator Robles also appears to have attended a meeting of the Political Affairs Commission of the CCIME in conjunction with the conference.  Her name appears on page 4 of the document below.  She is listed as an observer:

http://www.ime.gob.mx/ime2/images/ccime/minutas/13_min_pol.pdf

She apparently also attended a Legal Affairs Commission meeting.  Her name and signature appear at the bottom of page 6 of the following document:

http://www.ime.gob.mx/ime2/images/ccime/minutas/13_min_leg.pdf

Again, what was Senator Luz Robles doing in Mexico at this meeting after having taken office?

Given that Mr. Jiménez was so animated to see Luz Robles, we may find a clue in his speech as to why he was so happy to see her. 

Early in his speech, he says this:

"The Mexicans that [we] are in the exterior do not forget our land, our families, and the achievements that I will mention recognize the commitment that we have to this trans-border Mexican nation."

("Los mexicanos que estamos en el exterior no sabemos olvidar de nuestra tierra, de nuestras familias, y los logros que a continuación menciono dan cuenta del compromiso que tenemos en esta nación mexicana transfronteriza.")

Thinking of oneself as belonging to a nation that crosses borders would naturally lead to the idea that one should retain political rights in the nation one belongs to - even though it is not the nation of residence.

For example, later in his discourse, he makes this statement: 

"It is urgent to integrate the Mexicans abroad into the political life of our country and that we are guaranteed the right to vote and to be voted for and that the participation of the migrant sector in national politics in the large and small needs of the country is guaranteed."

"Es urgente integrar a los mexicanos del exterior en la vida política de nuestro país y que se nos garantice el derecho a votar y ser votados y que se garantice la participación del sector migrante en la política nacional y las grandes y pequeñas necesidades del país."

Mexicans living abroad achieved the right to vote for the President of Mexico and exercised this right for the first time in 2006.  Given this fact, what does Mr. Jiménez have in mind with his statement above?

He adds this: 

"We are 12 million Mexicans abroad who contribute more than 2.5% of the national GDP in remittances, however we have no formal representation (and) that directly knows our needs."

("Somos 12 millones de mexicanas y mexicanos en el exterior que aportamos más del 2.5% del PIB nacional, por concepto de remesas, sin embargo no contamos con representación formal y que conozca directamente nuestras necesidades.")

Mr. Jiménez then goes on to criticize the major Mexican political parties for not putting forth migrants as candidates, in any significant way, for the Chamber of Deputies (similar to the U.S. House of Representatives). 

The situation at the time seems to have been as follows:

1.  Mexicans abroad could vote for president, but not for other federal offices - unless they were present in Mexico to vote. 

2.  Mexicans abroad could be candidates for the Chamber of Deputies, but only if nominated by a Mexican political party for a seat by specific district or a proportional seat within a larger geographical area called a circumscription.  Mexicans abroad had no representation in the Chamber of Deputies outside of this method. 

3.  A Mexican citizen could hold an elected position in Mexico even though they were actually residing outside of the country. 

If the parties actively denied migrants a place on the candidate lists, they were essentially denied representation. 

The Mexican Chamber of Deputies electoral system is described as follows:

"The Chamber of Deputies is formed by 500 representatives of the nation. All deputies are elected in free universal elections every three years, in parallel voting: 300 deputies are elected in single-seat constituencies by first-past-the-post plurality (called uninominal deputies), and the remaining 200 are elected by the principle of proportional representation (called plurinominal deputies) with closed-party lists for which the country is divided into five constituencies or plurinominal circumscriptions. Deputies cannot be reelected for the next immediate term."  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_government_of_Mexico) 

The nation is divided into five geographic regions for purposes of proportional representation.  A map of these regions is available at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Circunscripciones_2006.svg&page=1

Mr. Jiménez goes on to state:   

"We want to be recognized and treated as Mexicans with full rights and for this it is imperative to be recognized as citizens who believe in the government institutions. For this it will be necessary that the attitude of our political leaders here in Mexico change, enough slights."

("Queremos ser reconocidos y tratados como mexicanos con derechos plenos y para ello es imprescindible que se nos reconozca como ciudadanos que creen en las instituciones de gobierno. Para ello será necesario, que la actitud de nuestros líderes políticos aquí en México cambie, ya basta de desaires.")

Mr. Jiménez is calling for a change in attitude among the Mexican parties and that they get serious about allowing candidates from abroad. 

How serious is he about the issue?  Very serious. 

For example, in a short article that appeared in a number of sources in Mexico, the following appeared:

"The activist [Jiménez] acknowledged that they will call to not vote on July 5 from the United States for a future legislature that may not have a migrant deputy, unlike the 3 there are now."

("El activista admitió que llamarán a no votar el 5 de julio desde Estados Unidos por una próxima legislatura que quizás no tenga ni un diputado migrante, a diferencia de los 3 que hay ahora.")

A blog entry about the issue included the idea that Jiménez said the parties will not be able to count on their families' votes on June 5 because of the situation ("that they will not have the vote of our families" - "que no cuenten con el voto de nuestras familias" - http://lahoradelmigrante.blogspot.com/2009/04/presentacion-de-los-carteles-de-cine-y.html).

Mr. Jiménez seems to be saying, therefore, that immigrant leaders in the United States will call for Mexicans in Mexico to not vote by having immigrants encourage family in Mexico not to vote if the situation is not changed. 

This article is found at:  http://www.cimacnoticias.com.mx/node/45233

The article also focuses on the removal of two immigrant candidates from the candidate list of the PRD, one of Mexico's main political parties - a situation that seems to have left only two immigrant candidates with the possibility of being elected to the new legislature. 

If the Mexican political parties will not put forward enough migrant candidates from the United States, what should be done to fix the situation?

A number of ideas for resolving the problem circulated among Mexican leaders in the United States.  These included:

1.  Setting up a cabinet-level department to deal with immigrant issues.  Although not directly addressing the issue of migrant representation, it was seen as a way to give Mexicans abroad a permanent voice in the Mexican government (proposed by Efraín Jiménez in his speech)

2.  Asking the political parties to nominate migrants to be candidates.

3.  Seeking a law to demand a certain number of migrants be candidates.

4.  Creating a Mexican political party in the United States that would represent immigrants. 

5.  Demanding that a certain number of the proportional representatives be set aside for migrant candidates. 

6.  Seek constitutional changes that would make the United States part of a 6th geographical region to be represented in the Mexican Chamber of Deputies and thereby ensure a minimal number of migrant representatives. 

Number two appears to have failed.  It was the subject of the speech by Jiménez and critical comments by other Mexican immigrant leaders. 

At the time of the April 2009 CCIME conference, there appears to have been a move to get the Chamber of Deputies to pass a law making a certain number of immigrant candidates mandatory. 

The article cited above, for example, ends with this paragraph:

"For her part, the Democratic Senator from Utah, Luz Robles, accompanied Quintana and Gerardo Trejo, advisor of the IME for Indianapolis, to the Chamber of Deputies to ask the parties that they pass a law in which is included by obligation a quota of migrant candidates in the 2012 elections."

("Por su parte, la senadora demócrata de Utah, Luz Robles, acompañó a Quintana y a Gerardo Trejo, consejero del IME por Indianápolis, a la Cámara de Diputados para pedir a los partidos que aprueben una ley en la cual se incluya por obligación una cuota de candidatos migrantes en las elecciones del 2012.")

Luz Robles? 

Isn't that a rather strange thing for a state senator from the United States to be doing? 

In all fairness, even though the article that mentions Luz Robles going to the Chamber of Deputies appeared in a number of news outlets, it comes from a single source.  To judge the credibility of the claim, therefore, we have to examine the larger context surrounding it. 

First, of course, is the mention of Luz Robles in the article.  The article was written by Federico Campbell Peña, who appears to be a respected and credible journalist.  But even journalists can make mistakes.

Second, the article was widely distributed and ended up in various Mexican news outlets.

Third, we also have as a clue the exuberant welcome given to Luz Robles by Efraín Jiménez in his speech at the CCIME - a welcome that seems to imply that he was glad to see her beyond just being pleasantly surprised - perhaps because she would help in the effort to get more migrant representation that his speech called for. 

Fourth, we also have the odd presence of Luz Robles at the CCIME in the first place.  Why was she there?  Certainly, there could be a variety of reasons and maybe she was in Mexico City or even at the CCIME meeting for more than one purpose.  Even so, fulfilling other purposes would not necessarily conflict with an effort to increase migrant representation in the Mexican Chamber of Deputies. 

Fifth, the article also mentions a Gerardo Trejo and says he was an advisor of the CCIME. 

Who is Gerardo Trejo? 

The name "Gerardo" is probably incorrect.  It likely is "Germán Trejo." 

The reasons are as follows: 

a.  He is mentioned in the article as being an advisor of the CCIME.  In both the list of advisors and the profiles for the CCIME for the the groups 2006 - 2008 and 2009 - 2011, there is no Gerardo Trejo listed.  However, there is a Germán Trejo in the 2006 -2008 group. 

b.  The article says he is from Indianapolis.  This is the jurisdiction area listed for Germán Trejo in the directory. 

c.  Germán Trejo has a close relationship with Luz Robles - they both served on the same CCIME commission (political affairs) for a time.  Germán Trejo, you may recall, was also a significant advisor to Luz Robles' state senate campaign - contributing $6,000.00 in in-kind contributions pre-convention in 2008 (http://immigrationutah.blogspot.com/2012/10/did-luz-robles-ccime-buddies-help.html). 

d.  The same journalist referred to Germán Trejo as "Gerardo" in a previous article (http://www.cimacnoticias.com.mx/node/45326); an article, incidentally, which places Trejo in Mexico City during the month of April 2009.

e.  But, if Germán Trejo was an advisor for the 2006 - 2008 group, is there any reason to believe he was in Mexico City during the April 2009 CCIME conference and that he attended the conference?

The Commission on Political Affairs of the CCIME held two meetings during the April 2009 conference.  The minutes for these meetings indicate that Germán Trejo was expected to attend the first meeting, but did not make it for some reason.  Mr. Mike Gonzalez tells us that a report of the previous (2006 - 2008) commission's work could not be made at that time because Germán Trejo was not present (http://www.ime.gob.mx/images/stories/ime/CCIME/reuniones_ordinarias/xiii/13_min_pol.pdf).  

Incidentally, among a variety of proposed topics for the new commission to work on, a couple of relevant issues for our discussion were outlined:   

1.  "Vote in the exterior, law reform for the vote of the emigrant"  ("Voto en el Extranjero, Reforma de Ley la para el Voto del Emigrante")

2.  "Emigrant representation in Congress"  ("Representation Emigrante en el Congreso")

Luz Robles attended this meeting of the Political Affairs Commission of the CCIME in which the issue of immigrant representation in the Mexican congress was placed on the agenda. 

Although the minutes do not indicate that Luz Robles attended the second meeting of this commission, they do indicate that Germán Trejo did - as several comments are attributed to him.  Luz Robles was possibly attending another commission (Legal Affairs) that was being held at about the same time (http://www.ime.gob.mx/images/stories/ime/CCIME/reuniones_ordinarias/xiii/13_min_leg.pdf).  The main work of this second meeting of the Political Affairs Commission was to vote on officers for the commission.  

It is possible that Mr. Trejo was attending the meeting as a "transition advisor," i.e., someone helping with the transition from the previous group of advisors to the new group.  He is mentioned as being a transition advisor at:  http://portal.sre.gob.mx/indianapolis/popups/newswindow.php?id=83&print=print.  He may also have attended in conjunction with his position at LULAC (Chair, LULAC National Immigrant Affairs Commission).  Either, both, or neither may be the case.  In any event, the information above is enough to establish that he attended part of the conference. 

We have now determined that Gerardo Trejo is actually Germán Trejo - a close associate of Luz Robles.  We also know that he was in Mexico in April 2009 and attended at least one commission meeting of the CCIME.

Germán Trejo, according to the Federico Campbell Peña article, was one of those who went to the Chamber of Deputies to push for a migrant deputy quota law. 

Is there other evidence of Mr. Trejo's interest in this goal?

There is. 

One avenue of pressure for immigrant leaders was to attempt to deliver a letter to President Obama during his visit to Mexico City in April 2009 and ask him to not meet with "anti-immigrant" leaders in Mexico, i.e., Mexican politicians who were impeding the goal of migrant representation in the Chamber of Deputies.  A complaint was also made to the National Commission for Human Rights in Mexico.

From an article which discusses the issue:

"Mexican immigrant leaders reported that PAN, PRI and PRD have excluded their community from the national political agenda and from the legislative spaces for proportional representation.
     
They went to the National Commission of Human Rights to complain about violations of their political rights. They revealed, by way of a letter, a request to U.S. President, Barack Obama, not to meet with anti-immigrant Mexican politicians during his visit to our country."

("Líderes de inmigrantes mexicanos denunciaron que PAN, PRI y PRD han excluido a su comunidad de la agenda política nacional y de los espacios legislativos de representación proporcional.
     
Acudieron a la Comision Nacional de los Derechos Humanos para quejarse por violaciones a sus derechos políticos. Ahí revelaron que, por medio de una carta, solicitaron ya al presidente estadunidense, Barack Obama, no se reúna con políticos mexicanos antiinmigrantes durante su visita a nuestro país.")

Germán Trejo was a key figure in this activity as was Fabián Morales:

"At the CNDH, attended Fabián Morales, of the Confederation of Mexican Federations in the Midwest, based in Chicago and which groups about 300 thousand countrymen; and Germán Trejo, of the coordination of immigrant affairs of LULAC, another Hispanic-Latino organization with 250,000 affiliated [people]."

("A la CNDH asistieron Fabián Morales, de la Confederación de Federaciones Mexicanas del Medio Oeste, con sede en Chicago y la cual agrupa alrededor de 300 mil paisanos; y Germán Trejo, de la coordinación de asuntos migratorios de LULA, otra organización hispanolatina con 250 mil afiliados.")

The article can be found at:  http://www.cronica.com.mx/nota.php?id_nota=426199

The article was significant enough for the CCIME to reproduce part of it and link to it in their "Lazos" for April 14, 2009:

http://www.ime.gob.mx/ime2/lazos/2009/1433.htm

Trejo and Morales, also made their concerns known about the political situation in another article which appeared mid-April:

http://www.novenet.com.mx/seccion.php?id=151678&sec=2&d=14&m=04&y=2009

Germán Trejo was also interviewed sometime in April 2009 - in conjunction with his role in LULAC as chair of the immigrant affairs commission of that organization.   The interview appears to have taken place in Mexico sometime around the anticipated visit of President Obama to Mexico in April 2009.  The interview was done by the Mexican news organization, Reporte Indigo.  In this video, Mr. Trejo takes up the themes of criticizing politicians and parties in Mexico that are impeding immigrant representation.

In the interview, he makes the following interesting comment:

"...I was in teleconferences in the last, the last few weeks with the immigrant leadership, people like Senator Luz Robles, the highest elected immigrant here in the United States, people named by governments to represent the Hispanic community who are immigrants ... with the leaders of the major federations of the major immigrant groups... Efraín Jiménez with the Zacatecanos ... "

("...estaba yo en teleconferencias en las ultimas, las ultimas semanas con el liderazgo inmigrante, gente como la senadora Luz Robles, la inmigrante electa de la mas altagera aqui en los estados unidos, gente nombrada por gobiernos para representar a la comunidad hispana que son inmigrantes...con los lideres de las federaciones mas importantes de los grupos de inmigrantes mas importantes...Efraín Jiménez con los zacatecanos..."

The video (Reporte Indigo - "Ha llegado el momento de decir Ya Basta!") is available at: 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhnEX9hmm40 

Germán Trejo, the man who is reported to have gone to the Chamber of Deputies with Luz Robles and Javier Quintana to petition for an immigrant candidate quota law, was in teleconferences with Luz Robles and Efraín Jiménez?

If accurate, this would mean that, at some level, Luz Robles was part of this discussion process about the problem of a lack of immigrant representation in the Mexican Chamber of Deputies and of how to correct the situation. 

This would have preceded her presence in Mexico at the CCIME conference in April 2009 and would make the report of her going to the Chamber of Deputies (to promote a law to ensure a minimal representation of immigrants) a very reasonable action, given the larger context of the efforts to ensure immigrant representation in the Mexican legislature. 

Mr. Trejo also mentions Efraín Jiménez as an individual who was part of the process.  Mr. Jiménez, you may recall, was the speaker at the CCIME conference who made such a fuss about Luz Robles being in attendance and then went on to address the very same themes as Mr. Trejo did in his interview. 

Imagine, a Utah state senator working to ensure that Mexican immigrants in America have representatives in the Mexican legislature. 

If Senator Luz Robles was part of such an effort, it seems massively in conflict with her role as an elected leader in the United States.

So, how did all these efforts turn out?

On August 22, 2009 a working meeting was held of the Political Affairs Commission of the CCIME at the Mexican Consulate in Chicago.  The meeting was outlined in the August 2009 Newsletter of the CCIME and among proposals considered at the meeting, the following was put forth:

"Political rights of Mexicans abroad: it was agreed to support the alliance between the political parties with a presence in the U.S. to promote the political rights of Mexicans abroad; also the modification of the Constitution and the Electoral Law to create the sixth nominal circumscription."

("Derechos políticos de los mexicanos en el exterior: se acordó respaldar la alianza entre los partidos políticos con presencia en EU para promover los derechos políticos de los mexicanos en el extranjero; así como la modificación de la Constitución y la Ley Electoral para crear la sexta circunscripción nominal.")

In attendance at this meeting was Jorge Mújica. 

Mújica was a new advisor from Chicago on the CCIME in 2009 and was at the Political Affairs Commission meeting in April 2009 - the meeting also attended by Luz Robles - the meeting where immigrant representation was placed on the work agenda.  He also appears to be an associate of Fabián Morales, who was in Mexico in April 2009 and coordinating with Germán Trejo, Luz Robles' close associate, to deliver a letter to President Obama to not-meet with Mexican leaders who were impeding immigrant representation. 

At the Political Affairs Commission of the CCIME meeting held in November 2009 (oddly enough, on Friday the 13th), Jorge Mújica proposes some modifications to a much more detailed proposal that would make the United States part of a new 6th circumscription.

If enacted, this proposal would turn the United States into a geographic area from which Mexicans would elect both deputies and senators on a proportional basis.  The number suggested in the document would be 15 deputies and 5 senators.  Given that most Mexican migrants live in the U.S., most of these deputies and senators would be from the U.S.  Mr. Mújica makes the following comment:

"Jorge Múgica [sic] makes a proposal for reform of the reform. (see the above points)  Of the 500 deputies, 300 are district and 200 are plurinominals [proportional]. It is proposed to add the number of deputies and senators. There is a movement in Mexico to reduce the number of lawmakers. We do not want to add to it but, within the existing number, to make a special allocation of migrants. We want 25 or a fixed number to be determined."

("Jorge Múgica hace una propuesta de la reforma de la reforma. (ver arriba los puntos) De los 500 diputados, 300 son distrito y 200 plurinominales. Se propuso agregar el número de diputados y senadores. Hay un movimiento en México de reducir el número de legisladores. No queremos agregarle sino que dentro del número existente se haga una asignación especial de migrantes. Queremos 25 o un número fijo por determinar.")

The minutes for this meeting and a copy of the more detailed proposal can be accessed at: 

http://www.ime.gob.mx/images/stories/ime/CCIME/reuniones_ordinarias/xiv/14_min_pol.pdf

Another of the proposals in this detailed document is that a Mexican elected from abroad could not hold a simultaneous position with a foreign government. 

Recall that Fabián Morales was in Mexico in April 2009 with Germán Trejo trying to deliver a letter to Barack Obama about the immigrant representation issue.  It is also likely that Mr. Morales is connected to Jorge Mújica in a significant way.  Mr. Morales was an instrumental figure in the "Movimiento 10 de Marzo" organization, which put together the coalition that led to the massive pro-amnesty march in Chicago on March 10, 2006.  Jorge Mújica was also a key figure in this movement. 

Jorge Mújica and Fabián Morales were also seeking political office in the Chicago area in 2009, along with another figure from the Movimiento 10 de Marzo organization, Omar Lopez.  Omar Lopez was running for a position as a Cook Country commissioner.  Fabián Morales was seeking to become a state representative.  Jorge Mújica was seeking to become a congressman in the Illinois third congressional district. 

Omar Lopez and Fabián Morales were former advisors on the CCIME during the 2006 - 2008 period - at the time Luz Robles and Germán Trejo served. 

Jorge Mújica was a new advisor to the CCIME in 2009.

Let's stop a second and ponder Mr. Mújica's actions and positions:  

Mújica is a significant Mexican immigrant leader.  He was a member of the advisory board, the CCIME, that represented immigrant issues to the Mexican government.  In addition, he was pushing for immigrant representation in the Mexican Congress as part of his work on the CCIME.  These changes would essentially result in the United States becoming a represented geographic area for electing deputies and senators to the Mexican legislature.  Mr. Mújica was doing this while himself seeking to be elected to the U.S. House of Representatives.

This boggles the mind in its brazenness. 

Mr. Mújica lost in the 2010 primary. 

If he had won the primary and gone on to win the general election, we would have had a sitting U.S. congressman who was seeking the right to have Mexican immigrants be elected in the United States to serve in the Mexican legislature on behalf of those immigrants. 

These changes being proposed in 2009 do not appear to have be enacted so far.  A look at the current votoextranjero.mx website seems to indicate that the situation today is the same as it was in 2009.  Mexicans abroad can vote for the Mexican president, but not for other federal offices (http://www.votoextranjero.mx/el-voto#http://www.votoextranjero.mx/html/js/twitter.html?). 

It is interesting to note that Mexicans who have dual-nationality can vote for the Mexican president from abroad. 

That would be an interesting question for Senator Robles.  Did she vote in the Mexican presidential election this year (2012) or previously in 2006? 

By way of conclusion:

We see that Luz Robles was mysteriously in Mexico City in April 2009.  She was reported to have gone to the Chamber of Deputies to push for a law to create a quota of migrant legislators.  We also see that in the context of other efforts to push for greater Mexican immigrant representation in the Mexican Chamber of Deputies, that her presence, if the report is correct, would have been very reasonably compatible with those efforts. 

It is hard to gauge the role Luz Robles may have played in these efforts.  On the one hand, perhaps she had little or no involvement.  Or, she may have had the involvement outlined here.  Could she have been even more involved in the effort to push for greater immigrant representation?  Difficult to say. 

Perhaps Senator Robles would publicly outline for us exactly what her positions are on this matter and precisely why she traveled to Mexico City in April 2009 and what role she may have played in the efforts described here. 

Is Luz Robles, therefore, planning to run for Congress in Mexico? 

That is also hard to say. 

Right now, it appears to not be possible unless changes are made in the Mexican election system. 

Even if Luz Robles is not interested in serving in Mexico's Chamber of Deputies or had little or no involvement in the efforts to ensure immigrant representation in the Mexican Chamber of Deputies, the larger context must be considered.

The fact that efforts were underway to create a representative system for Mexicans in the U.S. within the Mexican governmental structure ought to be something that every American carefully ponder. 

The impacts and challenges to our sovereignty, for instance, and to the idea of assimilation to American society and culture by immigrants would be seriously challenged. 






Note:  This post is a greatly expanded revision of the corresponding section of the "Luz Robles Report" ("Senator Robles Attends the CCIME After Taking Office") - which is available at ufire.net at:  https://sites.google.com/site/ufirenow/Home/misc-information

For More Information about the CCIME: The CCIME is an advisory board to the Mexican government.  Ms. Robles was part officially part of this board from 2006 -2008.  For more information about the board and Ms. Robles' role within it, please visit the following two sites:

https://sites.google.com/site/ufirenow/Home/misc-information
http://immigrationutah.blogspot.com/p/luz-robles-utah-state-senator.html)