Beyond HRC

A reader writes:

I think you have pulled back the corner of a bigger scandal. I remember years ago having a conversation with someone at a group then known as Citizens for a Sound Economy (now FreedomWorks). I asked her how it was that for so many years the group had said it had 250,000 members no more, no less, year after year.  She told me the same thing you heard from HRC anyone who had ever given them a nickel, ever, was counted as a member, forever. She refused to tell me how many actual, dues-paying members they actually had. I suspect it was in the low four-figures if that many. 

My point is, How many Washington-based interest groups that are regularly cited in the media as representing millions of people actually represent anyone at all? Women's groups, abortion groups (pro and con), environmental groups, gun groups, business groups, etc. how many are in reality paper organizations with no real constituencies? How many, like the AARP and the NEA, have real members, but most of those members probably don't support many of the organization's political positions? This is an issue crying out for investigative journalism that will probably never take place too many journalists depend upon the illusion that these groups actually represent their alleged constituencies, thereby saving the journalist from doing real reporting on what those constituencies actually think.

I think my reader is onto something. The kind of flim-flam that HRC purveys is not atypical. I'm concerned with them because I fear they waste vast amounts of resources from gay donors, have done very little real work on the issues, and yet posture as the voice for all gays (while secretly shilling for Clinton). But the b.s. from special interest groups is a real scandal in DC, and can distort national politics. More scrutiny please. And memo to HRC: please respond to my simple questions as soon as possible.