David Waters

Opinion Editor

These are dark days in Tennessee and across the country, and not just because autumn nights are getting longer.

Day and night, our airwaves are being inundated with political attack ads.

TV and radio ads filled with exaggerations, distortions and outright lies designed to confuse and polarize us.

Ads that fill us with anger, cynicism and doubt -- about the targeted candidates and the democratic process itself.

Ads funded by "dark money" -- out-of-state organizations backed by out-of-state billionaires who are turning our democracy into a plutocracy.

Government of the wealthy, by the wealthy and for the wealthy.

As the USA TODAY NETWORK -- Tennessee reported last week, outside groups (and their wealthy donors) already have spent more than $23 million turning Tennessee's U.S. Senate race into a partisan death match.

Much of this money comes from out-of-state "social welfare" nonprofits, out-of-state Super PACs, and their wealthy ultra-conservative or ultra-liberal benefactors.

Nonprofit "social welfare" organizations -- designated by the tax code 501(c)(4) -- can accept unlimited contributions from any source and are not required to publicly disclose their donors.

"The promotion of social welfare," according to the tax code, "does not include direct or indirect participation or intervention in political campaigns on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public office."

Unfortunately, there's a loophole big enough to drive a campaign through.

The tax code allows those dark money spenders to advocate for the election (or defeat) of a candidate for federal office -- "so long as that is not their primary activity."

No one is really guarding that hen house.

The six-member Federal Election Commission needs four votes to take action on any complaint. The FEC board has three appointed Democrats and three appointed Republicans. It is designed not to take action.

As a result, "social welfare" nonprofits have been able to promote whatever dark and ominous messages they like.

There's another loophole. The dark money outfits can't contribute directly to a candidate, but they can give unlimited amounts to a Super PAC that is supporting (or most often opposing) a candidate.

Those party-controlled Super PACs can raise and spend unlimited sums for (or against) candidates. They are required to report their donors, but often don't until after an election.

The two biggest outside spenders in Tennessee's uncivil Senate war are Super PACs backed by their own dark money nonprofits.

The Republican-affiliated Senate Leadership Fund has spent $8 million for ads portraying Democrat Phil Bredesen as Satan in a blue suit. That Super PAC gets money from One Nation, a Republican-directed "social welfare" nonprofit.

The Democrat-affiliated Majority Forward has spent nearly $6 million for ads portraying Republican Marsha Blackburn as a devil in a red dress. That Super PAC gets funding from Majority Forward, a Democrat-controlled "social welfare" nonprofit.

The next biggest spenders in the anti-Blackburn/anti-Bredesen barrage are the Koch brothers' Americans for Prosperity. Their Super PAC and "social welfare" nonprofit have spent $4.6 million on anti-Bredesen ads.

Can you follow that shell game?

Why don't the nonprofits just spend their money directly on ads? Because ads related to candidates are automatically classified as political ads (and subject to more IRS scrutiny) 60 days before an election.

The extra step keeps those political ads from counting against the tax code's "primary activity" requirements.

It also provides more cover for uber-wealthy donors behind those "social welfare" nonprofits -- from conservatives such as Sheldon Adelson and the Koch brothers to liberals such as George Soros and Michael Bloomberg.

Why are billionaires who live somewhere else so invested in whether we elect Marsha Blackburn or Phil Bredesen to represent us in the U.S. Senate? Because whichever party controls Congress controls billions of dollars in government spending and tax breaks.

Follow the money, if you can.

Researchers for a nonpartisan advocacy group called Issue One tried. They spent a year examining all available records for the top 15 dark money groups, which include the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the NRA, Planned Parenthood, and Americans for Prosperity.

They looked at FEC filings, tax returns and corporate reporter, and they only could identify the source of $1 of every $9 raised by these organizations.

"Elections shouldn’t be waged in the shadows. Neither Republicans nor Democrats should feel like they need to embrace dark money to win," said Zach Wamp, co-chair of Issue One's ReFormers Caucus and a former GOP Congressman from Tennessee.

"Policy ideas and candidates’ positions should be promoted by organizations who are proud to be engaged in our public arena, not secretive front groups designed to deceive voters, hide donors and deploy deceptive tactics," said Democratic Rep. Tim Roemer of Indiana, and co-chair of Issue One.

Congress could fix the dark money loopholes and close the rabbit holes. They could require all donors to disclose contributions, and all organizations to disclose expenditures -- and make all of that information available to the public.

Or they could empower the IRS or the FEC to enforce the law: "To be tax-exempt as a social welfare organization (501(c)(4)," the tax code states, it "must be operated exclusively to promote social welfare."

To do that, the code states, "an organization must operate primarily to further the common good and general welfare of the people of the community (such as by bringing about civic betterment and social improvements)."

The noxious political ads funded by dark money donors are doing just the opposite.