October 2, 2007 | Read Time: 1 minute
Can running a nonprofit group actually deter a politician’s presidential hopes? For Newt Gingrich, the answer is yes.
The former speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives announced last week that he will not seek the Republican Party’s nomination for president, after much speculation to the contrary.
While politicos scratched their head over the abrupt decision, according to The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Mr. Gingrich bowed out in part because of American Solutions, a nonprofit group he founded that seeks to find technological and bipartisan fixes to the country’s problems.
The newspaper quotes a letter Mr. Gingrich sent to supporters on Monday that said he didn’t jump into the race because doing so would force him to give up his role at the organization.
“I would have had to absolutely sever all ties with American Solutions to guard against allegations that I was ‘coordinating’ with the group I had help found. This would have left American Solutions, which is less than a year old, without a leader and therefore extremely vulnerable to failure,” he wrote.
In addition, Randy Evans, an Atlanta lawyer and long-time friend of Mr. Gingrich, told the newspaper the charity would have created legal problems under current campaign finance laws if Mr. Gingrich had run.
Mr. Gingrich is not the only presidential hopeful who has been hampered by involvement with a charity. Democrat John Edwards has been accused of using an antipoverty group he established for political purposes — an allegation he has denied.
What do you think? Have presidential politics and finance rules become too onerous for candidates to head a charity? Was Mr. Gingrich’s decision a good one for his organization? Click on the comments link below this post to share your thoughts.
