The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to governmental regulation of firearm ownership; the social, historical and political context of such regulation; and the people and organizations associated with these issues, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Conservatism High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Law Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Virginia B‑class Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Virginia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Virginia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VirginiaWikipedia:WikiProject VirginiaTemplate:WikiProject VirginiaVirginia articles B This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Organizations Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Politics Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. United States: District of Columbia / Government Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject District of Columbia (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as High-importance).

Archives

Index Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6

This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

• Suhay, Lisa (March 30, 2015). "Who's pushing the 'religious freedom' legislation in states?". The Christian Science Monitor.
• Bykowicz, Julie (December 3, 2014). "ALEC is Back and Ready to Resume its Conservative Agenda". Bloomberg Politics.
• Pilkington, Ed (February 17, 2016). "Ford becomes latest corporation to sever ties with conservative Alec lobby". The Guardian.
• Milman, Oliver (December 8, 2015). "American Electric Power quits Alec as it helps states move to clean power". The Guardian.
• Balcerzak, Ashley (January 26, 2016). "The Constitutional Convention 2016?". Slate.
• Dreher, Arielle (June 22, 2016). "Mississippi, Your ALEC is Showing". Jackson Free Press.
• Faturechi, Robert (January 6, 2017). "Conservatives Plot Their Course on the Rising 'Sea of Red' in State Capitals". Pro Publica.
• Woodard, Colin (May 2, 2017). "Bill seeks to restrict Maine towns' efforts to build high-speed internet networks". Portland Press Herald.

ACCE

• Greenblatt, Alan (June 2014). "ALEC Goes Local". Governing.
• Pilkington, Ed (July 30, 2014). "Conservative group Alec devises offshoot ACCE to lobby at local levels". The Guardian.
• Pilkington, Ed (March 6, 2014). "Conservative group Alec trains sights on city and local government". The Guardian. {{ cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= ( help)
• Jones, Tim (August 10, 2014). "Corporate Lobby Sets Its Sights on Your Garbage Man". Bloomberg News.
• Elbow, Steven (August 15, 2014). "ALEC sets sights on local governments". The Capital Times.
• Bravo, Ellen (October 17, 2014). "ALEC's disgusting new ploy: How corporate America's trying to roll back local liberal laws". Salon.

• Haven't analyzed reliability yet. -- Dr. Fleischman ( talk) 18:01, 11 November 2014 (UTC) reply

• Oliver, John (November 2, 2014). "State Legislatures and ALEC". Last Week Tonight with John Oliver. HBO.
• Dewan, Shaila (December 18, 2014). "Foes of Unions Try Their Luck in County Laws". The New York Times.
• Lucas, Phillip (February 13, 2016). "Alabama among many states moving to block local wage laws". The Washington Times.

Secrecy

• Hawkins, Beth (August 22, 2013). "ALEC declares itself exempt from public-disclosure laws, and is challenged". MinnPost.
• Barer, David (August 15, 2013). "Fort Worth lawmaker tries to block request for information on dealings with conservative group". Dallas Morning News.
• Shorman, Jonathan (December 14, 2013). "Springfield Democratic lawmaker hopes to send message about conservative group". Springfield News Leader.
• "Where Do the Elite Meet? Behind Closed Doors". Associated Press. May 12, 2014.
• DeFour, Matthew (March 29, 2014). "Leah Vukmir agrees to turn over ALEC documents to settle open records lawsuit". Wisconsin State Journal.
• Kroll, Andy (December 6, 2013). "ALEC Boots Mother Jones From Its Annual Conference". Mother Jones.

Education

• "Education". ALEC.
• Underwood, Julie; Mead, Julie F. (February 29, 2012). "A Smart ALEC Threatens Public Education". Education Week.

Opinion source. -- Dr. Fleischman ( talk) 06:42, 19 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• "ALEC's Report Card Receives Failing Marks". The Forum on the Future of Public Education: Empirical scrutiny of ideological issues. University of Illinois. May 9, 2013.
• "ALEC v. Kids" (PDF). ProgressNow.
• Lubienski, Christopher; Brewer, T. Jameson (May 2013). "Review of Report Card on American Education" (PDF). National Education Policy Center.
• Hawkins, Beth (March 26, 2012). "ALEC and corporate fingerprints are all over national push for online learning". MinnPost.

Questionable reliability. -- Dr. Fleischman ( talk) 06:47, 19 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• Hawkins, Beth (February 6, 2012). "What are MN attendees of ALEC confab likely bringing back? Think tenure reform". MinnPost.
• Parti, Tarini (July 30, 2015). "'Dark money': ALEC wants image makeover". Politico.

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on American Legislative Exchange Council. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120205023422/http://www.alec.org/about-alec/ to http://www.alec.org/about-alec/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{ source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:46, 5 December 2017 (UTC) reply

I reverted @Shock Brigade Harvester Boris's revert of my edit (see diff) as there was no explanation provided. My edits were perfectly in line with MOS and NPOV. Quis separabit? 04:09, 7 July 2018 (UTC) reply

There were a number of things wrong with your edits. For starters, you appear to have removed important, reliably sourced content such as the fact that ALEC's activities are legal. Second, your characterization of various media outlets (including the The New York Times and Bloomberg Businessweek) is unsourced and non-neutral. Third, you messed up the title of one of the sources. Fourth, you broke up some paragraphs in a way that in my view makes the prose read a little more choppily. Finally, the word "reportedly" is non-neutral as it's used as an expression of doubt. -- Dr. Fleischman ( talk) 06:59, 7 July 2018 (UTC) reply

Yup. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris ( talk) 11:54, 7 July 2018 (UTC) reply

@ Marquardtika: According to WP:SPLC, SPLC is WP:RS for such claims. If you revert me, WP:AE is just around the corner. tgeorgescu ( talk) 05:58, 3 August 2022 (UTC) reply

Discussion is now taking place at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#SPLC at ALEC. tgeorgescu ( talk) 02:15, 4 August 2022 (UTC) reply

@ Genericusername57: See:

Much of the Back to Neutral coalition’s work challenges companies’ attempts to expand racial and gender equality, CMD and Hatewatch found. An older nonprofit where Nelson is a board member, the National Center for Public Policy Research (NCPPR), spearheads that coalition. They purchase shares in corporations, lobby their board members and urge shareholders to vote out directors who support diversity initiatives.

If that's not being homophobic, then I don't know what it is. tgeorgescu ( talk) 03:23, 4 August 2022 (UTC) reply

Homophobic is one of those terms we really need in direct quotes. But also the quote seems much broader than homophobia. A summary of that would probably be about "lobbying against corporations' efforts to improve racial and gender diversity". Ok, that's a bit too close of a paraphrase, but something to that effect. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 13:30, 4 August 2022 (UTC) reply

@ Rhododendrites: About we can say they're involved to the extent the source says they are: the source is saying “We’re particularly sensitive about this corporate woke culture,” said Nelson, using a slang term associated with social justice activism. “We have a new coalition ... that is really, really active. ... We are certainly a part of that.” tgeorgescu ( talk) 13:05, 4 August 2022 (UTC) reply

Regarding my quote, by that I mean the source justifies saying ALEC is part of the Back to Neutral coalition. The coalition is engaged in these activities. I just mean that it would be a little too much to apply the transitive property to attribute Back to Neutral's activities directly to ALEC (as opposed to Back to Neutral, which ALEC is part of). Does that make sense? — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 13:30, 4 August 2022 (UTC) reply

This was an egregious WP:BLP violation which wasn't even verified by the source. I have changed the content to actually reflect what the source says. Marquardtika ( talk) 15:53, 4 August 2022 (UTC) reply

I'm not some kind of freak who cannot work collaboratively. The rub seems to be among "homophobic", "anti-LGBT", and the quote seems much broader than homophobia. So, yeah, "homophobic" isn't mentioned verbatim, it is implied something much broader than homophobia. Am I figuring it, or it got from bad to worse (for ALEC c.s.)? The BLP violation got removed so that the article sounds even meaner. You would not believe me, but in my version the charge was milder and more limited. While Nelson is no longer mentioned by name, the charge against her is worse now. By removing her name, the charge was not removed, but it is much broader. The BLP violation was thus a purely formal concern. tgeorgescu ( talk) 04:06, 5 August 2022 (UTC) reply

My WP:NPOV concerns (and the WP:BLP and WP:OR concerns raised by other editors here) have been addressed by this edit, although I question inclusion of the SPLC opinion per WP:UNDUE. For ALEC, “200 of its model bills become law each year”, so how many of these are LGBT-related bills, and which are on the pro- or anti- side? Participation in a coalition (which itself is not notable) and which has produced no notable model bills or even policy positions of ALEC seems irrelevant to the section titled “Notable policies and model bills”. BBQboffin ( talk) 03:28, 6 August 2022 (UTC) reply

Wrong place in the article? Then move the text, don't delete it. It is relevant to know what their broad network of Mitläufer organizations is doing. About laws, I heard there is a Texas law that websites are not allowed to censor Texans. See SCOTUS Vacates Appeals Court Order on Texas Social Media Law on YouTube. It is quite clear that if one is a neonazi from Texas, their posts should not be deleted. This is wholly in line with Nelson's aims. She fights against "woke corporations" who censor neonazis, anti-LGBT and racists, i.e. what she calls "this corporate woke culture". About such efforts against the woke Big Tech she stated "We are certainly a part of that." Of course, I don't have WP:RS that ALEC has drafted the Texas social media law, but it certainly seems that their Mitläufer did. It certainly looks like a MAGA law. tgeorgescu ( talk) 13:26, 6 August 2022 (UTC) reply

Tie to the Koch network should be made explicit in the lead section and not buried deep in the body of the text and falsely presented as unverified claims. There’s literally dozens of books on this subject. Viriditas ( talk) 01:22, 5 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Thanks, good suggestion on the principle that the most important items can be gleaned by the reader in the first paragraph. Multiple books on the subject indicates the content is important. It would be helpful if you could list some of those books as a bread crumb path for Wikipedians who may have time to edit the lead. Anne9853 ( talk) 22:10, 21 May 2023 (UTC) reply