The 1792 Exchange: Unveiling Its Mission, Funding, and Impact on Corporate Neutrality

Are you concerned about the increasing politicization of corporate America? The 1792 Exchange has emerged as a key player in the debate surrounding ‘woke capitalism’ and ESG policies. But what exactly is the 1792 Exchange, and what impact does it have? This blog post provides a comprehensive, unbiased analysis of its mission, funding, connections, controversies, and influence. Discover whether the 1792 Exchange is a neutral force or promotes a specific agenda.

Understanding the Mission and Purpose of the 1792 Exchange

The 1792 Exchange, legally registered as Constitutional Congress INC, is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. Its stated mission is to “develop policy and resources to protect and equip nonprofits, small businesses, and philanthropy from ‘woke capitalism,’ to educate Congress and stakeholder organizations about the dangers of ESG (environmental, social, and governance) policies, and to help steer public companies in the United States back to neutral on ideological issues.” Essentially, the 1792 Exchange seeks to counteract what it perceives as the intrusion of progressive ideologies into the corporate world. The organization defines “woke corporations” as those that enforce a “soft totalitarianism” by threatening First Amendment freedoms and advancing divisive ideological agendas. You can find more details on their official website and about page.

How 1792 Exchange’s Spotlight Bias Reports Offer Pro Bono Assistance

The 1792 Exchange offers “Spotlight Bias Reports,” which assess companies’ likelihood of canceling contracts or denying services based on differing views. This helps businesses and individuals make informed decisions about partnerships. The reports assign risk ratings – High, Medium, or Low – based on factors like service denial based on beliefs and support for ideological causes. In addition to these reports, the 1792 Exchange provides pro bono assistance from former Fortune 100 executives to businesses seeking guidance on navigating politically charged environments, offering a practical approach to maintaining ideological neutrality.

Exploring the Leadership and Connections of the 1792 Exchange

The 1792 Exchange is led by figures prominent in conservative circles. Daniel Cameron, former Attorney General of Kentucky, is the CEO. Doug Napier serves as Executive Chairman. Paul Fitzpatrick, President of the 1792 Exchange, also sits on the private advisory board of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). This connection to ALEC, a corporate bill mill as they are described at ALEC Exposed, warrants scrutiny, highlighting the organization’s ties to a network known for promoting specific legislative agendas. Understanding these connections is crucial for a comprehensive view of the organization’s influence.

Analyzing the Funding and Financials of the 1792 Exchange

As a 501(c)(3) organization, the 1792 Exchange is not required to comprehensively disclose its donors. However, publicly available IRS filings reveal some of its known funders, including the Christian Community Foundation, DonorsTrust, and National Christian Charitable Foundation. In 2023, the organization reported total revenue of $5,800,308 and total expenses of $6,131,273. Additional financial details can be found on their GuideStar profile. Understanding these funding sources provides insight into the organization’s priorities and potential influences.

Examining the Model Contracts and Pamphlets Created by the 1792 Exchange

The 1792 Exchange creates model contracts and pamphlets addressing “woke capitalism.” Examples include documents such as “Abortion Travel Benefits Sheet” and “Addressing Vendor Contract Language in Regard to Religious Freedom.” These resources aim to provide businesses with tools to navigate potential conflicts arising from differing ideological viewpoints, offering concrete solutions for businesses navigating complex social issues.

Addressing the Controversies and Criticisms Surrounding the 1792 Exchange

The 1792 Exchange has faced criticism for its role in what some perceive as fueling a right-wing manufactured crisis around ESG investing. In February 2022, the organization participated in a State Financial Officers Foundation conference where the main topic was criticizing Wall Street’s use of ESG investing methods. Concerns have also been raised regarding early ties to figures like Cleta Mitchell, an attorney who worked with Trump as he attempted to overturn the 2020 presidential election. A detailed overview of these controversies can be found on the SourceWatch page.

Diving Deep: What is the 1792 Exchange and What Does it Do?

The 1792 Exchange describes itself as a non-profit organization dedicated to ‘preserving freedom and bringing ideological balance back to public corporations.’ But what does this entail? Is it a neutral organization? What specific initiatives does it undertake? The organization aims to counter what it perceives as a left-leaning bias in corporate America and promote a return to cultural neutrality. Daniel Cameron, former Kentucky Attorney General, is the current CEO.

The 1792 Exchange contends that investment management firms, elected officials, and corporate interests are using other people’s money to advance their radical political agendas. It advocates for free exercise, free speech, and free enterprise, aiming to ensure all viewpoints have a seat at the table. They offer pro bono, confidential help to businesses from former Fortune 100 executives to navigate the difficulties of a divided political landscape and build an organization that respects all viewpoints.

The organization also maintains databases related to proxy voting, board bias, and China risk. Founder Nathan Estruth, stated the 1792 Exchange aims to steer public companies to a neutral stance on divisive, ideological issues.

Understanding the Spotlight Report

A key component of the 1792 Exchange is the ‘Spotlight Report.’ The 1792 Exchange has rated over 3,100 companies based on their divisive policies, actions, and cancellation of business relationships based on viewpoints or beliefs. The ratings aim to provide a resource for small businesses, individuals, and not-for-profits to assist in selecting vendors less likely to cancel a contract or deny services based on views or beliefs.

To create a risk rating, the 1792 Exchange assesses a company’s policies, corporate practices, and other relevant criteria, including the likelihood a company will cancel a contract or client or boycott, divest, or deny services based on views or beliefs. Companies are scored across six criteria and assigned a risk rating. A high score earns a company a HIGH RISK rating, medium scores earn a MEDIUM RISK rating, and lower scores earn a LOWER RISK rating.

Examining Model Contracts and Pamphlets

The 1792 Exchange creates model contracts and pamphlets for their allies. These materials cover topics such as abortion travel benefits, vendor contract language regarding religious freedom, and requests for proposals for banking services. They also offer resources like “The Big Tech Scorecard” and information on ESG. These resources are intended to equip businesses with the tools to address perceived biases and promote viewpoint neutrality.

Advocating for Free Exercise, Free Speech, and Free Enterprise

The 1792 Exchange engages in activities to advocate for free exercise, free speech, and free enterprise. The organization exposes coercion and corporate bias through Spotlight Bias Reports, protects First Amendment freedoms, and helps corporate leaders return to cultural neutrality. They define these terms within the context of maximizing shareholder value and respecting stakeholders.

What is 1792 Exchange’s involvement with Project 2025?

The 1792 Exchange is a coalition partner in Project 2025, an initiative spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation involving over 100 conservative organizations. Newsweek and the Heritage Foundation confirm this partnership. The 1792 Exchange’s involvement with Project 2025 aligns with its stated mission of “preserving freedom and bringing ideological balance back to public corporations,” likely contributing to the project’s policy recommendations and personnel recruitment. The Project 2025 logo can be found on their website, and the Heritage Foundation Headquarters is easily searchable on Google Images. Understanding 1792 Exchange frequently asked questions can help clarify the nature of this collaboration.

How is 1792 Exchange connected to Project 2025?

The 1792 Exchange is an advisory board member within the Project 2025 coalition. This connection likely stems from shared strategic goals related to establishing conservative governance and influencing policy. The 1792 Exchange’s expertise in corporate bias ratings and ideological balance may contribute to Project 2025’s efforts to reform the federal government. When considering 1792 Exchange frequently asked questions, the advisory role highlights a deeper level of engagement beyond simple partnership.

Analyzing the Funding and Financials: Where Does the Money Come From?

Transparency in 1792 Exchange funding is crucial for understanding potential influences. So, let’s examine the 1792 Exchange’s financial backing.

Exploring Major Donors to the 1792 Exchange

While the 1792 Exchange is not legally obligated to disclose its donors, some information is available through IRS filings and other sources. According to sfofexposed.org, the top known funders include:

These Christian-based organizations provide context to the 1792 Exchange’s mission, particularly concerning its stance on issues related to religious freedom and “woke capitalism.”

Revenue and Expenses Over Time

Analyzing the 1792 Exchange financials over time reveals a significant increase in both revenue and expenses. Data from ProPublica, based on IRS 990 filings, shows the following:

Year Revenue Expenses Net Assets
2021 $225,000 $225,431 $927
2022 $2,295,000 $1,766,677 $529,250
2023 $5,800,308 $6,131,273 $278,285

This rapid growth suggests a surge in support for the organization’s mission to combat “woke capitalism” and promote ideological neutrality in corporate America. The data also indicates a deficit in 2023, with expenses exceeding revenue.

Grant Distribution

The 1792 Exchange also distributes grants to other organizations. According to SourceWatch, in 2022, they granted $362,000 to the Institute for Women’s Health, and in 2023, they granted $7,190 to United Charitable. Understanding where these funds are directed offers further insight into the 1792 Exchange’s broader network and influence.

Core Financials

As of the most recent data available, the 1792 Exchange financials paint a picture of a rapidly growing organization with significant resources. In 2023, their core financials were:

It’s worth noting that in 2022 and 2023, the 1792 Exchange paid $1.3 million to Paul Watkins’s Fusion Law for “program support,” highlighting the organization’s investment in legal expertise and advocacy. These 1792 Exchange financials, combined with the information about their donors and activities, provide a more complete understanding of the organization’s role in the ongoing debate about corporate activism and ideological neutrality.

Key People: Leadership and Connections Shaping the 1792 Exchange

Understanding the individuals leading an organization can shed light on its direction and priorities. In the case of the 1792 Exchange, several key figures shape its mission to “steer public companies back to neutrality on ideological issues” and combat what it perceives as “woke capitalism.”

Exploring Daniel Cameron’s Role as CEO

Daniel Cameron’s appointment as 1792 Exchange CEO in January 2023 marked a significant shift for the organization. The former Attorney General of Kentucky, and the first Black American independently elected to statewide office in Kentucky, brings a background in law and politics to the role. Cameron served as legal counsel to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. His experience in challenging state and national Democratic policies as Attorney General suggests a continued focus on actively pushing back against perceived ideological agendas in the corporate sector. In 2022, Paul Fitzpatrick as President of the 1792 Exchange earned $134,346. The 1792 exchange CEO salary is a key facet of the organization’s financial structure.

Understanding Connections to ALEC and Other Organizations

The 1792 Exchange’s affiliations with other organizations provide further insight into its network and agenda. It is a gold-level sponsor of the State Financial Officers Foundation (SFOF). 1792 Exchange leadership is intertwined with SFOF, as President Paul Fitzpatrick sits on SFOF’s board of directors and ALEC’s Private Enterprise Advisory Council. Notably, a significant portion of SFOF members have also been associated with the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), suggesting a potential pipeline of influence and shared objectives. While the 1792 Exchange had early ties to Cleta Mitchell and Ken Blackwell, Paul Fitzpatrick has stated that neither has a current role with the organization.

Addressing the Controversies and Criticisms: A Balanced View of the 1792 Exchange

The 1792 Exchange has positioned itself as a defender of freedom and a counterweight to what it perceives as “woke capitalism.” However, the organization and its corporate bias ratings have faced significant scrutiny and criticism. It’s important to address these concerns head-on to provide a balanced perspective.

Main Points of Contention

The primary criticism against the 1792 Exchange revolves around accusations of bias in its corporate ratings. Media Bias Fact Check (MBFC) has rated the organization as right-biased, citing its focus on opposing progressive corporate practices and promoting conservative, free-market principles. The MBFC also suggests that its factual reporting is mixed due to the selective use of sources that align with its ideological perspective, which could lead to a biased presentation of information.

The 1792 Exchange’s Corporate Bias Ratings are a central point of debate. This initiative evaluates companies based on their likelihood of canceling contracts, denying services, or engaging in business practices based on ideological beliefs. Companies are then categorized as “Lower Risk,” “Medium Risk,” or “High Risk.” Critics question the criteria used to determine these ratings, which include factors such as service denial based on beliefs, discriminatory charitable giving practices, employment policies, support for ideological causes, use of corporate funds for non-business ideological purposes, and political contributions.

Several companies have been specifically highlighted for their “High Risk” ratings, including JPMorgan Chase, Etsy, Selective Insurance Group, and PayPal. Atlassian received a “Medium Risk” rating for its diversity and inclusion initiatives. The JPMorgan Chase controversy, in particular, stemmed from the bank’s closure of the National Committee for Religious Freedom’s account, raising concerns among conservatives about access to financial services due to perceived corporate political correctness.

The 1792 Exchange’s Response

In response to these criticisms, the 1792 Exchange maintains that its objective is to promote freedom in the marketplace by ensuring that companies do not discriminate against individuals or organizations based on their religious or ideological beliefs. Paul Fitzpatrick, President of the 1792 Exchange, has stated that the organization aims to inform Americans about where they can freely conduct business without fear of being canceled for their beliefs. He has also suggested that companies deemed “high-risk” should modify their behavior by moving away from stakeholder capitalism and focusing on shareholders, while treating all customers, employees, vendors, and communities with respect. The 1792 Exchange develops policy and protocols to protect and equip nonprofits and small businesses from the effects of woke capitalism, to educate Congress, state legislatures, statewide elected officials and stakeholder organizations about the dangers of ESG (environmental, social, and governance) policies and “woke capitalism,” and to help steer public companies in the United States back to neutral on ideological issues, so they can best serve their shareholders and customers with excellence and integrity.

Evidence of Bias

Accusations of bias are further fueled by the leadership and affiliations of the 1792 Exchange. Paul Fitzpatrick, the organization’s president, has a background in conservative advocacy and connections to organizations such as the State Financial Officers Foundation (SFOF), the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), and the Family Research Council.

Additionally, the selective use of sources by the 1792 Exchange, as noted by Media Bias Fact Check, raises concerns about the objectivity of its reporting. The organization’s focus on “woke” corporate practices, as described in The Washington Times, also contributes to the perception of a right-leaning bias.

It is important to acknowledge these 1792 Exchange controversies and criticisms to foster a transparent and informed discussion about the role of corporations in society and the balance between ideological neutrality and corporate social responsibility.

1792 Exchange and Project 2025: Exploring the Potential Overlap and Influence

Exploring the Potential Overlap

Project 2025, an initiative spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation, aims to install a conservative administration, ready for implementation from “Day One” of the next presidential term. At the heart of this project lies the “Mandate for Leadership,” a comprehensive policy guide outlining specific reforms and proposals for Cabinet departments and federal agencies. This is coupled with a personnel database designed to vet and place individuals loyal to the President in key governmental roles. The goal of 1792 exchange project 2025 is to ensure a swift and effective implementation of a conservative agenda across all levels of the executive branch.

The 1792 Exchange, a non-profit organization, is listed as an advisory board member of 1792 exchange project 2025. The 1792 Exchange focuses on “exposing corporate bias” and advocating for “free exercise, free speech, and free enterprise.” They provide resources such as corporate bias ratings and reports on proxy voting and board bias. Their Spotlight Report grades companies on their “policies, practices, and other relevant criteria to determine the likelihood a company will cancel a contract or client, or boycott, divest, or deny services based on views or beliefs.” The 1792 Exchange also tracks pro- and anti-ESG shareholder proposals that each state’s pension funds support, and then ranks the states accordingly.

While the precise nature of the 1792 Exchange’s collaboration with 1792 exchange project 2025 requires further investigation, its advisory board membership suggests an alignment with the project’s overarching objectives. The “Mandate for Leadership” clearly states an intention to dismantle the administrative state and install political appointees who prioritize a conservative agenda, including goals like restoring the family, nationalism, and securing individual liberties.

Acknowledging Project 2025’s disclaimer, that the opinions expressed by the project and the Heritage Foundation do not necessarily reflect the views of every advisory board partner.

Project 2025 has faced criticism for its radical policy proposals and the groups authoritarian approach to governance. Controversial goals include restricting abortion access, curtailing LGBTQ+ rights, and limiting the independence of government agencies. Understanding the potential influence of groups like the 1792 Exchange within 1792 exchange project 2025 is vital for assessing the project’s potential impact on American society.

Conclusion: A Balanced Perspective on the 1792 Exchange

The 1792 Exchange summary reveals an organization positioning itself as a defender of freedom and ideological balance in corporate America. Led by former Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron, the 1792 Exchange analysis focuses on exposing corporate bias, protecting First Amendment rights, and guiding companies back to cultural neutrality. They offer tools like Corporate Bias Ratings, proxy voting analysis, and board bias reports to achieve these goals. Their “Steer Back to Neutral” initiative aims to confidentially assist businesses navigating politically charged environments.

However, the 1792 Exchange analysis clearly shows ties to right-wing groups like the State Financial Officers Foundation, Heratige Foundation, Project 2025 and ALEC. Concerns arise from their “Spotlight Report,” which grades companies based on their likelihood to cancel contracts due to differing views, pressuring corporations to conform to specific ideologies.

The 1792 Exchange impact could stifle diversity and inclusion efforts, limit corporate social responsibility, and further polarize political discourse by pushing companies toward politically conservative stances. Ultimately, the true impact of the 1792 Exchange will depend on how its initiatives are implemented and received by corporations, policymakers, and the public.

Frequently Asked Questions About the 1792 Exchange

  1. What is the 1792 Exchange’s primary goal? The 1792 Exchange aims to promote ideological neutrality in corporate America and protect businesses from “woke capitalism.”

  2. How does the 1792 Exchange define “woke capitalism”? They define it as corporations enforcing a “soft totalitarianism” by threatening First Amendment freedoms and advancing divisive ideological agendas.

  3. What are the Spotlight Bias Reports? These reports assess companies’ likelihood of canceling contracts or denying services based on differing views.

  4. Who are some of the key figures leading the 1792 Exchange? Daniel Cameron (CEO), Doug Napier (Executive Chairman), and Paul Fitzpatrick (President).

  5. What are some of the criticisms leveled against the 1792 Exchange? Accusations of bias in its corporate ratings and connections to right-wing organizations.

  6. What is the 1792 Exchange’s connection to Project 2025? It is listed as an advisory board member within the Project 2025 coalition.

  7. What are some of the organizations that fund the 1792 Exchange? Known funders include the Christian Community Foundation, DonorsTrust, and National Christian Charitable Foundation.

  8. What are the Corporate Bias Ratings based on? Factors such as service denial based on beliefs, discriminatory charitable giving practices, and employment policies.

  9. What is the 1792 Exchange’s response to criticisms of bias? They maintain that their objective is to promote freedom in the marketplace by ensuring that companies do not discriminate based on beliefs.

  10. How can I learn more about the 1792 Exchange? Visit their official website or consult resources like SourceWatch and GuideStar.

Take Action: Do you want to learn more about how corporations are addressing ideological issues? Explore the 1792 Exchange’s Spotlight Reports and other resources to make informed decisions about the companies you support. Share this article to spark a balanced discussion about corporate neutrality and ideological balance!