There’s new information out about Clarion Fund. This is the group that released more than 20 million copies of a controversial anti-terror DVD called “Obsession” in battleground political states a few weeks before the election. (Background here and here.)

Clarion, which has released very little information about itself, just sent me its long-delayed 2007 tax return, IRS Form 990.

As a 501(c) organization, Clarion is not supposed to influence U.S. elections, but the 990 reveals that two of the fund’s unpaid directors in 2007 had strong GOP ties:

• Peter Feaman, a Florida trial lawyer. He’s also the author of Wake Up America! about the dangers of fundamentalist Islam. Feaman has been active in GOP political circles. He has run for the Florida house and serves as the Republican state committeeman for Palm Beach County. He was a delegate to the 2008 GOP convention.
• Nina Cunningham, founder of Quidlibet, a legal research consulting firm in Illinois. She has given more than $33,000 to GOP candidates and causes in the past three election cycles, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. She is the Illinois State chair of the Republican Jewish Committee’s women’s committee.

The other two directors were previous identified:

• Robert “Raphael” Shore, producer of Obsession and the follow-up film, The Third Jihad, and Richard Green, Clarion’s executive director and the organization’s only paid employee.

According to the 990, Clarion listed total revenue of nearly $2 million in 2007, about half of which came from direct public support. The contributors are not identified.

The fund’s biggest expense as $610,000 for film promotion and distribution. But Obsession earned Clarion more than $800,000 so the fund actually booked a small profit.

The fund’s distribution costs were much higher in 2008, but we won’t know the details for some time.

My piece on hedge funds is up now.

You’ve probably heard about hedge funds. Hedge funds are private pools of money, on the orders of billions of dollars. They are usually secretive. Ten thousand hedge funds are registered in the Cayman Islands. Why are they registered in the Caymans? So they can be secretive and avoid taxes.

Journalists tend to be naturally suspicious of secrecy, but there are good hedge funds. Ones that have a very narrow strategy they pursue. That don’t borrow huge amounts of money, that don’t speculate and drive up the price of oil or drive down the price of Ford, and that generally don’t concentrate on investments that almost nobody understands.

But the bad ones can be really bad. Because they move so much (borrowed) money in and out of the markets, they are blamed for the extreme market gyrations we’ve seen in the past few weeks. They will speculate on anything. The spectacular collapse of Long-Term Capital Management in 1998 had much to do with its bets on volatility itself.

So why do people invest in hedge funds? Well, not everybody does. Minimum investment is $5 million or so. And 20 percent of all profits goes to the fund managers, some of whom earned $1 billion in a single year.

Even with those huge hurdles, hedge funds managed $2 trillion when things were going well. And they did extremely well for their investors.

Those who did invest in hedge funds were sometimes drawn in by the promise of absolute return. That hedge funds will use sophisticated trading techniques and will always make money. No matter what. Long-Term Capital Management was run by a Nobel Prize winner who convinced people that the fund’s mathematical models guaranteed returns. Until they didn’t.

Long-Term Capital Management lost $4.5 billion in nine months in 1998.  The Federal Reserve decided to intervene because it feared the fund’s collapse could trigger a full-blown panic.

Today, 10 years later, there are many more hedge funds.  They have been wildly successful over the past seven years, helped once again by Alan Greenspan’s cherished beliefs in cheap money and unfettered markets. And success is a very bad teacher, as Bill Gates says. Because it seduces smart people into thinking they can’t lose.

Bloomberg reports that hedge fund assets will fall to $1 trillion by mid-2009. Some hedge funds lost quite a bit of money. Quite a few investors cashed out and fled to safety. And if Citigroup is right, we should remain seated because the turbulence is going to with us for some time.

So, I’ll be learning and writing more about hedge funds in the coming weeks. As always, I welcome comments, thoughts, criticisms, and musings, anonymous or not.

It’s election time and once again Californians have to consider a whole host of ballot propositions on issues about which most of us know nothing.

As usual, the ones that have gotten the most attention are two hot-button social issues. A yes vote on Proposition 4 would require doctors to notify parents of pregnant minors seeking abortions. And Proposition 8 places the question of gay marriage before voters yet again.

There are 10 other state propositions that would issue billions of dollars in bonds in our nearly bankrupt state, improve life for farm animals, change sentencing rules for judges, force utilities to generate power from renewable energy, and so on.

In the past eight years, Californians have had more than 100 state propositions to consider ranging from Indian gaming compacts to chiropractor licensing. And that’s not counting the dozens of county and city initiatives. I, for one, am sick of it.

I used to spend considerable effort going through the phone-book sized voter guide. This time, I saved myself a lot of time. When I cast my absentee ballot a few weeks ago, I went down the line and filled in the “no” bubble for every single state proposition on the ballot.

Why? Because a no vote on a proposition changes nothing and puts the issue back where it belongs:  in the California Legislature. It’s the legislature’s job to consider these issues, understand the implications pro and con, hold hearings, hear from lobbyists and their constituents, talk to their colleagues and make an informed decision.

California’s initiative process is completely broken. Time and again, the initiatives passed by voters turn out to be ambiguous and too complex with many exceeding 10,000 words. The courts often throw them out. If they don’t, we’re stuck with them: California is the only state that doesn’t allow its legislature to amend initiatives after passage.

Nearly a century ago, California voters overwhelmingly approved the initiative system as a way to wrest control of the political process from  special interests like the Southern Pacific Railroad. It was supposed to empower ordinary citizens, but today it only serves the special interests. According to the Center for Governmental Studies, a Los Angeles think tank, the year we last saw an initiative qualify on the effort of volunteers was 1982.

Who are these special interests? People with money. Two-thirds of all contributions now come in amounts of $1 million or more. In 2006, Hollywood producer Steven Bing spent more than $48 million to finance Proposition 87, an alternative energy measure, but lost to an even costlier effort financed by oil companies.

An industry has sprung up to cater to these people. It costs about $3 million to qualify a measure for the ballot by paying people to sit outside supermarkets and hassle you for your signature. But the big money is in advertising. Two years ago, a total of $330 million was spent on all the measures in the general election, including $154 million on Bing’s Prop 87.

This is madness. Money has corrupted the initiative process, subverted its noble intent of empowering citizens, and turned propositions into tools for wealthy, special interests who can’t get what they want from our hapless legislature.

It’s time for average citizens to stop pretending that we are lawmakers. Stop encouraging the special interests. Take back the process by voting no on ALL propositions this November and every November and help to fix California’s broken political system.

Voting no on all state propositions isn’t liberal or conservative, Democratic or Republican. It’s a vote against the special interests and the money that ruined the process. It’s a vote in favor of good government. So, as Nancy Reagan liked to say, just say no.

Many people seem to having trouble with all the terms in the fiscal crisis. Here is a handy guide I have prepared. Hope this helps.

“Typical investor”

You go to the grocery store and buy an orange, take it home, and eat it when it ripens.

“Short seller”

You go to the grocery store. You borrow 100 oranges and immediately sell them to someone else. You wait for the price of oranges to go down. You buy 100 cheaper oranges, return them to the bank and pocket the difference in price. Everybody hates you.

“Hedge fund”

You take your rich uncle’s money, borrow more, and secretly buy lots of oranges on the cheap. Then you then drive up the price of oranges. At the same time, you short oranges. Either way, you keep 20 percent of profits. Everybody envies you.

“Pension fund”

You take a bowling league’s meager savings and try to copy what the hedge funds were doing. Everybody pities you.

“Warren Buffet”

Owns the orange groves. Always makes money.

“Alan Greenspan”

The aging greeter who encourages you to buy more oranges than you can afford.

“Subprime mortgages”

Rotting oranges infested with worms.

“Mortgage-backed securities”

You buy a huge amount of oranges — including the diseased ones — chop them up and sell the whole thing off in baskets of varying sizes and quality. Nobody knows what they are buying.

“Credit-rating agency”

Clerk who says the worm-infested oranges in the basket are really very sweet and delicious.

“Credit default swap”

Insurance in case the bad oranges spoils the bunch. Sold at checkout counter.

“Special Investment Vehicle (SIV)”

The store stashes the rotten oranges in the freezer and forgets about them.

“Investment Bank”

Cashier who pockets a few cents every time oranges are bought and sold. Stuck with lots of unsold fruit baskets.

“Treasury secretary”

Ex-cashier promoted to management.

“Federal bailout”

The government buys all the worm-infested oranges and makes you eat them.

but to do what little I can to bring to your attention today’s parting words from Andrew Lahde, a hedge fund manager whose fund returned 866 percent betting against the subprime crisis. He quit today but not before taking out the whole Wall Street establishment with him and sharing his thoughts on corruption and yes, hemp. Enjoy.

October 17, 2008

“Today I write not to gloat. Given the pain that nearly everyone is experiencing, that would be entirely inappropriate. Nor am I writing to make further predictions, as most of my forecasts in previous letters have unfolded or are in the process of unfolding. Instead, I am writing to say goodbye.

Recently, on the front page of Section C of the Wall Street Journal, a hedge fund manager who was also closing up shop (a $300 million fund), was quoted as saying, “What I have learned about the hedge fund business is that I hate it.” I could not agree more with that statement. I was in this game for the money. The low hanging fruit, i.e. idiots whose parents paid for prep school, Yale, and then the Harvard MBA, was there for the taking. These people who were (often) truly not worthy of the education they received (or supposedly received) rose to the top of companies such as AIG, Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers and all levels of our government. All of this behavior supporting the Aristocracy, only ended up making it easier for me to find people stupid enough to take the other side of my trades. God bless America.

There are far too many people for me to sincerely thank for my success. However, I do not want to sound like a Hollywood actor accepting an award. The money was reward enough. Furthermore, the endless list those deserving thanks know who they are.

I will no longer manage money for other people or institutions. I have enough of my own wealth to manage. Some people, who think they have arrived at a reasonable estimate of my net worth, might be surprised that I would call it quits with such a small war chest. That is fine; I am content with my rewards. Moreover, I will let others try to amass nine, ten or eleven figure net worths. Meanwhile, their lives suck. Appointments back to back, booked solid for the next three months, they look forward to their two week vacation in January during which they will likely be glued to their Blackberries or other such devices. What is the point? They will all be forgotten in fifty years anyway. Steve Balmer, Steven Cohen, and Larry Ellison will all be forgotten. I do not understand the legacy thing. Nearly everyone will be forgotten. Give up on leaving your mark. Throw the Blackberry away and enjoy life.

So this is it. With all due respect, I am dropping out. Please do not expect any type of reply to emails or voicemails within normal time frames or at all. Andy Springer and his company will be handling the dissolution of the fund. And don’t worry about my employees, they were always employed by Mr. Springer’s company and only one (who has been well-rewarded) will lose his job.

I have no interest in any deals in which anyone would like me to participate. I truly do not have a strong opinion about any market right now, other than to say that things will continue to get worse for some time, probably years. I am content sitting on the sidelines and waiting. After all, sitting and waiting is how we made money from the subprime debacle. I now have time to repair my health, which was destroyed by the stress I layered onto myself over the past two years, as well as my entire life — where I had to compete for spaces in universities and graduate schools, jobs and assets under management — with those who had all the advantages (rich parents) that I did not. May meritocracy be part of a new form of government, which needs to be established.

On the issue of the U.S. Government, I would like to make a modest proposal. First, I point out the obvious flaws, whereby legislation was repeatedly brought forth to Congress over the past eight years, which would have reigned in the predatory lending practices of now mostly defunct institutions. These institutions regularly filled the coffers of both parties in return for voting down all of this legislation designed to protect the common citizen. This is an outrage, yet no one seems to know or care about it. Since Thomas Jefferson and Adam Smith passed, I would argue that there has been a dearth of worthy philosophers in this country, at least ones focused on improving government. Capitalism worked for two hundred years, but times change, and systems become corrupt. George Soros, a man of staggering wealth, has stated that he would like to be remembered as a philosopher. My suggestion is that this great man start and sponsor a forum for great minds to come together to create a new system of government that truly represents the common man’s interest, while at the same time creating rewards great enough to attract the best and brightest minds to serve in government roles without having to rely on corruption to further their interests or lifestyles. This forum could be similar to the one used to create the operating system, Linux, which competes with Microsoft’s near monopoly. I believe there is an answer, but for now the system is clearly broken.

Lastly, while I still have an audience, I would like to bring attention to an alternative food and energy source. You won’t see it included in BP’s, “Feel good. We are working on sustainable solutions,” television commercials, nor is it mentioned in ADM’s similar commercials. But hemp has been used for at least 5,000 years for cloth and food, as well as just about everything that is produced from petroleum products. Hemp is not marijuana and vice versa. Hemp is the male plant and it grows like a weed, hence the slang term. The original American flag was made of hemp fiber and our Constitution was printed on paper made of hemp. It was used as recently as World War II by the U.S. Government, and then promptly made illegal after the war was won. At a time when rhetoric is flying about becoming more self-sufficient in terms of energy, why is it illegal to grow this plant in this country? Ah, the female. The evil female plant — marijuana. It gets you high, it makes you laugh, it does not produce a hangover. Unlike alcohol, it does not result in bar fights or wife beating. So, why is this innocuous plant illegal? Is it a gateway drug? No, that would be alcohol, which is so heavily advertised in this country. My only conclusion as to why it is illegal, is that Corporate America, which owns Congress, would rather sell you Paxil, Zoloft, Xanax and other additive drugs, than allow you to grow a plant in your home without some of the profits going into their coffers. This policy is ludicrous. It has surely contributed to our dependency on foreign energy sources. Our policies have other countries literally laughing at our stupidity, most notably Canada, as well as several European nations (both Eastern and Western). You would not know this by paying attention to U.S. media sources though, as they tend not to elaborate on who is laughing at the United States this week. Please people, let’s stop the rhetoric and start thinking about how we can truly become self-sufficient.

With that I say good-bye and good luck.

All the best,
Andrew Lahde”