If the U.S. House of Representatives’ tax bill becomes law, partisan politics would overtake the nonprofit world, casting institutions designed to promote the public good into the depraved den of identity politics and selfish motives. This would become a seismic moment because charities would use tax-deductible contributions to favor or oppose political candidates at the behest of wealthy donors with devastating results for charities and the nation.
Since 1954, charities have been barred from getting involved in political campaigns by a rule known as the “Johnson Amendment.” Donald Trump vowed to destroy this rule at the behest of some evangelical churches that want to endorse candidates from the pulpit. But cogent opposition from nonprofit advocacy groups had a powerful effect. House Republicans now propose to relax, not repeal, the Johnson Amendment. The bill passed by the House of Representatives would let charities make political-campaign statements, but only in the “ordinary course” of their regular activities and only if the cost of the speech is not more than a small, incremental expense.”
According to the sponsors of this compromise, these limits ensure that “the organization’s primary function remains charitable or religious in nature,” and that there would be no risk that charities would become political action committees (PACs) or that taxpayers would subsidize political campaigns through charitable contributions.
Bottom of Form
Unfortunately, these hopes are misguided. It’s true that endorsements, political statements on websites, media presentations or fundraising letters are cheap. They would not violate the “ordinary course” provisions of the bill. But even though endorsements are of low or no cost to the organization, the value of the endorsement to the candidate or donors could be extremely high. Donors would undoubtedly be willing to pay thousands of dollars for routine endorsements from important charities. There would be no way to know whether a donor was paying for charity or for politics, and, in truth, for many groups, there would cease to be a difference.
The Johnson Amendment protects charities from political pressure applied by donors and from partisan capture. Without it, charities (and churches), which are always in the fundraising business, could be bought for political purposes. The result would be tax deductions of phony charitable contributions made for political reasons, something the sponsors of this measure say they want to avoid.
Further, it is common to assume that charities have a noble intent. But charities in the U.S. are easy to create and can serve a particular (and ugly) agenda under the guise of being educational. For instance, a charity that promotes white supremacy could “educate” and make political statements as part of its normal course of business. The same is true for less fringy groups, such as “social welfare” charities, or megachurches who could then make political statements at no extra incremental cost. In short, once nonprofits are permitted to take partisan stances, there is no realistic limit. And an underfunded IRS would not seriously attempt to enforce the bills weak limits on political speech.
Another curious provision in the House bill limits the charitable deduction to the wealthiest 5 percent of taxpayers. If this provision were combined with relaxing the Johnson Amendment, only the very richest would benefit by the tax deduction. It would further skew political discourse to those at the top of the income spectrum and drown out the voices of everyone else.
The Johnson Amendment has served the nonprofit world and American society well. It should be left in place. Relaxing it would be prophetically dangerous because it would openly assist in uniting church and state.
“The dignitaries of church and state will unite to bribe, persuade, or compel all classes to honor the Sunday. The lack of divine authority will be supplied by oppressive enactments. Political corruption is destroying love of justice and regard for truth; and even in free America, rulers and legislators, in order to secure public favor, will yield to the popular demand for a law enforcing Sunday observance. Liberty of conscience, which has cost so great a sacrifice, will no longer be respected.” The Great Controversy, page 592.
Comments
timesandlaws.com
Tuesday December 5th, 2017 at 09:42 AMJohnson an evil man from Texas, which here in Texas we actually know why he wanted that bill. It was to control the voice of the Pastors, that by being a non profit, you could no longer give voice to opposition of political power. His bill is why Preachers do not speak evil against evil in the government, because a 501 c3 would be revoked and the churches would have to pay huge fees. All churches before Johnsons bill were already exempt from paying taxes, and had protections, his bill was protecting from people in churches speaking against the government, hence giving government more control and is why SDA does not speak against Rome or the Image of Rome. And meanwhile…. SDA already signed on to Rome and Church and State by being a 501 c3, therefore if you are a corporation, you must abide by its rules…. hence why you must not discriminate against transgenders, bisexuals, etc. That is why a corporation like sda must comply. Any 501c3 must abide by the rules they signed up to…. including when and if they say you must keep Sunday.
timeofnoah.org
Thursday December 7th, 2017 at 01:39 PMJust to ad more to the comment posted above. Church and State has been a reality in the US for a long time. Every corporation belongs to the State. Church and ministries that have been incorporated are creatures of the State and thus fulfilling the prophecy of Revelation 13 in regards to the image of the beast.
“No corporation can exist without the consent or grant of the sovereign, since the corporation is a creature of the state and derives its powers by legislative grant. The power to create corporations is one of the attributes of sovereignty. There is no inherent right to conduct business as a corporation. The right to act as a corporation does not belong to citizens by common right, but is a special privilege conferred by the sovereign power of the state or nation. Until there is a grant of that right, whether by a special charter or under a general law, there can be no corporation. Any means of incorporation that a state sees fit to adopt are appropriate. “The right to conduct business as a corporation, being a privilege, may be withheld by the state, or may be made subject to appropriate terms and restrictions. Because
the granting of the privilege to be a corporation and to do business in that form rests entirely in the state’s discretion, a state is justified in imposing such conditions on that privilege as it deems necessary, so long as those conditions are not imposed in a discriminatory manner.”
American Jurisprudence 2d
Whether the Johnson Amendment is eliminated or not makes absolutely no difference when it comes to the unity of church and state. It would be simply the other side of the same coin. Whether State directs Church or Church Directs State, the bottom line is, it is still the unity between church and state. Thus the Image of the Beast has been formed in the US already. It only needs to speak now in regards to Sunday observance. Every incorporated church and ministry has the State as it’s sovereign. This is in direct violation of the God’s principles who alone can be the Sovereign of His Church and Christ the head of it. May God help us all….
MJ
Friday December 8th, 2017 at 07:04 PMThe “Johnson Amendment” as of Sept 14, 2017 has been “DE-fanged”. It cannot be completely taken off the books until the U.S. has a Constitutional Convention.
However no infraction of its prohibitions will be prosecuted, consequently its already gone.
Question: How much more evidence do we expect to see before we take seriously the threat of a National Sunday Law – soon?
What previous U.S. Administration promised to give Evangelicals, “whatever they want”, “to destroy the wall of separation between church and state?
Don’t be surprised if the National Sunday Law is buried or otherwise goes unnoticed in a hastily passed Bill. Bill are no longer monolithic. The Evangelical world will be elated and praise the government for turning back to god! And isn’t this the real reason why this Administration is in power, to force the conscience and establish worship to the enemy?
admin
Sunday December 10th, 2017 at 11:29 AMThe Johnson amendment is not a constitutional provision. It is an amendment to the IRS tax law relating to 501c3 organizations. It only takes an act of Congress to repeal or change it officially, not a constitutional convention.