Jones and Cleaver Try To Convert Churches Into Political Tools
Yesterday, U.S. Representatives Walter Jones and Emanuel Cleaver introduced H.R. 3600, a bill that would weaken campaign finance laws, sabotage the separation of church and state, and increase the federal budget deficit, all in one ill-conceived sweeping action.
H.R. 3600 would eliminate the 1954 Johnson Amendment. The Johnson Amendment made it illegal for organizations that accept tax-exempt donations from acting as campaign organizations on behalf of candidates for public office. Under the Johnson Amendment, it remains legal for churches and charitable organizations to campaign for political candidates. They simply cannot claim tax-exempt status and do so at the same time.
The Johnson Amendment exists in order to prevent organizations from using government tax exemptions to funnel money into partisan political campaigns. It’s a simple way to prevent the federal government from subsidizing partisan campaigns.
It’s also a means of maintaining the separation of church and state. Churches are supposed to be religious organizations, not money laundering operations and political powerhouses.
If churches are allowed to use tax-exempt donations to fund political campaigns, then they’ll enter the same corrupt sphere that corporations currently exist in. The biggest churches will use their money to gain influence in Washington D.C., rather than to help people in need or provide religious services. Funds from the collection plate will be siphoned off into campaign coffers, so that church leaders can make friends in high places.
If H.R. 3600 succeeds, political candidates and political parties will be able to convert churches and charities into little more than campaign tools. Power brokers will be able to make donations to campaigns for political office through churches, and then to write off these campaign donations on their taxes. New corrupt relationships forged by financial transactions between churches and politicians will encourage radical schemes to increase government interference in religious matters, in order to give special advantage to well-connected preachers.
If this legislation proceeds, the government will be giving special tax breaks to reward spending on political campaigns. The new arrangement would create a virtual subsidy for political campaign activities.
This new subsidy would create a new drain on the federal budget, making deficits even higher at the same time that Medicare and education are being slashed. Social services to people in need will be reduced if H.R. 3600 is passed into law.
H.R. 3600 benefits two small groups of people: Politicians, and greedy religious leaders who want to use their churches as platforms for personal ambition. All other Americans, whether they are religious or not, will suffer.
Preventing the free exercise meant that pastors could not be restricted in any way . President Johnsons action is in complete violation of this and can not exist by the constitution. None of the pastors are bound by it.
That’s nonsense. Can pastors commit murder? Can they become cannibals? No. Pastors, and their organizations, are restricted by the same laws as everyone else. Among those laws is the law that when an organization receives tax exempt status, it cannot make political contributions. That applies to environmental organizations and hunger relief organizations as much religious organizations.
Also, while there is individual religious freedom, religious organizations do not have the freedom to hijack the government. That’s because Congress is forbidden to commit any act to establish religion. The proposed law would do just that, AND would corrupt churches along the way.
Since I run a non-profit organization my organization is prohibited from campaign speech or contributions for or against specific candidates; but my speech for or against general principals would be protected by the first amendment as is my pastor. Churchs put out voting issue pamphlets. But it seems that this proposal might swing the pendulum as far to the right as Lyndon Johnsons’ 1954 swings it to the left. What seems more appropriate would be an amendment to the current law restraining non-profits contributions to political campaigns that specifically acknowedges that pastors speech from the pulpit is still protected by the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution and is not gagged by the 1954 law even though church funds may not be contributed to political candidates campaigns.