Re: Oppose the Houses of Worship Political Speech Protection Act
Dear Representative:
The American Civil Liberties Union strongly urges you to oppose H.R. 2357, the Houses of Worship Political Speech Protection Act. The ACLU opposes any proposal, including H.R. 2357, which would allow only religious tax-exempt organizations to engage in political activities prohibited under current tax law. H.R. 2357 clearly provides a preference and benefit to religious non-profit 501(c)(3)s that it denies to all other non-profit 501(c)(3)s. This is blatant discrimination against non-religious 501(c)(3)s, and violates both the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment and constitutional guarantees of equal protection under law. In contradiction to what the bill's supporters have argued, this bill does nothing to clarify the rights of religious institutions. Instead, this bill would grant special privileges to religious groups not given to similarly situated secular groups. For these reasons, we urge you to oppose this bill.
Current tax law exempts certain organizations from taxation, including those organized and operated for religious purposes, provided they do not "participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office." 26 U.S.C. § 501 (a), (c)(3) (1994). H.R. 2357 would allow institutions described in section 508 (c)(1)(a) ["churches, integrated auxiliaries, and conventions or association of churches"] to engage in partisan activities so long as "no substantial part" of their activities would constitute intervention in political campaigns.
Under the Establishment Clause, government cannot favor religious groups over non-religious groups. The current exemption applies equally to both churches and other secular charities that claim tax-exempt status. We agree with Rev. Barry Lynn's comment before the House Committee on Ways and Means that there is absolutely no Supreme Court authority under either the "free exercise of religion" or "free speech" provisions of the First Amendment that suggests that churches are entitled to exemption from tax law requirements that apply to all similarly situated secular groups.
The United States Supreme Court has ruled unconstitutional provisions like H.R. 2357 that create different levels of protection based solely upon whether or not a group is religious. In Texas Monthly, Inc. v. Bullock, 489 U.S. 1 (l989), the state of Texas created an exemption for sales tax on religious publications, including periodicals and books containing sacred texts. The publishers of Texas Monthly, a secular magazine, challenged this disparate treatment favoring religion and prevailed. The Court noted: "It is difficult to view Texas' narrow exception as anything but state sponsorship of religious belief?" Id. at 15. If H.R. 2357 were enacted, non-religious 501(c)(3)s would still be prohibited from endorsing political candidates, while religious organizations would be exempt from this general prohibition. Under the Supreme Court's decision in Bullock, this is clearly unconstitutional.
Giving preferential treatment to houses of worship, but not to the scores of other charitable non-profit groups is unconstitutional and unacceptable. Whatever one's opinion on the underlying issues regarding the appropriate amount of permissible political activity of tax-exempt organizations generally, we should all embrace the constitutional principle that the form of preferential treatment provided in H.R. 2357 should never be endorsed by Congress. If the free speech rights of 501(c)(3)s are going to be discussed, these rights need to be discussed broadly as they relate to all non-profit organizations, rather than attempting to grant new privileges to religious groups while retaining the restrictions for non-religious groups.
Sincerely,
Laura W. Murphy
Director
Terri Schroeder
Legislative Representative
