Democrats and independents have often challenged the use of churches by GOP candidates for campaigning and voter registration drives. The same concern would appear raised by the remarks of senior White House adviser Valerie Jarrett this Sunday at Ebenezer Baptist Church where she appeared to be stumping for the President — followed by a voter registration drive at the church.
The speech included the following highly partisan remarks:
“Teachers, and firefighters, and policemen, whose jobs are now in jeopardy because Congress–well let me be specific–because the Republicans in Congress,” Jarrett told the crowd. According to the CBS affiliate in Atlanta, at this point, “Before she could finish her sentence, people in the congregation were laughing, and applauding.”
Jarrett also celebrated the killing of Osama bin Laden — a developing theme by the President and his supporters to highlight his national security credentials. At some point, this becomes a bit distasteful like a modern version of the old system of quartering enemies and sending his body parts around the country to thrill the populace. William Wallace was displayed in separate parts in Newcastle upon Tyne, Berwick-upon-Tweed, Stirling, and Aberdeen. I have no grief for Osama bin laden who is no William Wallace and frankly I am glad he is no longer with us. However, the use of his killing as a campaign theme is a bit off-putting.
Jarrett, however, used the church to relish the killing a bit more and noted “We all sleep a little better at night knowing Osama Bin Laden and his lieutenants are not plotting a terrorist attack against the United States.” If that is the case, by the way, is it time to declare victory in the war against terror? The position of the Administration is that the plotting continues . . . as do the president’s increasing national security powers.
Here is what the IRS says about 501(c)(3) organizations:
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.
Certain activities or expenditures may not be prohibited depending on the facts and circumstances. For example, certain voter education activities (including presenting public forums and publishing voter education guides) conducted in a non-partisan manner do not constitute prohibited political campaign activity. In addition, other activities intended to encourage people to participate in the electoral process, such as voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives, would not be prohibited political campaign activity if conducted in a non-partisan manner.
On the other hand, voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias that (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or intervention.
The Internal Revenue Service provides resources to exempt organizations and the public to help them understand the prohibition. As part of its examination program, the IRS also monitors whether organizations are complying with the prohibition.
These remarks would appear to cross the line laid out by the IRS. The timing of the registration directly after the remarks only magnifies the problem.
Of course it’s not time to declare “victory”. “The War on Terror” is an Orwellian concoction foisted on the public to inspire fear and submission as Constitutional and other civil and international rights are abrogated in the name of the 1% by both arms of the Military-Corporate Plutocracy R and D, with some exceptions, of course. See the new book
Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion by Jeffrey St. Clair et al.
ConLawCon – if you actually read this blog you would see that there was a post up about Dr. King on this blog – but that wouldn’t fit your screed would it? Like you care about Dr. Kings memory.
You might also note that Dr. King used his pulpit to preach for specific ideas, racial equality, economic justice and non-aggression. That is entirely separate from campaigning for specific politicians.
IOKIYAR
http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/01/barack-obama-not-hard-understand
Dog I would love to have the plaintiffs case if the IRS decided to punish the Ebeneezers. Let me outta here and try one more lawsuit in federal court for the First Amendment.
This is not as some suggest a violation of the separation of church and state. The First Amendment guarantees the right of the people to assemble and petition their government for the redress of grievances. What better place than in a church. Who was violating the supposed barrier? Valierie? She has a right to speak at the congregation. I have a dream that one day all gods children…..
Name droppers using OBL shows how near the end the empire really is.
“It is a close question”, hence Epistemology. When honest people come out of the rabbit hole they exclaim “who knows” and become friends with Pat of SNL.
Why are things so unbelievable for heaven sake? 😉
The I.R.S. sanction is unconstitutional Jonathon. THAT is what we should be discussing. There are several prongs of the First Amendment and the bully pulpit is afforded protection by all of them. The right to speak, the right to speak to an assemblage, the right to speak to an assemblage to petition ones government for redress of grievances, the right to exercise religion. Yeah, go yank the Ebeneezer Baptist Church not for profit status. Some guy who had a birthday on Monday used to preach there. You know, the Birthday. That got missed here on this blog while today we get treated to stories about cherries.
Jill,
the obvious answer to your comment is an emphatic no. If the other side is using any and all means to defeat you, you have to use any and all legal means to prevent that defeat. Mike Appleton said it best when he suggested that the trip wire had long ago been stomped to the ground. I am in favor of a new “wire”,but the Republicans have to honor it as well.
Did Valerie Jarrett “trip the wire”? I would say yes but for the fact that the wire was long ago stomped to the ground. I think we need new wire.
I agree JT, the talking point about how “Obama killed Osama” is getting VERY old. Good grief.
I just HATE partisan politics; full of lying, obfuscation, disingenuousness, lack of integrity, rife with ends-justifies-the-means tactics, etc., ad nauseum.
It’s all just so disheartening and aggravating.
When I was a kid back in the ’50’s the Congregational Church to which my family belonged was part of the group that voted to join with the E&R to form the United Church of Christ. I remember the minister constantly talking about the merger and stressing the political strength this would bring to the newly formed group. A huge push had begun for Civil Rights and the church wanted to carry as much political clout as it could into the battle. The minister periodically preached sermons in favor of one candidate over the other and voter registration drives were common during coffee hour after church. Everybody figured they were carrying on the work of our abolitionist ancestors who organized their efforts through their churches.
Churches have been mixing it up in politics since the 1801 … how in the hell do you think they got all those tax exemptions later on?
This is one of the reasons separation of Church and State is important.