Connect with us

GOP Tax Reform to Include Repeal of Law Banning Churches From Endorsing Candidates

Published

on

Trump: ‘I Think Maybe That Will Be My Greatest Contribution to Christianity’

The Republican plan to reform America’s tax code includes repealing the law that prohibits churches from endorsing political candidates. Known as the Johnson Amendment, named for then-Senator Lyndon Johnson, the 63-yar old law actually applies to all  501(c)(3) tax-exempt nonprofits, including universities, charities, scientific, and educational organizations, but only the religious right has been demanding its demise.

Through a campaign of disinformation, groups like the Family Research Council claim the Johnson Amendment is “just another way for the Left to crack down on pastors’ ability to speak openly about political issues and candidates.” That’s not true: nonprofits and churches can, and do, speak openly about political issues all the time, even issues like abortion and same-sex marriage, and it’s federal law, not Democrats’ law. 

“The inclusion of the repeal in broader tax legislation could bolster its chances. A stand-alone bill would almost certainly face a filibuster in the Senate, where opponents fear the measure would effectively turn churches into super PACS,” The Washington Post reports.

Tax reform is a major Trump campaign process, and after repeal and replace of ObamaCare, Trump said it is one of his next agenda items.

While many far right churches and activist organizations want the law gone, many religious institutions and organizations on the left do not.

“A coalition of 99 organizations, including many Jewish and Baptist groups, sent a separate letter to Congress last week, urging the ban stay in place,” the Post notes.

 

During the presidential campaign, Donald Trump promised evangelical Christian pastors he would “get rid of and totally destroy” the Johnson Amendment, even though it has almost never been used to strip any church of its nonprofit status.

“I think maybe that will be my greatest contribution to Christianity — and other religions — is to allow you, when you talk religious liberty, to go and speak openly, and if you like somebody or want somebody to represent you, you should have the right to do it,” Trump said in June last year. “We’ve got to spiritize this country.”

Trump pledged to repeal the Johnson Amendment again, at February’s National Prayer Breakfast:

Why does Trump want it repealed so desperately? Simple self-interest. 

If the Johnson Amendment is repealed, the church donation plate becomes an endless source of non-traceable campaign contributions. All of a sudden, not only will pastors be able to preach in favor of their favorite presidential candidate, they’ll be able to pour millions of dollars into Super PACs and even individual candidates’ campaigns nationwide.

As it is, studies show that Americans are forced to pay between $71 and $80 billion more in taxes to cover the tax exempt status of churches and religious institutions. Why should we also have to pay for their political speech?

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘He Is Not in Charge’: Trump Mocked After Asking What’s in His Own Executive Order

Published

on

President Donald Trump has signed more than 150 executive orders, often with cameras rolling and staff looking on. The ritual rarely varies: seated at the desk in the Oval Office, the President listens as someone—typically the White House Staff Secretary—reads a brief summary of the order. On occasion, Trump interjects with a question, prompting speculation that he may not be fully familiar with the contents. He is seldom seen fully reading the orders themselves, which can span anywhere from a few pages to nearly 70.

On Friday, President Trump signed several executive orders, but according to The Daily Beast, one particularly revealing moment suggested he may not have known what he was signing—describing it as “a telling moment” that implied the president hadn’t read the order.

“Are we doing something about the regulatory in here?” Trump asked a business person attending the event.

READ MORE: ‘There Is No Tariff’: Trump Denies Policy Shift After Calling for 50% EU Tariff

“Several business leaders standing around him were quick to chime in that his order did address the regulations while Interior Secretary Doug Burgum also responded, ‘You are, sir,'” The Daily Beast also reported.

At the end, Trump asked, “Is that it?” and one of the attendees replied, “That’s all we have for you now, sir.”

Then, rather than asking if there were any questions for him about the executive orders, Trump asked if anyone had any questions for the guests in the room, whom he called “brilliant.”

READ MORE: ‘This Is Extortion’: Former Harvard President Blasts Trump’s Act of ‘Madness’

Critics blasted the President.

Fred Wellman is a graduate of West Point and the Harvard Kennedy School, an Army veteran of 22 years who served four combat tours, and a political consultant.

“He is not in charge,” Wellman alleged.

MSNBC columnist Michael A. Cohen snarked, “It’s almost as if Trump has cognitive deficiencies, which from what I hear on CNN is a major scandal.”

“’Is that it?’ while signing orders he doesn’t understand, parroting talking points he didn’t write, and pretending it’s leadership,” wrote investment banker Evaristus Odinikaeze. “Peak performative confusion.”

Watch the videos above or at this link.

READ MORE: Franklin Graham Scores Pentagon Christian Prayer Services Invitation

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

‘There Is No Tariff’: Trump Denies Policy Shift After Calling for 50% EU Tariff

Published

on

Just hours after President Donald Trump called for a 50% tariff on products from the European Union starting June 1, he told reporters “There is no tariff,” and “I’m not looking for a deal.”

“The European Union, which was formed for the primary purpose of taking advantage of the United States on TRADE, has been very difficult to deal with,” Trump wrote on Truth Social at 7:43 AM. “Their powerful Trade Barriers, Vat Taxes, ridiculous Corporate Penalties, Non-Monetary Trade Barriers, Monetary Manipulations, unfair and unjustified lawsuits against Americans Companies, and more, have led to a Trade Deficit with the U.S. of more than $250,000,000 a year, a number which is totally unacceptable.”

“Our discussions with them are going nowhere! Therefore, I am recommending a straight 50% Tariff on the European Union, starting on June 1, 2025. There is no Tariff if the product is built or manufactured in the United States. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

READ MORE: ‘This Is Extortion’: Former Harvard President Blasts Trump’s Act of ‘Madness’

While signing executive orders in the Oval Office on Friday, a reporter said to Trump, “You are deal maker, deal breaker—what are you hoping to achieve with a 50% tariff?”

“Well, I think this is—there is no tariff because what they’ll do is they’ll send their companies into the U.S. and build their plant,” the President responded. “You know, we have, I guess, over $12 trillion practically committed. You look at other presidents, haven’t had a trillion dollars for a year, two years, for three years.”

“We have numbers. Nobody’s ever seen numbers like we have. And if they build their plant here, then they have no tariff at all.”

READ MORE: ‘Cut, Rip, Gut, Kill, Cruel’: Top Republican Lashes Out Over Dems Using These Words

“Are you looking for a deal in nine days? Will you be able to do that, sir?” the reporter asked.

“I’m not looking for a deal. I mean, we’ve set the deal. It’s at 50%, but again, there is no tariff if they build their plant here.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: Franklin Graham Scores Pentagon Christian Prayer Services Invitation

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

‘This Is Extortion’: Former Harvard President Blasts Trump’s Act of ‘Madness’

Published

on

Former Harvard University President Lawrence Summers delivered sharp criticism of President Donald Trump and his administration for barring the nation’s oldest university from admitting foreign students—part of the President’s ongoing feud with several Ivy League institutions.

Harvard quickly sued the Trump administration. A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order against Trump’s efforts to revoke Harvard’s ability to admit foreign students, which comprise about one-quarter of the school’s total enrolled population.

“U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs’ order provides temporary relief to the thousands of international students who were faced with being forced to transfer under a policy that the Ivy League school called part of the administration’s broader effort to retaliate against it for refusing to ‘surrender its academic independence,'” Reuters reported.

READ MORE: White House Scrambles to Clean Up Trump’s Walmart ‘Rage Tweeting’ Amid Upcoming ‘Standoff’

Summers, who not only helmed the nearly-four-century-old Cambridge, Massachusetts, institution, but also served as U.S. Secretary of the Treasury, took to social media to blast Trump and praise the school for fighting back.

“Harvard University is doing just the right thing,” Summers wrote. “This is extortion. It’s a vendetta using all powers of the government because of a political argument with Harvard. It is violating the First Amendment. It is also violating all the laws we have regarding administrative procedures.”

“The consequences are real,” he continued, “whether it’s students who are dissidents from tyrannies who are going to be sent home and possibly be imprisoned, whether it’s labs that are fighting cancer or diabetes, that are going to lose key people, whether it’s 7,000 people, some small fraction of whom are going to go on to be Prime Ministers of countries who’ve now been turned into enemies of the United States, whether it is the way in which America [is] seen when it expels people whose dream it was to come to Harvard to study, this is madness.”

And he criticized the move as a “gift” to enemy nations.

READ MORE: ‘Shameless Liar and Insane Conspiracy Theorist’: RFK Jr. Slammed by Democratic Senator

“I cannot imagine a greater strategic gift that we could be giving to China and Russia, the enemies of freedom around the world,” Summers wrote. “If this lawsuit is allowed to stand, it is going to be incredibly damaging to Harvard. But that is the least of it. It is much more profound in how damaging this will be to the standing, the role and the position of the U.S. We used to be a beacon to the world. We’re now becoming a negative example. I imagine there must be great joy in Beijing and Moscow, seeing us implode with these kinds of policies.”

Current Harvard University President Alan Garber in a letter wrote: “For those international students and scholars affected by yesterday’s action, know that you are vital members of our community. You are our classmates and friends, our colleagues and mentors, our partners in the work of this great institution. Thanks to you, we know more and understand more, and our country and our world are more enlightened and more resilient. We will support you as we do our utmost to ensure that Harvard remains open to the world.”

Others weighed in as well.

“America cannot long remain free, nor first among nations, if it becomes the kind of place where universities are dismantled because they don’t align politically with the current head of the government,” wrote former Biden Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg.

“When Trump and [DHS Secretary Kristi] Noem say that they are cutting off visas for Harvard students because of ‘DEI’ concerns, they mean that Harvard admits non white males and has non white male faculty. DEI is just now code for white male supremacy,” declared U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT).

“The letter Noem sent to Harvard cites no law violated, no regulation broken, no policy ignored,” noted attorney and immigration expert Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, “just a threat to punish Harvard for their refusal to hand over FIVE YEARS of video of every student protest at the university, among other things. THAT is weaponization of government.”

READ MORE: ‘Cut, Rip, Gut, Kill, Cruel’: Top Republican Lashes Out Over Dems Using These Words

 

Image via Shutterstock

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.