[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 14 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E123-E124]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




      TIME TO CLARIFY THE ROLE OF CHURCHES IN THE POLITICAL SPHERE

                                 ______


                          HON. PHILIP M. CRANE

                              of illinois

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, January 31, 1996

  Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing legislation along with 
my colleague from New York, Charlie Rangel, which will allow churches 
to carry on a minimal degree of grassroots lobbying and campaign 
activity without jeopardizing their tax exempt status.
  The proposal can best be described in two parts, with the first part 
focusing on the grassroots lobbying activity of churches. Section 
501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code states that ``no substantial 
part of [church] activities [can] consist of carrying on propaganda or 
otherwise attempting to influence legislation.''
  While this language clearly suggests that some such activity is 
acceptable, churches have had a hard time determining just exactly what 
level will pass muster with the Internal Revenue Service. Because of 
the verbiage ``no substantial part,'' and varying court interpretations 
as to just exactly what ``substantial'' means, churches are very shy 
about engaging in any lobbying activity on issues at all because of the 
fear that they could lose their tax exempt status. In an effort to give 
churches a better idea of just exactly how much in the way of resources 
they can devote to grass roots lobbying, we have drafted a proposal 
which would give churches and the IRS a bright line test.
  Working with legislative counsel, we have crafted a proposal which 
allows churches to continue to maintain their tax exempt status as long 
as they do not make lobbying expenditures in a taxable year ``in excess 
of an amount equal to 20 percent of such organization's gross revenue 
for such year.'' This ``20 percent rule'' for lobbying activity 
parallels another provision in the Code for nonprofits (501(h)).
  The second part of the proposal addresses church involvement in 
actual campaign activity. The Code currently states that churches 
cannot engage in ``any political campaign on behalf of--or in 
opposition to--any candidate for public office.'' In other words, a 
church is prohibited from campaigning for or against a specific 
candidate.
  The current language begs some questions. Is allowing a candidate to 
come into a church to speak from the pulpit or allowing a meeting of a 
candidate's volunteers in the church basement really something we want 
to prohibit? Shouldn't a certain minimal degree of activity be 
acceptable? Without getting into a 

[[Page E124]]
lengthy debate on the subject of separation of church and state, I do 
need to make some observations on that matter at this juncture. As a 
Ph.D. in American History, I have taken great pains to study our 
Constitution and the writings of the Founding Fathers. There is no 
question in my mind that the so-called wall erected to separate church 
and state was erected to prevent the state from interfering with the 
activities of the church--not to prevent the church from being involved 
in the activities of the state. In other words, it is my view that 
church involvement in the political process is not something that would 
have been frowned upon at all by the Founding Fathers. Indeed, I would 
imagine that they might be surprised if there were no such activity.

  Frankly, plenty of churches on both the right and left currently 
allow such activity, and that fact raises the question of selective 
enforcement by the IRS. If the IRS decides to step up enforcement in 
this area, are we going to see some churches lose their tax exempt 
status simply because of a volunteer meeting in the church basement? 
Will we see a situation where, depending on the political party in 
power at the time, harassment of churches exclusively on the right or 
churches exclusively on the left? If the reality is that the IRS 
currently looks the other way when it comes to such minimal activity, 
putting a bright line test in law for such minimal activity will put 
everyone's mind at ease and would seem reasonable.
  To address these concerns and questions, the second part of this bill 
states that it is acceptable for a church to devote up to 5 percent of 
the organization's gross revenues to campaign on behalf of--or in 
opposition to--any political campaign or candidate for public office. 
This would allow for the very limited and modest activities given as 
examples above.
  Finally, I would note that the legislation contains an aggregate 
limit which states that both the grass roots lobbying activity and the 
campaign activity combined cannot exceed 20 percent of gross revenues.
  It is my hope that this proposal will generate broad bipartisan 
support, and I encourage my colleagues to join us and cosponsor this 
legislation.

                          ____________________