At an American Bar Association teleconference, Judy Kindell, senior technical adviser to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) director of exempt organizations, commented on some important issues for charities. BNA Money and Politics ($$) reported on Kindell's comments. 501(c)(3) organizations are "prohibited from engaging in campaign activity, defined as any activity that favors or opposes candidates for public office. This can include endorsement of candidates, contributions to candidates or to political action committees, public statements for or against particular candidates, and distributing materials prepared by the organization or other organizations that favor or oppose candidates." 501(c)(4), (c)(5), and (c)(6) organizations can get involved in campaign activity as long as it is not their primary activity.

Kindell also commented on the Political Activity Compliance Initiative (PACI) that began in 2004. "IRS has only revoked the tax exemption of five organizations—one of them was not even for political activity—and has made its main goal to educate tax-exempts on the issues. Where necessary, IRS also issues letters telling them there is no change in their tax status but advising them not to engage in prohibited activities again." For more on the PACI program, see our IRS enforcement resource center.

Another important topic touched upon was lobbying and the notion that 501(c)(3) groups are not allowed to lobby, which is not true. "Eric Gorovitz, counsel with Adler & Colvin in San Francisco, focused on the lobbying rules, saying he hoped to dispel a widely held myth that lobbying is somehow inappropriate for charities. [. . .] 'Charities that work on issues where there is a community that is underserved, or where stories have been left out of policy debates, are expressly empowered to participate in those debates,' he said."

The Virginia NAACP sued Virginia Governor Tim Kaine, the Virginia Board of Elections and its executive secretary, Nancy Rodrigues, and registrars and election officials in Richmond, Norfolk and Virginia Beach on October 27 for a lack of election preparedness.

The lawsuit claims that the state is unconstitutionally failing to allocate enough voting machines, poll workers and polling places. The NAACP alleges that the problem is particularly acute in heavily minority precincts and that the state's failures can result in long lines and ultimately voter disenfranchisement.

According to the Washington Post, the suit "asks the state to move voting machines to precincts most likely to have long waiting lines; keep polls open for an extra two hours; and use paper ballots in some cases."

An Associated Press article notes that during the Virginia presidential primary, officials in some precincts "ran out of ballots during the primary, leaving voters in tears and forced to mark their preferences on sheets of paper. The makeshift ballots were later rejected."

Americans United for Separation of Church and State has asked the IRS to investigate the Roman Catholic Diocese of Paterson, N.J. and Rock Christian Fellowship in Espanola, New Mexico.

According to AU's letter to the IRS, Roman Catholic Bishop Arthur J. Serratelli has published a letter on Catholic Diocese of Paterson, N.J.'s website and newspaper attacking Barack Obama."

The letter criticizes Obama for his pro-choice stance and encourages parishioners not to vote for Obama.

AU also wants the IRS to investigate Rock Christian Fellowship in Espanola, New Mexico for posting a large display that encourages voters to support republican candidates over democratic candidates.

According to AU, the display has a picture of an aborted fetus with the names Obama, Udall (a Democratic U.S. Senate candidate) and Lugan (a Democratic U.S. House of Representatives candidate) underneath it. Next to that picture is a picture of a healthy baby with the names McCain, Pearce (a Republican U.S. Senate candidate) and East (a Republican U.S. House of Representatives candidate) underneath it.

According to AU, Michael Naranjo, the pastor of the church, told the Santa Fe New Mexican that his purpose is "educating on who stands pro-life and who is pro-death" and that "I'd rather lose my 501(c)(3) than my soul."

Catholic parishioners in the Dallas-Fort Worth area recently received a letter from their local bishops that many of the parishioners felt was advising them who to vote for in the upcoming presidential election. The letter summarized key points of Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, a document issued by the Bishops of the United States.

Many Dallas-Fort Worth Catholics told the Dallas Morning News that they were offended by the letter. "My bishop basically told me that if I vote for Barack Obama, I will go to hell," said Phillip Archer, a Dallas Catholic.

The letter says that it is "morally impermissible" to vote for a candidate who supports abortion if there is another alternative. It also identifies "intrinsic evils" that should dictate how a Catholic should vote.

According to the Dallas Morning News, the letter was read and distributed at parishes across Dallas. It is also being mailed to registered Catholics in the Fort Worth Diocese through its newspaper.

Barry Lynn, Executive Director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, told the Dallas Morning News that, "This is clearly an attempt on the part of these bishops to do an end-run around the federal tax law ban on electioneering by churches."

It would be impossible to ignore the news surrounding the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN, a grassroots community organization that advocates for low and moderate income people and has traditionally been active in registering low income voters. The group has had clear and unacceptable organizational troubles, for example, a relative of one of its leaders embezzled funds from the group. However, on the issue of voter registration, ACORN admits that some of its hired canvassers have turned in forms with fake names, but they say these represent only a tiny fraction of the new voters the group signed up.

After news that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) opened an investigation into ACORN, Representative John Conyers (D-MI) wrote a letter to FBI Director Robert Mueller and Department of Justice Attorney General Michael Mukasey concerned that such a leak about an ongoing criminal investigation is inappropriate. The letter states, "Moreover, this news is all the more troubling in light of the proven wrongdoing at the Justice Department in the United States Attorneys scandal. As you are aware, there is extensive evidence that political operatives improperly pressured United States Attorneys to investigate and prosecute spurious claims of voter fraud in close proximity to an election. When some did not, they were terminated.

In any case, undeniably some faulty voter registration forms were submitted, but does this result in voter fraud? Even if the voter registration forms are forged, these fake people or even Mickey Mouse will not show up to the polls to vote. Therefore no ballot will be cast, and it will not affect the outcome of an election. And yes, those who submit fraudulent voter registration cards should be punished.

Instead of worrying about fake and unqualified voters from going to the polls, we must ensure that every registered eligible voter can cast ballots that count. For example, the Brennan Center for Justice recently issued a report on the practice of voter purging. The report found that 700 people were removed from the voter lists in Muscogee, Georgia, supposedly because they were ineligible to vote due to criminal convictions. Some of the people removed never even received a parking ticket. Careless purging, possibly rooted in concerns about voter fraud, may lead to such aggressive practices where qualified voters are mistakenly removed from the rolls.

A New York Times editorial agrees, and urges the government do "a better job of registering people to vote. That way there would be less need to rely on private registration drives, largely being conducted by well-meaning private organizations that use low-paid workers."

A Judge recently ruled that a Michigan program that requires clerks to purge voters whose voter cards are returned as undeliverable violates federal law. The National Voter Registration Act allows voters to remain on the election roles for two cycles after the voter registration cards are returned as undeliverable.

According to an ACLU press release, the Judge ordered the state of Michigan to "immediately discontinue their practice of canceling or rejecting a voter's registration based upon the return of the voter's original voter identification card as undeliverable."

The voting purges disproportionately affected students, minorities, and low-income individuals.

According to Matthew Lund, the ACLU cooperating attorney and Pepper Hamilton LLP partner who argued the case, "Michigan voters who were removed from the voting rolls for no reason other than failure to receive their ID card in the mail will now be allowed to vote in November."

The Alliance for Justice has released a new fact sheet for 501(c)(3) organizations on how to interact with political campaigns and parties. To read Permissible Nonpartisan 501(c)(3) and Partisan Campaign Contact on Voter Engagement/Protection Efforts, click here. The fact sheet is focused on voter protection issues, and when 501(c)(3) voter-protection groups can talk with political candidates or parties.

If you are an ex-offender seeking to vote in Alabama, your voter rights may hinge on which voter list the Alabama Board of Registrars uses to determine your eligibility. Alabama officials have given the registrars conflicting lists regarding which felony convictions prevent individuals from voting.

Alabama law prohibits individuals convicted of felonies of "moral turpitude" from voting, unless their rights are restored. The problem is that the term "moral turpitude" has not been defined by Alabama statute or case law.

According to the Birmingham News, a "statewide computer system for the past 11 months has been noting convictions for more than 400 crimes that Gov. Bob Riley's administration deemed to be felonies of moral turpitude - even though officials with the Administrative Office of Courts said they were assured by Riley's office only a shorter list of 70 felonies developed by the attorney general's office were being checked."

A 2005 opinion by the Attorney General named 28 felonies, or approximately 70 crimes if degrees of each crime are counted, "that have by statute or appellate decision been defined as crimes of moral turpitude," said the Birmingham News.

Jeff Emerson, Communications Director for Gov. Riley, told the Birmingham News that, "until last month, crimes on both lists were being flagged by the computer system. Cost was a factor in not swapping the lists."

Thus, voters who were convicted of felonies that no Alabama statute or appellate decision has ever considered to be a crime of "moral turpitude" have been prevented from registering to vote.

Several groups are paying close attention to efforts to disenfranchise ex-offenders. The NAACP Legal Defense Fund filed a lawsuit to allow Reverend Kenneth Glasgow to resume registering eligible voters who are incarcerated in Alabama prisons.

To see our blog posting regarding Alabama officials' efforts to prevent groups from conducting voter registration drives inside state prisons, click here.

Across the nation, millions of people are already in the process of voting for the next President of the United States. The emerging popularity of early voting has changed the manner in which elections are conducted.

Paul Gronke, a researcher with the Early Voting Information Center in Portland, Oregon, told the Washington Post that, "early voting, by mail or in person, is becoming more common and is likely to account for one-third of all votes cast in the November elections, up from 14 percent in 2000."

Both major presidential campaigns are encouraging their supporters to vote early. Experts say that early voting does not benefit one candidate or party over another. However, candidates tend to target infrequent voters with their early voting initiatives. According to the Washington Post, "On the Democratic side, that means urban, often minority voters and students. On the Republican side, it is older voters and those in more rural areas who favor absentee ballots."

Thirty-one states allow early voting without requiring the voter to provide an excuse for doing so. Other states allow voters to vote early if they have a valid reason for doing so.