|
Advocacy Blog
Monday, July 28, 2008
Indirect Campaign Intervention or Issue Advocacy?
An article from MSNBC's online magazine, Contribute, discusses the ways that 501(c)(3) organizations, according to the report, actually engage in illicit campaign intervention.
The report argues that partly because of the Internet, the line between issue advocacy and illegal partisan electioneering becomes crossed more often and easily. "[I]t's OK to put on such events as a voter registration drive or voter forums - or a get-out-the-vote push, as long as all are nonpartisan. Clearly, some issues and causes are aligned more with one party than another - Al Gore and global warming, or George Bush and troop support in Iraq, for starters."
As they should, "501(c)(3)s are considering their potential for political advocacy. [. . .] To help Minnesota nonprofits walk the line — and skirt the ban on political activity — this group created the Minnesota Participation Project, a Web site to help the state's nonprofits define and conduct permissible, nonpartisan voter recruitment efforts." Such voter registration activities are a vital characteristic to 501(c)(3) groups.
"But woe to those nonprofits that go too far. Indeed, the difference between issue advocacy and political intervention can get pretty murky sometimes — and there's a need for clarity that has become especially urgent in this era of instant communication."
Referencing the NAACP and the All Saints Episcopal Church cases; "the IRS actions sent a stringent — albeit mixed - message to the nonprofit community."
Posted by Amanda Adams
|