Posted on 10/31/2004 7:00:32 PM PST by crushelits
The IRS sent a letter Oct. 8, less than a month before Tuesday's election, to the National Assn. for the Advancement of Colored People informing it of the investigation. The group has until Nov. 5 to respond.
"I think what's at issue is our right to criticize the president of the United States," Bond said Thursday. "The IRS is saying that because I criticized the president's education policies, his economic policies and his war policies that somehow I placed the tax exemption for the NAACP at risk."
Bond, 64, a college professor at the University of Virginia and American University, said the timing of the inquiry raised questions about the administration's motives.
President Bush (news - web sites)'s relationship with the NAACP, the nation's oldest and largest civil rights organization, has been contentious. He appeared before the group as a candidate for president in 2000, but has rejected all invitations since.
Asked about the IRS investigation, the Bush campaign referred all questions to the agency, which issued a statement from IRS Commissioner Mark W. Everson. Without mentioning the NAACP investigation by name, Everson denied that the agency was politically motivated.
"Law enforcement decisions at the IRS are made without regard to political considerations," Everson said.
At issue is a speech Bond delivered July 11 at the NAACP's 95th annual convention in Philadelphia.
The speech touched on Bond's personal history, the history of racial discrimination in America and the Bush administration.
"The NAACP has always been nonpartisan, but that doesn't mean we're noncritical. For as long as we've existed, whether Democrats or Republicans have occupied the White House, we've spoken truth to power," Bond said in the keynote address.
He then went on criticize the administration's positions on affirmative action, the war in Iraq (news - web sites), civil rights and the economy. "They write a new constitution for Iraq and ignore the Constitution here at home," he said.
"If a president lies about having an affair, they say, 'Impeach him!' If a president lies about going to war, they say, 'Reelect him!' " Bond continued.
He spoke about the 2000 election, as he had in previous addresses to the group.
"We must guarantee the irregularities, suppression, nullification and outright theft of black votes that happened on election day 2000 never, ever happen again," he said.
Bond, a former Georgia state lawmaker, also called on the group's members to vote this year. "You cannot win this race by ignoring race," he said. "We know that if whites and nonwhites vote in the same percentages as they did in 2000, Bush will be re-defeated by 3 million votes."
The NAACP could lose its tax-exempt status or face a fine if the IRS decides it engaged in political activity.
Under the law, nonprofit groups cannot endorse candidates, contribute money or raise funds for them or "distribute statements for or against a particular candidate."
Even encouraging people to vote for a particular candidate "on the basis of nonpartisan criteria" violates tax laws. The federal tax code also says that organization leaders cannot make "partisan comments" at official events.
But Bond said he was careful in his speech not to explicitly tell NAACP members whom to vote for. "We understand what the tax laws are. We understand what nonpartisan means. We never thought it meant don't be critical."
He accused the Bush administration of using the IRS as "a political arm of the Bush campaign."
Everson, the IRS chief, said, "The IRS follows strict procedures involving the selection of tax-exempt organizations for audit and resolution of any complaints about such groups.
Career civil servants, not political appointees, make these decisions in a fair, impartial manner.
"Any suggestion that the IRS has tilted its audit activities for political purposes is repugnant and groundless," he said.
Bond said he spent several days writing the 45-minute NAACP speech, which he delivered on the opening night of the convention.
It was the sixth address he has given to the national convention since he became chairman in 1998.
He compared the chairman's annual keynote speech to a State of the Union address, except it was more about the state of racial affairs.
The group distributed copies of the speech at the convention and posted it on its website, where it remained until the organization received notice of the IRS inquiry.
what kind of crap headline is that ?
The title is WRONG!
The IRS is not investigating the NAACP because it criticized President Bush; the IRS is investigating the NAACP because its officers are alleged to have violated the NAACP's tax-exempt status by engaging in partisan politics.
The NAACP should have lost its tax-exempt status a looooooong time ago. Republicans ought to stage a sit-in at NAACP headquarters. The NAACP is a mafia that shakes down businesses by threatening to sue them for "discrimination." At least one member of the NAACP has been implicated in a crack-for-votes scandal.
That is exactly what you get from a LIBERAL EDITOR AT THE LOS ANGELES SLIMES. Dumping on Bush for something the corrupt and ractist NAACP did.....typical liberal trashy people.
Too long and hard to remember, but more accurate.
CORRECTION: Bond, 64, a peripheral race-baiting hustler from the 60's ...
This is how liberals operate. The rules don't apply to them. They know full well that if they wish to remain a non-profit tax exempt entity, then they must be apolitical. They have gotten away with this crap for years. They are hypocrites, who wish to keep racial tensions at the maximum in order to secure their high paying cushy irrelevant jobs. None of them could cut it in the real world.
WHEN ARE THEY GOING TO INVESTIGATE REV. JACKSON
Why don't the Libs at the times drop a frontpage headline Monday morning like this:
WE DISPISE BUSH AND THE GOP....GIVE US BACK OUR POWER, WAH-HAH-HAH!!!
No coded language, no subtle bias, just outright animosity.
Writers do not often choose headlines. There are frequently headline editors. I don't know if Getter chose the default headline which yahoo (with no space restrictions for headlines) ran with or if there was an editor at yahoo. Certainly an LAT editor would have chosen a headline for the paper.
An agency will not lose its tax-exempt status for criticizing the President. The NAACP officers could criticize President Bush for his stand on education vouchers or no child left behind. Or they can just say they think he is a jerk. Both of those type of statements are protected. What they cannot do is endorse a political candidate -- which Bond and Enfume seem to have clearly done. And that action should result in the NAACP having (1) to pay income taxes on all of its income and (2) everyone and every corporation who donated to them losing their federal income-tax deductions (and for those states who allow state charitable tax deductions based upon the federal deduction those as well).
This is actually an action which should have been taken against the NAACP in the late 1970s.
What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
The Christian Coalition lost its tax-free status for simply mailing out tables of how various senators and congressmen voted on key issues. They didn't tell people how to vote on this information.
Same thing with politicians campaigning in black churches. The same rules must apply to black churches as to Catholic churches or any other churches.
It's time to tackle this head-on. There's nothing racist about demanding that everyone should be treated the same.
Not knowing why IRS is after NAACP ? after seeing this story posted at FR multiple times from different sources during the last three days ?
see post #3 for a BINGO !
Getter ripped the headline from NAACP talking point.
No, we don't. Tell us what your theory is. Don't make the assumption that I think the same as you. Have the stones to say exactly what you think.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.