Free Speech v. Tax Code - The IRS takes on the NAACP

opinionjournal.com ^ | Tuesday, December 14, 2004 | opinionjournal

[crushelits]

We're on the NAACP's side.

Kweisi Mfume recently announced his departure as NAACP President, and not a moment too soon. His tenure has been a disaster for the storied civil rights organization, driving it deeper into liberal irrelevance. But that doesn't mean it still shouldn't be defended against the current IRS probe of its tax-exempt status.

Back in October the NAACP was informed that it may have violated a law that prohibits charities, churches and other nonprofits from engaging in partisan activities. Under Mr. Mfume and chairman Julian Bond, the group has accused President Bush of being at war with black America; compared Republicans to the Taliban; and declared that the GOP's "idea of equal rights is the American flag and the Confederate swastika flying side by side." Charming stuff.

But in an address to the NAACP's 95th annual convention in July, Mr. Bond apparently crossed a far more consequential line. According to the IRS, Mr. Bond explicitly "condemned the administration policies of George W. Bush," which is a no-no if your organization is tax-exempt and wants to stay that way.

Some conservative groups, which have found themselves under similar IRS scrutiny during Democratic administrations, can barely contain their schadenfreude. But perhaps they should be less concerned with political payback than with the implications of such a powerful agency haphazardly policing speech. We recall how the Clinton Administration used the IRS to harass the Heritage Foundation, among others, and of course there were those Nixon excesses. continues....

[blanknoone]

I disagree with the WSJ on this one. The law is the law and should be enforced. I think it is absurd to think that in this day and age the NAACP is not a massively partisan political organization...in fact, an extension of the Dem Party.

We may not like the way tax law is written, but then the campaign should be to change it, not to stop enforcing it. The NAACP crossed the line. And it isn't like they are producing white papers and issue analysis...all they are doing is fiery rhetoric to whip up the base (oh yeah, and political organizing). I don't see this as nearly the 'free speech' issue that, for example, the Hertige Foundation case was.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

The IRS Takes On the NAACP

[vannrox]

THE LAW is THE LAW.

AND IT NEEDS TO BE ENFORCED.

[bowzer313]

"THE LAW is THE LAW. AND IT NEEDS TO BE ENFORCED."

...said Inspector Javert.

[Max Combined]

I agree with your well thought out analysis.

[untrained skeptic]

The NAACP went well beyond criticizing Bush policies.

They passed out Democratic literature, and actively supported democratic candidates.

If the NAACP is allowed to have tax-exempt status, so should the NRA.

If the NAACP is allowed to endorse candidates they like and directly attack those they don't, then so should Churches.

The NAACP should be held to the same rules as everyone else.

[TUX]

Socialist organizations hide the fact that they milk the unsuspecting contributor for resources directed to political action. Positions that may not agree with the contributors point of view.

Cloaked in fancy rhetoric and idealistic goals these groups are wolves in sheep clothing. Wrecking the body politic and limiting sincere discussion. Bomb throwers and rabble rouser's for power and profit.

[Wonder Warthog]

I concur completely with all your points. Free speech should be free speech, tax-exempt or not. The law should be changed, but while it exists, it should be enforced on all parties.

[RebelBanker]

Most of the time I find the WSJ's editorial page very much on target, but this time they blew it big time. They fail to differentiate restrictions on free speech (i.e. McCain-Feingold) from abuse of tax-exepmt status by a blatantly partisan political organization. The NAACP has become joined at the hip with the Democratic Party and acts as a part of that party, so it should not be allowed to remain a non-profit. That non-profit status is a taxpayer-funded subsidy that was intended for religious and charitable groups, not political groups.

[Highest Authority]

I wonder if McCain is still proud of his super flawed "Campaign Finance Reform" that hatched idiots like Soros.

[RebelBanker]

IMHO, anything that keeps McVain's mug on TV is OK with McVain. I am SO sick of the liberal spin machine (formerly known as the mainstream media) constantly giving him airtime to violate Reagan's 11th Commandment. He really should just be honest and put a "D" after his name.