Mediaboss Marketing

Churches should have the right to endorse political candidates and still keep their tax-free status, say House Republicans targeting a law that prohibits such politicking from the pulpit.

Republicans repeatedly have failed to scrap the law preventing churches and other nonprofits from backing candidates, so now they are trying to starve it.

With little fanfare, a House Appropriations subcommittee added a provision that would deny money to the IRS to enforce the 63-year-old law to a bill to fund the Treasury Department, Securities and Exchange Commission and other agencies.

The subcommittee passed the bill this week.

Republicans say the law is enforced unevenly, leaving religious leaders uncertain about what they are allowed to say and do.

I believe that churches have a right of free speech and an opportunity to talk about positions and issues that are relevant to their faith, said Rep. Jim Renacci, R-Ohio.

Democrats say the measure comes too close to mixing church and state.

They say religious leaders already have First Amendment rights, just like anyone else. But if they want to get political, they dont have a constitutional right not to pay taxes.

Some also worry that the measure could upend the system of campaign financing by allowing churches to use their tax-free status to funnel money to political candidates.

Rep. Richard Neal, D-Mass., recalled a speech that former President John F. Kennedy gave to religious leaders when he was running for president.

He said the pope wouldnt tell him what to do, and the people in that audience shouldnt be telling people on Sunday morning who to vote for, Neal said. I dont think churches should be endorsing.

Many nonprofit groups want to avoid politics. In April, 4,500 nonprofit groups signed onto a letter to congressional leaders asking them to preserve the law.

The law prohibits tax-exempt charitable organizations such as churches from participating directly or indirectly in any political campaign to support or oppose a candidate. If the IRS determines that a group has violated the law, it can revoke its tax-exempt status.

The law doesnt stop religious groups from weighing in on public policy or organizing in ways that may benefit one side in a campaign.

The bill specifically forbids the IRS from spending money to enforce the law against a church, or a convention or association of churches, unless the IRS commissioner signs off on it and notifies Congress.

The bill doesnt mention other types of non-profit groups, or even synagogues or mosques, said Nick Little of the Center for Inquiry, which promotes secularism.

All they care about is the Christian groups, and in particular, it will end up as the extreme religious right Christian groups, Little said. If this goes through, this would add just another way in which unregulated dark money could be used.

Religious leaders have been weighing in on political issues for generations, whether its the debate over abortion or advocating for the poor. But periodically, the IRS has stepped in when religious leaders explicitly endorse or oppose candidates.

The law is called the Johnson Amendment after former President Lyndon Johnson, who introduced it in 1954 when he was a Democratic senator from Texas. Johnson was upset because a few nonprofit groups attacked him as a communist in a Senate campaign.

The law was signed by a Republican president Dwight Eisenhower but Republicans have been attacking it in recent years.

House Republicans have pledged to repeal the law as part of a tax overhaul. President Donald Trump signed an executive order in May discouraging the IRS from enforcing the law.

Rep. Pat Tiberi, R-Ohio, says the law has been enforced unevenly.

Some churches, including my own, have been very concerned about appearing political in any way shape or form, Tiberi said. Churches I went to that were primarily in Democrat areas, that I would go to because I had a Democrat district, the local candidates on the Sunday mornings before the election would be introduced, would speak from the pulpit about the campaign and why the congregation should vote for them.

The full Appropriations Committee will consider the measure after the July 4 congressional recess.

See the rest here:
House Republicans want churches to be able to endorse political candidates - Wisconsin Gazette

Did a 2010 law violate Latino students constitutional rights?

Edwin RiosJul. 2, 2017 6:00 AM

Protesters rally in support of Tuscon Unified School District in 2011 after Arizona state superintendent announces Mexican-American Studies program violates state law.Ross D. Franklin/AP

Seven years ago, Arizona Republicans passed a measure, HB 2281, that sought to limit ethnic studies programs in public schools.

Specifically, the bill set out to bancourses that promote the overthrow of the United States government, promote resentment toward a race or class of people, are designed primarily for pupils of a particular ethnic group, or advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals. Only one program in one school district qualified to be shut down: the Mexican American studies program in the Tucson Unified School District.

Since then, parents and students from the district have protested HB 2281. This week,attorneys on behalf of Tucson students argued in federal district court that the state violatedLatino students constitutional rightsand that the law should be tossed out.

When did the Tucson program start?

The Mexican American studiesprogramfirst started in 1998, partlyin response to a long-standing desegregationorderagainst Tucsons school district in which black and Latino parents claimed that the districts make-up promoted intentional segregation and unconstitutional discrimination on the basis of race or national origin.

Tucsons program aimed to offer a curriculum through the lens of the Mexican American experience, driven by works of Mexican American authors and other writers of color, as a way to narrow the academic gaps between Latino students and their peers.

Curtis Acosta, a former teacher at Tucson High Magnet School and one of the programs founders,testifiedearlier this week the program was meant to build confidence in students who didnt engage in a traditional curriculum.

Ethnic studies courses, which first arose at universities during the civil rights movement, have been expanding into high schools in recent years. In California, for instance, Gov. Jerry Brown signed a bill last year that called for the development of a model curriculum for ethnic studies in high schools throughout the state.

How did the Tucson program fare?

Over the next 13 years, the program expanded, enrolling about 1,300 students in courses in elementary, middle, and high schools at its height in 2010.A state-commissioned audit in 2011 recommended, among other things, maintaining and expanding the program.And participation in the courses paid off for students: A 2012 study by University of Arizona professor Nolan Cabrera found that students who participated in the programs courses performed better on state tests and graduated at higher rates.

How did it become so controversial?

The crusade against the Mexican American studies program goes back to 2006whenlabor rights activistDolores Huerta gavea speechto students at Tucson High Magnet School. She called on studentsto look at the immigration legislation arising at the time and address why Republicans hate Latinos.

The comment stuck with Thomas Horne, then the superintendent of public instruction for Arizonas Department of Education. When students werent allowed to ask questions at a meeting with Hornes deputy, some raised their fists and turned their backs in protest. In an open letter to Tucson residents following the speech, Horne criticized the Mexican American studies program for teaching students a kind of destructive ethnic chauvinism and blamed teachers for the students actions.

In 2010, the same year Arizona lawmakers passed an infamous anti-immigration law, SB 1070, a Republican-controlled legislature passed HB 2281. That October, a group of teacherssued the state, alleging that the elimination of the program violated their First Amendment rights.

On his last day as state superintendentin January 2011and right before he officiallybecame state attorney generalHorne announced that the Tucson program violated state law and ordered that the district terminate the program or else lose 10 percent of state funding.

John Huppenthal, a state senator who helped pass the law, emerged as Hornes successor. Despite an independent audit in 2011 that found no observable evidence the Mexican American studies program violated Arizona law, Huppenthal rejected the finding. After a second investigation,he statedthe program violated state law and threatened to withhold state funding from Tucsons school district for failing to end the program. In January 2012, in the wake of sanctions, the school board voted to end it and physically confiscated books from schools.

Whats at stake in this case?

The casefocuses on the intent of state officials when they implemented the law.In 2013, District Judge A. Wallace Tashima, who is hearing the case again,upheldmost of the 2010 law, arguing that the students involved failed to show that it waspassed with discriminatory intent.Two years later, a federal appeals court in San Francisco disagreed and ordered the case back to trial, concluding that there was enough evidence to determine otherwise.

In court this week, Huppenthal denied his actions in enacting the law were made with discriminatory intent. I never anticipated that the program would collapse, Huppenthal testified Wednesday. He refusedto apologize forinflammatory remarks he made anonymously on different websites before and during his time as state superintendent: Under different pseudonyms, Huppenthal lambasted the programs teachers, likening them to the Ku Klux Klan and saying the classes use the exact same technique that Hitler used in his rise to power, according to court documents.

At one point during testimony, Huppenthal described the fight over the ethnic studies program as eternal, adding that the battle between collectivism and individualism defines the human race, the Huffington Post reported. The trial will come to an end in mid-July.

Edwin Rios is a reporter at Mother Jones. Reach him at erios@motherjones.com.

Mother Jones is a nonprofit, and stories like this are made possible by readers like you. Donate or subscribe to help fund independent journalism.

Here is the original post:
Arizona Republicans Banned Mexican American Studies. The Fight Is Now Back in Court. - Mother Jones

BY: Jack Heretik July 2, 2017 12:13 pm

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) suggested on Sunday that Republicans are to blame for the federal investigation into allegations that his wife, Jane Sanders, committed fraud in obtaining bank loans to secure a land deal while she was presidentof the now defunct Burlington College.

The FBI is also probing whether Bernie Sanders used his political influence to help secure the loans.

CNN host Jake Tapper asked Sanders if he, or anyone in his Senate office, had contacted the bank involved in the deal to help approve loans.

"The answer is absolutely not," the Vermont senator responded before defending his wife's tenure at the college and blaming politicalopponents for the investigation.

"In fact, let's be clear: five years after my wife left Burlington College, and she left it in better shape than it had ever been in, five years after, guess what happened?" Sanders said. "Right in the middle of my presidential campaign, I know this will shock the viewers, the vice chairman of the Vermont Republican Party who happened to be Donald Trump's campaign manager raised this issue and initiated this investigation."

Sanders added that the person who made the claims against Sanders refuted his allegations.

"So Ithink what you're looking at is something the Republican National Committee is very excited about," Sanders said. "My wife is perhaps the most honest person Iknow. She did a great job at Burlington College. Sadly we are in a moment where parties not only attack public officials; they have to go after wives and children."

Sanders and his wife recently retained a lawyer as the investigation began to intensify.

Burlington College is now permanently closed, with someblaming the school's downfall on Jane Sanders.

The rest is here:
Sanders Suggests Republicans to Blame for FBI Investigation Into His Wife - Washington Free Beacon

With time further expiring on House Republicans long list of legislative goals, members have again asked Speaker Paul Ryan to cancel the chambers August recess.

During the 2016 elections, President Trump and Republican candidates running for the House and Senate promised the American people that with unified Republican government we could achieve many of the policy priorities that have been mere wishes for the last several years, Arizona GOP Rep. Andy Biggs wrote in his letter to Ryan, a Wisconsin Republican.

Biggs and the 11 other House Republicans who signed the letter Friday cited a long list of pressing issues on our docket including the repeal of ObamaCare, passing a tax reform plan, reign in federal spending and working toward balancing the budget.

The American people put their faith in us and are counting on us to carry out these goals, they also wrote.

Congress on Friday broke for a roughly two-week Fourth of July recess and will return to Washington for about 14 legislative working days before their month-long August break.

The letter also cited the need to pass a federal budget and appropriate federal funding by Sept. 30, when the U.S. government technically runs out of money.

And it cited the need to reauthorize the Federal Aviation Administration, the Childrens Health Insurance Program, the National Flood Insurance Program and Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

The House Freedom Caucus -- roughly 30 of the chambers most conservative members including Biggs -- was among the first to support the effort to cancel the August recess.

The group said in early June that Congress must remain in session this summer to continue working to accomplish the priorities of the American people.

White House budget Director Mick Mulvaney recently said that he supports Congress staying in session through at least part of August.

And White House Counselor Kellyanne Conway has made clear that President Trump, a businessman and real estate mogul by trade, wants faster results.

When he says drain the swamp, its not just about getting rid of all the crocodiles in the water that we dont need. Its about moving at a different pace, she recently told Fox News Fox & Friends.

The GOP-led Senate is perhaps under an even tighter deadline, after leaving for July break without passing their ObamaCare overhaul bill.

Still, getting Republican congressional leaders to cancel or shorten the August recess, practically a perennial request, is unlikely.

Capitol Hill lawmakers historically use August to travel in delegations to foreign countries.

This year, a trip to China is scheduled through the U.S. Asia Institute, and a trip to Israel is being led by the American Israel Education Foundation, according to a high-ranking congressional aide.

See the original post here:
House Republicans renew call to nix August recess, citing 'long list of pressing issues' - Fox News

WASHINGTON House Republicans had planned to finally introduce a budget Wednesday already months behind schedule but then announced they are punting to July because they cant reach agreement on spending levels overall and cuts to food stamps specifically.

A further delay on a budget bill could forfeit much of the Republican agenda. They need the spending outline in order to be able to use a parliamentary procedure called budget reconciliation, which would allow them to do tax reform with only 50 votes in the Senate. So if they cant agree on how much to cut food stamps, they wont be able to cut taxes a priority for Republican leadership.

Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas) is the chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, which reauthorizes the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program every five years as part of a farm bill that also includes agribusiness subsidies. For weeks, Conaway has been trying to prevent Rep. Diane Black (R-Tenn.), chairwoman of the House Budget Committee, from including massive SNAP cuts in her budget. Blacks committee has been floating the prospect of significant spending reductions since May.

Conaway said Friday that they had a deal, though neither he nor Black would reveal any specifics.

I will leave it to them to discuss the details of their budget when they are ready, Conaway said in a statement. What I will say is that I am very confident that the agreement we have reached will give the Agriculture Committee the flexibility it needs to craft a farm bill that works for all of our various stakeholders.

If Conaway is on board, that suggests Black has agreed to relatively modest reductions to programs under the Agriculture Committees jurisdiction. She has been seeking $200 billion in cuts overall, which would be spread across an array of unspecified programs.

A spokesman for Black said only that the chairwoman is committed to getting a budget done next month. Its the strongest possible step to achieving real deficit reduction, strengthening our military and beginning the tax reform process, Budget Committee spokesman William Allison said.

Conaway has been holding hearings for next years reauthorization since 2015 and has kept his policy plans a secret.

One reason Black would want to cut SNAP in her budget, aside from the fact that many Republicans consider cutting SNAP good policy, is that the reduced safety net spending can be used to offset the budgetary effect of other Republican priorities, such as more military spending and less taxes.

Over the years, SNAP has essentially been an ATM machine for Republicans so they can pay for increases in defense spending and tax cuts, Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) told HuffPost.

About 42 million Americans receive SNAP benefits, down from a peak of 47 million in 2013. The aid can be used only to buy food at grocery stories and markets. Experts have credited it for helping eradicate starvation in the U.S., but the program, one of the federal governments biggest safety nets, has nevertheless been a frequent target of Republican criticism. An overlooked detail is that SNAP spending has been declining and that the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office expects enrollment to fall to 32 million by 2025.

The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, laid into Conaway this week for his refusal to go along with Black and the conservative House Freedom Caucus in their quest to cut food stamps.

Chairman Conaways apparent unwillingness to cut a paltry amount of federal spending from his committee is a slap in the face to American taxpayers and jeopardizes historic tax reform, Dan Holler, the vice president of Heritage Action, the lobbying arm of the think tank, said in a statement.

In response, Conaway told reporters that he considered the people at Heritage advocates for raising the cost of food for the most vulnerable in our society for years.

The Trump administration earlier this year proposed a steep 27 percent cut to SNAP as part of an overall budget that would give states more freedom to set stringent eligibility standards. Such a policy would be similar to what House Republicans and President Bill Clinton did when they reformed Aid to Families with Dependent Children in 1996, leaving the welfare program a shell of its former self.

We believe that welfare reform should be part of any reconciliation instructions, Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, told HuffPost on Monday.

Politico reported Thursday that moderate Republicans are strongly opposed to Blacks draft budget. The moderates could potentially prevent it from passing the House.

The House approved its Obamacare repeal-and-replace bill earlier this year only after party leaders caved to demands from the Freedom Caucus to make the bill more conservative. Going the conservative route on food stamps in 2013, however, didnt work Republican leaders added a bunch of amendments on the House floor only to see their policy ideas thwarted when the House farm bill merged with the Senate version.

Ive been through the SNAP wars. Its a painful process, Rep. Frank Lucas (R-Okla.), the former chairman of the Agriculture Committee, told HuffPost. If you use [the Agriculture Committee] as a cash cow for something else, that wont generate good policy.

Matt Fuller contributed reporting.

Go here to see the original:
Food Stamps Are Holding Up The Republican Agenda - HuffPost