You must be registered to comment and vote on comments.
This is one of the more obvious lawsuits in recent memory. Every other group engaging in political activity has to follow the rules.
OK for tax-exempt to advocate for issues & positions, not OK to advocate for or against particular candidates. As in 'vote for pro-life candidates versus vote for Joe'. That said they have a point. Why should any tax-exempt outfit be able to work for election of a person as opposed to an issue.
If Billy Graham wants to campaign for Mitt Romney, he is welcome to do so, but he should expect to pay taxes, just like everybody else. If the Catholic Church wants to distribute voting guides, or if the bishops want tell their parishioners how to vote, they should be taxed -just like any other organization that endorses candidates or which engages in political campaigns.
swmnguy, the reason the IRS is not pursuing these cases against the church is because their legal department has determined that they will lose and I am afraid that I agree. That's going to open a bigger Pandora's Box. However, in my opinion I wish that Congress would remove their tax exempt status for another reason. I'm tired of pay their bills even though I don't attend their church. The fact that Mittens can donate $10,000,000 to the Mormons and reduce his taxes by 35% means that you and I must make up that $3,500,000 to pay for bullets, roads, and other federal expenses.
Your comment is being reviewed for inclusion on the site.
Comments will be reviewed before being published.
Poll: Will Leslie Frazier be coaching the Vikings in 2014?
425 Portland Av. S.
Minneapolis, MN 55488
© 2013 StarTribune. All rights reserved.
StarTribune.com is powered by Limelight Networks