[EL] non-profit political activity and the IRS

[Benjamin Barr]

But what if your premise is wrong, David?  What if scores of bureaucrats
really don't understand this, or only do in a superficial way?  What if the
triggers and regulatory thresholds are so vague that bureaucrats of
ordinary bureaucratic intelligence are free to apply them in a haphazard or
discriminatory manner?  Your five page handout is helpful, but I doubt
citizens and bureaucrats could rely on it alone to decipher exactly what
the law, regulations, and advisory opinions command or prohibit.  It also
presumes incorporated and sophisticated knowledge, that bureaucrats or
grassroots might have working knowledge of "express advocacy," its
"functional equivalent," and so on.  That alone takes years to master along
with hefty therapy bills.  It's sometimes tough for clients to understand
even the difference between direct lobbying and grassroots lobbying.
 Asking for more, as the FEC, IRS, and state boards do, makes engaging our
electorate and participating in the democratic process a professional
sport.

As IJ's reports and my on-the-ground experience with the FEC and state
election boards have shown, the ability of average citizens to comply with
detailed campaign finance laws and non-profit regs is unlikely. Suppose
further that average bureaucrats also have a hard time with this complexity
and vagueness. Are citizens then left with the promise of noblesse oblige
to save the day?  Or is something more fundamental at issue here?

Perhaps it is time for the notion of government offering or withholding
benefits based on unknowable, contradictory criteria linked to the exercise
of First Amendment freedoms to be excised from our history books.

Forward,

First Amendment Ben

Sent by my Android device. Please excuse any typographical errors.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130515/29d935fe/attachment.html>