Thomas More Law Center

Guidelines For Churches and Pastors Regarding

Initiative Petition Drives and other Political Activities

By:  Richard Thompson, Chief Counsel

I.  Introduction

Churches may become involved in initiative petition drives without losing their federal tax exempt status as long as their efforts are not a substantial part of their total activities (see definition of substantial part beginning on page 5).  Pastors acting in their individual capacities may do even more (see page 12).

Yet, a fear of adverse tax consequences, namely the loss of their federal tax exemption, has influenced many Catholic Churches and pastors to refrain from forcefully expressing and acting on their religiously-based views on the crucial moral issues facing our nation.   

The Catholic Church has consistently exhorted its faithful to infuse the temporal order with Christian values, including active participation in the political life.[1]  The purpose of this memorandum is to provide pastors general guidance on the extent to which they can become involved in initiative referenda or legislative and political activities without jeopardizing the federal tax exemption of their church. [2]

II.   Federal Tax Exempt Status of Churches

Catholic churches are exempt from paying federal income tax and donations to them are deductible on federal tax returns pursuant to Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.  The pertinent language of §501(c)(3) provides a list of organizations exempt from taxation:

            “Corporations . . . organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable . . . 

            purposes, . . . no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on             propaganda,     or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation (except as      otherwise provided in subsection (h)), and which does not participate in, or             intervene in (including the publishing or distributing or statements), any political   campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office.” 

Accordingly, §501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code grants exemptions to any institution operated exclusively for . . . religious purposes . . . no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting to influence legislation, and which does not participate in, or intervene in, any political campaign on behalf of any candidate for public office.

Although §501(c)(3) uses the phrase “operated exclusively”, an organization nevertheless satisfies the operational test if it engages primarily in activities which accomplish one or more exempt purposes.  In other words, if only an insubstantial part of a church’s activities is directed to influencing legislation, it will not lose its tax-exempt status.  World Family Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 81 T.C. 958 (1983).

III.       Churches Need Not Apply In Advance For Recognition Of Their TaxExempt

            Status

Although most organizations seeking §501(c)(3) status are required to apply to the Internal Revenue Service for an advance determination that they meet the requirements of §501(c)(3), a church may simply hold itself out as tax exempt and receive all the benefits of that status without applying for advance recognition from the IRS (IRC §508 (c)(1)(A).  Churches are automatically considered exempt and are not required to obtain IRS recognition of tax-exempt status. 

IV.              Churches May Participate In Petition Drives and Referenda as Long as These Activities Do Not Constitute a Substantial Part of Their Activities

The Internal Revenue Code makes a distinction between “attempting to influence legislation” and political campaigning or electioneering.  Churches may engage in activities attempting to influence legislation, and still retain their tax-exempt status as long as such activities are not a substantial part of their overall functions.  To put it another way, a church will retain its tax-exempt status if it meets the “substantial part” test, namely, “no substantial part” of its activities is carrying on propaganda or otherwise attempting to influence legislation.

If a substantial part of a church’s activities is involved with carrying on propaganda or otherwise attempting to influence legislation," it is considered an “action” organization that does not qualify for tax exempt status. 

A.  Meaning of “legislation”

It is important to understand the meaning of the term legislation for purposes of the Substantial Part Test.  Legislation in this context is defined to include any action by Congress, by any State legislature, by any local council or similar governing body, or by the public in a referendum, initiative, constitutional amendment, or similar procedure. The IRS considers an attempt to influence U.S. Senate confirmation of a federal judicial nominee as an attempt to influence legislation.  On the other hand, action such as promulgation of rules and regulations, by the executive branch of government or independent regulatory agencies, are not included in the meaning of legislation.

The Treasury Regulations provide that an organization will be treated as attempting to influence legislation if it:

(a)    contacts, or urges the public to contact, members of a legislative body for the purpose of proposing, supporting, or opposing legislation; or

(b)   advocates the adoption or rejection of legislation. 

B.        Church Is Not Responsible for Those Acting Independently of Church    Control

For an organization to lose its tax-exempt status because it is attempting to influence legislation, the legislative activity must be undertaken as an act of the organization itself.  

Individuals acting independently of church control may circulate initiative petitions on church property without jeopardizing the tax-exempt status of the church.

“For an organization to be denied or lose tax-exempt status because of lobbying activity, the legislative activity must be undertaken as an act of the organization itself.”[3]

For instance, the IRS recognized that the legislative activities of a student newspaper were not attributable to the sponsoring university. 

C.        “Safe Harbor Rule” Not Applicable to Churches

The obviously subjective nature of whether the activities are “substantial” led Congress to enact IRC §501(h), a "safe harbor" rule that can be elected by exempt organizations, but not churches.  The safe harbor rule sets ceiling limitations for "lobbying expenditures" and "grass roots expenditures."  If an exempt organization makes the election as provided by IRC §501(h), they will not risk loss of their exempt status merely because of the incidental activities relating to lobbying.  (The statute permits most exempt organizations other than churches to make the election.) 

If the exempt organization makes the §501(h) election and they then exceed these ceilings, they are subject to the excise tax provided by the Internal Revenue Code (see below).  If they consistently exceed it, they may have their exempt status revoked notwithstanding the election.  The election must be made before the first day of the year in which it applies by filing Form 5768.  To reiterate, churches are not permitted to make the §501(h) election.

D.        USCCB’s General Counsel on Legislative Activity by Churches

The Office of the General Counsel of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has prepared an excellent memorandum entitled “Political Activity Guidelines for Catholic Organizations” which can be obtained by visiting the U.S.C.C.B. website.  The memorandum has this to say about Church legislative activity:

"Distinguishing Between Lobbying and Political Campaign Activity. Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code curtails both lobbying and political activities by Catholic organizations. However, it is important to understand that whereas lobbying is merely limited, political campaign activity is strictly prohibited. There is no de minimis rule applicable to political campaign activity by section 501(c)(3) organizations. [See Exempt Organizations Handbook (IRM 7751) § 3(10)1(1)].”

“Lobbying includes both contacting (direct lobbying) and urging the public to contact (grassroots lobbying) members of a legislative body, whether federal, state, or local, for the purpose of proposing, supporting, or opposing legislation or advocating the adoption or rejection of legislation. [Treas. Reg. § 1.501(c)(3) 1(c)(3)(ii)].   Legislation is defined to include any action: (1) by Congress, a state or local legislative body; or (2) by the public in a referendum, initiative, constitutional amendment or similar procedure. [Treas. Reg. § 1.501(c)(3) 1(c)(3)(iii)].  The section 501(c)(3) lobbying limitation applies both to lobbying that is germane to an organization's tax-exempt purposes and to lobbying that is not. [See Rev. Rul. 67-293, 1967-2 C.B. 185].”

“Under section 501(c)(3), Catholic organizations may engage in lobbying activities only if they do not constitute a substantial part of their total activities. Neither the Code nor the regulations define what is "substantial" in this context⁵. In 1976, Congress enacted section 501(h) of the Code, which is an elective provision that established a sliding scale of permissible lobbying expenditures based on an exempt organization's total budget. However, at their own request, churches, conventions or associations of churches, and integrated auxiliaries of churches were made ineligible to elect treatment under section 501(h). [See I.R.C. §§ 501(h)(5) and 4911(f)(2)]. Thus, most Catholic organizations remain subject to the general "substantiality" test, i.e. only an insubstantial amount of their activities can be devoted to lobbying.”

“Ballot measures, including referenda, initiatives, constitutional amendments, and bond measures, which have become increasingly popular, particularly in the Western states, are considered legislative proposals. Thus, involvement by Catholic Churches in ballot measures, etc., is limited, not prohibited.  (Emphasis in the original.)  Catholic organizations may support or oppose ballot measures, etc., in furtherance of their exempt purposes, subject to the relevant lobbying limitation, without jeopardizing exempt status."

E.         Definition of “substantial part”

The question of whether church participation in a particular initiative referendum constitutes a substantial part of their activities has been left to the courts since Congress did not attempt a definition of what it meant by “substantial”.  The determination of whether a specific activity of an exempt organization is “substantial” is essentially a factual one.  The courts have suggested at least three tests for substantiality:

(a)    5 percent rule

(b)   Less than 10 percent rule

(c)            Facts and circumstances rule

In Seasongood v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 22 F.2d 907 (1955), the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals found that where 5% of the time and effort of the Seasongood Government League was devoted to political activities, such activities of the league were not substantial within the meaning of the Internal Revenue Code.

In Christian Echoes National Ministry v. United States, 470 F.2d 849 (1973), the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected sole reliance upon percentage tests to determine substantiality, and held that the political activities of a tax-exempt organization must be balanced in context of the objectives and circumstances of the organization.  In this case the court cited a catalogue of incidents and referred to hundreds of exhibits to demonstrate that the attempts to influence legislation were not incidental, but substantial and continuous.

However, in Haswell v. United States, 500 F.2d 1133 (1974), the United States Court of Claims held that to determine whether an organization’s attempts to influence legislation were substantial, the organization’s political activities must be compared with its exempted charitable and educational activities.  The court further held that although a percentage test is not determinative of substantiality, one measure of the relative significance of its various activities in relation to its objectives is the amount of money devoted to each category of operation.  The court found that 17% in 1967 and 16.6 % in 1968 were substantial and an indication of the relative importance of the organization’s total legislative activities.

Later, in World Family Corporation v. Internal Revenue Commissioner, 81 T. C. 958 (1983), the Tax Court held that an exempt organization’s non-exempt activities were insubstantial even though it expended something less than 10% on those activities.

Using either the 5% test or the facts and circumstances test, considering the great breadth of work done by the Church, both in the spiritual and secular sectors, it is doubtful that the IRS or the courts would conclude that a church’s minimal involvement in petition signature gathering once or twice every couple of years would be considered a substantial part of its activities.  In other words, a good argument can be made that such involvement in petition drives is insubstantial and thus not likely to jeopardize exempt status.

When determining substantiality, the IRS considers a variety of factors including the time devoted by both volunteer and compensated workers and the expenditures devoted by the church to the activity.

V.        Churches May Not Participate in Political Candidate Campaigns

There is an absolute ban on political campaigning or electioneering by churches if they want to keep their tax-exempt status.

Section 501(c)(3) provides that an organization may qualify for exemption only if “it does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office.”  This obviously requires (1) a "candidate," (2) "for public office," (3) "involved in a political campaign," (4) in which the exempt organization "participates" or "intervenes." 

For purposes of this analysis, a candidate is basically any person who is a contestant for federal, state or local public office.  Whether the office is a "public" one is determined through an inquiry into whether the primary purpose of the office is to perform independent policymaking functions.  If such a person is involved in attempting to be named for elective public office, they are involved in a political campaign.  Please note that this does not include appointive offices (although it may involve lobbying if legislative confirmation is required and this may require an analysis of whether the entity is involved in more than an insubstantial amount of lobbying).[4]

Whether or not the exempt organization intervenes or participates in a political campaign is subject to significant discretion on the part of the IRS, but the IRS view is that it occurs when the non-profit takes a position for or against a candidate, either expressly or implicitly through action. 

A.        Statements of Moral Positions

Many exempt organizations, including churches, have their exemption, in whole or in part, as a result of their mission.  While there is a prohibition against Section 501(c)(3) organizations engaging in certain political activities (such as endorsing a candidate), they may engage in activities associated with elections and these activities may include advocacy of controversial policy provisions.  The difficulty in reaching conclusions on these issues is drawing the dividing line between permissible activities and impermissible intervention in campaigns or attempts to influence legislation.

Definition of permitted activities:  Permissible activity includes the presentation of controversial views, the analysis of controversial issues and often the advocacy of controversial positions.  Generally, such controversial views may be presented “so long as it presents a sufficiently full and fair exposition of the pertinent facts to as to permit an individual or the public to form an independent opinion or conclusion.” 

The IRS has established a four part test to determine if a particular activity provides a full and fair exposition of the facts:

1.      Whether a significant portion of the communication consisted of viewpoints unsupported by a relevant factual basis;

2.      Whether the facts relied upon are “distorted;”

3.      Whether the organization “makes substantial use of particularly inflammatory and disparaging terms based upon strong emotional feelings rather than objective factual evaluation;"

4.      Whether or not the approach to the subject matter is aimed at developing an understanding on the part of the persons to whom the information is directed.

The courts have not directly ruled on this methodology, but have implicitly endorsed it in at least one case.

All forms of direct political participation or intervention, such as endorsing or using others to vote for a particular candidate for public office or using particular persons to seek public office, are prohibited.  It is also important to note that whether or not the exempt organization has the intent to participate in a campaign is irrelevant under the applicable law.  Indirect participation is also prohibited.

B.        The “Facts and Circumstances” Test

In application, it is obviously difficult to determine when the activity is a permissible activity or a prohibited participation in a campaign.  The IRS uses a "facts and circumstances" test in making these determinations.  The question is obviously one of degree and the activities involved.  In order to assist you in determining policy, the following examples of particular activities and the standards applied to avoid impermissible intervention in campaigns may be of some assistance.

1.         Issue advocacy during a campaign is permitted. 

Obviously, it is difficult to determine when mere "issue advocacy" (which is permitted) crosses the line into intervention in a political campaign (which is not permitted).  The IRS has stated that an exempt organization may use an election to obtain greater exposure for issues that are matters of concern to that organization and can even work to get such issues included in a party's platform.  It can publish its own issue agenda, but should refrain from rating the candidate's agreement with the organization's agenda or seeking a candidate's endorsement of the agenda.  In this instance, it is helpful if the exempt organization has established its agenda in advance of the election (since this makes it easier to demonstrate that the issue advocacy was just that rather than an attempt in intervene in a political campaign).  Nonetheless, the IRS has said that it will not prohibit exempt organizations from taking such positions merely because a campaign is ongoing.  See PLR 89-36002 (relating to Star Wars).

2.         Advocacy for or against a candidate is not permitted.

While issue advocacy is permitted, express advocacy in support of or in opposition to a candidate is prohibited (not only under the IRC but under Federal Election Commission rules as well).  Advocacy of a particular candidate or position does not need to satisfy an “express advocacy” standard, and such advocacy of a particular candidate is prohibited even if done in an indirect manner.  The determination centers in part on whether or not a label or other coded language is used as a proxy for a reference to one or more identifiable candidates.  The IRS has said that it has “the concern that an IRC 501(c)(3) organization may support or oppose a particular candidate in a political campaign without specifically naming the candidate using code words to substitute for the candidate’s name in its messages, such as ‘conservative’, ‘liberal’, ‘pro-life’, ‘anti choice’, ‘Republican’, ‘Democrat’, etc. coupled with a discussion of the candidacy or the election.”  When this occurs, it is quite evident what is happening – an intervention is taking place - and the IRS has stated that it will treat it as such.

Please note that part of the issue here is the direct endorsement or opposition.  Using the example above, while the church should not say "Don't vote for this candidate because his position is not consistent with the church's teaching on abortion."  An aggressive counter position would assert that the church can say that a position is not consistent with the church's teaching on abortion and is inconsistent with a candidate's duties as a Catholic.[5] 

3.         Churches may not make cash or in-kind contributions to candidates. 

Exempt organizations may not make any contributions, cash or in-kind, to any candidate, political action committee or party.  While the prohibition against cash contributions appears obvious, the in-kind contributions limitations prohibit the exempt organization for providing anything of value without receiving fair market value in return from the candidate.  This prohibition generally prevents churches from providing its mailing list, facilities, equipment, staff time, or other resources to a political candidate.  In political campaigns, the issue presented is often the use of the mailing list.  While the IRS has permitted exempt organizations to sell their mailing lists at full price, it must also offer it to other political contenders for the office and must report the amounts received as unrelated business income on their tax returns.

4.         Rating candidates, endorsements and criticism of incumbents. 

a.         Explicit Endorsements of candidates is not permitted

An explicit endorsement by a church is prohibited.  This prohibition is best demonstrated by the case of Jimmy Swaggart Ministries (“JSM”).  In 1986, JSM endorsed the candidacy of Pat Robertson at a regular worship service and in its official magazine.  While the IRS did not revoke JSM's 501(c)(3) status, it did assess JSM $170,000 in back taxes and interest.  The IRS has held that the statements of an official at an official function of the exempt organization will be attributed to the organization.  There is a narrow exemption for personal endorsements providing they do not in any way utilize the organization's financial resources, facilities or personnel, and they clearly and unambiguously indicate that the actions taken or statements made are those of the individuals and not those of the organization.  See Tax Guide for Churches and Religious Organizations, IRS Pub. 1828 (7-2002).

Please note that this is the express endorsement of a particular candidate.  There is no prohibition from the ministry stating its moral position.  A church could teach that suicide was always a grave evil and that no member of the church could legitimately support adoption of a law that would foster or encourage such a grave evil.  The result may be little different and there is a certain level of risk, but it would probably be pretty difficult for the IRS to take the position that the church must remain silent on moral questions.  If this is true, there is little reason for the church to exist.  Similarly, while it might not be permissible for a Church to state "Vote for the opponent of "X," it would be proper for it to teach that truly Catholic politicians could never legitimately support abortion.  A considerably riskier step, but by no means a clearly prohibited step, would be for the church to go one step further and state publicly that Candidate "X's" position on a moral issue is consistent with the church's position and Candidate "Y's" position is not.[6]

b.         Rating Systems. 

Because rating systems involve distinctions among candidates, they are generally treated as prohibited participation on behalf of or in opposition to a candidate for elective office by the IRS. 

Incumbents sit a slightly different position.  Exempt organizations that have criticized incumbents, attempted to persuade them to consider the organization's views, and tried to hold them accountable prior to an election year can continue to do so.  If, on the other hand, there is no track record of such activities, or if the frequency and intensity of such criticisms increases as the election approaches, there is a greater indication that such actions will be considered intervention in the campaign.  While an exempt organization may disclose how an incumbent voted on the issues, they probably should not devote special church publications to the incumbent’s voting record, increase circulation of its publication, or comment on how bad the incumbent’s voting record has been immediately before an election.

V.                 Rights of Pastors to Speak

As the IRS's own publications[7] note, the political campaign prohibition is not intended to restrict free expression on political matters by leaders of churches, as individuals, nor are they prohibited from speaking about important issues of public policy.  They do suggest that the church should avoid making partisan comments in official organization publications or at official church functions.

A.                 Rights of Commentary in Parish Publications

The foregoing rules also have application in the context of newspapers which have editorial content and where criticizing incumbents, endorsing candidates, and similar activities are deemed to be part and parcel of their purpose for existence.  As a general rule, even though the restrictions arguably raise First Amendment issues, any newsletters or newspapers distributed by an exempt organization must comply with the rules noted above.  Nonetheless, the IRS has indicated a willingness to allow such editorials providing the editorial board is truly independent and the publication makes it clear that the views expressed are those of the authors and not those of the exempt organization.  See Rev. Rul. 72-513 [college newspaper]. 

            B.        Get out the vote campaigns and voter registration. 

These activities may generally be conducted by church organizations providing they are done in a clearly non-partisan manner.  The focus should be on the importance of voting and should not show any bias for or against any party, position or candidate.  It can mention the critical issues in the election but should not focus the organization's positions on these issues.  For example, a voter drive intended to get out the "pro life" vote would probably be improper, but note that Proposal B, Michigan’s ballot question to legalize physician assisted suicide was a significant issue that the public needed to decide and since voting was important for the person to provide their input, such activity would probably be acceptable.  (It should be noted that the Federal Election Commission requires those who conduct such a voter registration drive to name either all candidates or no candidates, to give all party affiliations or none, and to register all persons regardless of their party preference.  See 11 C.F.R. §114.4.)

            C.        Use of Church facilities for Partisan Activities.

The use of church facilities in political campaigns for public office is not per se prohibited, but prudence dictates avoiding the practice if alternative venues are available.  If this is not feasible, then policies should be created to insure that the activities are not attributed to the church.  These include: (a) the facilities cannot be provided free of charge, (b) if the facility is ordinarily made available to only church activities, it should not be made available to political activities, and conversely, if it is, it should be provided to all candidates or parties on the same basis, and (c) the church should not advertise, promote, or provide other services in connection with the party or event taking place in its facility.  If it has never rented the facility before, it is advisable that the first rental not be to a candidate or party.[8]

VII.     Summary of Rules for Political Action[9]:

Churches may not "participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of any candidate for public office." Thus, a church may not participate in a political campaign by expenditure of its funds. However, not all political activity, which would influence a political campaign, falls under this prohibition.

A.        Political Activities

Activities which can influence the election of a political candidate are quite broad and range from contributions to a political candidate to activities such as publishing the voting record of incumbents running for re-election. Only some of these activities are considered active electioneering which cannot be done by a church.  Some of this activity can even be done by 501(c)(3) organizations; it depends on the type of activity.

Churches could lose their tax-exempt status if they engage in active electioneering. Active electioneering involves actions such as endorsement of candidates and expenditures of funds to expressly advocate the election or defeat of a candidate for political office. Active electioneering is of three types: (1) a direct contribution which is a monetary contribution given to a candidate, (2) in-kind contributions which include giving things of value to a candidate (such as a church mailing list) and paying for a communication which expressly advocates the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate made in consultation with or without the knowledge of the candidate, and (3) independent expenditures which are expenditures expressly advocating the election or defeat of a political candidate made without the knowledge of or consultation with any candidate.

Individual pastors, may participate in political campaigns, as long as they do so as individuals, and not in the name of the church.  Any individual, including a pastor, may wear different hats at different times and, therefore, be involved in political activity, as long as he is wearing the right hat.

The following is a list of activities that may be considered political activities in the broad sense and that a church or pastor, in his individual capacity and using his own funds, may wish to do.  A "yes" response means the activity is permissible, a "no" means it is not.

B.                 Explanation of Individual Items

Item 1.  Discuss the positions of candidates on public issues

Pastors and churches are free to discuss the positions of candidates on issues - including criticizing or praising them for their positions. This is called issue advocacy.

Item 2.  Endorsement of Political Candidates

The endorsement of a candidate includes any statement which uses explicit words to expressly advocate the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate, such as "elect," "support," "defeat," or "oppose." This is called express advocacy.  A church may not engage in express advocacy but a pastor, in his individual capacity, may.

Item 8.  Candidate Appearance at Church Meeting

A political candidate may appear at a church service.  The appearance of a candidate before a church service, however, is limited as follows:

(1) any other candidate for the office or any other political party who is a candidate for the office who requests to appear must be given the same opportunity, and

(2) no solicitation for funds for the candidate or endorsement of the candidate may be made by any representative of the church.

In addition, a church may allow political candidates to have a meeting or use the facilities of the church on the same basis that civic groups and other organizations are allowed to. If civic groups and other organizations are required to pay some rent for using the church property, the political candidate should be charged the same amount.

Item 9(a).  Candidate Survey

A church may publish or distribute the results of surveys of candidates on public issues. Such surveys, however, must be non-partisan. As a result, 501(c)(3) church groups should observe the following conditions in publishing or distributing the survey:

(1)    publish the response of all the candidates for the particular office by use of "yes" and "no".   Avoid use of "+" and "-" or "pro-life" and "anti-life".  The survey should not specify what is the desired response;

(2) do not include any words indicating either endorsement of or support for any of the candidates or indicate that the reader should "vote pro-life". Advocacy of one issue voting should be reserved for other issues of the church bulletin when the survey is not published; and

(3) do not publish the response to the survey under the control, direct or indirect, of any candidate.

It is preferable that candidate surveys involve a variety of issues, but this is not required.

Item 9(b). Voting Records

501(c)(3) church groups may also publish the voting records of incumbent public officeholders.  In the case of publication of voting records, the church has more leeway than in publishing candidate surveys as follows:

(1) the church, in publishing the incumbent's votes on particular issues,   may indicate the church's view and the fact that the incumbent supported or opposed the church's view.  Thus, indicators, such as "+" or "-" or "pro-life" and "anti-life" may be used, and

(2) in other respects, the publications should be non-partisan. As a result, the voting records of all incumbents in the area should be presented, candidates for re-election should not be identified, no comment should be made on an individual's overall qualifications for public office, and no statements expressly advocating the election or defeat of any incumbent as a candidate for public office should be offered.

Item 11.  Rental of Church List to Political Candidates

Lists of members of the church congregation may be rented to candidates for their use in seeking support or raising funds.  The candidate must pay the fair market value for the list, if it is rented from the church.

Item 12. Voter Education

A church may participate in non-partisan voter education.  Here, voter education involves discussion of the electoral process, such as how to run for public office, how to register, and where to vote, helping or assisting people to register, and get- out-the-vote drives.  All such activity is permissible as long as it is not directed at one party or candidate over another.

Item 13(a) & (b).  Church Bulletin or Newsletter:  Political Ads

A church bulletin or newsletter may publish an ad for a political candidate as long as the ad is purchased at the regular rate for such ads published in that bulletin.  If discounts are given regular advertisers under certain circumstances, the same discounts may be extended to the political advertiser.  In addition, the bulletin may be selective in printing ads - for instance, only ads from pro-life candidates can be accepted.  A political ad may not be sold to a candidate at less than the regular rate since this would constitute a political contribution to the candidate.

Item 13(c).  News Stories

A bulletin published by a church may publish without limitation news stories on political candidates, political campaigns, and endorsements of political candidates by political organizations.

The publication of voting records and candidate surveys in bulletins are subject to the limitations delineated in Items 9 (a) and 9 (b).

Item 13(d).  Editorials

A bulletin published by a 501(c)(3) church, however, may not publish an editorial supporting or endorsing a candidate for political office. This would be considered a church endorsement which it may not do.

C.        Pastors

Pastors, as individuals, have the same rights as all other American citizens to involve themselves in political activity.  Pastors thus have much greater latitude to involve themselves in political activities than does a church.  The following should guide a pastor regarding personal political activities which may relate to his church position:

(1) A pastor may individually and personally endorse candidates for political office, but a pastor may not endorse candidates on behalf of his church.

(2)  A pastor's personal endorsement may be made from the pulpit if it is clear that it is his personal view and not that of the church itself.

(3)  A pastor may allow his name to be used as a supporter of a candidate in the candidate's political advertisements.  In this connection, the pastor may be identified as pastor of a particular church.

(4) While a church may not establish a political action committee, pastors and other like-minded individuals may establish a political action committee, but care should be taken that the committee is separate from the church and no use is made of church assets or facilities except to the extent that church facilities are allowed to be used by other outside groups.

These are guidelines for action recommended to insure that churches and pastors conform with the law.  In applying them to specific situations, particularly state elections, you should consult your own local counsel.

If you are seeking legal advice on a particular matter, you need to contact an attorney.  If you are unable to obtain an attorney, you may call the Thomas More Law Center at 734-827-2001 and we will attempt to assist you.

The Thomas More Law Center defends the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life through litigation, education, and related activities.  The Law Center provides its services at no charge.  The IRS recognizes the Law Center as a 501(c)(3).  You may contact the Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit its website at www.thomasmore.org.