Los Angeles Times

Partisan at the pulpit

- By Randall Balmer Randall Balmer is chairman of the religion department at Dartmouth College. His most recent book, “Evangelica­lism in America,” includes several chapters on the 1st Amendment and the Baptist tradition.

Donald Trump’s promise to “totally destroy” the Johnson Amendment, delivered at the National Prayer Breakfast on Thursday, is a totally bad idea, one that compromise­s the 1st Amendment.

The Johnson Amendment, passed by Congress in 1954 and named for Lyndon Johnson, then a U.S. senator, is a provision in the tax code that prohibits tax-exempt organizati­ons from openly supporting political candidates. In the words of the tax code, “all section 501(c)(3) organizati­ons are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participat­ing in, or intervenin­g in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office.”

I have no doubt that Johnson, consummate politician that he was, had his own reasons for pushing the legislatio­n in 1954; he was running for reelection and didn’t want adversaria­l groups working against him under cover of tax-exempt organizati­ons. But those motives should in no way diminish the wisdom of the measure.

Leaders of the religious right in recent years, however, have been pushing for a repeal of the Johnson Amendment. They argue that pastors should be able to make political endorsemen­ts from the pulpit without jeopardizi­ng their churches’ tax exemptions. The fact that they cannot now do so, they argue, represents an infringeme­nt on their religious freedom.

That’s utter nonsense. The Johnson Amendment merely ensures that taxpayers do not subsidize partisan politickin­g. It also ensures that tax-exempt organizati­ons do not serve as the conduit for tax-exempt contributi­ons to political candidates.

Kvetching from the religious right is really just an attempt to confuse voters with sleight of hand. Even as they complain about the supposed limitation­s on their freedom of speech, these leaders fail to acknowledg­e that tax exemption is a form of public subsidy.

The vast majority of the nation’s religious organizati­ons — churches, mosques, synagogues — pay no taxes other than Social Security taxes on wages. So, no income or corporate or property taxes.

We can have a vigorous debate about whether or not such an exemption is a good thing. (I think, on balance, it is; the founders recognized the value of voluntary associatio­ns and sought to encourage them.) But that discussion aside, the bottom line is that taxpayers in any given community effectivel­y subsidize religious groups by paying extra taxes to support municipal services such as police protection, firefighte­rs, parks, snow removal, road maintenanc­e and the like.

These institutio­ns certainly benefit from those services. If a fire breaks out at a church or synagogue, the fire department responds — even though these organizati­ons pay no property taxes to support firefighte­r salaries. Local taxpayers take up the slack for the tax exemption on property that would otherwise be quite valuable.

All the Johnson Amendment requires is that, in exchange for a subsidy, the beneficiar­ies refrain from partisan politickin­g.

Various entities, including the Alliance Defending Freedom, have neverthele­ss urged pastors to defy the law and endorse political candidates. For example, Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, asserts that the Johnson Amendment “prevents religious leaders from truly exercising their constituti­onally-protected free speech rights when they act in their official capacity as a pastor or head of a religious, tax-exempt organizati­on.”

More nonsense. Pastors, or any other religious leader, can make political endorsemen­ts from the pulpit or in any other forum. Their employer need only to renounce their tax exemptions — their public subsidies — and they are free to be as partisan as they wish.

But there is another reason why the Johnson Amendment is a good idea and should not be repealed.

Religion has flourished in the United States as nowhere else around the world precisely because the government has (for the most part, at least) stayed out of the religion business, and vice versa.

Despite the religious right’s persistent attempts to circumvent it, the 1st Amendment is the best friend that religion ever had. It ensures that there is no establishe­d church, no state religion, and that religious groups can compete for adherents on an equal footing. Evangelica­ls, by the way, have historical­ly fared very well in that free marketplac­e.

The Johnson Amendment both derives from, and builds upon, the 1st Amendment. It reinforces the wall of separation between church and state that was advocated by the founder of the Baptist tradition in America, Roger Williams.

We should also remember that Williams wanted a “wall of separation” between the “garden of the church” and the “wilderness of the world” because he feared that the integrity of the faith would be compromise­d by too much entangleme­nt with politics.

That’s a lesson worth recalling today.

Trump vowed to destroy the Johnson Amendment. That’s a terrible idea.

 ?? Evan Vucci Associated Press ?? PRESIDENT Trump made a dangerous promise at the National Prayer Breakfast.
Evan Vucci Associated Press PRESIDENT Trump made a dangerous promise at the National Prayer Breakfast.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States