Today, the
Commonwealth Foundation released an “analysis” of gubernatorial candidate Tom
Wolf’s state budget proposals that clearly crosses into what the IRS considers
to be electioneering. The "analysis" is no more than a political hit paid for by taxpayer funds timed for
the day of the last gubernatorial debate.
The
Commonwealth Foundation is 501c3 charity under IRS rules and it is prohibited
from electioneering. Below is an explanation from the Congressional
Research Service about how the IRS assesses whether or not an advocacy
communication such as this “analysis” intervenes in political campaigns. Let’s
count the ways – we get all 7.
Find this on
page 5 of the CRS report:
Section
501(c)(3) organizations may take positions on policy issues. Because there is
no rule that campaign activity occurs only when an organization expressly
advocates for or against candidate, the line between issue advocacy and
campaign activity can be difficult to discern.
According to
the IRS, key factors that indicate an issue advocacy communication does not
cross the line into campaign intervention include the following:
• the
communication does not identify any candidates for a given public office, whether
by name or other means, such as party affiliation or distinctive features of a
candidate’s platform;
• the
communication does not express approval or disapproval for any candidate’s positions
and/or actions;
• the
communication is not delivered close in time to an election;
• the
communication does not refer to voting or an election;
• the issue
addressed in the communication has not been raised as an issue distinguishing
the candidates;
• the
communication is part of an ongoing series by the organization on the same issue
and the series is not timed to an election; and
• the
identification of the candidate and the communication’s timing are related to a
non-electoral event (e.g., a scheduled vote on legislation by an officeholder who
is also a candidate).
