John Perry

Comm 1270, TT
IRS Code 501c3 Should be Amended

Since the establishment of this great country, the United States has always been

concerned with the freedoms of its citizens. During the development there was focus to

preserve and maintain the freedoms that were thought to be basic human rights. One of these

viewed rights was the freedom of religion. This is the ability to worship how one chooses, as

long as it does not infringe on the rights of others. This value is established in the very first

amendment to the constitution and states “Congress shall make no law respecting an

establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”. (U.S. Const. Amend. I) This

specific section of the bill of rights has become known as the Establishment Clause and it is this

section that first implements the idea of separation between church and state. This separation

is so important because it helps preserve the idea of religious freedom. If either one is guiding,

pushing, or even puppeteering the other, then it would mean the eventual demise of this

essential freedom.

As time has passed, both the country and organized religions have grown. In response to

this growth laws, codes, and legislation have been erected and amended to adapt to an ever-

changing world to help maintain the separation of the two. However, current laws only seem to

regulate laws that would be directly correlated to the advancement or hinderance of any

certain religion. The current process to tell if a proposed law has too much involvement with a

religion is known as the Lemon Test. This test is broken down into three questions that are as

follows “First, the statute must have a secular legislative purpose; second, its principal or
primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion; finally, the statute must

not foster an excessive government entanglement with religion.” (Mount, 2010) It is this

screening that is intended to stop bias laws from being established.

To help maintain this separation, the United States government established that certain

nonprofit organizations, religions included, would be tax exempt. This would prevent

governments from squandering organizations through excess taxes or enabling others through

tax breaks. This is found in the IRS Code 501(C) section 3, known also as 501c3.

With this tax-exempt status there are a few limitations that organizations have to abide

by in order to maintain this status. Some of these limitations are in regard to political

involvement. “…lobbying, propaganda or other legislative activity must be kept relatively

insubstantial. Intervention in political campaigns or the endorsement/anti-endorsement of

candidates for public office is strictly prohibited.” (What is a 501(c)(3)?, 2019) It is this vague

definition that has stated to create a problem.

Some organizations have stated to push the boundaries of the separation of

government and religion. As religions are not allowed to tell you who to vote for, they are

allowed, however, to tell you how to vote. This has become more and more frequent in recent

year. This becomes problematic in areas where sect members have become the majority of the

voting population. By telling sect members specifically how to vote they circumvent current

tests and are able to push laws that indirectly help further their establishments or even

indirectly hinder other organizations.

 The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (LDS) is a good example of how

organizations are able to push the boundaries through directing members and persuading

voting. The LDS church is not opposed to telling its members how to vote. The state of Utah has

by far the highest concentration of LDS members; with some estimates reporting around 67.7%

of Utah’s population. (Omondi, 2019) When unified and encouraged to vote in a specific manor

this can become an unstoppable force that easily drowns out any minority groups.

During 2018 Utah was scheduled to vote on a proposition that would make Medical

Marijuana more accessible to those who could benefit from it. It had become known as

Proposition 2, or Prop 2 for short. From the beginning the LDS church was opposed to the

proposition. A few months after the proposal of prop 2, one reason for this opposition became

apparent when some of the churches financial records got leaked. The church had a little more

than 32 billion dollars invested in 13 pharmaceutical companies in which Medical Marijuana

would be a direct competitor. (Staff, 2018)

Shortly before it was to be voted on the church sent out a mass email to all voting age

church members living in Utah. In the email it expressed concern and asked voters to vote

against the proposition. Stating in bold “… we urge voters of Utah to vote NO on Proposition 2.”

(Winslow, 2018) This leaves the question as to if it was done out of concern for Utah citizens or

for protection of assets.

Despite intentions, when voted on the public went in favor of the proposition. Only days

after the vote, Marty Stephens, the church’s director of community and government relations,

released a public statement saying “Our expectation is that prompt legislative action will
address the shortfalls of the initiative which have been acknowledged by advocates of

Proposition 2. The legislative alternative is better public policy and has broad support among

Utahns.” (Rogers, 2018) Shortly thereafter a compromise bill was enacted. Jim Dabakis, Utah

senator, stated this about the compromise bill being drafted, "[The] ‘compromise’ plan will

make it much harder, if not impossible, for patients to get the help they need." (Staff, Utah

Medical Cannabis Act signed into law by Gov. Gary Herbert, 2018)

This was not the first time the LDS Church has asked member to vote a certain way. In

2008, Proposition 8 was to be voted on in California. Its intent was to make gay marriage illegal

in California. Prior to this, a proposition passed that made it illegal, but then was overturned by

the California Supreme Court as being unconstitutional. The proposition in question would

reinstate a revised version of the law. The church pushed this proposition and church members

in the state were read a statement asking for support to get the proposition passed. Through

their efforts the proposition was passed but eventually overturned again by the California

Supreme Court stating that it was unconstitutional.

There is another problem that Utah in particular faces with the LDS church being able to

directly ask members to vote a certain way. In Utah, roughly 90% of State Legislature self-

identify as members of the religion. (Mormons Account for Nearly 90 Percent of State

Legislature, 2019) This percentage further minoritizes the political power of non-members of

the church in Utah. If the church is directly contacting members and saying ‘your religion wants

you to vote a certain way,’ then they are also contacting these Utah legislatures and depicting

the same message. This means 90% of Utah legislature has a religion saying they hold a certain
stance that good religious followers should hold as well. This could be seen as a conflict of

interest as these legislatures are then forced to choose between their religion and the people.

Organizations telling members to vote a certain way has become an issue and that issue

will only continue to get worse if left uncorrected. However, prohibiting them from speaking on

issues could be seen as a restriction of freedoms. A solution that satisfies both of these fields is

to amend IRS Code 501c3 to also restrict advising members how to vote. This means that

organizations would still be able to direct and ask members to vote for concerning issues if

inclined. However, if done, they would be taxed as a political organization and lose their tax-

exempt status. This could reduce political involvement from religious organizations and help

maintain a separation of church and state.

References
Mormons Account for Nearly 90 Percent of State Legislature. (2019, January 27). Retrieved from
usnews.com: https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/utah/articles/2019-01-27/mormons-
account-for-nearly-9-of-10-utah-state-legislators

Mount, S. (2010, January 24). The Lemon Test. Retrieved from Usconstitution.net:
https://www.usconstitution.net/lemon.html

Omondi, Sharon. (2019, March 21). Mormon Population By State. Retrieved from
https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/mormon-population-by-state.html

Rogers, B. (2018, November 7). Utahns approve medical marijuana as LDS Church, a Prop 2 foe,
reaffirms backing for legislative approach. Retrieved from sltrib.com:
https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/2018/11/07/medical-marijuana-leaps/

Staff, G. D. (2018, May 30). MormonLeaks: LDS Church has $32B in stock market. Retrieved from
Gephardtdaily.com: https://gephardtdaily.com/top-stories/mormonleaks-lds-church-has-32b-in-
stock-market/

Staff, G. D. (2018, December 3). Utah Medical Cannabis Act signed into law by Gov. Gary Herbert.
Retrieved from Gephardtdaily.com: https://gephardtdaily.com/breaking/utah-medical-cannabis-
act-signed-into-law-by-gov-gary-herbert/

U.S. Const. Amend. I.

What is a 501(c)(3)? (2019, december 9). Retrieved from Foundation Group:

https://www.501c3.org/what-is-a-501c3/

Winslow, B. (2018, August 23). LDS Church sends email to Utah members urging no vote on medical
marijuana ballot initiative. Retrieved from Fox13now.com:
https://fox13now.com/2018/08/23/lds-church-sends-email-to-utah-members-urging-no-vote-
on-medical-marijuana-ballot-initiative/