Deaf Watch Newsletter
Richard Roehm
(Address Snipped)  
Deaf@Activist.com

March 21, 1998

The Honorable Loretta Sanchez
United States House of Representatives
Washington, D.C.  20510

Dear Representative Sanchez:

H.R. 3485, the Campaign Reform and Election Integrity Act,
sponsored by Rep. Bill Thomas (R-CA), will soon be considered
by the full House. Title I of the bill would significantly
restrict the ability of nonprofits to engage in public policy
matters, such as commenting on federal regulations or educating
the public about federal laws and regulations.  I strongly
oppose these restrictions and urge you to oppose any
legislation that contains such provisions.

Title I of the Thomas bill contains a provision that requires
nonprofit organizations to annually seek consent from their
members before they can use their funds for "political
activity." "Political activity" not only includes activities to
influence elections, but also activities to influence federal
legislation, federal regulations, or educating individuals
about candidates for federal office or about federal
legislation, law, or regulations.

Nonprofits would be required to send an annual notice to their
members indicating how much they expect to spend on political
activities in the forthcoming year.  Members would then "vote"
whether they want their dues or contributions to be used for
such activities. The amount of dues money represented (on a pro
rata share) by those voting in the negative would be deducted
from the overall amount designated by the nonprofit
organization for political activities.  It would be illegal --
and enforceable by the Federal Election Commission -- to exceed
the amount permitted for political activities.

Tax law already prohibits America's charities from
electioneering.  Furthermore, nonprofits are already regulated
regarding the amount of lobbying that they can do under the tax
code.  Most are required to report to the IRS annually about
lobbying expenditures -- and these reports are available to the
public.

The bill's anti-advocacy provision raises significant concerns
for the nonprofit sector.  It:

Would undermine the ability of charities across the
country to speak out on public policy matters.  Nonprofit
organizations work in partnership with government to deliver
services throughout the country.  The definition of "political
activity" in H.R. 3485 goes far beyond electioneering and would
substantially burden the ability of nonprofits to communicate
directly with federal government agencies and with Congress to
discuss public policy matters.

In fact, both Congress and government agencies seek the
input of nonprofits on policy matters.  Nonprofits play a vital
role in the development of regulatory matters ranging from
workplace to environmental protections, from consumer to health
safeguards, and from civil rights to education.  Title I of
H.R. 3485 would unnecessarily restrict nonprofit participation
in the development of good public policy.

Establishes an artificial and restrictive cap on
expenditures for "political activity."  The bill requires
nonprofits to establish an annual cap for political activity
expenditures and restricts nonprofits from exceeding the cap.
This cap is enforceable regardless of public policy matters
that develop during the year.  It may mean that nonprofits
cannot discuss policy issues unless they planned on it a year
in advance.

Creates an unfair administrative burden on nonprofits.
The definition of "political activity" in the Thomas bill is
different than the IRS definition of "lobbying."  This means
that charities will need to keep two sets of records, one for
the IRS and one for the FEC, and report to two agencies.  It
also means that both the IRS and the FEC would now be involved
in overseeing nonprofit public policy activities.

Forces nonprofits to divert resources from providing
direct services to communities.  Rather than using staff time
to educate youth on the dangers of drunk driving and the law,
groups such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving would have to
expend staff time and money keeping two sets of books for the
FEC and the IRS.  Such government intrusion and overregulation
is not only unnecessary but harmful to nonprofits and the
people they serve.

Significantly broadens the type of "political activities" 
that are now regulated by the federal government.
All nonprofits organized under 501 of the tax code are covered
by this provision.  501(c)(3) organizations are currently
prohibited from electioneering.  But this provision goes beyond
electioneering issues to cover positions taken on federal laws
and regulations and education about such matters.  The tax code
has limits on charitable lobbying, but has no limits on
participation in the regulatory process.

For all of the above reasons, I urge you to oppose any
legislation that contains restrictions such as those in Title I
of H.R. 3485.

Disability groups around me will be adversely affected by H.R. 3485.
They include the Dayle McIntosh center for the Disabled and the Orange 
County Deaf Equal Access Foundation as well as Greater Los Angeles 
Council on Deafness, Inc.  This act if passed will increase the burden
of lobbying our interests to the state, and national legislatures.  We
dont need this extra work to bring our messages to them.

The disability community is one of the largest and most underrepresented 
groups in the State as well in the nation.

Sincerely,

Richard Roehm
Deaf Watch Newsletter