Unlike his religious right cohorts (Falwell, Robertson, et al), James Dobson is always careful about partisan politics. He seems all-too-aware that tax-exempt ministries, such as his Focus on the Family, cannot legally intervene in partisan campaigns. This is not to say that Dobson takes a hands-off approach to politics — he actually endorses candidates all the time — but he’s always careful not to misuse his non-profit organization.
That is, until now.
Shortly before the election, Dobson’s tax-exempt group ran a feature in its monthly magazine about the presidential election. It can hardly be described as non-partisan.
The November article, “The 2004 Election: What’s At Stake,” compares presidential candidates George W. Bush and John Kerry and their positions on abortion, stem-cell research and same-sex marriage.
“You’re pro-life, and you want to preserve the traditional definition of marriage for the next generation,” the article states. “So which of the presidential candidates comes closest to sharing your values?”
There was nothing subtle about this. The magazine item positioned Kerry as being on the wrong side of these culture-war issues and Bush as being right.
It prompted a group in Colorado to file a complaint with the IRS about this yesterday — which may raise a legal problem for Dobson that may be difficult to spin out of.
Federal tax law says tax-exempt organizations, such as Focus on the Family, cannot “intervene” in partisan campaigns. Groups or ministries that violate the law can lose their tax-exempt status.
Dobson’s group has already offered a defense, but it’s not a persuasive one.
Focus officials said the article was written under the umbrella of its lobbying arm, Focus on the Family Action. That organization operates under a different set of tax criteria, and its money can be used for lobbying.
“It makes this particular article free and clear, as per our attorneys,” said Tom Minnery, vice president of government and public policy for Focus on the Family Action.
That would be a good defense, if it were true. Focus isn’t denying that the article represented intervention in the campaign; they’re arguing that it was acceptable because the group’s lobbying arm was responsible for the endorsement. But that doesn’t make a lot of sense — the article ran in a magazine published by Focus’ tax-exempt side, not its lobbying side.
Indeed, I checked with a knowledgeable source on this today who mentioned that on page 4 of the same issue of the magazine there’s a box clearly stating that it is published by Focus and that contributions to Focus are tax deductible. If the magazine came from Focus’ lobbying arm, that wouldn’t happen.
In other words, Focus slipped. Dobson’s group apparently broke federal tax law, and its explanation doesn’t make sense.
This has the potential to become a major headache for Dobson. Ten years ago, a ministry lost its tax exemption after publishing an ad accusing Bill Clinton of being immoral. Like the Focus article, it never said “vote against” Clinton, but it didn’t have to; the message was clear. Similarly, the ministry sought tax-deductible donations despite the partisan political message, just as Focus did in the same magazine that ran the pro-Bush item. There is, in other words, a precedent in a similar situation that Dobson would find very unpleasant.
One last point: Why on earth did Dobson and Focus think this was necessary? The magazine only goes out to Focus members, who were probably already predisposed to vote for Bush anyway. In this case, their greed may not go unpunished.