Watchdog group sicced on Leslee Unruh
The Argus Leader is reporting today that a political watchdog group was sicced on Leslee Unruh for alleged lobbying activities which are said to contravene federal IRS Law for non-profits:
Regardless, it's all part of the political theatre that surrounds this issue, and isn't going to let up anytime in the near future as we approach November.
Stay tuned.
The complaint, filed by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, alleges that the National Abstinence Clearinghouse and the Alpha Center - both headed by well-known abortion opponent Leslee Unruh - failed to report lobbying activities as required under the tax code.Read it all here. So, in this court of opinion, it looks like they're not going to disclose who made the accusation, making it difficult for one to face their accusers.
The two "have a clear pattern of flagrantly flouting the laws that govern charitable organizations," said Melanie Sloan, executive director of CREW. "The IRS should immediately investigate these organizations and revoke their tax-exempt status."
CREW, a liberal-leaning group, is calling for the IRS to revoke the two Sioux Falls-based groups' tax-exempt status and impose fines and other penalties.
and..
A spokeswoman for Unruh said she was unavailable for comment Wednesday. But the Alpha Center provided a written statement in which center director Ellie Brito-Larsen denied any wrongdoing and called the allegations "false and mean-spirited."
"Those allegations have been published to serve an ideologically driven agenda, and Alpha Center has been chosen for their cross hairs precisely because Alpha Center, in its mission to protect women's rights, has supported the newly enacted laws which prohibit the exploitation of women by banning abortion," Brito-Larsen said.
The Alpha Center also violated tax law, CREW claims, by "openly endorsing" Abstinence Clearinghouse and Alpha Center board member John Stratman for a Sioux Falls School Board seat in May 2005. The Alpha Center spoke favorably of Stratman in an electronic newsletter to its supporters.
Unruh said then that the e-mail was not an endorsement of a candidate, but rather information to help voters who share similar beliefs. "You've got to be very careful with that," Unruh told the Argus Leader at the time.
"We got a tip about this one, but they're not the first organizations we've filed an IRS complaint against," said Sloan, who added that she does not know who called CREW's attention to the two South Dakota organizations.
Regardless, it's all part of the political theatre that surrounds this issue, and isn't going to let up anytime in the near future as we approach November.
Stay tuned.
Comments
Moreover, it sounds like a legitimate complaint. Nonprofits can't lobby. Obviously, these ones are lobbying, and Leslie Unruh is making a lot of money from those organizations while doing her lobbying.
Does she really expect anyone at all to believe that while collecting a fat paycheck that her lobbying activities were completely unrelated to her organizations that she mentioned in every other sentence she spoke?
Further, nonprofits can't endorse candidates, which they clearly did in the school board race.
The IRS rules apply to everyone - even the self-righteous.
So Alpha Center's mission is to protect women's rights? Bizzarro world in the newspaper today.
BS, it just can't be a "substantial" part of their activity. Amazing how the left doesn't like freedom when it comes to political speech.
Free speech has nothing to do with this issue; the issue is whether or not the NAC, the Alpha Center, and/or Leslie Unruh broke the law.
If the Abstinence Clearinghouse and/or the Alpha Center wanted Unruh to do lobbying for them, great--that just means that they were legally required to file as such, instead of saying they had no lobbyist for 2003 and 2004. If they wanted to make her lobbying a substantial portion of their budget, they needed to get 501(c)(4) status.
Free speech is fantastic, but they can't claim to be a "charity" while doing significant direct lobbying.
Besides, my headlines are either a poor attempt at humor, or a poor attempt to grab attention.
"If it bleeds, it leads"
Reegardless, thanks for reading.
If the law violates free speech, then it is unconstitutional. Read the First Amendment.
You can tell it to the IRS. Speech isn't free when you get tax exempt status based on statutory restraints. She can say what she wants, do what she want, but she subjects her organization to forfeiture (sp) of that tax exempt status.
Don't through out a first amendment argument when you have NO idea what the issue is.
ps-spell check is for overly important blowhards.
She has the right to lobby as an individual as anyone does, and no reporting required. However, if she was lobbying for 1215, which she was, and claimed to be doing it on behalf of, or as a lobbyst for Alpha Center, etc then that must be reported.
Sibby is right that a nonprofit can lobby as long as it is not a substanial part of their budget, but it must be reported. But again, was Unruh statedly lobbying for her nonprofits, or as an individual?
So, Sibby, does that mean that you feel that churches (as tax-excempt 501(c)(3) organizations) should be allowed to lobby and/or endorse candidates?
If so, then I'd be all about starting the Church of Liberalism (since Ann Coulter gave us the idea anyway), and according to you, we could do as much lobbying or candidate endorsement as we wanted, and that's all covered under the First Amendment. Since we'd be tax-exempt, one could say that your tax dollars would be funding our organization. Doesn't that just give you warm fuzzies all over?
I'm not saying that Unruh couldn't say what she wanted. I'm saying that my tax dollars shouldn't fund it. If the Abstinence Clearinghouse and the Alpha Center want to be political education groups (by lobbying for 1215, or endorsing candidates that do so), then all they had to do was file as a 501(c)(4) instead of a (c)(3). Instead, they apparently chose to misrepresent themselves as a "charitable non-profit," which made their lobbying illegal.
If they wanted to address the constitutionality of the restrictions of 501(c)(3) laws, they should have done so through the courts, not by lobbying and hoping no one noticed.
I know she was there in 2004; I felt like there was no where in the Capitol to hide from her.
If I were these folk who persist in this action against Leslee Unruh, I'd want to cease and desist.
If I were these folk who persist in this action against Leslee Unruh, I'd want to cease and desist."
Like Planned Parenthood.
All I am saying is that if someone were to take the time to do some background checking on one or two people over there it would make some similar headlines.