March 4, 2004 | Read Time: 2 minutes
Many nonprofit groups have expressed relief that a Federal Election Commission decision does not subject their public-policy statements to the finance limits imposed on political committees. Such groups had worried that the limits would restrict their ability to speak out on issues, such as environmental or antipoverty legislation, because such a stand could be construed as a political message against a president who was running for reelection.
But the matter is far from settled. The commission made clear that it plans to consider new regulations that could cover nonpartisan advocacy groups at a meeting this week.
Last month, the commission issued an advisory opinion stating that any political committee that issues a communication that “promotes, supports, attacks, or opposes” any federal candidate must follow campaign-finance rules, meaning that it cannot use any donation larger than $5,000 to pay for it.
The commission narrowed a proposed opinion from its legal staff after more than 300 organizations joined to fight the proposal, arguing that it would make it impossible for them to take positions on issues that are important to their members and clients (The Chronicle, February 5). It voted to amend the advisory opinion to make it clear that the rule doesn’t apply to “tax-exempt entities” other than political committees registered under Section 527 of the Internal Revenue Code.
However, several commission members left open the possibility that it may issue regulations restricting charitable organizations’ ability to publish public-policy statements that could be seen as supporting or opposing candidates for Congress or the presidency.
John Pomeranz, director of the Nonprofit Advocacy Project at the Alliance for Justice, a Washington coalition of environmental, civil- rights, and other liberal nonprofit organizations, said he worries the commission may still subject charities’ public-policy statements to the finance limits of federal campaign fund-raising law. Such a move, he says, could prevent groups that work with the poor from using foundation grants or large gifts from individual donors to pay for newspaper advertisements that, for example, urge Congress to vote against budget cuts proposed by the White House, since such ads could be classified as “opposing” the president.
