In an amazing show of politics trumping common sense, the Internal Revenue Service announced last year it was investigating the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People with an eye toward revoking the storied organization's tax-exempt status due to allegedly politically partisan remarks made by Chair Julian Bond.
Now, the NAACP, the oldest and largest civil rights organization in America, is refusing to comply with the IRS audit. Given the organization's inspiring history of civil disobedience, its strategy of noncompliance is certainly understandable. Until now, the IRS has always had a proud tradition of rising above politics. Wielding the considerable power of the audit in the name of partisan gain is wrong. It impugns the dignity of the nation and endangers one of our most important charities.
The IRS began its investigation upon complaints from two unidentified members of Congress and informed the NAACP of the audit Oct. 8, 2004, a month before the presidential election. The ostensible justification was Bond's speech at the NAACP National Convention last July. In this speech, Bond criticized both major political parties, specifically targeting Bush's war, economic and educational policies. Both Democratic and Republican presidential candidates were invited to speak at the convention. Apparently, the IRS believes this constitutes a prohibited campaign intervention.
Of course, it makes sense for the IRS to have the power to audit groups that masquerade as charities while running political campaigns. Tax law rightly restricts charities from taking sides in campaigns, though, of course, they can engage in traditional advocacy and voter registration efforts. If the NAACP actually engaged in illicit politicking the IRS would be right to come after them. But they didn't do any such thing. Using the IRS-the nation's tax police-to harass them politically in the absence of wrongdoing is simply inappropriate.
This audit is clearly motivated by politics. Bond's speech was critical of the president, surely, but that's a freedom long enjoyed by Americans. Since his speech was also critical of Democrats and, more importantly, was made in July, at the organization's national convention, rather than in October on any campaign trail, it seems obvious that it was not improper political activity. Criticizing the government is practically our national pastime, not an effort to throw the NAACP's weight behind one candidate. In any event, Bond was only one of many speakers at the conference.
The IRS denies any partisan motivation behind the audit, claiming they investigate groups with a wide variety of ideologies. This denial is not persuasive, however, when seen in context. Criticism of elected officials of either or both parties is not only permitted, it is practically the raison d'??tre of advocacy organizations. That the IRS started its investigation a month before the election-long before the actual date federal tax filings were due-suggests the audit was intended to chill the NAACP's get-out-the-vote activities.
Perceiving the manifest injustice of using the IRS as a weapon against civil rights groups, the NAACP has refused to comply with the audit. In a letter to the IRS, the organization claimed Bond's comments \were consistent with the organization's long-standing practice of advocating positions in the interest of minorities in the United States without regard to election cycles."" Bond himself noted that the NAACP has ""criticized, condemned and/or praised every President since Theodore Roosevelt.""
It's worth noting that the principle of free speech means the government can't arrest those who criticize it, not that it has to give its critics tax-exempt status. The NAACP deserves to remain tax-exempt, not due to the general policy of free speech, but because it is plainly an actual charitable organization. Founded in 1909, our oldest civil rights group has been struggling for equal rights for nearly a century. No one can deny its history of triumph in the cause of justice.
It's hard to say where blacks and other minorities would be without the NAACP. Certainly their many victories, from the civil rights movement to Brown v Board of Education, the Supreme Court case which outlawed segregation in public schools, are enduring testaments to the human spirit-and to our commitment to equality. To question the NAACP's legitimacy as a charity, indeed, as the nation's preeminent civil rights organization, over one critical speech is to subjugate moral principle to political expediency. Worse, it is a stain on the honor of this great nation.
opinion@dailycardinal.com.
