Daily Digest 12/29/10

• Organ transplant group prepares lobbying campaign [The Hill]
  
  
• One Iowa planning massive lobbying day at the start of the 2011 legislative session [The Iowa Independent]
  
  
• Campaign finance disclosure sunlight is needed
  [Huffington Post]

California’s new “Top Two” primary system to be put to use for the first time in February

The new “nonpartisan” primary election system (the result of the passage of Proposition 14 last summer) will be put to use for the first time on February 15 in the special elections for Senate Districts 17 and 28.

Previously, primary elections held in the state of California were “partisan,” meaning that voters registered under a specific political party would only be able to vote for candidates running for that party.  The winner of each party’s primary would then appear on the ballot in the general election.

However, on February 15, all candidates in Senate Districts 17 and 28, regardless of their party, will appear on the primary ballot, and all voters, regardless of their party registration, will be able to vote for any candidate.  The top two vote getters will then face off in the general election, hence the name “Top Two” primary.

Although the new primary elections are no longer “partisan” in the sense that the candidates’ and voters’ party affiliations are, in effect, irrelevant, the elections remain to be considered “partisan” under federal tax law.  Accordingly, 501(c)(3) organizations continue to be prohibited from carrying out activities that have the effect of supporting or opposing a political candidate – even in these new “open” primaries.

A possible result of this primary system is that two candidates from the same party could end up facing off in the April 19 general election, as opposed to one candidate from each of the two parties receiving the most votes.  Also, because these are special elections, the primaries present the possibility that, in the case that one candidate receives more than 50% of the votes, that candidate would win the election outright and there would be no follow-up general election.

Daily Digest 12/21/10

• At the intersection of social media and campaign finance [Lobby Comply Blog]

AFJ in the News: Nonprofit Advocacy blog post by National Alliance for Media Art + Cutlure

Advocacy as a Core Function of Nonprofit Leadership

17 DEC 2010

Blog Author:

Paula Manley

 

Paula wrote the essay "Creative Acts: The Media Artist as Organizational Leader" Leading Creatively.

Thanks to Doug Blandy for highlighting the importance of advocating for net neutrality as a leadership issue at the heart of our democracy. I was pleased to see NAMAC’s action alert about net neutrality, including the link to the campaign: http://www.savetheinternet.com/ (Everybody has signed on, right?)

In my work with many nonprofit organizations over the past 30 years, I’ve been involved in advocacy efforts and I have encouraged boards of directors and executive leaders to more fully embrace their roles as advocates. I remember coming across an early publication from BoardSource, a training resource for nonprofits, and being stunned to see that “advocacy” was not included within their “10 Responsibilities of Nonprofit Boards” publication (Perhaps that has changed by now).

Whether their missions address the arts, human services or social justice issues, public benefit nonprofit organizations exist to provide public goods—to benefit the society and address needs the market alone cannot fulfill. As nonprofit leaders and cultural citizens, our work is incomplete if we are not advocating in the public policy realm (whether it’s the city council, the state arts council, the FCC or the U.S. Congress). Unfortunately, many nonprofit leaders assume that the prohibition on partisan political activity for 501 (c)(3) organizations also means “no advocacy” or “no lobbying.” It does not. The Alliance for Justice has done a great job providing useful information on this topic (http://www.afj.org/).

At a recent NAMAC regional gathering in Philadelphia, a group of media arts leaders shared stories about how they are responding creatively to a much-changed (and changing) environment. We met at PhillyCAM, the new public access community media organization that was more than 20 years in the making. Despite significant political-economic-cable franchising challenges, MANY local groups and individuals in Philadelphia advocated over the long haul and ultimately prevailed (Celebrations ensued!). Ongoing advocacy will be needed to sustain these gains in Philadelphia. And ongoing advocacy will be an essential task for all of us to maintain an open Internet.

http://namac.org/node/25439

Weekly Wrap-Up 12/13 - 12/17/10

Check out AFJ's weekly Advocacy Digest e-newsletter for the latest news, policy updates and training opportunities.

• Click here to view our latest update.

• Click here to sign up to receive our Advocacy Digest newsletter right to your in box by joining our Nonprofit Advocacy Network!

Massachusetts org provides reminder to 501(c)(3)s that prohibited campaign intervention goes beyond 'express advocacy'

The uproar over a 501(c)(3) organization’s activities shortly before the Massachusetts gubernatorial election is a powerful indicator of the hot water a 501(c)(3) can find itself in when it its advocacy mentions an upcoming election and particular candidates for public office. 501(c)(3) public charities are permitted to conduct various nonpartisan activities during election periods, but face a clear prohibition on engaging in any activity that tends to show support or opposition to particular candidates for public office. This prohibition, as the IRS has explained in its Revenue Ruling 2007-41, goes beyond barring express advocacy for or against a candidate: “Even if a statement does not expressly tell an audience to vote for or against a specific candidate, an organization delivering the statement is at risk of violating the political campaign intervention prohibition if there is any message favoring or opposing a candidate.”

If your 501(c)(3) organization is involved in campaign activities, you must be careful to insure that none of these activities tend to indicate support or opposition to particular candidates for public office. The IRS considers “all facts and circumstances” to determine if a particular activity constitutes political campaign intervention. It has identified seven “key factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention”:

• Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office;
   
• Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval for one or more candidates’ positions and/or actions;
   
• Whether the statement is delivered close in time to an election;
   
• Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election;
   
• Whether the issue addressed in the communication has been raised as an issue distinguishing candidates for a given office;
   
• Whether the communication is part of an ongoing series of communications by the organization on the same issue that are made independent of the timing of any election; and
   
• Whether the timing of the communication and identification of the candidate are related to a non-electoral event such as a scheduled vote on specific legislation by an officeholder who also happens to be a candidate for public office.

If you have questions about whether particular activities of your organization would be considered nonpartisan, or improper campaign intervention, we encourage you to seek technical assistance from an attorney at Alliance for Justice (www.afj.org): 866-NP-LOBBY.

Daily Digest 12/17/10

• Bauerly elected to chair FEC in 2011; hints at attempt to push for more action [BNA] (subscription required)
  
  
• Greenpeace urges IRS to review wind farm opponent's ad [Boston Globe]

Daily Digest 12/16/10

• Political activity revocations reported; IRS work plan outlines 501(c)(4) focus [BNA] (subscription required)

Daily Digest 12/15/10

• Orange County can't figure out lobbyist registry, so Sacramento will step in [The O.C. Register]

Standing Up for Your Community: Influencing the Redistricting Process

The redistricting process presents an excellent opportunity for your nonprofit organization to get involved to ensure your community is not unfairly divided by district boundaries.  Your 501(c)(3) public charity can safely and legally participate in the redistricting process, although you must understand that some of your activities may count as lobbying.  In addition, you must ensure that your efforts do not cross into impermissible campaign intervention.  To understand the classification of particular redistricting-based activities, read Alliance for Justice’s new fact sheet.

Click here to learn how your organization can have a role in the redistricting process.

Weekly Wrap-Up 12/6 - 12/10

Check out AFJ's weekly Advocacy Digest e-newsletter for the latest news, policy updates and training opportunities.

• Click here to view our latest update.

• Click here to sign up to receive our Advocacy Digest newsletter right to your in box by joining our Nonprofit Advocacy Network!

Daily Digest 12/13/10

• RNC, Cao call on Supreme Court to review challenge to FEC limits on political parties [BNA] (subscription required)
  
  
• Texas nonprofits an economic force, study says [Statesman.com]
  
  
• Valuing the nonprofit sector [Huffington Post]
  
  
• California:  2010 election produced high voter turnout [Sacramento Bee]

Daily Digest 12/10/10

• Judge set to hear new arguments in RTAO case challenging disclosure [BNA] (subscription required)

Daily Digest 12/9/10

• Colorado:  What are the "Magic Words?" [Lobby Comply Blog]

Daily Digest 12/7/10

• FEC, IRS unlikely to act soon to clarify requirements for disclosure, officials say [BNA] (subscription required)
  
  
• Bloomberg seeks election law changes to increase voter turnout [New York Times]

Weekly Wrap-Up 11/29 - 12/3/10

Check out AFJ's weekly Advocacy Digest e-newsletter for the latest news, policy updates and training opportunities.

• Click here to view our latest update.

• Click here to sign up to receive our Advocacy Digest newsletter right to your in box by joining our Nonprofit Advocacy Network!

IRS announces new filing thresholds for Form 990

Today the IRS announced the new Form 990 filing thresholds for the 2010 tax year.  Most tax-exempt organizations are require to file a Form 990 with the IRS each year.  The filing thresholds for the 2010 tax year are as follows:

• Organizations with gross receipts normally less than or equal to $50,000 must file Form 990-N (but may choose to file a complete Form 990 or Form 990-EZ).  In prior years only organizations with gross receipts normally less than or equal to $25,000 could file the Form 990-N ("e-postcard").
  
  
• Organizations with gross receipts greater than $50,000 and  less than $200,000 and total assets less than $500,000 must file Form 990-EZ or a complete Form 990
  
  
• Organizations with gross receipts greater than or equal to $200,000 or total assets greater than or equal to $500,000 must file Form 990
  
  
• Private foundations must file Form 990-PF

 For more information on the Form 990, please visit the IRS website, here.

Daily Digest 12/3/10

• Nonprofits fear losing tax benefit [New York Times]
  
  
• Wisconsin Supreme Court to hear campaign finance case [Lobby Comply Blog]