On September 28, thirty-three pastors around the nation participated in "Pulpit Freedom Sunday," an initiative by the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) designed to challenge a 1954 amendment to the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) that prohibits churches from supporting or opposing candidates for political office from the pulpit.

Churches, which are tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the IRC, can lose their tax-exempt status if they engage in prohibited electioneering. The ban against electioneering applies to all 501(c)(3) organizations.

ADF, an alliance of conservative attorneys, encouraged dozens of pastors to intentionally violate federal tax law by endorsing a political candidate from the pulpit, in hopes that the IRS will investigate the churches. ADF is hoping to challenge the IRS' ban on pulpit electioneering in federal court. Three former high level IRS officials filed an ethical complaint against ADF with the IRS.

According to an ADF Press Release, it will fight any attempt the IRS makes "to remove a church's tax-exempt status because a pastor exercised his constitutional right to engage in religious speech from the pulpit. The goal is to have the Johnson Amendment declared unconstitutional."

ADF released a list of the pastors who participated in "Pulpit Freedom Sunday" earlier today.

Rabbi Jack Moline, chairman of the Interfaith Alliance board, a group that believes religion and politics should remain separate, told the Washington Post that "a sanctuary should not be a place of political agitation on behalf of a candidate. On behalf of issues, yes. Of candidates, no."

Americans United for Separation of Church and State filed IRS complaints against six churches whose pastors endorsed candidates from the pulpit yesterday. Five of the six pastors in question openly endorsed Senator John McCain from the pulpit. The sixth pastor did not mention McCain, but he did criticize Senator Barack Obama stating, "according to my Bible and in my opinion, there is no way in the world a Christian can vote for Barack Hussein Obama. Mr. Obama is not standing up for anything that is tradition in America."

"Church leaders are supposed to tend to Americans' spiritual needs, not behave like partisan political hacks. I urge the IRS to act swiftly in these cases," said Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United, in a Press Release.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) began the "I'm a Constitution Voter" campaign, to get Americans to pledge to consider civil liberty concerns when they go to vote in November. The ACLU is asking voters to sign a petition opposing warrantless surveillance and opposing torture. The petition also states;

• "I believe that government officials, no matter how high-ranking, should be held accountable for breaking the law and violating the Constitution.
• I reject the notion that we have to tolerate violations of our most fundamental rights in the name of fighting terrorism.
• I am deeply committed to the Constitution and expect our country's leaders to share and act on that commitment—every day, without fail."

The ACLU also has a number of "activist tools" available, such as information on canvassing, how to write a letter to the editor, and how to ask questions at a candidate event.

Sign the Constitution Voter pledge here.

Alabama Prison Commissioner Richard Allen halted voter registration drives inside state prisons after receiving complaints from Alabama Republican Party officials.

According to the Associated Press, Alabama Republican Chairman Mike Hubbard told Commissioner Allen in a September 26 letter that "the party supports the idea of registering more people to vote. But he says that doesn't extend to prisoners."

Various groups began registering prisoners inside Alabama state prisons earlier this week, so that the prisoners could cast absentee ballots in the November elections.

Close to 80 prisoners filled out registration forms during the two days that organizations conducted registration drives inside Alabama state prisons.

The First Amendment Center conducts a survey every year on adults' opinions about free expression, a free press and religious liberty. A press release states; "Americans traditionally support the general concepts of free expression and religious liberty, but when asked about specific situations, many appear willing to accept a measure of government involvement or even control,' said Gene Policinski, vice president and executive director of the First Amendment Center."

A New York Times editorial praised a court's decision denying the Real Truth About Obama's (RTAO) request to block Federal Election Commission (FEC) campaign finance rules. The editorial states; "The wholesale descent into Swift Boat campaigning has been blocked - for now - by a federal judge in Virginia."

If the group were to win on appeal, it would signal open season for countless stealth groups to flood the remaining weeks of the campaign with underhanded attack ads. [. . . ] Posing as a mere 'issue advocacy' operation, the group's ad attacks Mr. Obama's character and accuses him of 'lying' about his abortion record. In truth, it trashes the candidate's nuanced position.

In response the Center for Competitive Politics (CCP) states; "the RTAO issue offers a good example as to why we should not fear the advocacy efforts of outside groups. While RTAO believes that Obama's position on abortion is wrong, many other groups and the Obama campaign itself thinks that Obama's abortion position is correct."

The question of issue advocacy, as the New York Times brings up, should be left alone because the court had to decide whether or not to grant the group protection in case the FEC were to consider the group a political committee. The issues are a bit muddled, and each of these reactions, a bit zealous.

Following complaints from civil rights groups, the Justice Department announced on September 23 that it will not station criminal prosecutors at polls on Election Day. The civil rights groups fear that the presence of criminal prosecutors may intimidate minority voters.

According to the Associated Press, "[t]he move reverses a decades-long practice that put prosecutors on the lookout for voter fraud, ballot access violations and other polling problems."

Acting Assistant Attorney General Grace Chung Becker said in a statement that "[t]his decision was made as a precaution and is not the result of any instance of intimidation or complaint regarding any specific incident."

Even though this effort was focused on voter fraud, the Justice Department is pledging to place hundreds of federal monitors at polls around the nation to ensure that voters are not disenfranchised. The federal monitors will not be prosecutors, either.

Some civil rights groups are worried about intimidation by the federal monitors, as well.

RollCall ($$) reports that Senators can now legally post YouTube videos on their Web sites. "Until now, any Senator who embedded a YouTube video or linked to a Flickr album was in violation of outdated rules that required them to keep within the senate.gov domain. Some posted such links anyway, and few were reprimanded."

"The House is still struggling with the issue. Democrats and Republicans agree that the current restrictions are unrealistic; with everyone violating the rules, true enforcement is impossible. The House servers can't keep up with the demand for online multimedia, and Members are forced to find free outside sites that can."

In a Los Angeles Times opinion piece, Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State (AU) and Erik Stanley, head of the Pulpit Initiative for the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) debate federal tax laws that prohibit clergy members from publicly endorsing political candidates.

Stanley defends ADF's Pulpit Initiative, meant "to restore the right of pastors to speak freely to their congregations. The goal is not to turn churches into political action committees. Rather, the Pulpit Initiative is designed to restore freedom to the pulpit." He goes on to assert that tax exemption is a right, and clergy are being censored. "The point is not whether pastors actually will speak on the issues of candidates and elections (and no one is forcing or telling them to speak about candidates or elections), but whether the government has the right to tell them they cannot under threat of losing their tax-exempt status."

While Lynn reminds us that the prohibition "does not say that pastors, priests, rabbis or imams cannot applaud or denounce policies of the government at any level; it doesn't prohibit clergy specifically arguing that parishioners should support a named and numbered piece of legislation or an upcoming ballot initiative. It just says no help for candidates on the campaign trail with the resources or imprimatur of your church."

See below for an update on the Pulpit Initiative.

A New York Times editorial puts the situation bluntly; "there is no excuse - except a desire to slow the public's right to know - for their ongoing efforts to block electronic filing of their reports on campaign donations."

The editorial is referencing the stalled Senate bill S.223 to require senators to file their contribution reports electronically. OMB Watch has supported this measure for a long time. Presidential candidates and candidates running for the House of Representatives file their campaign contributions in electronic form, allowing citizens quick access to such information. However, the in the Senate, filers do not have to file electronically. This delays disclosure by weeks and possibly till after the election.

As the New York Times observes; "the Senate is still cynically mired in the dark age of paper filings. Candidates submit required reports on political money and donors via paper sheaves that wend through slow-mo typing, re-typing and mailing, ensuring that full disclosure only occurs sometime after Election Day."

In August Pass223.com was launched to find out which senators are willing to officially support the bill. Visit Pass223.com and call your senators!

According to electionline.org the Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Act (S. 453) is stalled in the Senate. The Department of Justice (DOJ) said they are working with the Senate on the bill and encouraged advocates to get in touch when they identify cases of deceptive practices and voter intimidation. "Sen. Benjamin Cardin, D-Md., said he agreed with the need to combat deceptive practices but expressed his disappointment that the deceptive practices bill has languished in the Senate since October 2007."

Sabin said that preventing deceptive practices and voter suppression is a DOJ priority and said the deceptive practices bill would make it explicit that such acts are illegal, though he warned that policing political rhetoric may conflict with the First Amendment. Cardin said deceptive practices aren't covered by the First Amendment and reiterated his support for the bill.