|
|
|
Public Policy
Independent Sector Policy Update
January 24, 2006
Congress Returns to Full Agenda
Lawmakers face a full agenda when the Senate returns this week and the House next week. The Senate will first take up debate on Samuel Alito's nomination to the Supreme Court. The House must elect a new Majority Leader since Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX) stepped down from his leadership post. The House will also vote again on a spending reconciliation bill that the Senate modified in late December (more below) and House and Senate conferees will begin ironing out the differences in their respective tax reconciliation bills. The Senate version (S. 2020) contains a number of charitable incentives and reforms that IS supports (described below). Overlaying this busy agenda is a growing concern about the widening Abramoff investigations has prompted lobbying reform proposals from both parties. It is expected that this issue will also occupy the Members’ attention while they attempt to return to normal business.
Charitable Incentives and Reforms on Congress’ To Do List
House and Senate conferees will be chosen and begin meeting to work out differences in tax reconciliation legislation soon after Congress returns next week. The Senate bill (S. 2020) includes an important package of charitable giving incentives and reforms, many of which mirror recommendations of the Panel on the Nonprofit Sector. IS is working with the Senate Finance Committee and potential conferees to resolve our sector's concerns with those components of the bill that are not in line with the Panel's recommendations and that could be harmful to our sector. The House counterpart (H.R. 4297) does not contain similar provisions, and without strong support from the charitable sector, the House may choose to exclude these measures from the final tax legislation. We urge you to contact your congressional representatives and ask them to support the inclusion of a significant package of reforms and incentives in the final conference bill. See the IS website for details on both our concerns and the components of the bill we think deserve support, as well as talking points and sample letters.
House Will Vote Soon on Spending Reconciliation Issue
A provision that would adversely affect charitable giving and is very troubling is included in the spending reconciliation conference report (S. 1932) that will also be considered by the House soon after it returns to Washington on January 31. This provision would deny needed long-term care to older Americans who've made legitimate charitable donations during the five years prior to applying for Medicaid, even though they were in perfectly good health and did not expect to need Medicaid at the time they made the donations. It would lead many professional and personal advisors to recommend that anyone who might one day require government assistance for long-term health care refrain from making charitable contributions. Although the Senate narrowly passed S. 1932 in December, the entire House must once again vote on the package because of minor changes made to the bill in the Senate. A House vote is tentatively scheduled for February 1. Now is our last opportunity to make clear our concerns to House members, and encourage them to reconsider the Medicaid provision as well as other significant measures in S. 1932. See the IS website for more information and to take action.
IS Files Comments on Fax Rule
Independent Sector filed comments (PDF) with the Federal Communications Commission regarding a proposed rule that would relieve nonprofits of the obligation to obtain prior written permission from members and others with whom they have an “existing business relationship” prior to sending faxed advertisements of conferences, publications, or membership solicitations. The FCC requested comments on specifics of defining the business relationship and the required opt-out notice. IS also filed comments on a petition that urges the FCC to assert its authority to preempt a California fax law that conflicts with federal law.
Read IS’ comments (PDF) on the proposed rule.
Read IS’ comments on the preemption issue (PDF).
Read
More on these issues.
Comments Requested on JWOD Governance Proposal
The Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled, which administers the Javits-Wagner-O'Day (JWOD) Act, is again considering proposing governance and executive compensation standards for nonprofit agencies awarded contracts under the JWOD program. When the Committee first suggested standards in 2004, several nonprofits, including Independent Sector, raised strong objections, and the standards were withdrawn for further study and revision. The Committee has now offered a list of 14 criteria it considers benchmarks of best practices for nonprofit management and is gathering information about governance standards and executive pay before it issues new rules for JWOD grantees. Independent Sector will be preparing comments for submission by the January 31, 2006, deadline. IS will be holding a meeting on January 25, 2006 at 2:00 pm EST to discuss draft comments. Contact Mary Coogan at maryc@independentsector.org if you would like to participate.
More
Supreme Court Sends Issue Advocacy Case Back to Lower Court
The U.S. Supreme Court this week decided to send a case involving nonprofit issue advocacy back to a lower court for reconsideration. The case, Wisconsin Right to Life (WRTL) v. the Federal Election Commission, involved a challenge to election law restrictions on grassroots lobbying communications. There were two questions before the Court: 1) whether such challenges are allowed under the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA), and 2) whether WRTL's grassroots lobbying ads should be exempt from BRCA restrictions for constitutional reasons. The Court sent the decision back to the Federal District Court in Washington, DC based on the first question (whether such challenges should be allowed) and did not address the merits of WRTL’s constitutional challenges to the ban. Independent Sector joined a coalition of 35 charities in filing an amicus brief in the case.
More on this issue
Read the decision (PDF)
-Top of Page-
|
