United Methodist churches responding to the Republican Party’s request for their church membership directories could be setting themselves up for charges of invasion of privacy and potentially jeopardizing their tax-exempt status, say denominational officials.

Numerous media began reporting July 4 on the Bush-Cheney campaign’s plan to use church rosters to mobilize religious conservative voters and to organize support among congregations.  

Reports said the Bush-Cheney re-election strategy asks religious volunteers to help identify churches that could be organized by the campaign and to talk to pastors about conducting voter registration drives, distributing voter guides and other campaign materials in churches and conducting get-out-the-vote efforts during Sunday services.  The strategies are included in a guide for volunteers listing duties and deadlines for activities targeting religious voters. 

Reactions from faith groups about the campaign’s desire for church lists have run the gamut from being offended or appalled to amenable. Numerous groups, including the Americans United for Separation of Church and State, call the campaign strategy a violation of the separation of church and state.

The Rev. Eliezer Valentin-Castanon, director of civil and human rights at the United Methodist Board of Church and Society in Washington, told United Methodist News Service that since a “party” was seeking information from churches, “there is no violation of church and state. It is a candidate looking for information. Parties have the right to ask.”

But, he said, churches will have to decide how to handle the request because not everyone in the congregation will be agreeable to a church handing over its directory. “It is important for churches to know that if they provide the information from the directories, without members being aware, they might be liable because it is a privacy matter.”

Saying the release of church membership lists is a potential violation of the separation of church and state is James Allen, associate general counsel for the churchwide Council on Finance and Administration.  He said the Bush campaign initiative seeks “to encourage church members and churches to walk a very fine legal line.” If churches participate in political activities and “if the church should inadvertently cross the line by assisting a candidate, it could endanger its tax-exempt status.”

“A church should be extremely cautious about assisting any candidate or party,” Allen said.  

One person saying that the Bush-Cheney efforts do violate the separation is Charlotte Coffelt, a member of St. Paul’s United Methodist Church, Houston, and a board member of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State.

“It is a violation of the separation of church and state to politicize the church,” she said, noting that her group has been tracking churches that have been engaged in politicking for decades.

Coffelt, who is also a candidate for the Texas State House of Representatives, said she has no problem with members of faith groups talking to each other and their neighbors on their own about candidates. “Under no circumstances should a campaign think of using church directories as part of the campaign, because it is a violation and churches could jeopardize their tax exempt status.”

Coffelt said she “would not dream of taking my political campaign material into the foyer of any United Methodist church in the district in which I am running. My campaign would not use church directories to distribute campaign material.”

InfoServ, the United Methodist Church’s toll-free answer line, has fielded calls from church members concerned about political parties contacting them after getting their names from directories. They also wonder about the effect on churches’ tax-exempt status.

One lifelong United Methodist said, “No matter which political party/candidate one supports, this is definitely an invasion of personal rights, privacy, etc.”  She wanted assurance that the denomination “is not participating in nor condoning such partisan practices.”

“No one ever tells me how to vote,” she said.  “I look at the entire candidate, not just a few views of that candidate, and then vote, often skipping back and forth from one party to the other as I go down the ballot. To try to pressure me, through my church, to vote a certain way is, I would think, illegal.”

As each presidential campaign season begins, questions arise about the role of churches in campaigns. On June 10, the Internal Revenue Service sent a letter to the major political parties warning them that certain activities could endanger the tax-exempt status of non-profit organizations, including United Methodist and most other churches.

The letter signed by Steven T. Miller, commissioner of the Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division of the IRS, provided information “to help ensure that during this election season your committee and the candidates that you support do not, inadvertently or otherwise, jeopardize the tax-exempt status of any charitable organization.”

The letter summarized the law when it warned:  "[U]nder Federal law, tax-exempt charitable organizations are prohibited from endorsing any candidates, making donations to their campaigns, engaging in fund-raising, distributing statements, or becoming involved in any other activities that may be beneficial or detrimental to any candidate.  Even activities that encourage people to vote for or against a particular candidate on the basis of nonpartisan criteria violate the political campaign prohibition of section 501(c)(3).”

Acknowledging legislation is pending which might modify the campaign rules for tax-exempt organizations, Miller wrote that Congress charges the IRS with policing current law. The IRS, he said, “will take whatever actions are necessary to stem abusive behavior.”

*Green is a United Methodist News Service news writer in Nashville, Tenn.

News media contact: Linda Green, Nashville, Tenn., (615) 742-5470 or newsdesk@umcom.org