Local rabbis grapple with new IRS decision

A new decision by the IRS allows religious congregations to endorse political candidates.

The new carve out alters the so-called “Johnson Amendment,” enacted in 1954, which prohibits tax-exempt organizations from engaging in political campaigns.

In Pittsburgh, no consensus exists about the impact of the new ruling or what it will mean for synagogue life.

Get The Jewish Chronicle Weekly Edition by email and never miss our top stories Free Sign Up

Congregation Beth Shalom Associate Rabbi Mark Goodman called the ruling a “slippery slope.”

“The challenge,” he said, “is that the ruling removes the rug and it’s unclear where things go from here.”

Part of the challenge, Goodman said, is that Jewish spiritual leaders talk about morals and values, which often intersect with politics.

“For instance, if the government does something around immigration, what does Jewish tradition teach about that? I can talk about immigration and LGBTQ rights or the environment from the pulpit, but I wouldn’t necessarily continue by saying, ‘And candidate X is good or bad and that’s why you should vote for candidate X,’” he said.

The new ruling, Goodman said, is dangerous because some religious organizations will become extremely political, which will bring with it “political money,” something that may tip the scales of religious life.

“That leaves synagogues and churches in the position of choosing whether to be political or not, and the potential is that the churches that chose to not be political may choose, accidentally, to be irrelevant,” he said.

Goodman foresees a possible future where rabbis may soon be receiving phone calls from political candidates asking for meetings so they can make a case for an endorsement by the congregation.

“That’s a very weird world I did not anticipate in my career,” he said. “And, if I say no, and the guy down the street says yes, then I’m irrelevant and that congregation is irrelevant or they’re going to get a donation and I’m not going to get a donation.”

In a d’var Torah delivered shortly after the decision was made public, Temple Emanuel of South Hill’s Rabbi Aaron Meyer expressed concern about the IRS’ new ruling.

A place of worship, he said, is a “large tent” in which not everyone agrees.

“My using your valuable time at a temple program or service to tell you whom to vote for won’t make our tent stronger or our community cohesion greater,” he said.

In an interview with the Chronicle, Meyer said that even if Temple Emanuel congregants agree with 99% of his values, “we may disagree on individual candidates who we see as being the most likely to bring the most values to bear, or have different lines where we’re unwilling to compromise.”

Meyer doesn’t see a potential positive on the horizon.

“I don’t see a future where endorsing political candidates would be good for the Temple Emanuel community,” he said.

Without clear IRS boundaries, he said, legal clarity and good policy run the risk of being replaced with communal tensions as “congregants, donors, board members and staff try to force Temple into positions that diminish the size of our tent.”

He, too, worries about campaign finance, noting that donations to religious organizations are not reported to the IRS in the way donations to political campaigns or 501(c)4 organizations are, creating untraceable streams of dollars that may now be funneled into political campaigns.

The potential for political fissure exists, he said — not only as congregations of different political persuasions endorse candidates, but also within individual congregations.

“Who makes the decision to endorse a candidate. Is it the boards of trustees, separate from the staff? Is the staff separate from the lay leadership? Does an influential donor hold sway at a time when synagogues are challenged for financial resources?” he asked. “I see only division rather than gains.”

Meyer’s congregation is a member of the Union for Reform Judaism; the Religious Action Committee, a 501(c)3 organization, is that organization’s political lobbying arm. RAC released a statement saying it was “deeply alarmed” by the IRS’ decision.

“This decision further weakens campaign finance laws, raising the prospect of political donors contributing to houses of worship to support such partisan purposes and obtaining a tax deduction for such ‘contributions,’” the RAC wrote.

The policy, it said, “risks dividing congregations and alienating those supporting different parties or candidates, thereby threatening the congregation’s status as a place where all feel welcome, rooted in faith teachings and transcending partisanship.”

It called on Congress to reverse what it termed a “misguided policy.”

Reform congregation Temple Ohav Shalom’s Rabbi Aaron Bisno said he doesn’t like the change, noting that religion and politics are two “non-overlapping magisteria,” a phrase he credits to American paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould.

Still, he said, it’s important to understand the role of the government and religion.

“We like to believe in the separation of church and state,” Bisno said. “The fact is, the separation is one direction — that is to say, government should not be involved in religion and not legislate [that] religion has something to say to the body politic.”

The ruling, he said, most likely returns the country to a state of affairs that’s more in keeping with how the separation of church and state was originally envisioned.

“It may make our job more challenging as clergy rabbis, but it doesn’t actually change what I believe most rabbis will choose to share when they teach Torah or preach from the pulpit,” Bisno said. “Government should not be involved in telling us what we can and can’t say from the pulpit. From there, we need to use our best discretion and judgment.”

Meyer, too, sees the decision as potentially removing the firewall between church and state, something he said that might not be good for the Jewish community in a primarily Christian country.

“Removing bricks from that firewall destabilized the position of non-majority religions in America in a way that is deeply troubling, for when that boundary has blurred in the past, it has not been good for Jews,” he said.

As the issues play out over time and across synagogues, Chabad of Squirrel Hill’s Rabbi Yisroel Altein said he prefers to concentrate on the Jewish community.

“Chabad will continue to be a place where Jews of all political viewpoints can find deeper engagement in Jewish life and ritual,” he said. “We don’t talk politics because we want to be a place where all Jews feel welcome.” PJC

David Rullo can be reached at drullo@pittsburghjewishchronicle.org.