House Agrees To Let Trump Kill Nonprofits He Doesn't Like
On the bright side, only 15 Dems voted for it, instead of the original 52 who were going to!
On Wednesday, the House voted 219-184 to pass the Stop Terror-Financing and Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act (HR 9495), which sounds a lot like it should have been a good thing, but … it was not. Very much not. Well, the first part of it, anyway.
Why? Because the bill, if passed, would allow the secretary of the Treasury to take away the tax-exempt status of any 501(c) nonprofits he (or she, but obviously probably he) claims “support terrorism.” Given that there is no real, official criteria for what that even means, that the onus is on the nonprofits to prove a negative, and that there is no due process for reversal, this is the kind of thing that could go very, very wrong under the Trump administration. Or under any administration, really. It’s a very bad, free-speech-threatening idea that would severely undermine the ability of nonprofits to provide humanitarian aid around the world and allow Trump to punish nonprofits he dislikes for ideological reasons.
And let’s be real, you know he will.
Nonprofit organizations representing nonprofit organizations — like The Council on Foundations, Independent Sector, National Council of Nonprofits, and United Philanthropy Forum — have opposed the bill since its inception as a bipartisan effort meant to go after nonprofits they thought might “support Hamas.” In September, the ACLU and 200 nonprofits sent a letter to Congress citing their concerns about the bill.
Because H.R. 9495 vests vast unilateral discretion in the Secretary of Treasury, it creates a high risk of politicized and discriminatory enforcement. The executive branch already has extensive authority to prohibit transactions with individuals and entities it deems connected to terrorism and nonprofit organizations are already prohibited from providing material support to terrorist organizations.
In fact, it would be a federal crime for them to do so. […]
Without any evidence as to the need for this legislation2, H.R. 6408 authorizes broad and easily abused new powers for the executive branch. It grants the Secretary of the Treasury virtually unfettered discretion to designate a U.S. nonprofit as a “terrorist supporting organization” and to strip it of its tax-exempt status if the Secretary finds that the nonprofit has provided material support to a terrorist group, even if the “support” is not intentional or connected to actual violence.
Humanitarian groups like the anti-poverty organization Oxfam were especially adamant about the problems with the bill.
“H.R. 9495 is a threat to free speech,” Oxfam America President and CEO Abby Maxman said in a statement about the bill. “It would grant the Trump administration, and any future administration, the ability to silence and censor its critics, curb free speech, target political opponents, and punish crucial organizations that speak truth to power and help people in the United States and around the world. This bill would increase the powers of the president at the expense of all of our freedoms, and could impact not only organizations like Oxfam, but other non-profits, news outlets, or even universities who dare to dissent. It could put our ability to respond to some of the worst humanitarian crises at risk and prevent us from delivering lifesaving aid to some of the world’s most marginalized people.”
“This bill follows the same playbook Oxfam has seen other governments around the world use to crush dissent,” she added. “Now we are seeing it here at home.”
“I don’t care who the president of the United States is,” said Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Michigan), who voted against the legislation for the third time on Monday. “This is a dangerous and unconstitutional bill that would allow unchecked power to target nonprofit organizations as political enemies and shut them down without due process.”
“This bill is an authoritarian play by Republicans to expand the sweeping powers of the executive branch, to go after political enemies and stifle political dissent,” Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Washington) said ahead of the vote.
While progressives like Tlaib and Jayapal opposed the bill from the outset, other Democrats in the House didn’t quite realize how dangerous it could be until Trump won the election. In fact, just last week, when the House voted on the bill, which would have required a two-thirds majority to pass, only 56 Democrats voted in favor of it and the bill failed.
However, after a campaign encouraging voters to contact their representatives and tell them why they opposed the bill, that number dwindled down to 15.
And the cool thing (and good news for all of us!) is that many of those Democrats specifically said that all of the calls convinced them to change their mind on the vote.
“I have heard loud and clear from folks in my district and understand the concerns of my constituents, non-profit leaders and their staff. The incoming administration's recent Cabinet nominations give me little faith that this tool would be used as originally intended. Therefore, I have decided to vote against H.R. 9495 and will continue acting in our district's and nation's best interests,” Rep. Gabe Vasquez (D-New Mexico) said in a statement released on Monday.
You love to hear it.
Of course, this development enraged the absolute shit out of Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith (R-Missouri).
“This piece of legislation received unanimous approval by the Ways and Means Committee and contains provisions that already passed this House with overwhelming bipartisan support and received unanimous consent in the U.S. Senate. And yet, despite that consistent showing of bipartisan support, the majority of our Democrat colleagues voted last week to block passage of this bill,” Smith said in his opening statement. “Why? Because President Trump won the election. Don’t take my word for it. Our Democrat colleagues said it themselves on this Floor.”
Aw, the poor baby.
The unfortunate thing is that the other part of the bill was voted down too — it would eliminate any tax penalties that those taken hostage overseas might incur while, well, having been taken hostage overseas. In fact, I can’t even believe that was a thing to begin with. It would be lovely if we could get that taken care of separately and not in a way that will allow our terrible future President to murder Amnesty International for saying mean things about all his dictator pals.
The bill won’t become a law, of course, unless it passes the still-Democratic Senate and Joe Biden signs it into law — which I like to believe is a thing they and he won’t do, given the current circumstances.
OT- Wal Mart is starting to raise prices in anticipation of PAB's tariffs. Since it's happening now, I imagine Wal Mart shoppers will blame Biden.
This bill is going to be used to target RAICES and other immigrant and refugee assistance nonprofits.
Like, immediately.