IRD Questions Mandate of Church Officials To Denounce Tax Cuts
by Mark Tooley
April 10, 2001

A group of mainline Protestant church officials has condemned President George W. Bush’s tax cut plan, now pending before Congress, as “too inequitable,” “too large,” and a threat to the nation’s future.   This salvo marks the opening of a new religious front of resistance to the Bush agenda.  

“Most mainline church members would be surprised to learn that their church’s representatives claim a mandate to lobby Congress on the details of the tax code,” responded Diane Knippers, President of the Institute on Religion and Democracy.  “Like many Americans, I mailed my tax returns this week.  Our churches may legitimately teach us that we have the responsibility as citizens to obey our tax laws.  But I am appalled to see church leaders squander their moral authority on highly partisan debates over tax and budgetary policies.”

The statement of opposition to the Bush tax plan came from the “Religious Community for Responsible Tax Policy.”  That coalition includes top officials of the National Council of Churches, the American Baptist Churches, the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), the United Church of Christ, the United Methodist General Board of Church and Society, the United Methodist Women’s Division, and Church Women United.  Signatories also include a Roman Catholic caucus group, several Jewish organizations, and Bread for the World. 

As far as IRD is aware, the Bush tax cut proposals have not been evaluated by the policy-making bodies of the denominations listed above.  So the coalition seems to reflect the personal political views of top church officials, without significant consultation from their claimed constituencies.   

These officials seemingly doubt there is ever a time when across-the-board cuts in tax rates are appropriate.  “There is no budget surplus if there are still people living in poverty,” said Bob Edgar, general secretary of the National Council of Churches.  Edgar seemed not to consider the possibility that returning revenue from the federal government to the private economy might help reduce poverty.

The anti-tax cut coalition officials said they are “appalled” that Congress is discussing tax cuts rather than increasing spending on federal programs that benefit  “parents and children, the elderly, people with disabilities, and the working poor.”   The church officials claimed that polls show most Americans do not want tax cuts at the expense of social programs.  But no major cuts in federal social programs are currently proposed. 

The coalition did endorse President Bush’s proposal for a charitable tax-deduction for non-itemizers and also asked for a refundable child tax credit and expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit.   The coalition did not take a position on smaller Democratic-proposed tax cuts but implied that it wants cuts in tax rates, if they must happen, to be as “modest” as possible.

“Polls show that mainline Protestants voted strongly for George W. Bush,” observed IRD president Knippers.  “At the same time, these denominations, like all churches, include Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and liberals.  Most church members do not want their church officials adopting controversial stances on issues to which the Scriptures do not speak directly and on which Christians of good will may disagree.  The Lord has given us no direct guidance on which tax rates He prefers.”