he Christian Coalition, already preparing for a major campaign effort in the year 2000 elections, won a major victory yesterday in a suit over its distribution of millions of voters guides to churches throughout the country. In a 180-page decision, U.S. District Judge Joyce Green rejected most of the charges lodged against the activist political group founded by televangelist Pat Robertson; the Federal Elections Commission had argued that the Coalition was a partisan political action committee which slanted its literature, voters guides and other materials to favor specific -- often Republican -- candidates.

   Green did find against the Coalition, though, in two specific instances. One involved a 1994 campaign flier which supported then-Rep. Newt Gingrich of Georgia which, she ruled, "expressly advocated" Gingrich's election. The other concerned the Virginia campaign of Oliver North for the U.S. Senate, when the Coalition shared its mailing list with the North organization, a violation of state law. As a result, the Christian Coalition will pay a civil penalty although the amount has not yet been determined.

   But the ruling was clearly a decisive victory, and a sweet one following two years of other legal setbacks and organizational difficulties. Earlier this year, the Coalition lost its 10-year battle with the Internal Revenue Service over a tax exempt status, and then announced that it was reorganizing as two separate organizations. The Christian Coalition of Texas, which already has the crucial tax exemption, will continue distribution of voters guides and other political materials, while the new Christian Coalition International will openly endorse individual candidates. After yesterday's ruling, though, the line separating the two will be further blurred.

   The suit against Christian Coalition was lodged following complaints to the Federal Elections Commission that the organization was exceeding its role as an education group, and instead acting as a partisan committee. Democrats especially charged that the "voters guides" distorted legislative issues and misrepresented candidate's stands, and were "coordinated" with Republican groups and campaign committees. Another complaint was that the guides were distributed the Sunday before election day throughout the Coalition's network of over 125,000 participating churches and religious congregations; candidates portrayed unfavorably complained that they often did not have sufficient time to respond to charges or statements appearing in the information brochures.

   Pat Robertson gushed that the ruling was "a major victory for free speech in this country," adding "There's no question it's full speed ahead with what we're doing." The group's former Director, Ralph Reed, said that the decision "is one of the worst defeats for the FEC in the history of the agency."

   Randy Tate, CC Vice President for Government Operations, said that although it is too late for the decision to affect the group's tax status with the IRS, the ruling affirmed the Coalition's policy of distributing voters guides and related materials. "The IRS, in its attempt to stifle our activities, was engaged in arbitrary enforcement of the law," Tate declared. He noted that neither the FEC nor the IRS has chosen to prosecute Vice President Al Gore over questionable activities including a fundraising party at a Buddhist temple in California, or the use of subscriber lists from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

"...it is fauly to 'demonize' the Christian Coalition as the only group engaging in such flagrant political behavior, essentially demolishing the wall of separation between pulpit and the state house. We expect the ruling to be a 'green light' for other political groups, left and right, to involve churches in similar activity..."

   The decision may as much a clear-cut victory for the Christian Coalition, as well as recognition that many regulations pertaining to "outside committees" and campaign organizations are vague and may indeed infringe upon free expression. One question concerns "issue advocacy" advertising by outside political groups. Democratic Party attorney Robert Bauer charged that Judge Green's decision "is yet another setback for any attempt to control issue group advertising." He added that in recent elections, organizations have run "a series of traffic lights" by placing issue-oriented advertisements in newspapers or other media, and blanketing the mails. "Now, the yellow light is merging very distinctly into green," he added. But a GOP attorney, Benjamin Ginsberg, told the Washington Post newspaper that the FEC blundered by going after the Christian Coalition. "It was a showcase for their effort to try to bring issued advocacy under their purview. Losing that argument ought to suggest a more prudent course," Ginsberg noted.

   Nonprofit groups such as Christian Coalition may address specific issues, and educate the public. Green noted, though, that the CC, or any other group, would swerve into questionable legal territory only if it engaged in activity which was an "explicit directive" which "unmistakably exhort(s) the reader/viewer/listener to take electoral action to support the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate."

   Judge Green staked out a middle-ground position in respect to the question of whether or not the Coalition "coordinated" its activities with partisan campaign groups and political parties. She rejected the argument that the CC could engage in unlimited "conversations" with such partisan groups as long as this did not affect the language in its voters guides, but also chastised the FEC for trying to restrict permissible interaction. The Post noted that attorneys for both sides were "divided" about how to evaluate that portion of Green's ruling.

   What will be the result of this latest ruling? We predict a number of likely outcomes:

   ¶    The Christian Coalition will certainly be emboldened by this ruling. Reacting to yesterday's decision, Randy Tate predicted that the group will distribute a walloping 75 million voters guides in the next election, about thirty million more than in the last national races. Expect the coalition to effectively counter any warnings made to churches concerning political activity. Indeed, the CC now has the court on its side, and this will be an incentive for even more congregations to affiliate with Robertson's group (or others) in hopes of electing religiously worthy candidates to public office.

   ¶    As we have noted in previous dispatches, it is faulty to "demonize" the Christian Coalition as the only group engaging in such flagrant political behavior, essentially demolishing the wall of separation between pulpit and state house. We expect yesterday's ruling to be a "green light" for other political groups, left and right, to involve churches in similar activity. The dirty secret for many liberal political organizations which have excoriated the Christian Coalition for distribution of voters guides is that OTHER churches and religious groups are doing essentially the same thing. While decrying efforts by Robertson to "politicize" Christianity, mainstream Protestant and Catholic groups have been distributing plenty of their own issue-oriented materials, holding quasi-campaign rallies and meetings for candidates, and essentially encouraging their respective congregations to vote a certain way. This "nod and a wink" style of politics is disingenuous, to say the least, but Judge Green's ruling may now well encourage such groups to become more open in their political advocacy.

   Already, the Roman Catholic Church is contemplating a full-scale campaign to distribute voters guides to its respective congregations. Philadelphia Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua has stated that the archdiocese will be handing out these guides in the next elections, and church officials are watching this effort closely to see how compliant parishioners turn out to be. While the Coalition seeks to enlist congregations in its quest to outlaw abortion or ban gays from the military, moderate and liberal religious groups will, in turn, intensify their efforts to politicize denominations on their key issues such as gun control, welfare, the environment or other issues. Expect the continued "religionization" of political issues and contests, and expect to see churches and other religious groups to become more proactive on political and social issues, even if means straying in the obvious direction of partisan activism.

   ¶    Controls do remain, at least on paper, as to how far churches or other religious groups may go in endorsing candidates and mobilizing the flock. Clearly, yesterday's ruling lowered the standard which determines whether a group like the Christian Coalition is acting an educational organization or a political action committee. The fact remains that religious leaders already do endorse candidates, or may give the appearance of doing so.

   ¶    We expect churches to engage now in greater "issue advocacy" that is timed with elections, and geared to the platform positions of various candidates. As the FEC suit demonstrates, it is difficult (if not impossible) to legally prove that ads in newspapers or on television, or mass mailings, are not "coordinated" with political campaigns. GOP attorney Jan Baran noted in reaction to the CC ruling, "There's kind of a sense of, boy, if they didn't find coordination in this case, they're not going to find it with the AFL-CIO or environmental groups or the business groups that engage in issue advertising." He should have added religious groups to this category. "I think it has some major consequences for the 2000 election," Baran observed.

   ¶    Finally, all of this will have a peculiar and somewhat unexpected impact on denominational structures and the effort to achieve ecclesiastical unity. As churches continue to be politicized down to the precinct level, expect fragmentation, division and clashes within not only individual churches but religious associations and denominations. Rather than achieving ecumenical unity, the religious landscape of the culture may well fragment as denomination include political parties, candidates and philosophies as an important part of their identity. Expect tensions between church policy-makers at the top and rank-and-file parishioners as well; a case in point here is the split between Roman Catholic officials and the bulk of their parishioners who disagree with the pope over issues such as abortion and birth control.

[text only]