These are some words of wisdom from a viewer who noticed the discussion of contacting elected officials on one of our YouTube live chats. This person didn’t ask for this to be published, so I have hidden personal identifying details in case it might be a problem in some way.
I saw a question in the group live chat re: contacting elected officials (specifically asking for a template they could use) and I thought I could be helpful and explain why that is a VERY bad idea….while offering some tips on what actually works.
About me: I was a political communications strategist for 15ish years. I’ve worked in the House, Senate and White House and am currently teaching political communication at the University of Xxxxxx, while I work on a book to help readers understand exactly how politicians manipulate them. This — interestingly enough — is how I found myself studying cults and ended up reading Marc’s book…and, of course, becoming a loyal SPTV viewer. (I’m a big fan of you guys and if there is ever anything I can do to help, please do not hesitate to ask.). I also lived in LA for 10 years, just up the street from the Celebrity Center and was always curious what was going on there.
So…for your viewers re: contacting elected officials.
If you want your calls, letters, etc. to have maximum impact, you should resist the urge to use templates, automated mailers, robocalls or even petitions. Why? Because the more time, energy, money, etc. it takes you to contact your elected official about a given issue, the more you convey how much you care about said issue AND how much their position on said issue is likely to impact your vote. Think about it: since it only takes a few seconds to sign a petition, you don’t really have to care that much about an issue to add your name to one..or check a box on an automated form. (Elected officials know this.) But when you invest the time and personal resources it takes to make a phone call or write a heartfelt letter….it’s clear that the issue is important to you and that you are also probably following developments, etc. (And yes, offices can tell the difference between a heartfelt, personal letter and one cut and pasted from a template. In fact, if an office gets a huge influx of letters that look exactly the same, those letters tend to end up in the trash.)
You can find contact information for your congressman and senators (these are the folks with jurisdiction over the IRS) at https://www.house.gov/representatives and https://www.senate.gov/senators/senators-contact.htm respectively. Viewers should focus on contacting their personal representatives as many offices only log/respond to correspondence from their personal constituents. (Note: elected officials get thousands of emails a day, so it’s not a bad policy.) The elected officials who are best positioned to have an impact on Scientolocy’s tax exemption are those on the tax writing committees — the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee. (You can find out if one of your representatives is a member of those committees at their corresponding links. Government oversight committees could also hold hearings/conduct an investigation.)
Note: when contacting an elected official’s office, you are unlikely to reach your elected official personally. (They are usually scheduled to be in five places at once and thus are — most likely – not available to take your call.) But that’s okay, because winning over the staff member who handles that issue can often be more impactful (remember said staff member is the one who advises the member on the issue and will put in the work on the issue.). So, if you call, don’t ask to speak to the Congressman or Senator (this will flag you as unserious) and don’t just leave a comment with the person who answers the phone (this person is often just an intern or administrative assistant), INSTEAD ask to be connected with the person who handles the Congressman or Senator’s tax policy. If they aren’t available, ask if you can schedule time to talk with them or ask for their name/email address. (If you have someone’s name it’s pretty easy to figure out their email address, and it’s far better to email them directly than to email the generic office email.) Note: staff members typically work 60+ hours a week and cover hundreds of issues, so the best way to have an impact is to be HELPFUL: yes, make a compelling argument, but also give them facts, figures and other resources that they can use to brief/convince their boss. The more controversial the issue, the more an elected official (and their staff) will want to know about an issue before they get involved. (Think about it, if you knew someone was going to attack you on an issue, you’d want to be an expert on that issue so you can respond to those attacks. So, helping staffers gain expertise/confidence that they can mitigate attacks can make a big difference.) Sending books could be a good idea, not only because they provide good information (and indicate that you care enough to buy and mail a book), but staff are unlikely to miss/throw them away, AND if you stack enough of them on a staffer’s desk, their boss is likely to see them and ask about them.
I would add only that I think the issues that would attract the most attention from lawmakers are the following — but PERSONAL experiences are the most powerful:
Spending taxpayer subsidized dollars on campaign to harass and intimidate those who speak about their abuses — and that this is part of their “scripture”
Breaking up families with disconnection policies
Hubbard’s anti-government/justice system writings
Scientology accumulating “billions of dollars” (their lawyer admitted to this on CBS This Morning show) — but they don’t provide shelter to the homeless or food for the hungry or any other form of charity
A couple things, First, Thank you for sharing this information. I’ve been trying to figure out the best way to reach someone in my State, especially since we don’t have (THANKFULLY) a COS org/mission/etc. anymore.
Second, and I’m sure i can look this up and I think I know the answer, but since Scientology is a “pay to play” religion (I use that term EXTREMELY loosely), and these payments are considered “donations”, does that mean that all the money that these wealthy members “donate” are a tax write off? If so, it makes a lot of sense why they haven’t had their tax free exemption pulled.
If they are not considered a tax write-off, then I really give myself a headache trying to contemplate how they have gotten away with all of these BS shenanigans, especially AFTER they infiltrated the IRS in the 70s during Operation Snow White.
I just keep hoping that with more and more people speaking out, realizing that there are people who support them (they won’t “end up flipping burgers” after leaving), it will catch the attention of the people who have power to make changes.
COS can claim that “Oh, they are lying” all they want, but please explain how thousands of people (who were essentially raised IN the “church” and taught to live by COS policies) have the same, or EXTREMELY similar experiences and can prove it, are the ones with the problem.
I really think that this Masterson trial, regardless of the outcome, will be a HUGE tipping point for change. They can’t silence everyone, especially now that some of the PI’s that worked for COS are speaking out about the parts they played.
Hi Mike
Can you advise about Australian law and if we can also help lobby the soc for the UK as well?
Would really appreciate your advice.
Thanks 😊
“Criteria For Religious Tax Exemption”
1) The religion does not make the parishioners sign legal agreements of any kind when it relates to the results of the religious practices of that religion, or non religion practices of that religion on the follower of that religion.
———————–
If this cannot fly, as a criteria, then another category, “Irreligious Requirements Criteria” I think this 1) above should fit inside.
Requiring “Legal Agreements” be signed prior to a religion allowing a follower to engage in that religion’s practices within that “official” religion, are grounds to call that legal agreement signing as a “Irreligious Requirement”
So, if a Criteria point isn’t one a Tax Office can legally use to deny a religion tax exemption, then that Criteria point ought to fall into then arguable a “Irreligious Requirement Criteria” so that the public knows what they are getting into, and take note of such requirements.
————————————-
This is all historically to expand on the Professor Kent papers on the non religious aspects of Scientology.
And expand really on Massimo Introvigne’s offering up “criminal religious organization” as a sort of beyond the pale final label which if a religion gets that far, they lose their tax exemption.
One barrier, is that Hubbard did push for the “religion angle” to Scientology, and enough so to be backed by the various religious lobbyists.
In US history were there some precedents, laid out, in an instructive book, giving the legal precedents the “other way” meaning countering religious groups who have lost their tax exemption, and how, in simple language so that newly, those “religious” tax exempt groups, here in the US and worldwide, relevant info how they lost their tax exemption, is spread.
Then people who’ve been hurt irreligiously by tax exempt “religions” can at least be informed of what other successes have been accumulating.
A one stop book would be useful, I think.
And an edition which could be updated every five years.
We need new types of books in the world, ones that stand the text of time, and have accumulating history.
I wish life were longer, and somehow there developed some institutions that put out more relevant books on subjects like “religions” which act so irreligiously they lose their tax exemptions, etc.
“How To Report On Irreligious Behavior by Your Religion, for Laypeople”
Mike,
In several videos shot in China, Massimo Introvigne did mention his wish to replace the word “cult” with “criminal religious organizations” and I think that is a useful new label that even the lobbyists for new religions would have to accept arguing over which “new religions” warrant this label.
Really, a criteria for when a religion loses its tax exemption, that should even become an argument taken up by the religion lobbyists.
This is quite helpful information. Many thanks to the writer and to Mike for posting it here.
I would add an item to that list at the end:
Why is $cientology the only 401(c)3 tax exempt organization allowed to set ‘fixed donation’, otherwise known as a set price, for services? Any other 401(c)3 tax exempt organization risks losing their exemption for doing so.
My Congress people were very interested in this until COVID and a certain ex-President came along.
Pick, good point. Also, how can they pay sales commissions to members on those ‘fixed donations’ for essential ‘religious’ items and services from ‘scripture’ to ‘counseling’ – which are so overpriced to begin with, the commission alone is often about equal to the normal real world value of it.
And on top of that, the overpriced things members get large commissions on, are produced and delivered by ‘religious’ workers paid only a small fraction of even minimum wage – on the order of what prison convicts get paid for labor.
That’s why SCOTUS said $cientology was a quid pro quo business in their Hernandez v. Commissioner, 490 U.S. 680 (1989) decision. A decision which has never been overturned, only ignored by the IRS.
I’m not wild about government subsidies for churches in general, but some do charitable works. Scientology does not and doesn’t deserve taxpayer support.
This conforms to my own experiences in different aspects. I would just want to point out that this works in other countries and at a smaller than state level as well.
Thanks!
This is so spot on. Mike thank you for sharing this great information.
No real church needs a government subsidy.
NO church deserves government funding let alone tax exemptions, but as long as politicians are shit scared of upsetting potential voter bases then the whole crooked system will continue unabated.
Les, a lot of churches couldn’t make it these days if they had to pay property taxes. But that and any other privileges should be granted based on being open to the public and providing a public benefit as it has always been generally understood religious institutions do, not running more like a private club for those of means and with a lavishly inured leadership the way the CofS does.
And I’m not necessarily for such institutions getting anything other than essential property and income tax breaks. But also, if places of worship couldn’t afford their longstanding buildings in city centers where property values are high, we’d lose a lot of services provided to urban communities as well as historic buildings.
If I recall correctly, the plot of The Blues Brothers movie was driven by a property tax bill. (“I hate Illinois Nazis.”) Before the Ideal Org Program Scientology used to have an Org next to a CBS affiliated television station on the Nicollet Mall (The part of Nicollet Avenue that ran through Downtown Minneapolis).