Tax-exempt �social welfare� organizations play an important part in the democratic process, educating voters and generally fighting for the causes that they think are important. Because the groups � which...

Tax-exempt �social welfare� organizations play an important part in the democratic process, educating voters and generally fighting for the causes that they think are important. Because the groups � which range from the environmentalist League of Conservation Voters to the American Civil Liberties Union, to Tea Party-aligned FreedomWorks � don�t engage in �political activity� as such, their work is not subject to federal taxation. (�Political activity� in the form of direct support for candidates is taxable.) This is an important protection for civil society. But, regrettably, it�s a protection that could go away soon.

At issue is how the Internal Revenue Service defines �political activity.� Under a proposed rule change that the agency announced last year, many basic functions of advocacy organizations, including holding voter registration drives, leading get-out-the-vote activities, and even hosting candidate forums, would now be considered �political activity,� and would be taxable. The definition of a �political� candidate, meanwhile, would expand to include judicial and executive appointments. If these changes go through, the tax-exempt status of many advocacy organizations would be at risk. (Advocacy and speech by unions, which tend to support the administration, would not be limited under the change.)

It�s a basic axiom that the more you tax something, the less you get of it. A tax on these organizations would result, essentially, in fewer of the activities that encourage a robust exchange of ideas and make our democracy function. So it�s unsurprising that the proposed rule change has drawn sharp criticism. The IRS reports that it has received more than 23,000 comments from citizens regarding the matter, and those comments have reportedly been overwhelmingly opposed to the proposed change.

A central tenet of American democracy is free, unfettered speech and advocacy, guaranteed under the First Amendment. As Cathy Duvall, the Sierra Club�s director of strategic partnerships, told The Washington Post, the rule change �harms efforts that have nothing to do with politics, from our ability to communicate with our members about clean air and water to our efforts to educate the public about toxic pollution.�

The New York Times wrote recently of a �rare agreement between Tea Party and liberal activists, [and] organizations across the political spectrum [who] say new regulations drafted by the Internal Revenue Service to curb a surge in political spending and activity by nonprofits are far too broad.�

These activists and citizens are right. All Americans, regardless of their particular ideology, must be wary of overweening government intrusion into civil society. The IRS will finalize its decision on Feb. 27. We urge it to reconsider its rule change. Under our constitutional system, to the greatest extent possible, political speech and good citizenship should not be regulated and taxed.