February 28, 1973
Page 5746
By Mr. MUSKIE (for himself, Mr. BAKER, Mr. BAYH, Mr. BIBLE, Mr. BROCK, Mr. BROOKE, Mr. BURDICK, Mr. CHILES, Mr. CHURCH, Mr. CLARK, Mr. CRANSTON, Mr. DOLE, Mr. EAGLETON, Mr. GRAVEL, Mr. HART, Mr. HARTKE, Mr. JAVITS, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr. McINTYRE, Mr. METCALF, Mr. MONDALE, Mr. Moss, Mr. NELSON, Mr. PASTORE, Mr. PELL, Mr. RANDOLPH, Mr. RIBICOFF, Mr. SCHWEIKER, Mr. SCOTT Of Pennsylvania, Mr. STEVENSON, Mr. TAFT, Mr. TOWER, Mr. TUNNEY, and Mr. WILLIAMS)
S. 1036. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 with respect to legislative activity by certain types of exempt organizations. Referred to the Committee on Finance.
DEFINING PERMITTED LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITY BY TAX-EXEMPT ORGANIZATIONS
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, for the past 2 years Congress has been studying the problem of defining the amount of legislative activity in which tax-exempt e organizations can engage. Today I am introducing with Senators SCOTT of Pennsylvania, NELSON, and DOLE a bill
we hope will write the last chapter in this debate. We are joined in cosponsorship by Senators BAKER, BAYH, BIBLE, BROCK, BROOKE, BURDICK, CHILES, CHURCH, CLARK, CRANSTON, EAGLETON, GRAVEL, HART, HARTKE, JAVITS, MCGOVERN, MCINTYRE, METCALF, MONDALE, MOSS, PASTORE, PELL, RANDOLPH, RIBICOFF,
SCHWEIKER, STEVENSON, TAFT, TOWER, TUNNEY, and WILLIAMS.
Current law, in section 501(c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code, denies tax deductibility for contributions to otherwise eligible publicly supported charities engaging in "substantial activities" which attempt to influence legislation. This vague standard – that legislative activity not be substantial – has unpredictably, unreasonably, and unnecessarily restricted the worthwhile and legitimate legislative activities of these 501(c) (3) organizations.
For instance, the Chairman of the Board of Lincoln Center for the Performing Arts has explained how he was prevented from generating support for the National Endowment for the Arts because charities supporting cultural activities across the country were afraid to engage in "legislative activity." In Delaware a local YWCA was threatened with loss of its tax-exemption because it established a public affairs committee to contact local legislators. And the Maryland Association of Mental Health, which spoke out about legislation affecting the rights and care of mental patients, was challenged by the Internal Revenue Service for engaging in "substantial" legislative activities. In fact, after 18 months of uncertainty, the challenge was rejected when it was discovered that less than 5 percent of its activities consisted of appeals to legislators and to the general public and 4 percent of its activities consisted of research and reporting on legislative positions.
With such a vague standard – substantial activities – it is understandable that organizations would be challenged about legislative activities which were in fact minimal, and that the Internal Revenue Service auditors might use standards which differ from case to case. That is why we must enact clear standards against which organizations can judge the legitimacy of their legislative activities.
Current law makes the standard even more inequitable because it allows businesses, under a tax code provision enacted in 1962, to deduct all expenses incurred in lobbying, while public charities have no such privilege. Our bill reduces this inequity, even though it would still not place publicly supported charities on an equal footing with business interests. When the interests of businesses and public charities conflict, business organizations would still be in a relatively stronger position, with regard to tax benefits, to carry out their lobbying activities. But more important, the interests of public charities are usually those which most businessmen would support, and on which there is no conflict.
The amount of attention which Congress has paid to this issue in the past makes me hopeful that the bill we introduce today can be enacted in this Congress. In 1971 I introduced S. 1408, which was patterned after a resolution adopted by the American Bar Association. In 1972 Senator SCOTT and I introduced S. 3063, which represented a modification of my earlier proposal. This measure was eventually cosponsored by 42 Senators. At the same time, members of the House Ways and Means Committee introduced another version, H.R.13720. This bill was the subject of 3 full days of hearings by the House Ways and Means Committee last May 3, 4 and 5, and was supported by over 150 public charities. Supporters included such diverse organizations as the National Audubon Society, the National Association of Mental Health, the American National Red Cross, and the League of Women Voters. To demonstrate the breadth of this endorsement, I will ask that the list of organizations supporting this proposal be printed in the RECORD.
After careful study, Senators SCOTT, NELSON, DOLE, and I have determined that the bill we are introducing today, which is identical to the House bill (H.R. 13720) introduced in the last session, now represents the best proposal for defining and liberalizing permitted legislative activity by public charities. We feel that it would correct the current uncertainty of the law, correct the inequity caused by full availability of tax deductions for business lobbying, and provide public charities with flexibility to provide legislators in Congress and in the States with valuable information on activities that relate to their charitable purpose.
Our bill would apply only to publicly supported charitable organizations – those which have qualified under section 501(c)(3) to be exempt from income tax and to allow a contributor to deduct contributions to them. These section 501(c)(3) organizations are consistently subject to Treasury Department review on whether or not they legitimately deserve this tax status. If such organizations elect to be covered by our bill, their tax exempt status could not be revoked unless their expenditures for legislative activities normally made up more than 20 percent of their overall budget. However, not more than 5 percent of their budget could be used for legislative activities other than public or private communications with governments, legislative bodies, or the members of the organizations on matters directly relating to their charitable purpose. This provision would thus allow a limited amount of public education campaigns. In addition, our bill would explicitly permit without restriction the current practices of allowing tax-exempt organizations to present their views on matters affecting their own tax-exempt status, to provide technical advice when requested, and to distribute the products of nonpartisan study and research.
We feel that this bill provides adequate safeguards against abuse. It does not apply, for instance, to private foundations supported primarily by investment income. And it does not change the current absolute prohibition against section 501 (c)(3) organizations participating in or intervening in any political campaign on behalf of any candidate for public office.
An identical bill will be introduced today in the House by Representative SYMINGTON and 44 cosponsors.
We believe that the legislative process works best when exposed to the free and full expression of views by all individuals and groups. The present Internal Revenue Code limitation on the activities of public charities unwisely excludes from this process a diverse and important class of organizations.
I ask unanimous consent to include in the RECORD a list of organizations which indicated their support of this measure in public hearings last year, and the text of the bill we introduce today.
There being no objection, the list and bill were ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
ORGANIZATIONS WHICH SUPPORTED THIS BILL
American Bar Association.
American Civil Liberties Union.
Easter Seal Society for Crippled Children and Adults of Arkansas.
Liberty Lobby.
Lincoln Center.
National Assembly for Social Policy and Development.
National Association for Mental Health.
National Association of Railroad Passengers.
National Audubon Society.
National Health Council, Inc.
National Jewish Community Relations Advisory Council.
National Urban Coalition.
United Way of America.
The Repertory Theater of Lincoln Center, Inc.
The Library & Museum of the Performing Arts.
The Chamber Music Society of Lincoln Center, Inc.
The Metropolitan Opera Association.
The Film Society of Lincoln Center, Inc.
The Juilliard School.
New York Philharmonic.
The City Center of Music & Drama, whose performing companies include: New York City Ballet, New York City Opera, City Center Drama Co., City Center Light Opera, Gilbert & Sullivan Co., City Center Joffrey Ballet.
American Academy of Family Physicians.
American Academy of Pediatrics.
American Association of Dental Schools.
American Association for Inhalation Therapy.
American Cancer Society.
American College Health Association.
American College of Preventive Medicine.
American Diabetes Association.
American Heart Association.
American Medical Technologists.
American National Red Cross.
American Occupational Therapy Association.
American Osteopathic Association.
American Public Health Association.
American Social Health Association.
American Society of Clinical Pathologists.
Arthritis Foundation.
Association of Schools of Allied Health Foundation.
Association of Schools of Public Health.
Epilepsy Foundation of America.
Goodwill Industries of America.
Muscular Dystrophy Association America.
National Association of Social Workers.
National Council on the Aging.
National Council on Alcoholism.
National Council for Homemaker-Home Health Aide Services, Inc.
National Cystic Fibrosis Research Foundation.
National Environmental Health Association.
National Hemophilia Foundation.
National Kidney Foundation.
National League for Nursing.
National Medical Association.
National Multiple Sclerosis Society.
National Safety Council.
National Society for the Prevention of Blindness.
National Tuberculosis and Respiratory Disease Association.
Student American Medical Association.
United Cerebral Palsy Association.
American Psychiatric Association.
American Foundation for the Blind.
Big Brothers of America.
Child Welfare League of America.
Community Services of Pennsylvania.
Council of Jewish Federations and Welfare Funds, Inc.
Council on Social Work Education.
Family Service Association of America.
International Social Service, American Branch.
National Accreditation Council for Agencies Serving the Blind and Visually Handicapped.
National Association for Statewide Health and Welfare.
National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials.
National Council of Jewish Women.
National Council of Young Men's Christian Association of the U.S.A.
National Council on Crime and Delinquency.
Young Women's Christian Association National Board.
American Association of School Administrators.
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
American College of Surgeons.
American Council of Learned Societies.
American Council on Education, Commission on Federal Relations.
American Library Association.
The American Occupational Therapy Association, Inc.
American Optometric Association.
American Psychological Association.
American Symphony Orchestra League.
Association of American Colleges.
Association of American Medical Colleges.
Arizona Wildlife Federation.
California Institute of Technology.
Council for Financial Aid to Education, Inc.
Council of Community Services.
Federation of Western Outdoor Clubs.
Florida Wildlife Federation.
The Garden Club of America.
Greater Portland Arts Council.
Illinois Wildlife Federation.
League of Women Voters of the United States.
Common Cause.
Kamehameha Schools/Pauahi Bishop Estate, Honolulu, Hawaii.
Medical Library Association.
Michigan United Conservation Clubs.
Milwaukee County Conservation Alliance, Inc.
National Congress of Parents and Teachers.
National Music Council.
National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States.
National Wildlife Federation.
Nevada Wildlife Federation, Inc.
Sierra Club.
State Association for Community Services.
State Communities Aid Association.
Trout Unlimited.
United Cerebral Palsy Association, Inc.
The Conservation Law Society of America.
S.1036
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. LOSS OF EXEMPT STATUS.
(a) Section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (relating to exemption from income tax) is amended by redesignating subsection (f) as subsection (g) and inserting after subsection (e) the following new subsection:
"(f) EXPENDITURES BY PUBLIC CHARITIES TO INFLUENCE LEGISLATION
"(1) GENERAL RULE.– In the case of an organization described in paragraph (2) that has elected under paragraph (3) to have this subsection apply, exemption from taxation under section 501(a) shall not be denied because a substantial part of the activities of such organization consists of carrying on propaganda or otherwise attempting to influence legislation, unless, with respect to the total of the amounts (including administrative expenses) paid by such organization (other than amounts chargeable to capital account) to accomplish one or more purposes described in section 170(c) (2) (B) (relating to religious, charitable, etc., purposes)
"(A) amounts paid or incurred by such organization during each taxable year to influence legislation (as defined in paragraph (5)) normally exceed 20 percent, or
"(B) amount paid or incurred by such organization during each taxable year to influence legislation (within the meaning of paragraph (5) (A)) normally exceed 5 percent.
"(2) ORGANIZATIONS TO WHICH THIS PROVISION APPLIES.– An election under paragraph (3) to have this subsection apply may be made by any organization described in
"(A) section 170(b) (1) (A) (i) (relating to churches and conventions or associations of churches),
"(B) section 170(b) (1) (A) (ii) (relating to educational institutions),
"(C) section 170(b) (1) (A) (iii) (relating to hospitals and medical research organizations),
"(D) section 170(b) (1) (A) (iv) (relating to organizations supporting government schools),
"(E) section 170(b) (1) (A) (v) (relating to governmental units),
"(F) section 170(b) (1) (A) (vi) (relating to organizations publicly supported by charitable contributions),
"(G) section 509(a) (2) (relating to organizations publicly supported by admissions, sales, etc.), or
"(H) section 509 (a) (3) (relating to organizations supporting certain types of public charities), except that for purposes of this subsection, section 509 (a) (3) shall be applied without regard to the last sentence of section 509(a).
"(3) ELECTIONS.– Any organization described in paragraph (2) may elect, in such manner and at such time as the Secretary or his delegate may prescribe, to have the provisions of this subsection apply to such organization.
"(4) YEARS FOR WHICH ELECTION IS EFFECTIVE. – An election by an organization under paragraph (3) shall be effective for all taxable years of such organization which–
"(A) end after the date the election is made, and
"(B) begin before the earlier of (i) the date the election is revoked (under regulations prescribed by the Secretary or his delegate) or (ii) the date such organization ceases to be described in paragraph (2).
"(5) INFLUENCING LEGISLATION.– For purposes of this subsection the term ‘influencing
legislation’, with regard to an organization, means–
"(A) any attempt (other than an attempt described in subparagraph (B) or (C)) to influence any legislation (including an attempt to affect the opinion of the general public or any segment thereof),
"(B) any attempt to influence legislation, on a matter which directly affects any purpose for which such organization is organized and operated, through communication with any member or employee of a legislative body, or with any other government official or employee who may participate in the formulation of the legislation, and
"(C) any attempt to influence legislation, on a matter which directly affects any purpose for which such organization is organized and operated through direct communication of information between such organization and one or more of its members, other than through making available the results of nonpartisan analysis, study, or research; the term 'influencing legislation', with regard to an organization, does not include the providing of technical advice or assistance to a governmental body or to a committee or other subdivision thereof in response to a written request by such body or subdivision, as the case may be, nor does it include an appearance before, or communication to, any legislative body with respect to a possible decision of such body which might affect the existence of the organization, its powers and duties, its tax-exempt status, or the deduction of contributions to such organization; the term 'legislation' includes action with respect to acts, bills, resolutions, or similar items by the Congress, any State legislature, any local council, or similar governing body, by any similar governing body outside the United States, or by the public in a referendum, initiative, constitutional amendment, or similar procedure; the term 'action' is limited to the introduction, amendment, enactment, defeat, or repeal of acts, bills, resolutions, or similar items."
(b) Section 601(c) (3) of such Code is amended by striking out "no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation," and inserting in lieu thereof "no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on propaganda or otherwise attempting to influence legislation (except as otherwise provided in subsection (f) ),".
SEC. 2. DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION FOR CONTRIBUTIONS TO INFLUENCE LEGISLATION.
(a) Section 170(f) of such Code (relating to disallowance of charitable contribution deductions in certain cases) is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new paragraph:
"(7) CONTRIBUTIONS TO INFLUENCE LEGISLATION.– No deduction shall be allowed under this section for a contribution for the use of and organization described in subsection (c) if the contribution is made for the purpose of influencing legislation (as defined in section 501(f) (5) ) ."
SEC. 3. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.
(a) (1) The following sections of such Code are amended by striking out "no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation," wherever it appears therein and inserting in lieu thereof "no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on propaganda or otherwise attempting to influence legislation (within the meaning of section 501(c) (3) ), ':
(A) Section 170(c) (2) (D) (relating to the definition of charitable contributions) ;
(B) Section 2055 (a) (2) relating to transfers for public, charitable, and religious uses);
(C) Section 2106 (a) (2) (A) (ii) (relating to transfers for public, charitable, and religious uses);
(D) Section 2522(a) (2) (relating to charitable and similar gifts of citizens or residents) ; and
(E) Section 2522(b) (2) (relating to charitable and similar gifts of nonresidents).
(2) Sections 2055(8) (3) and 2106(a) (3) of such Code (relating to transfers for public, charitable, and religious uses) are each amended by striking out "no substantial part of the activities of such trustee or trustees, or of such fraternal society, order, or association, is carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation," wherever it appears therein and inserting in lieu thereof "no substantial part of the activities of such trustee or trustees, or of such fraternal society, order, or association, is carrying on propaganda or otherwise attempting to influence legislation (within the meaning of section 501(c) (3)) ,".
(b) Sections 2055(c) and 2522(c) of such Code (relating to disallowance of charitable contributions in certain cases) are each amended by adding at the end thereof the following new paragraph:
"(3) CONTRIBUTIONS TO INFLUENCE LEGISLATION.– No deduction shall be allowed under this section for a contribution for the use of an organization described in section 170 if the contribution is made for the purpose of influencing legislation (as defined in section 501(f)(5)) ."
SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE.
The amendments made by this Act shall be applicable to taxable years beginning after the date of the enactment thereof and to estates of decedents dying after the date of the enactment thereof.
Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, I am pleased to join Senators MUSKIE, SCOTT, and DOLE as a principal cosponsor of a bill to allow publicly supported charitable organizations to communicate directly with Congress and State legislatures, and to allow their members to express their views on legislation without jeopardizing the charities' tax exemption. The present law governing legislative activities of public charities is unduly restrictive, difficult to administer, highly discriminatory, inconsistent, and undemocratic. The present law effectively inhibits a diverse, informed, and important segment of our society from presenting its views either to Congress or State and local legislative bodies, and deprives legislators of the experience and knowledge of these charities.
A similar bill last year received wide bipartisan support. Russell E. Train, Chairman of the Council on Environment Equality, in testifying on a modified version of this bill before the House Committee on Ways and Means last year stated:
The administration strongly supports the objectives of (the modified bill) to clarify the tax treatment of certain exempt organizations in connection with their legislative activities. ... In providing guidance on the extent to which public charitable organizations under Section 501(c) (3) of the Code can make a contribution to the legislative process, the bill addresses an important and long-felt need, and goes far toward correcting an inequity in existing law.
Organizations are an integral part of a democracy. In a Nation of over 200 million persons, an individual, while seldom having an influence on the legislative process by himself, can have a profound effect if he allies himself with others of similar views. More than 100 years ago, Alexis de Tocqueville, one of the keenest observers of the United States noted that joint activity was necessary in a democracy. He stated in 1840:
If men living in democratic countries had no right and no inclination to associate for political purposes, their independence would be in a great jeopardy.
Forty-eight years later, Lord Bryce also noted the importance of associations in this country:
Such associations have great importance in the development of opinion, for they rouse attention. excite discussion, formulate principles, submit plans, embolden and stimulate their members, produce that impression of a spreading movement which goes so far towards success with a sympathetic and sensitive people ... (t)his habit of forming associations ... creates new centers of force and motion, and nourishes young causes and unpopular doctrines into a self-confident aggressiveness.
These are some of the reasons why certain organizations founded by religious, charitable, scientific, or educational purposes are allowed tax exempt status under section 501(c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code. These organizations have a rich tradition in our history and tax law.
Religious, educational, and charitable organizations were exempt from tax as early as 1894. The same exemption was contained in the Excise Tax Act of 1909 and in the first modern tax law passed in 1913. None of these laws contained any limitation of the legislative activities of the charitable organizations.
In 1934, however, the law governing the exemption of, and the deductibility of contributions to charitable organizations was amended by adding to the definition of charitable organization the phrase "no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on the propaganda or otherwise attempting to influence legislation." This language remains in the tax law today. The legislative history of this amendment is scanty and obscure. The amendment was not recommended by the Treasury Department, but was added to the bill by the Senate Finance Committee. The amendment was intended principally to bar deductions for contributions to an organization advancing the donor's selfish economic interests and was phrased more broadly only because of the difficulty of writing any standard of selfishness into the law.
In discussing this amendment, Senator Reed stated in the Senate debate on the Revenue Act of 1934:
Mr. President, as that amendment is worded, it would apply to the society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, or any of the worthy institutions that we do not in the slightest mean to effect ... There is no reason in the world why a contribution made by the National Economic League should be deductible as if it were a charitable contribution if it is a selfish one made to advance the personal interests of the giver of the money. That is what the committee was trying to reach; but we found great difficulty in phrasing the amendment. I do not reproach the draftsmen. I think we give them an impossible task, but this amendment goes much further than the committee intended to go.
Take the case of those who are urging the adoption of the child-labor amendment. Certainly they are not acting from selfish motives, and yet almost their entire activity is an effort to influence legislation.
Senator Reed's misgivings have been borne out by events. During the Ways and Means hearings on this issue last year, representatives of some 150 national public charities testified in support of this bill and expressed their difficulty with the present law. Their testimony clearly demonstrates public charities' great reluctance in expressing their views on legislative matters for fear of losing their tax-exempt and tax-deductible status.
This prohibition on the legislative activities of public charities is particularly unfair, because in 1962 Congress permitted business organizations for the first time to take income tax deductions for certain lobbying expenses related to legislation of direct interest to them. In support of this action, the House Ways and Means Committee reported (H. Rept. No. 1447, 87th Congress, second session, 17 (March 16, 1962))–
It is also desirable that taxpayers who have information bearing on the impact of present laws, or proposed legislation, on their trades or businesses not be discouraged in making this information available to the Members of Congress or legislators at other levels of government. The presentation of such information to the legislators is necessary to a proper evaluation of their part of the impact of present or proposed legislation.
These words have equal applicability to public charities. The tax law should enable an organization to protect the public interest to the same extent that another organization can protect economic interest.
The bill we are introducing today would make several improvements in existing law. It would allow public charities to participate in the legislative process, but is carefully drafted to provide significant safeguards against abuse. First, the bill applies only to public charities – that is, educational institutions, hospitals, churches, nonprofit environmental organizations, and other publicly supported charities.
Second, and most importantly its mechanism is elective, permitting public charities, including churches, either, first, to choose the bill's new quantitative tests on legislative activities, or second, to continue under the existing insubstantial activities rule.
Third, under the election, a public charity's exemption would not be jeopardized so long as its spending to influence legislation normally did not exceed 20 percent of its total expenditures to accomplish its exempt purposes. At the same time, no more than 5 percent of its total expenditures could be for grassroots activities – that is, attempts to affect the opinion of all or part of the general public.
Fourth, the bill makes clear the types of legislative activities in which an electing public charity may engage. Under the general 20 percent rule, first, they must relate to a matter which directly affects any purpose for which such organization is organized and operated, and second, they must consist of–
First. Testimony before Federal, State, and local legislative committees;
Second. Communications directly with members and employees of legislative bodies and with other Government officials or employees who participate in the formulation of legislation; or
Third. Direct communication of information between the organization and its members.
Fifth, the bill also specifies the types of other related activities – not considered expenditures to influence legislation – in which electing public charities may engage:
First. Making available the results of nonpartisan analysis, study, or research;
Second. Providing technical advice or assistance in response to a written request by a governmental body or committee; and
Third. Appearing before or communicating to a legislative body on issues which might affect the organization's own existence, powers, or duties, its tax-exempt status, or the deduction of contributions to it.
Beyond this, two inherent safeguards carefully limit the scope of this bill.
First, private foundations are not eligible to take advantage of this legislation. Thus, all restrictions imposed on private foundations by the 1969 Tax Reform Act remain wholly in effect.
Second, unaltered is the absolute ban on electioneering contained in present law under code section 501(c) (3) – that is, the flat prohibition against participating or intervening in political campaigns on behalf of candidates for public office.
This bill would allow greater participation by private citizens in public affairs, open the legislative process to a wider and more balanced presentation of views and greatly assist all legislators by providing them the benefits of the experience and knowledge of public charities.
These organizations represent the public in many important areas such as health, education, and the environment. These groups have much information to contribute and a wide range of helpful experience that could greatly assist the consideration and enactment of this country's laws. Democracy is served best when all views are heard.
Finally, my sponsorship of this bill does not deny, to any extent, the very compelling arguments that parts of section 501 (c) (3), conditioning the availability of a tax exemption on the promise to forego attempts to influence legislation, violates the first amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech and the right to petition the Government. The attempt to persuade legislative action is an exercise of the first amendment right to petition. As such, it may not be the occasion for the imposition of a penalty whether it take the direct form of a fine or the more indirect form of the denial of a Government benefit – tax exemption – to which the organization is otherwise entitled.
This is particularly so where, as here, there is no "compelling governmental interest" which would warrant abridging the right of charitable organizations to communicate with their representatives.