Margaret Fuller 2 360x1000
3albion
Mary Ann Evans 360x1000
Tad Friend 360x1000
Betty Friedan 360x1000
Ruth Bader Ginsburg 360x1000
James Gould Cozzens 360x1000
4albion
lifeinmiddlemarch2
Storyparadox1
1transcendentalist
AlexRosenberg
Lafayette and Jefferson 360x1000
1defense
1gucci
7albion
1lafayette
storyparadox2
2theleastofus
1theleasofus
Margaret Fuller5 360x1000
399
4confidencegames
2jesusandjohnwayne
lifeinmiddlemarch1
13albion
Susie King Taylor 360x1000
Samuel Johnson 360x1000
1jesusandjohnwayne
1albion
Margaret Fuller4 360x1000
Edmund Burke 360x1000
Learned Hand 360x1000
1madoff
Margaret Fuller2 360x1000
George M Cohan and Lerarned Hand 360x1000
1paradide
Office of Chief Counsel 360x1000
Maria Popova 360x1000
Margaret Fuller 360x1000
Mark V Holmes 360x1000
2falsewitness
2defense
Adam Gopnik 360x1000
3defense
2transadentilist
299
9albion
Margaret Fuller3 360x1000
LillianFaderman
1falsewitness
Richard Posner 360x1000
Susie King Taylor2 360x1000
10abion
5confidencegames
6albion
Brendan Beehan 360x1000
Thomas Piketty2 360x1000
12albion
Maurice B Foley 360x1000
Margaret Fuller1 360x1000
14albion
499
2gucci
1trap
Gilgamesh 360x1000
2lafayette
Thomas Piketty3 360x1000
1empireofpain
Anthony McCann2 360x1000
Spottswood William Robinson 360x1000
6confidencegames
11albion
7confidencegames
Thomas Piketty1 360x1000
3theleastofus
8albion'
11632
1lookingforthegoodwar
5albion
2trap
3confidencegames
1confidencegames
storyparadox3
2lookingforthegoodwar
199
3paradise
Stormy Daniels 360x1000
2albion
2confidencegames
Anthony McCann1 360x1000
George F Wil...360x1000
2paradise
1lauber
Originally Published on forbes.com on March 2nd, 2012

______________________________________

Robert Baty recently appeared here in a guest post on the constituionality of the clergy housing allowance.  He is back to discuss how the thinking behind the desire for conscience excecptions to Obamacare provisions compares to that behind the clergy housing allowance.
An Analogy: Healthcare for all and Housing for “ministers”!
By Robert Baty
March 1, 2012
ObamaCare and its latest manifestation regarding insurance and reproductive options have been topics of considerable discussion in recent days.  I have been attracted to that debate because of the analogy I see between it and the “sleeper” issues addressed by Senator Grassley’s recent commission investigating, in part, the income tax free ministerial housing allowance and the proceeding Freedom From Religion Foundation lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the income tax free ministerial housing allowance.
Here’s the proposed, basic analogy:
> The opponents of ObamaCare have latched on
> to a certain administrative provision allegedly
> offensive to some.  The opponents want to
> expand the exemption for churches and their
> “integrated auxiliaries” to include, depending
> on who you talk to, just about any organization
> or business owned or operated by someone
> that invokes “religious conscience.
> The income tax free ministerial housing allowance
> that has been around for almost 100 years, was
> originally a nominal benefit for a few individuals,
> but has since been expanded to include million
> dollar benefits to tele-evangelists, their media
> production crew, corporate executives,
> “basketball ministers” and similar employees at
> private schools such as Pepperdine University.
> If the opponents of ObamaCare are allowed to
> prevail on this issue, the Government will again
> be placed, arguably, in the position of
> unconstitutionally “ entangling” itself in matters
> of religion and allowing administrators to
> quibble over whether or not certain businesses
> and organizations are “religious” enough to
> be given the option currently allowed only
> to churches and their “integrated auxiliaries”.
> The Government should have stopped with
> the allowance of a nominal benefit for “ministers”
> who live in a residence provided by their
> employer on the grounds of the employer (in
> effect codifying the application of IRC 119 to
> “ministers” so situated).

> The Government is justified in proposing that
> the healthcare exemption regarding conscience be limited
> to churches and their “integrated auxiliaries”.
There are reasons why certain businesses and other organizations have been established independent of the religious organizations (e.g., churches) to which their owners/operators might be members.
While the reasons may be as diverse as the organizations and individuals who operate them, the distinction should be recognized by the Government.  The benefits afforded to the religious organizations (e.g., churches), in this case, may be denied to the other activities of members of the religious groups in order to prevent the Government from unconstitutionally “entangling” itself in the miserable task of evaluating the “religiosity” of non-church organizations, businesses, and individuals.
Freedom of Religion is not absolute!
There may be some middle ground that is ultimately legislated or litigated, but I propose the current effort to simply expand the exemption for churches and their “integrated auxiliaries” to just about any organization or business that has someone willing to invoke “religious conscience” is misguided from a legal standpoint.
We’ve seen how such a course has played out with reference to the incometax free ministerial housing allowance and we don’t need to start down a similar road with reference to the current health care debate over reproductive options and insurance under ObamaCare.
The Government is constitutionally justified in drawing the line at churches and their “integrated auxiliaries”.
Another possible analogy also comes to mind that might be worthy of notice; some of most vocal apologists for doing little or nothing with reference to the income tax free ministerial housing allowance might look and sound like some of the most vocal apologists for expanding the health care exemption to any organization, business or individual who utters the magic words “religious conscience”.
———————–
I really admire Mr. Baty for continuing his fight against clergy tax abuse into retirement.  I hope he remains a regular visitor here.
You can follow me on twitter @peterreillycpa.