FEDERAL TAX LAW ALLOWS ACADEMICS TO LOBBY

Abstract

As public health lawyers and long-time advocates for the use of law as a tool to improve the public's health, we applaud Longest and Huber's call for more direct involvement by public health academics in public policy advocacy.1 Their description of the law governing lobbying by university employees, however, suggested much more restriction on such activity than federal law actually imposes. We write to correct that misimpression. First, contrary to the authors’ assertion that “overt lobbying” by charities is prohibited, federal tax law expressly permits charities to lobby within certain limits, and even provides powerful tools that allow charities to lobby without putting their tax-exempt status at risk.2 Second, the relevant definition of lobbying, as set forth in the Internal Revenue Code,3 does not include efforts to influence administrative regulations, as opposed to legislation. Third, the authors failed to describe several exceptions to the lobbying definition that allow public health faculty to communicate with legislators and take a position on specific legislation without engaging in lobbying. Two of the exceptions, for “non-partisan analysis, study, and research”4,5 and for responses to a written request from a government body for technical advice,4,5 are particularly useful for public health academics. We agree with Longest and Huber that advocates, including public health academics, must be mindful of the relevant law governing lobbying by charities when contemplating initiating a communication intended to influence legislation. With sound legal advice, however, those who work for universities or other charitable organizations can participate directly in shaping public health policy through effective advocacy, including both direct and grassroots lobbying.