It’s been such a long time since I shared a rant. And, today (ok, whenever this really gets posted) seems like the perfect day.

You see, Congress is reverting back to its dirty tricks. Of course, TheDonald encouraged them a few months ago when he suggested that we needed to allow earmarks once again. Like, these slush fund projects that promote the parochial interest of lobbyists does America a whit of good. But, these “hidden gems” are even more devious.

First, a little history. The Johnson Amendment. You know, I’ll bet a bunch of you have heard of this- and thought it was developed when Lyndon Johnson was President. Nope.

This amendment dates back to July 1954. Right about the time that the United States decided to add two words to our Pledge of Allegiance. (Thankfully, New York State was a little late in adopting that change, so I never learned that “under God” was added.) Which is why the amendment is so curious to folks like me.

Here we are, letting folks change our tune, by adding the concept of the Supreme Being to the existence of the United States. (I always am fearful when any “side” believes that they have God on their side. That usually means things aren’t really as “good” as one would like.) And, (then) Senator Johnson manages to amend the Internal Revenue code to disallow 501(c)(3) non-profit organizations from endorsing or opposing political candidates. (Now, I admit the IRS has been WAY too lax in enforcing this provision- but it does exist…. for now.)

You see, someone (trust me on this- I’ll explain later) plans to repeal the Johnson Amendment. To allow churches (and synagogues, and mosques) and their leaders to advocate for a specific political candidate. After all, this is a vital tenet for the WrongWing Christians (and more than a few GOP politicians) who feel that the separation between church and state needs to be sheared apart. (They claim it’s religious freedom. Yup. By trampling on the long-held and well-established “mechitza“- keeping church and state separate.) What it really does is let folks donate money to a “charity” that is nothing other than a political action committee. (Political donations are NOT tax-deductible, unless this provision – or something similar- becomes law.)

How will ‘they’ do this? Via a “rider” to a “must-pass” bill. (In case you don’t know, a rider is a totally unrelated provision to the law or statute being considered; the rider doesn’t require a separate vote, or even be subject to debate.) And, here’s the kicker. No one officially knows who proposed that change, when this “process” is employed. (Now, you see why I said “someone”.)

In particular, this heinous act will be proposed sometime in the next two weeks when (or is that if?) Congress finishes its constitutionally mandated function and will pass an appropriations bill that extends for the entire fiscal year.

And, as long as we are desperate to destroy the fabric of the United States, why don’t we remove the caps on the cash folks are allowed to donate to candidates?  Oh, wait!  That’s coming soon to a voting booth near you.

In particular, this rider will skirt the rules by letting candidates and/or parties coordinate their “communication” activities. Right now, it is illegal for a candidate and his/her party to employ the same vendor for public relations or advertising. Since that means the money gets co-mingled, and the limits that a candidate and the party can each spend are moot.

(By the way, that hush money that Stormy Daniels got to NOT divulge her dalliances with TheDonald while his wife was pregnant? If Michael Cohen, TheDonald’s personal lawyer, really did use his own money to fund that LLC that came up with the bribe? That was a violation of the campaign finance laws, because he exceeded the amount of money he could donate to a candidate.)

And, there’s more. ‘Someone’ (again that nebulous term) is attempting to slip into the House budget a provision to outlaw the rules that businesses seeking (whether they obtain them or not) any federal contract must disclose their political spending.

Why am I bringing this up? Because I’m scared for America. And, because some slimy $^&%^&& has already added a rider preventing the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) from enforcing the rules stipulating that public companies must disclose their political contributions to their stockholders and yet another rider stopping the IRS from developing standards for “dark money” groups- those political action committees that claim (wink-wink, nod-nod) that they are social organizations . That means they never have to tell us who are their donors or from where (or how) they obtain their funds and spend their money.

Don’t you hear Miss Liberty crying too?