Over on the social channels I have boosted a lot of noise about HR 9495, known as the Stop Terror-Financing and Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act and co-sponsored by Rep. Claudia Tenney. Tenney is a Republican representing New York’s super-gerrymandered 24th district. As a fellow Upstate New Yorker, I have my gripes about Tenney beyond her sponsorship of this bill, but those are for another post.
What would HR 9495 do? The main concerning text of the bill would give the federal government the power to strip the tax-exempt status of any charitable organization and non-profit deemed to have aided terrorist activity. Now you may ask: Will, why’s that so bad? Don’t we want that? Well, we already have legislation preventing any American entity from aiding and abetting terrorists. Thank the PATRIOT Act and the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1996, if it pleases you.
The real purpose of HR 9495 is to allow the government to shut down organizations sympathetic to Palestine. The reason this legislation has become such a hot button now is because of the genocide occurring in Gaza and the West Bank, in Lebanon, and in other parts of the Levant such as Syria and Yemen. Supporters of this bill want to stifle dissent against Israeli violence and its American assistance. They want to continue to paint all Palestinians as terrorists, all Palestinian supporters as terrorist sympathizers, and anyone who speaks out against the genocide as a mouthpiece for terrorists and deem them brainwashed by propaganda.
This shouldn’t stand. It goes against basic freedom of speech, first off. Second off, it would strip many charitable organizations – many of which have nothing to do with sending support to Palestine – of their tax-exempt status, effectively making their financial situations difficult and making it hard for many of them to survive. It would put a lot of Americans at risk and stoke fear, doing nothing to actually protect the people and instead making them aware that they have two choices: Comply or die.
Is there anything good about the bill? Yes, actually. The bad part of the bill, as you might have seen from the title, only makes up one part of the legislation. The other part aims to remove tax penalties placed on Americans held hostage overseas, as well as postpone and alleviate any taxes they might have owed. This is fantastic! No one should return home from being held hostage only to get slapped with a hefty tax bill. If this was all HR 9495 aimed to do, I’d be calling every member of Congress to sign this bill and have it on the President’s desk as soon as possible.
But… There’s that other part. Yep. The part where the government can call your non-profit a funnel for terrorist funds and shut you down if you can’t provide proof that you never supported terrorist activity. That’s the part of this bill that makes it unacceptable. And therefore, it’s gotta be stopped at all costs.
Is this the first time Congress has tried to vote on this? No, it’s not. The bad part of this bill was originally its own piece of legislation, HR 6408, titled “To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to terminate the tax-exempt status of terrorist supporting organizations.” That passed the House with an overwhelming majority back in April, when not many folks were paying attention. 382 House members (including 179 Democrats) voted YEA, ten members (all Democratic) voted NAY, and 37 House members did not vote. Despite passing the House, HR 9495 died in the Senate before coming to a vote.
So Republicans in Congress tacked the bad text of HR 6408 onto the good text of HR 9495, ran it back through the necessary committees, and said, “Look! Now this bill has good parts! Don’t we want tax aid for hostages? Why won’t you vote on that? Clearly if you vote against a bill that helps hostages and hurts terrorists, you’re anti-American!”
Well, funnily enough, HR 9495 went back before the House for a vote last week, and it was even more unpopular. Who would have thought! This time, the bill failed to get a two-thirds majority in the House, with only 52 Democrats voting YEA. Still, the final roll call on the bill was 256 YEA votes, 145 NAY votes. Still far too close.
Wait, 52 Democrats still voted for this thing? Yep. It’s not surprising that all Republicans in the House either voted to pass this bill or didn’t vote at all. But while most Democrats either caved to public pressure or saw the light about this bill themselves, 52 of them still decided this bill was worth moving ahead to the Senate.
This is a big deal, because for last week’s vote, the House needed a two-thirds majority to pass this bill. For the next vote, they’ll only need a simple majority (or more than 50 percent.) Even if every Democrat votes NAY, it may still not be enough, but it’s better than if 52 Democrats side with the Republicans to put this bill over the top.
Those Democratic members of the House who voted YEA, by the way, are listed in the image below, and they’re also listed in the alt text if you have trouble viewing images. They are:
All right, so what do I do about it? Do you see your representative listed? Do you vote Democratic or consider yourself a liberal or left-of-center? Do you want to help prevent the rise of authoritarianism in this country and prevent the president from having the power to call your neighbors threats to the nation just for standing up against genocide? Well, call up your representative’s office and tell them to vote NAY on HR 9495 this time around. And if you don’t see your representative listed, still call them and remind them to vote NAY again.
(And if your Democratic representative still votes YEA on this bill, maybe you might consider having them primaried in the midterms!)
Public pressure helped bury this bill last time it came around for a vote. It’s important to stay ahead of Republican attempts to quash public dissent and manufacture consent for genocide. HR 9495, as we’ve seen, is not the first nor the last attempt Republicans will make to carry out their agenda.
Aren’t you afraid this will make you look bad, Will? I don’t think it’s a bad thing to speak out against authoritarian tactics, against genocide, against state-endorsed violence, and against real terrorism. And I never will! So there. Anyway, how about those Buffalo Bills.