Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Trump's FEC member says this election is a 'spiritual war'

Trey Trainor

FEC Chairman Trey Trainor said the separation of church and state is a "fallacy."

Caroline Brehman/Getty Images

The nation's newest campaign finance regulator is inserting himself into the never-ending debate about separating church and state, and causing a stir by accusing Roman Catholic bishops of hiding behind their church's nonprofit status to avoid endorsing candidates.

Trey Trainor, a Catholic who was confirmed for a long-vacant seat on the Federal Election Commission in May, also said in an interview with the conservative website Church Militant released on Wednesday (and a followup interview with the Religion News Service) that separation of church and state is a "fallacy" and that this year's election amounts to a "spiritual war."

None of these comments would appear to have any bearing on Trainor's role overseeing the federal rules that govern the flow of money into politics, but they quickly attracted criticism.


All nonprofits are prohibited by federal law from taking part in political campaigns, and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops states in its "Political Activity Guidelines" that this precludes supporting or opposing specific candidates.

Trainor said he believes church officials are motivated by a fear of losing their tax status and the tax dollars that go to Catholic social service agencies.

"The bishops are using their nonprofit status as a shield to hide behind from having to make a decision about who to support," said Trainor, a longtime Republican campaign lawyer in Texas who is the only person President Trump has put on the FEC.

He said the bishops have nothing to fear about their tax status because Trump issued an executive order in 2017 directing the Treasury not to pursue legal action against religious organizations that speak out about politics. The actual impact of that order has been heavily debated but even Trainor agreed that it does not change the law on the books.

Fellow FEC Commissioner Ellen Weintraub is among those who disputed Trainor's views about limits on religious groups' political activity.

"My colleague is not correct," Weintraub, a Democrat who recently turned over the rotating job of FEC chairman to Trainor, said in a statement to RNS. She said the "statute remains the law of the land and cannot be undone with an executive order."

John Gehring, Catholic program director with the progressive group Faith in Public Life, tweeted that Trainor's comments were a "brazen use of federal power to encourage Catholic leaders to endorse Trump."

While their clergy have avoided endorsing candidates, some Catholics argue that followers of the faith should not vote for Democrats because of their support for abortion rights — most prominently Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, who is Catholic.

A Lacrosse, Wis., priest sparked controversy when he posted a video last month saying: "You cannot be a Catholic and a Democrat. Period." His bishop promised last week to "correct" the priest but a bishop in Texas stated his support for what the Wisconsin priest said.

Trainor's comment about the separation of church and state was based on the conservative legal view that the prohibition against government-sponsored religion in the Constitution is not meant to preclude people from expressing and acting on their faith in the public square.

And in his interview with RNS, he expanded on his comment that the election is a spiritual war.

"What we see going on around the country is complete anarchy in places where the rule of law has been completely abrogated," Trainor said. "So it is a spiritual war in that it is striking at the underlying foundations of our constitutional republic. It's getting rid of the Christian moral principles that are the basis of the foundation of the country."

The dustup comes at a time when Trainor is somewhat underemployed. Just a month after he joined the FEC one of his new colleagues resigned, leaving just three commissioners on the job — one short of a quorum, meaning the regulators have not been able to take any enforcement actions during the height of campaign season.


Read More

Business meeting, blurred background and people in office for teamwork, collaboration and planning

Another recruitment drive won’t fix a nonprofit board. A practical guide to sharing real decision-making power with diverse members: acknowledge, affirm, act.

Jacob Wackerhausen/Getty Images

Before Recruiting Diverse Board Members, Examine Who Holds Power

Nonprofit leaders keep asking me where they will find the next generation of diverse board talent. My question is what those leaders will be allowed to change once they arrive. In this piece, I outline concrete steps boards can take to ensure diverse members have real opportunities to shape organizational decision-making and to translate good intentions into meaningful progress.

In my board service and consulting work, I hear the concern from executives and grassroots activists alike. They worry about recruiting successors, sustaining funding, and governing organizations whose work increasingly depends on partnerships beyond their own walls. I share those concerns. I also wonder whether another recruitment initiative will solve what troubles them.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

jimfeng/Getty Images

Pennsylvania’s Bipartisan Exchange Is Rebuilding Trust in Governance

The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics has nearly 40 years of experience working with legislators from different political parties, and it is building on this history by drawing on lessons from the successful American Congressional Exchange model, begun in 2018 at the Bipartisan Policy Center, and from state exchanges now underway in Minnesota and Michigan. The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics, in collaboration with the Bridge Alliance, has launched the Pennsylvania Legislative Exchange.

This state-based, systematic approach is designed to foster better relationships and build trust across the political aisle with the following guiding principles:

Keep ReadingShow less
Shadow on a wall of Judge hitting gavel in court, concept of justice, law, and legal protection

DOJ lawsuits in Alaska and California preview post-Election Day fights over certification and seating winners. Here’s how officials and voters can prepare.

Aitor Diago / Getty Images

The Lawsuits Will Lose. The Delays Will Still Win.

Less than two weeks before Election Day, President Trump’s Justice Department asked a federal court to stop Alaska from certifying its U.S. Senate race if Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan loses to Democrat Mary Peltola. The lawsuit claims that a second candidate on the ballot, Daniel J. Sullivan, will confuse voters. That argument went nowhere in June, when the Alaska Supreme Court ruled that the state had no legal way to remove him from the ballot. Asked about the suit, the president took credit. “I’m the one that said do it,” he told reporters.

Alongside the Alaska suit, the Trump administration sued California to keep the state from counting mail ballots from 20,000 people it calls “likely” noncitizens. Over the summer, the Department of Homeland Security put that number at 190,000. Legal experts expect both suits to fail, as so many suits like them have. Still, Alaska and California give us an early look at what the weeks after November 3rd could bring: recount demands, calls to review or throw out ballots, and pressure to delay seating winners.

Keep ReadingShow less