In America: Logrolling & The Controversy of H.R. 9495
What is Logrolling, and Why Does It Matter?
“Logrolling" refers to the deliberate placement of unpopular elements into the text of a bill with more favorable attributes. This strategy is frequently used to ensure the passage of contentious or unpopular measures by tying them to legislation likely to receive widespread support. Logrolling has long been common in Congress, with notable examples including the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which included provisions addressing racial and gender discrimination, and the Affordable Care Act, which combined various healthcare reforms to secure enough votes to pass.
What is H.R. 9495, and why is it Controversial?
H.R. 9495, the Stop Terrorist Financing and Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act, is a recent and particularly contentious example of logrolling. This bill, proposed in the 118th Congress, sought to amend the Internal Revenue Code to grant tax compensation to American citizens wrongfully detained or held prisoner abroad. However, it also included an ambiguous provision authorizing the Secretary of the Treasury to revoke the tax-exempt status of groups found to "promote" terrorism. Which - on the surface, sounds like an excellent thing - nobody would want to support terrorist organizations willingly. But the bill was introduced to the house at the height of student protests in Israel's war in Gaza - when various congresspeople branded the student protestors "perpetrators of terror."
Who Supports and Opposes H.R. 9495?
Proponents of the bill argued that the current process for revoking tax-exempt status from organizations supporting terrorism is inadequate and time-consuming. Congressman David Kustoff, a Republican co-sponsor of the bill, said to Al Jazeera, "Right now, our ability to crack down on tax-exempt organizations that support terrorism is inadequate. Doing so, under current law, requires a time-consuming bureaucratic process that has sometimes prevented federal authorities from acting."
However, critics saw the bill as a dangerous overreach that could target civil rights organizations and stifle dissent. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and over 100 other groups signed a letter warning that the bill "raises significant constitutional concerns" and could lead to "politicized and discriminatory enforcement." Kia Hamadanchy, a senior policy counsel at the ACLU, expressed concerns about potential abuse, stating, "The entire process is run at the sole discretion of the secretary of [the] treasury. So, you could have your nonprofit status revoked before you ever have a chance to have a hearing."
How Did the Bill Change and What Happened Next?
The bill initially failed to pass the House of Representatives, falling short of the two-thirds majority needed. Critics argued that the bill's provision targeting nonprofits was designed to suppress pro-Palestinian groups and other rights organizations. The bill was reintroduced with amendments to exclude the controversial provision about revoking tax-exempt status but retained the measure to provide tax relief to Americans held hostage abroad.
A notable case highlighting the potential benefits of the amended bill was that of Travis Timmerman, an American recently freed from captivity in Syria. If the bill passes the Senate and is signed into law, Timmerman and others in similar situations could receive significant tax relief during their period of captivity.
What Are the Broader Implications of H.R. 9495?
Despite the amendments, the bill continued to face opposition. Oxfam America President and CEO Abby Maxman released a statement saying, "H.R. 9495 is a threat to free speech. It would grant the Trump administration, and any future administration, the ability to silence and censor its critics, curb free speech, target political opponents, and punish crucial organizations that speak truth to power." But the bill’s criticisms do not end there. Other prominent critics include - Amnesty USA and the NAACP.
Which Democrats voted for H.r. 9495?
Unsurprisingly, the Republican members of the House voted along party lines. Surprisingly, however, 15 Democrats decided against towing their party’s line and voted to enforce the controversial bill. Following the 2024 elections, the outcomes for these representatives were mixed. Colin Allred lost to Ted Cruz in the U.S. Senate race, and Yadira D. Caraveo lost to Gabe Evans in Colorado's 8th Congressional District. However, the rest won reelection in their respective districts. Siding with the incoming administration to make their lives easier in the next administration is not a new or unfounded practice in American politics. Collin Peterson (Minnesota) and Dan Lipinski (Illinois) voted on Republican lines in 2017 to pass a controversial tax cut for corporations and high-net-worth individuals, causing the bill to be passed narrowly during the first Trump Presidency.
What Does This Mean for the Future of Logrolling and H.R. 9495?
In short - not much. Logrolling will still be used, be that by a Democratic or Republican administration. While the practice has been labeled "reprehensible" by the American Economic Review as far back as 1992, it has yet to stop. It is an effective tool to help you swallow the pill if you must. Assuming the bill passes the Senate, the odds of outgoing President Biden signing it are very low - but that's not to say that it will never be signed. President-Elect Trump's second administration has a sweeping majority of both houses, so in theory - it could be signed by the former and future president in the early months of his second regime.
But - is it unconstitutional? Not really - hiding unpopular text in large chunks of favorable text is almost engrained into the fabric of American politics. Be that in 1964, where ending segregation wasn't popular enough and had to be combined with rights for women and other marginalized communities, or as recently as 2020, where Iowan lawmakers sneaked language into a bill that nearly left the states that left the state's 3 million residents liable to a large increase in their electric bill. For better or for worse - logrolling is here to stay. The solution - individual scrutiny of the bills and advocacy to amend the bills.