We respect all religions — and none should have a seat at the table of government. The First Amendment got it right: free exercise AND no establishment. Both clauses matter. Yet the Establishment Clause has been weakened, the Johnson Amendment goes unenforced, and 500+ bills have weaponized religious exemptions to override civil rights. The CGP enforces both clauses — equally, consistently, and without exception.
Your faith is yours. Government's job is to protect it — not promote it, not favor it, not impose it. The First Amendment established the framework: free exercise AND no establishment. Both clauses matter. When government stays neutral, every faith is equally protected. When government picks a favorite, every other faith is at risk. This is not an anti-religion position. It is the most pro-religion position possible — because the only way to protect all faiths is for government to favor none.
Seven pillars of constitutional neutrality: Enforce the Establishment Clause. Protect genuine free exercise. Codify science-based policy making. Reform religious tax exemptions with real accountability. Keep public schools neutral. End weaponized religious exemptions that override civil rights. Require secular alternatives and full financial auditing for faith-based government programs.
The people support separation. The system has drifted — not because Americans changed their minds, but because organized political movements have systematically eroded the Establishment Clause while weaponizing the Free Exercise Clause. This platform restores the balance the Founders intended.
For five decades, the Lemon test provided a clear framework: government action must have a secular purpose, must neither advance nor inhibit religion, and must avoid excessive entanglement with religion. In Kennedy v. Bremerton School District (2022), the Supreme Court abandoned this standard in favor of a vague “historical practices and understandings” test. The result: a high school football coach leading prayers on the 50-yard line was protected; the Establishment Clause that was supposed to prevent government-sponsored religious activity was sidelined. States have since rushed to install Ten Commandments displays in public schools, inject creationism into curricula, and expand government-funded religious programs without secular alternatives.
RFRA — the Religious Freedom Restoration Act — was signed in 1993 by President Clinton with overwhelming bipartisan support. Its purpose was to protect minority religious practices: a Native American who uses peyote in ceremony, a Sikh who wears a turban in the military, a Muslim prisoner who needs halal food. In Burwell v. Hobby Lobby (2014), the Supreme Court expanded RFRA to allow closely held corporations to deny contraceptive coverage to employees based on the owners’ religious beliefs. The law designed to protect the powerless became a shield for the powerful.
The Johnson Amendment (1954) prohibits tax-exempt organizations — including churches — from endorsing or opposing candidates for political office. It has been virtually unenforced. The IRS has not revoked a single church’s tax-exempt status for political endorsement in over two decades. Churches receive tax exemptions worth tens of billions annually, face no financial disclosure requirements that every other nonprofit must meet, and increasingly function as political operations with zero accountability. Meanwhile, religious organizations received over $13.5 billion in Paycheck Protection Program loans during the pandemic with minimal oversight.
The First Amendment contains two religion clauses — and both are under attack. The Establishment Clause has been weakened by the courts. The Free Exercise Clause has been weaponized to override civil rights. The result is a system where government favors religion in general and specific religions in particular — exactly what the Founders prohibited.
Sources: Pew Research — pewresearch.org · ACLU — aclu.org · ProPublica — propublica.org
The Supreme Court incorporated the Establishment Clause against state governments, ruling that “neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church” and that the Clause means “neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another.” The wall of separation between church and state “must be kept high and impregnable.”
The Court prohibited government-composed prayers and mandatory Bible reading in public schools. These rulings established that government neutrality toward religion is the constitutional default — not hostility toward religion, but genuine neutrality. Students retain the right to pray individually; government simply cannot organize, compose, or mandate prayer.
Established the three-part test governing Establishment Clause cases for the next five decades: government action must have a secular purpose, must neither advance nor inhibit religion, and must avoid excessive entanglement. The Lemon test was imperfect but provided a workable, predictable standard for courts and government actors.
Passed with overwhelming bipartisan support after Employment Division v. Smith (1990) weakened free exercise protections. RFRA was designed to protect minority religious practices from generally applicable laws. Its original purpose was noble and necessary. Its subsequent expansion — particularly in Hobby Lobby (2014) — transformed it from a shield for minority faiths into a sword for majority religious power.
The Supreme Court ruled 5–4 that closely held corporations could invoke RFRA to deny contraceptive coverage to employees under the ACA. Justice Ginsburg’s dissent warned that the ruling “would deny legions of women who do not hold their employers’ beliefs access to contraceptive coverage.” The decision opened the door to using religious belief as a basis for denying legally mandated benefits and services.
The Supreme Court ruled 6–3 that a public high school football coach had a constitutional right to lead prayers on the 50-yard line after games. The decision effectively replaced the Lemon test with a “historical practices and understandings” analysis that dramatically weakened the Establishment Clause. Justice Sotomayor’s dissent: the majority “elevates one individual’s interest in personal religious exercise” over “the competing interest of students who do not wish to participate.”
Sources: Supreme Court opinions — supremecourt.gov · Americans United — au.org
Multiple democracies have solved the church-state challenge. They protect religious freedom while maintaining government neutrality — and they do it better than the United States. The models vary, but the principle is consistent: government serves everyone, favors no one.
| Country | Model | Key Features |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | Federal neutrality with cantonal autonomy | 26 cantons, multiple official religions at cantonal level, zero state religion at federal level. Among the highest religious freedom index scores globally. Proves that protecting multiple religions requires favoring none. |
| France | Laïcité (strict separation) | Since 1905: government provides no funding to any religion. Complete separation of religious institutions from state institutions. Government does not collect religious data or fund religious schools. |
| Turkey | Constitutional secularism | Secular constitution since 1923 despite 99% Muslim population. Diyanet (Directorate of Religious Affairs) manages religious services without establishing a state faith. Shows secularism and deep religiosity can coexist. |
| India | Constitutional secularism | Equal respect and protection for all religions with state neutrality. No state religion. Personal law systems for different religious communities. Manages the world’s largest religious diversity. |
| Japan | Strict separation | Article 20 of the Constitution prohibits religious organizations from exercising political authority. No public money may be spent on religious institutions. Religious freedom protected without government involvement. |
| United States | Constitutional separation (eroding) | First Amendment protections weakened by Kennedy v. Bremerton; Johnson Amendment unenforced; 500+ religious exemption bills; $13.5B+ in PPP loans to religious orgs with no oversight; no financial transparency for churches. |
Switzerland is the CGP model. Twenty-six cantons with multiple religious traditions coexisting under a federal government that favors none. The result: among the highest religious freedom scores in the world. Government neutrality does not weaken faith — it protects it. The Swiss model proves that the way to protect all religions is to favor no religion.
Sources: Pew Research Global Restrictions on Religion — pewresearch.org · OECD Religious Freedom data — oecd.org
Seven pillars covering the full scope of church-state neutrality: Establishment Clause enforcement, free exercise protection, science-based policy, tax accountability, education neutrality, civil rights protection, and faith-based program reform. The underlying principle is simple: government protects your faith. Government does not promote it, favor it, or impose it.
Kennedy v. Bremerton (2022) weakened the Establishment Clause by abandoning the Lemon test. States responded by installing Ten Commandments displays in public schools, expanding government-funded religious programs, and blurring the line between government and faith. This pillar restores what the First Amendment requires: government neutrality on religion.
Free exercise means the right to worship, pray, and practice your faith without government interference. It means the government cannot tell you what to believe, how to worship, or whether to worship at all. It does not mean the right to use government power to impose your beliefs on others or to override laws that protect everyone’s civil rights.
Climate policy should reflect atmospheric science. Healthcare coverage should reflect medical consensus. Education curricula should reflect scientific standards. Policy is accountable to evidence. Faith is a personal matter — it does not get a veto over peer-reviewed research, and it does not override the scientific method in public institutions.
The Johnson Amendment (1954) prohibits tax-exempt organizations from endorsing candidates. It has not been enforced against a church in over two decades. Religious organizations are the only 501(c)(3) category exempt from basic financial disclosure. Churches receive tax exemptions worth tens of billions annually with zero accountability. Religious organizations that received $13.5 billion in PPP loans faced minimal oversight.
Public schools serve every child regardless of faith. That means they cannot promote any faith. Students retain the right to pray individually — the government simply cannot organize, compose, or promote prayer. After Kennedy v. Bremerton, multiple states attempted to reintroduce organized prayer, creationism, and religious instruction into public classrooms.
Between 2015 and 2024, 45 states introduced over 500 bills using religious exemptions to override civil rights protections in housing, employment, healthcare, and adoption. RFRA — designed to protect a Native American’s peyote ceremony or a Sikh soldier’s turban — has been transformed into a license for discrimination by powerful institutions.
Federal faith-based initiatives have expanded significantly since 2001 without adequate safeguards. Faith-based organizations providing government-funded services — drug treatment, homeless services, job training, disaster relief — operate with less oversight than secular providers and often lack secular alternatives for citizens who do not want religious programming as a condition of receiving services.
Church-state separation is primarily regulatory, not budgetary — and most reforms are revenue-positive. Religious organizations currently receive an estimated $71 billion per year in tax exemptions (FFRF/Cragun et al., 2012, adjusted for inflation). The CGP does not propose eliminating religious tax exemptions — it proposes accountability and the closure of specific loopholes. Total 10-year net fiscal impact: +$6–16 billion in net revenue after all enforcement costs.
| Component | 10-Year Fiscal Impact | Mechanism & Source |
|---|---|---|
| Closing the clergy housing (parsonage) loophole | +$8–10B revenue | The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates the parsonage exemption (IRC §107) costs $800M–$1B per year in foregone revenue. Eliminating the exemption for housing allowances above the local median home value recovers most of this while protecting modest clergy housing. (JCT, “Estimates of Federal Tax Expenditures,” 2023) |
| Johnson Amendment enforcement & revocation of violating exemptions | +$2–5B revenue | An estimated 2,000–4,000 churches openly violate the Johnson Amendment each “Pulpit Freedom Sunday.” Revoking tax-exempt status for organizations engaged in sustained political campaigning recovers federal income tax on their net revenue. Deterrent effect reduces violations over time. (Alliance Defending Freedom “Pulpit Freedom Sunday” data; IRS exempt organizations division) |
| Form 990 filing requirement for religious organizations | +$1–3B revenue | Religious organizations are the only 501(c)(3) entities exempt from Form 990 financial disclosure. Requiring filing exposes abusive arrangements — prosperity gospel operations, unreported investment income, excessive compensation — that currently escape scrutiny. The $71B annual religious tax exemption (FFRF estimate) likely includes $1–3B in organizations that would lose exemption status under standard nonprofit accountability rules. (FFRF/Cragun et al.; Tax Policy Center) |
| IRS Religious Organizations Audit Division (new) | $1.5–2.5B cost | Expanding IRS capacity by 300–500 specialized agents at $150–250M/year. The IRS currently has a near-total moratorium on church audits due to the Church Audit Procedures Act. This investment enables enforcement of the reforms above. ROI estimated at 4:1 based on IRS enforcement data showing every $1 in audit capacity returns $4–12 in revenue. (IRS Data Book; Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration) |
| Establishment Clause enforcement & government neutrality codification | $200–500M cost | Statutory codification and DOJ Civil Rights Division resources for enforcement. Partially offset by reduced litigation costs from clearer legal standards — Establishment Clause cases cost federal, state, and local governments an estimated $50–100M/year in legal fees. (ACLU; Americans United for Separation of Church and State litigation databases) |
| Science-based policy standards (EPA, FDA, NIH, DoEd) | Net savings: $1–3B | Removing faith-based interference from public health produces measurable savings. Abstinence-only sex education programs cost $2B+ over 20 years with no demonstrated efficacy; evidence-based alternatives reduce teen pregnancy and STI costs. Faith-based resistance to needle exchange and harm reduction policies costs an estimated $1–2B/year in preventable HIV treatment. (Mathematica Policy Research; CDC cost-effectiveness analyses) |
| Public education neutrality enforcement | $300–500M cost | Department of Education curriculum standards enforcement and monitoring through existing Office for Civil Rights, expanded by $30–50M/year. (DoEd OCR budget justification) |
| RFRA reform | $0 | Statutory amendment — no ongoing cost. Reduces litigation by clarifying that religious exemptions cannot override civil rights protections. (Congressional Budget Office scoring of similar amendments) |
| Faith-based program accountability & secular alternatives | $2–3B cost | Ensuring secular alternatives exist for all federally funded programs ($150–250M/year) plus auditing requirements ($50M/year). Offset by improved program outcomes and reduced waste from unaccountable faith-based contractors. (GAO reports on faith-based initiative outcomes) |
10-year fiscal summary: Revenue gains of $11–18 billion (parsonage loophole closure + Johnson Amendment enforcement + Form 990 transparency) minus enforcement and program costs of $5–9 billion = net revenue of $6–16 billion over 10 years. This is one of the few policy areas where doing the right thing also generates revenue for the federal government.
What we are NOT doing: The CGP does not propose taxing churches broadly. The $71 billion annual religious tax exemption (FFRF estimate) remains largely intact. What changes is that religious organizations must meet the same transparency and accountability standards as every other nonprofit — Form 990 filing, no political campaigning, honest financial disclosure. Organizations that follow the rules keep their exemptions. Organizations that abuse them do not.
Sources: Joint Committee on Taxation — jct.gov · FFRF / Cragun et al. — ffrf.org · Tax Policy Center — taxpolicycenter.org · IRS Data Book — irs.gov · Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration — treasury.gov/tigta
Sources: Treaty of Tripoli — avalon.law.yale.edu · Americans United — au.org · Freedom From Religion Foundation — ffrf.org
| Statistic | Figure | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Religiously unaffiliated Americans | 29% — the largest single group | Pew Research 2023 |
| Support for separation of church and state | 70% | Pew Research |
| Religious exemption bills (2015–2024) | 500+ bills in 45 states | ACLU Legislative Tracker |
| PPP loans to religious organizations | $13.5 billion+ | SBA / ProPublica |
| Churches losing tax-exempt status for political endorsement | 0 in 20+ years | IRS data |
| Johnson Amendment enacted | 1954 — 70+ years of non-enforcement | 26 U.S.C. § 501(c)(3) |
| Estimated annual religious tax exemptions | ~$71 billion | Tax Policy Center |
| First Amendment ratified | 1791 — free exercise AND no establishment | U.S. Constitution |
| Switzerland religious freedom ranking | Top 10 globally | Pew Research Global Restrictions |
| France laïcité enacted | 1905 — zero government funding for religion | French Republic |
| Treaty of Tripoli (1797) | “not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion” | Ratified unanimously by US Senate |
| “In God We Trust” as national motto | 1956 — Cold War-era addition, not Founding-era | Congressional Research Service |
Church-state separation intersects with nearly every rights issue in this platform. When government favors religion, it is reproductive rights, LGBTQ+ rights, education policy, and criminal justice that suffer. Neutrality is not one issue — it is the precondition for equal treatment across all issues.
“We respect all religions — and none should have a seat at the table of government. The government serves every citizen equally: Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, atheist, agnostic, and everyone else. Your faith is yours. Government’s job is to protect it — not promote it, not favor it, not impose it. The First Amendment got it right. Both clauses matter.”— The Common Good Party