‘We Want God Writing the Laws of the Land'
Feucht has recently become a MAGA superstar. He tours the country holding rallies that blend upbeat Christian-rock songs with sermons that tie in his right-wing political views. Between praising President Donald Trump as God's chosen one and suggesting that abortion supporters are 'demons,' Feucht has repeatedly advocated for the fusion of Church and state. During a performance in front of the Wisconsin statehouse in 2023, Feucht paused after a song to make a proclamation: 'Yeah, we want God in control of government,' he said. 'We want God writing the laws of the land.' He has held rallies at all 50 state capitols, spreading similar theocratic messages.
Feucht did not respond to multiple requests for comment. At times, he has denied being a Christian nationalist, but it can be hard to take that perspective seriously. Last year, he overtly embraced the term at a church in Tulsa, Oklahoma. 'That's why we get called, Well, you're Christian nationalists. You want the kingdom to be the government? Yes! You want God to come and overtake the government? Yes! You want Christians to be the only ones? Yes, we do,' Feucht said. 'We want God to be in control of everything,' he continued. 'We want believers to be the ones writing the laws.'
Feucht has the ear of many top Republicans. After he held a prayer gathering on the National Mall a week before the 2024 presidential election, Trump personally congratulated him for 'the incredible job' he was doing defending 'religious liberty.' Feucht then attended Trump's inauguration prayer service at the National Cathedral in January, where he embraced Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth. The very next week, he posted that House Speaker Mike Johnson had invited him to hold a worship event in the Capitol. Then, in April, Feucht performed at the White House.
Given his rallies and political connections, Feucht is 'maybe the most effective evangelical figure on the far right,' Matthew D. Taylor, the senior Christian scholar at the Institute for Islamic, Christian, and Jewish Studies, told me. He is a big reason Christian nationalism has more purchase now than at any other point in recent history. According to a February poll from the Public Religion Research Institute, a majority of Republicans support or sympathize with Christian nationalism. They agreed with a variety of statements provided by PRRI, such as 'If the U.S. moves away from our Christian foundations, we will not have a country anymore.' Last month, the Appeal to Heaven flag —a symbol popular among Christian nationalists—was spotted flying above a D.C. government building. Feucht is pushing to bring religion and government into even closer alignment.
Feucht comes from a subset of evangelical Christianity known as the New Apostolic Reformation, or NAR. As my colleague Stephanie McCrummen has written, 'The movement has never been about policies or changes to the law; it's always been about the larger goal of dismantling the institutions of secular government to clear the way for the Kingdom. It is about God's total victory.' Many NAR adherents believe in the 'seven-mountain mandate,' a framework that seeks to go beyond ending the separation between Church and state. The goal is to eventually control the 'seven mountains' of contemporary culture: family, religion, education, media, arts and entertainment, business, and government. Feucht has endorsed the fundamental concept. 'Why shouldn't we be the ones leading the way in all spheres of society?' he said in a 2022 sermon. In a conversation that same year, Feucht referenced his desire for Christian representation in 'the seven spheres of society.'
NAR has several high-profile leaders, but Feucht has been especially adept at drawing outside attention to the movement's goals. After rising to prominence during the early days of the pandemic by throwing Christian-rock concerts in violation of lockdown orders, Feucht has built a massive audience of devotees. His constant stream of worship events across the country makes Christian nationalism more accessible for the religious masses, as does his prolific social-media presence (he has half a million followers between Instagram and X). Feucht is connected to just about every faction of the modern right, even the grassroots fringe: On one occasion, he enlisted a member o f the Proud Bo ys, the sometimes-violent far-right group, as part of his security detail. (Feucht later claimed that he wasn't familiar with the group.)
With Feucht's help, a version of the seven-mountain mandate is coming true. The Trump administration is cracking down on 'anti-Christian bias' in the federal government, and the president has hired a number of advisers who are linked to Christian nationalism. Under pressure from parents and lawmakers, schools have banned lesson plans and library books related to LGBTQ themes. Feucht is not single-handedly responsible for these wins for Christian nationalists, but his influence is undeniable. Feucht and Hegseth discussed holding a prayer service inside the Pentagon months before the secretary of defense actually did it. Or consider Charlie Kirk, the MAGA power broker who helped run the Trump campaign's youth-vote operation, and then vetted potential White House hires. In 2020, Feucht unsuccessfully ran for Congress and was endorsed by Kirk. Within a week of the endorsement, Kirk invoked the seven-mountain mandate at CPAC, the conservative conference. With Trump, he said, 'finally we have a president that understands the seven mountains of cultural influence.'
But not everything has been going well for Feucht. In June, six staffers and volunteers who worked for Feucht's published a long and detailed report accusing him of engaging in financial malfeasance. Feucht's former employees claim that he withheld promised expense reimbursements from ministry volunteers, engaged in donor and payroll fraud, and embezzled nonprofit funds for personal use. The allegations track with earlier reporting by Rolling Stone and Ministry Watch, the nonprofit Christian watchdog. Both have reported on opaque financial dealings involving his nonprofits. Citing a lack of transparency and efficiency, Ministry Watch currently gives Sean Feuch Ministries a 'Donor Confidence Score' of 19 out of 100, and encourages potential donors to 'withhold giving' to the organization.
Feucht hasn't been charged with any crimes stemming from the allegations, and has denied wrongdoing. 'None of those allegations are true,' Feucht said in a video he recently posted to YouTube. 'We're in great standing with the IRS. We're in great standing with our accountants.' He later added, 'We are taking ground for Jesus and we are not apologizing for that.' It's possible Feucht's audience will take him at his word. The NAR movement is insular and unwavering in its worldview: Allegations are evidence of persecution for success. Still, a large part of Feucht's power is derived from his donors. At some point, some people might get fed up with giving him money. 'He could lose traction at the follower level,' Taylor said.
So far, that seems unlikely. Scandals can take down people, but ideas are more resilient. Kirk has continued to advocate for Christian-nationalist positions; last year, he argued that 'the separation of Church and state is nowhere in the Constitution.' (It is, in fact, in the Constitution—right there in the First Amendment.) Even the formerly staunchly secular world of tech is becoming more open to Christian nationalism. In October, Elon Musk held a town hall at Feucht's former church in Pennsylvania, and has called himself a ' cultural Christian.' Marc Andreessen and other investors have backed a tech enclav e in rural Kentucky closely affiliated with Ch ristian nationalists. Regardless of what happens to Feucht, many of the world's most powerful people seem to be inching closer to what he wants.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
19 minutes ago
- Washington Post
National pride in the U.S. sees dramatic decline, Gallup survey finds
Just 58 percent of adults in the United States are 'extremely' or 'very' proud to be American, according to a Gallup poll released this week — the lowest level recorded by the company in the more than two decades since it started including the question in surveys. The dramatic decline was largely driven by Democrats, while most Republicans had strong feelings of national pride, according to the poll published Monday — an indicator of the deepening partisan divide in the U.S. Younger Americans, particularly Gen Z, are also less likely to be proud of their country compared with previous generations.
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Here's how Trump's megabill will affect you
Seniors, students, taxpayers, children, parents, low-income Americans and just about everyone else will be affected by the massive tax and spending bill being hashed out in real time on Capitol Hill. Republicans call it President Donald Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act,' but there have been several versions. The latest passed the Senate on Tuesday with Vice President JD Vance's tie-breaking vote. Senate Republicans' version of the bill differs in key ways from what the House passed in May. Both chambers will ultimately have to pass the same version to send the package to Trump's desk by his desired July Fourth deadline. But the general contours of the massive piece of legislation are known. It extends Trump's first-term tax cuts, funds his vision for a border wall, and offsets some of that revenue loss and additional spending with cuts to federal support for the social safety net that helps Americans afford food and health insurance. Here's what we know about how the Senate bill will affect … For many Medicaid enrollees, the biggest impact would be the new work requirement. Certain able-bodied Americans ages 19 to 64 who are enrolled through the Medicaid expansion would have to work, volunteer, attend school or participate in job training at least 80 hours a month. The mandate would also apply to parents of children ages 14 and older. Read more from Tami Luhby here. In addition, expansion enrollees would have their eligibility reviewed more frequently and would have to pay up to $35 for certain care. Overall, Medicaid enrollees could face other changes, since states would receive less federal funding for the program. This could force some states to eliminate certain benefits or tighten enrollment, among other alterations. Plus, many enrollees would face more paperwork and verification requirements, which could make it harder for some to apply for and maintain their benefits. The bill would delay the implementation of some provisions in two Biden administration rules aimed at streamlining enrollment and renewing coverage. Nearly 12 million more people would be uninsured in 2034, with many of them losing coverage because of the Medicaid provisions in the bill, according to a Congressional Budget Office analysis published Sunday, before subsequent changes to the bill that the Senate ultimately passed. More Americans who receive food stamps would have to work to keep their benefits. The bill would broaden the existing work mandate to enrollees ages 55 to 64 and parents of children ages 14 and older, as well as to veterans, former foster youth and people experiencing homelessness. Enrollees in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP, the formal name for food stamps, may also face other changes: Many states would also have to cover part of the benefit costs for the first time and pay more of the administrative costs, both of which may force them to tighten benefits, cut eligibility or make other alterations, including potentially withdrawing from the safety-net program. Also, the growth of food stamp benefits would be limited in the future. Read more from Tami about an earlier iteration of the Senate bill's food stamp changes here. Americans looking for coverage on the Obamacare exchanges could have a tougher time enrolling in plans and receiving federal subsidies to help pay their premiums. The bill would increase verification requirements and would effectively end automatic reenrollment. The CBO estimates that millions of people would lose their Obamacare coverage. Just because you aren't on Medicaid doesn't mean your health care wouldn't be affected by the bill. Hospitals are warning that the steep cuts to Medicaid could force some hospitals — particularly in rural locations — to close their doors, limit services and reduce staff. 'The real-life consequences of these reductions will result in irreparable harm to access to care for all Americans,' Rick Pollack, CEO of the American Hospital Association, wrote in a letter to senators Sunday. The bill could also affect those who don't receive food stamps. A trade group for independent grocers warned that cutting federal support for the program could hurt local food retailers, which increase access to groceries, provide jobs and help local economies — particularly in rural and underserved areas. State lawmakers would likely have to make tough decisions since they would face massive reductions in federal support for Medicaid and food stamps. They could try to limit the cost of the programs by cutting benefits or eligibility, but they might also decide to try to save money in other areas, such as education or infrastructure. The bill would reduce the amount of taxes that state and local governments can levy on providers, notably hospitals, which is a key source of funding for states. Also, it would require many states to start paying for part of the food stamp benefits and shoulder more of the administrative costs. Many taxpayers would continue to benefit from the array of individual income tax cuts from the 2017 Trump tax package that are set to expire at year's end. The current bill would permanently extend essentially all those tax breaks, including the lower individual rates and a near-doubling of the standard deduction. But a lot of those taxpayers may not notice this tax relief because it would be a continuation of provisions that have been in place since the 2017 law was enacted. Some, however, may benefit from the larger child tax credit and temporary increase in the cap on state and local tax deductions, as well as other new tax breaks in the bill. Households would see their taxes reduced by $2,900, on average, according to a Tax Policy Center analysis of the tax provisions in the bill. But that figure varies widely depending on taxpayers' income. More on that later. Senior citizens would receive a $6,000 boost to their standard deduction from 2025 through 2028. The benefit would start to phase out for individuals with incomes of more than $75,000 and couples with incomes double that amount. This tax break is in lieu of Trump's campaign promise to eliminate taxes on Social Security benefits. Some lower-income seniors enrolled in both Medicare and Medicaid, however, could be affected by the Medicaid cuts in the bill. They could lose their Medicaid coverage, which helps them cover their Medicare premiums and out-of-pocket costs. They could also lose benefits they receive through Medicaid, such as long-term care and dental services. New caps would be placed on the amount students can borrow in federal student loans for graduate school and how much parents can borrow to help pay students' tuition. There would be fewer opportunities for deferments or forbearance. There would also be limits on lending for part-time students and a much more limited set of repayment options, veering away from the loan forgiveness programs of the Biden era. A primary focus of the bill is tax cuts, but not everyone who pays taxes will pay less. Private universities are generally tax-exempt, although they do pay a 1.4% tax on income from their endowments. This bill would jack up that endowment income tax to a top rate of 8% for colleges whose endowments exceed $2 million per enrolled student. We're talking about schools like Harvard, Yale, Stanford, MIT and Princeton. Good news for anyone buying a new American-made car with a loan: This bill will allow up to $10,000 in interest to be deducted from taxable income. Bad news for anyone wanting to buy an electric vehicle: EV tax credits, which ranged up to $7,500 and were enacted by Democrats under President Joe Biden, would end at the end of September. They had been scheduled to last through 2032. Many parents would get a larger tax break: The legislation would permanently beef up the child tax credit to $2,200 per kid, up from the current $2,000. Single parents earning up to $200,000 and married couples earning up to $400,000 would qualify. The credit would phase out for those with higher incomes. However, other parents could lose out on government assistance since many of those with children ages 14 and older would have to work to continue receiving Medicaid and food stamps. In a three-year pilot program, every American baby born between 2025 and 2028 would get a $1,000 nest egg from the government to be invested in an index fund. Parents could then add $5,000 each year to those accounts and watch the interest grow during childhood. No deductions would be allowed until the child turns 18. Originally called a 'baby bonus,' or a 'MAGA account,' the name was changed to 'Trump accounts' over the course of this year. It bears some similarities to proposals put forward by Democrats, including Sen. Cory Booker. Read more from CNN's Jeanne Sahadi. Many workers who receive tips or overtime compensation would get a tax break through 2028. Employees who work in jobs that traditionally receive tips could deduct up to $25,000 in tip income from their federal income taxes, while workers who receive overtime could deduct up to $12,500 of that extra pay. Highly compensated individuals who make more than $160,000 in 2025 would not qualify. The bill speeds up the end of tax incentives for renewable energy projects to 2027. The bill would limit eligibility for federal benefits — including food stamps, Medicaid, Affordable Care Act premium subsidies and Medicare — to a smaller set of noncitizens. Some immigrants, such as refugees, asylees and victims of domestic violence and sex trafficking, would no longer qualify. In addition, immigrants would have to pay new or higher fees to apply for various programs, including asylum, work authorization, humanitarian parole and Temporary Protected Status, as well as for most immigration court filings. Wealthy Americans would benefit far more from the tax package than those lower on the income scale, according to a Tax Policy Center analysis of the Senate bill. While all households would see their taxes reduced, some 60% of the benefits would go to those making $217,000 or more (the top 20%). These folks would receive an average tax cut of $12,500, or 3.4% of their after-tax income, in 2026, the analysis found. But the lowest-income households, who earn about $35,000 or less, would receive an average tax cut of only $150, less than 1% of their after-tax income. Middle-income households would see their taxes reduced by about $1,800, or 2.3% of their after-tax income, on average. This analysis does not take into account the historic cuts to the nation's safety-net program, which would hurt lower-income Americans. They would see their income reduced after factoring in the changes to Medicaid and food stamps, according to a report from the Budget Lab at Yale. It's hard to believe, but according to a Congressional Research Service report, thousands of people who made $1 million or more claimed unemployment benefits in 2021 and 2022. This bill puts an end to that. Musk is furious about the bill and howling about it on social media. Not only does he disagree with the deficit-exploding tax cuts, he would also prefer more spending cuts. The Tesla CEO also vehemently opposes the abrupt end to EV tax credits. 'It gives handouts to industries of the past while severely damaging industries of the future,' he wrote on X. He predicted 'political suicide' for Republicans if they turn this bill into law. The bill would increase the deficit by $3.3 trillion over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office report published Sunday. Republicans have embraced a budget gimmick to argue the impact of the bill is much smaller. But nobody should expect the roughly $36 trillion national debt to shrink as a result of the package. The legislation would also raise the debt ceiling by $5 trillion to allow the Treasury Department to borrow more to pay the bills that have already been incurred. Many Americans could feel the consequences of the nation's ever-growing debt in their wallets. The bill would increase interest rates, according to a CBO analysis of the House version. That could make mortgages, car loans and credit card payments more expensive. Read more from CNN's Matt Egan here. The money Trump could not secure for a border wall during his first term is in this bill. It allocates $46.5 billion for border wall construction and $45 billion for the detention of undocumented people apprehended by Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
33 minutes ago
Trump says the GOP mega bill will eliminate taxes on Social Security. It does not.
WASHINGTON -- President Donald Trump keeps saying that Republicans' mega tax and spending cut legislation will eliminate taxes on federal Social Security benefits. It does not. At best, Trump's 'no tax on Social Security' claim exaggerates the benefits to seniors if either the House or Senate-passed proposals is signed into law. Here's a look at Trump's recent statements, and what the proposals would — or would not — do. Trump repeatedly told voters during his 2024 campaign that he would eliminate taxes on Social Security. As his massive legislative package has moved through Congress, the Republican president has claimed that's what the bill would do. Trump said on a recent appearance on Fox News' 'Sunday Morning Futures" that the bill includes 'no tax on tips, no tax on Social Security, no tax on overtime.' But instead of eliminating the tax, the Senate and House have each passed their own versions of a temporary tax deduction for seniors aged 65 and over, which applies to all income — not just Social Security. And it turns out not all Social Security beneficiaries will be able to claim the deduction. Those who won't be able to do so include the lowest-income seniors who already don't pay taxes on Social Security, those who choose to claim their benefits before they reach age 65 and those above a defined income threshold. The Senate proposal includes a temporary $6,000 deduction for seniors over the age of 65, contrasted with the House proposal, which includes a temporary deduction of $4,000. The Senate proposal approved Tuesday would eliminate Social Security tax liability for seniors with adjusted gross incomes of $75,000 or less or $150,000 if filing as a married couple. If passed into law, the tax deduction would last four years, from 2025 to 2029. The deductions phase out as income increases. Touting a new Council of Economic Advisers analysis, the White House said Tuesday that '88% of all seniors who receive Social Security — will pay NO TAX on their Social Security benefits," going on to say that the Senate proposal's $6,000 senior deduction 'is estimated to benefit 33.9 million seniors, including seniors not claiming Social Security. The deduction yields an average increase in after-tax income of $670 per senior who benefits from it.' Garrett Watson, director of policy analysis at the Tax Foundation think tank, said conflating the tax deduction with a claim that there will be no tax on Social Security could end up confusing and angering a lot of seniors who will expect to not pay taxes on their Social Security benefits. 'While the deduction does provide some relief for seniors, it's far from completely repealing the tax on their benefits,' Watson said. The cost of actually eliminating the tax on Social Security would have massive impacts on the economy. University of Pennsylvania's Penn Wharton Budget Model estimates that eliminating income taxes on Social Security benefits 'would reduce revenues by $1.5 trillion over 10 years and increase federal debt by 7 percent by 2054" and speed up the projected depletion date of the Social Security Trust Fund from 2034 to 2032. Discussions over taxes on Social Security are just part of the overall bill, which is estimated in its Senate version to increase federal deficits over the next 10 years by nearly $3.3 trillion from 2025 to 2034, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Administration officials have said the cost of the tax bill would be offset by tariff income. Recently, the CBO separately estimated that Trump's sweeping tariff plan would cut deficits by $2.8 trillion over a 10-year period while shrinking the economy, raising the inflation rate and reducing the purchasing power of households overall.
