Word: exemption
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 1950-1959
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
This would be a natural for Harvard, and it is surprising that the usually astute and forward-looking Corporation has overlooked such an opportunity. Not only would it correct the unfair discrimination against the law students and exempt them also from an athletic fee, but there would be ample revenue left over to endow a couple of more scholarships or even a now theatre...
...opening his investigation of tax-exempt foundations last year, Tennessee's Republican Congressman Brazilla Carroll Reece declared: "Here lies the story of how Communism and socialism are financed in the U.S. . . . There is evidence to show there is a diabolical conspiracy back of all this." Last week Recce's committee published the results of its work, along with an angry dissent by the committee's two Democrats, Ohio's Wayne Hays and Idaho's Gracie Pfost. The committee's conclusions, said the Democrats, "was, like the theme of doom in a tragic opera, revealed...
Reece's report attacks a far bigger target than tax-exempt foundations. It looks with a jaundiced eye on the social sciences and at empirical methods of scientific inquiry. It excoriates empiricism as the "fact-finding mania," the "fetish of statistics" and the "comptometer compulsion." It charges that the Kinsey reports (partially financed by the Rockefeller Foundation) are "socially dangerous." The report declares but does not prove: "The research in the social sciences with foundation support slants heavily to the left...
Congress is expected to do nothing whatever with Recce's report, which cost the taxpayers $115,000 to produce. Reece thinks that the foundations waste billions of what he regards as public funds, i.e., if there were no tax-exempt foundations, some of the money given to them would be collected in taxes. But Reece does not want to abolish tax exemption for foundations. Apparently, he wants sharper legal distinctions between "good" research, which would be tax exempt, and "bad" research, which would not be. Who is the judge between good and bad research? Obviously, Brazilla Carroll Reece thinks...
...league flatly demanded that state sterilization and antimarriage laws be revised to exempt epileptics, recommended that epileptics be allowed to drive after a two-year period free of seizures. The league also asked that states encourage employers to hire epileptics by passing laws exempting the employer from liability if an epileptic is injured as the result of a seizure. Employers' baseless fears that epileptics will be more accident-prone have left half the nation's epileptics unemployed, saddled the states with an unnecessary economic burden...