Word: tax-exempt
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...SLID are tax-exempt educational organizations which do not lobby or endorse political candidates, Farmer said. He likened the relationship between the LID and the Fabian Society to that between the ADA and the Harvard Liberal Union...
...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...
Everybody talks a good deal about educational TV, but, in the view of Federal Communication's Commissioner Robert E. Lee, *- nobody seems to do much about it. More than two years have passed since the FCC set aside 242 tax-exempt channels for education, and 195 of them are still going abegging. Is educational TV worth the long wait, or should the unused channels be thrown open to commercial use? By last week Lee's public statements had created enough of a stir to set educators to examining their TV records...