on propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation (except as otherwise provided in subsection (h)), and which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of any candidate for public office.

H.R. 96

"Provided, That the Internal Revenue Service shall not terminate for reasons of racial discrimination the exempt status of any organization listed in this section which is operated exclusively for educational purposes unless said organization is adjudicated as racially discriminatory in a court of the United States or of any State."

STATEMENT BY CARL MCINTIRE

Honorable Congressmen, I appear in two capacities:

First, as the pastor of the Bible Presbyterian Church of Collingswood, New Jersey, a church with 1,800 members where I have been pastor for 45 years. The church conducts a Christian school from Kindergarten through High School.

Second, as the president of the International Council of Christian Churches, which was organized in 1948 and consists today of more than 275 Protestant denominations throughout the world.

The Amended Revenue Procedures for Guidelines now before this Committee plans for a revolution the like of which we have not seen before. An attack is here being made upon the First Amendment, the Bible, Christianity, the rights of the family, the precious children of the country, which will make out of the United States something entirely different from that social order which God gave us from our founding fathers: our liberty and our First Ten Amendments.

The First Amendment reads: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. . ." It goes on to speak about freedom of speech and freedom of the press, but these are second in order. The first great concern of those who drafted the Constitution was that there would be no possible government interference, directly or indirectly, in any way, in the religious life and religious activities of the citizens of this Republic. This First Amendment is sacred. It is the primary law of this land and it should be honored in every possible degree in this Committee and before the Congress of the United States. To transgress this, to tamper with it, to ignore it, or to rationalize it, is to enter the realm where God is supreme over the hearts of men. He is Lord in the conscience of the citizens of this country, who must consider Him every time they go into a voting booth and in secret cast their ballot for the good of their country and for the protection of their liberty.

The reason Christian people and Christian churches want religious schools which they build and support is that they are carrying out the teaching of the Bible, which they believe to be the Word of God. When God gave to Moses the Ten Commandments, as reported in Deuteronomy, chapter six, He told Moses: "And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children. And thou shalt do that which is right and good. (Deut. 6:7; 8:18.) Repeatedly, Moses was commanded, "Thou shalt teach them." Solomon, the wisest man who ever lived, said, "Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it." (Prov. 22:6.) And Paul the Apostle told young Timothy, "From a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation." (2 Tim. 3:15.) Those who have drafted these IRS guidelines, as they are called, have totally ignored the reality of education as it is desired by Christian people for their children. One cannot say why they did it, but the document presents itself to the public as pertaining to "certain private schools," and the publicity given throughout the land is that it has to do with private schools. This is deceptive! Eighty-five to ninety-five percent of the schools that have been organized in this century are religious, and various religious groups have started them that they might propagate and maintain their faith among the youth.

If one is to understand what has actually happened in our country, he must look at the question of religion and the place it has in the life of those who are sacrificing to establish schools where the Ten Commandments can be taught and where the Bible and prayer can be heard. The bringing in by the Government of any question or any matter that is going to affect in any way these religious schools is completely unconstitutional and constitutes open highway robbery, taking from the people their right to have their children learn their faith in schools which they support and in churches to which they belong and receive the ordinances of God. The chasm which has existed, or the wall which has been built up by the Constitution, has now been torn down and is totally shattered by this present action. It is

devastating. The judgments and penalties of Government now will hang over every religious school. And it must be recognized that this is an assault upon the Bible, that we have never had before in the history of this country by any government agency.

Moreover, all of the government intrusion is to be in the hands of a few men who have themselves prepared the so-called "guidelines." The three branches of government which our fathers separated in the Constitution so that the people could be protected from men are here vitiated. These revenue procedures are law. They are made by those in the IRS. They are administered by those in the IRS. Those who violate them are brought to trial by those in the IRS. Judgment is pronounced upon them by the IRS. And the subjective elements and the uncertain elements which cover a broad area of undefined mischief abound throughout the entire document. This is as much the law as if it were passed by Congress, signed by the President of the United States, but it is so constituted that men do with it what they please, and they literally can roam all over creation, all over the political spectra, and implement it to their own personal, ideological and political satisfaction. It is now rule by men, not the law. Their "guidelines" are a cover for their own power.

Section 2, paragraph .03 (a), says, "The question whether a private school has a racially nondiscriminatory policy as to students is based on all the applicable facts and circumstances." That is the entire paragraph. Please, where are we going to be able to gather all the facts into one place, and who in the world is going to be able to bring to pass all of the circumstances? It must be "all," according to this mandate.

Then the next paragraph says, "If a school engages in any acts or practices that are racially discriminatory as to students. . ." Again we have the phrase, “any acts" of any kind or any practices that are deemed racially discriminatory.

One, therefore, looks for the definition of what should be called a racial discrimination. He finds it in Section 3, paragraph .01. Here the sky is the limit. The school, it is said, is not to discriminate "on the basis of race in administration of its educational policies, admissions policies, scholarship and loan programs, and athletic and other school-administered programs." Here is a black. He is an athlete, but he does not quite measure up to being on the basketball team or to play in every game of the team as the coach may think that he should. He immediately begins to cry, "Discrimination, discrimination." The other blacks join him. The community of blacks join him. He gets to the NAACP; they join him. There was no discrimination. The judgment of the coach was simply being manifest on the basis of the best qualified men at the time to use in a particular game. This type of thing is applicable to every single reference that is made here: the "administration of its educational policies." My, the charges that can be made, and used, and who decides to prosecute them? Well, the IRS. The Constitution puts all religious activity of any kind beyond the hand of Government and bureaucrats to whom Congress may have entrusted its law-making prerogatives. Now a man's enemies, or the religious opponents, can attack; if he speaks on public issues, he can and will be threatened with a "complaint" against his school, intimidation, briberies, actual discrimination by the IRS itself by not treating all schools equal. Corruption is becoming the order of the day.

Under "Definitions," Section 3, paragraph .02, "A school 'adjudicated to be discriminatory' means any school found to be racially discriminatory as to students by a final decision of a federal or state court of competent jurisdiction; by final agency action of a federal administrative agency in accordance with the procedures of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 551, et seq.; or by final agency action of a state administrative agency following a proceeding in which the school was a party or otherwise had the opportunity for a hearing and an opportunity to submit evidence. The terms 'final decision of a federal or state court' and 'final agency action' mean actions or decisions from which no further administrative or judicial appeal can be taken."

This could simply kill ninety-nine and nine-tenths of the schools in the United States that are religious. The expense of such procedures, hiring lawyers, paying for the court costs, going through the administrative process clear on up to the Supreme Court of the United States is calamitous. I can affirm: a poor man no longer has a chance in the United States to get a hearing or to get justice. It cannot be afforded. These Christian schools which have been started are here out of good conscience and this procedure is designed to destroy virtually all of them at the will of the IRS. All that has to be done is that somebody, a black, or another ecumenical church group, can file a complaint, take out affidavits alleging certain things did or did not happen, demand a hearing, get these processes under way, and even years may be consumed with the case.

I have had personal experience with this very same procedure down here in connection with another bureau, the Federal Communications Commission. Our Seminary, a theological seminary, purchased a radio station, WXUR. I am the president of the Seminary. Immediately the religious groups in the area objected to our views being presented throughout the community, and they complained to the FCC, asking that the license not be renewed. They had the ear and the support of the Broadcast Bureau of the FCC. The hearing was called. It lasted nine months. Before it finished, after seven years of processing, just as outlined here, a half a million dollars were spent on lawyers' fees at $125 an hour, and all the other expenses, and the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals by a vote of two to one took the radio station off the air. But when the case finally got to that final juncture, the Court threw out all the objections, all the false charges, and the only thing left was that in the original application the station was alleged not to have fully revealed its program intentions. It had done so at the time, and Judge David Bazelon in his minority opinion said that the FCC had no right to require the knowledge of the programming content as a condition of their licensing; that would violate the First Amendment. But the station died. I have been through this very same process and death. Now the same procedures are here being forced by "law" upon these schools that are being organized to serve their God.

What must be seen by the Congress is, the issue so far as the schools are concerned is not integration. The IRS has made an idol out of integration and erected it in every Christian school and church with a school. These schools are coming into existence at the rate of one every seven hours because of the total breakdown of morals in our State-financed schools: sex, pregnancies, dope, murder, rape, assaulting teachers, destroying property, and the production at the end of high school of "functional illiterates." These Christians who are starting these schools do not want their children to be functional illiterates. They love them. The fundamentals of reading, writing, arithmetic—not the new math, but the good old multiplication tables and with it all the Ten Commandments and the responsibility that man has to God. It is the moral bankruptcy of the public schools which has produced the rapid growth of the Christian schools-not fleeing integration. The IRS seems to have some kind of colored glasses. They are of the opinion that schools exist for the one and only purpose of integration. The fact that the First Amendment regulates and forbids their having anything to do with it, is no concern of theirs. They want to subordinate everything and everybody to their integration program and percentages; and they would usurp, slip into the sacred domain of the Church and gather to themselves an authority and a power which was never intended to be a part of their collecting of income taxes. The power to tax is the power to destroy. But how many thousand new agents will be necessary, and where would Proposition 13 come in? In 1948, the International Council of Christian Churches was organized in Amsterdam and among its functions, spelled out in its constitution, is the following: "To encourage all members of the Council to promote on every continent, as God enables, an educational system for all ages which shall be free from the blight of rationalism and in which the Bible shall be basic, to the end that education may again become the handmaid of the Church rather than a foe to the whole Christian conception of God and the world." This was before the Supreme Court decision of 1954 and all the subsequent civil rights actions. This is the main purpose that Christians have for maintaining Christian schools. Perhaps I should point out just here to the Committee that all of this civil rights legislation has in it prohibitions concerning discrimination on the basis of race or color, and also creed, or religion. Now creed and religion are placed on the same level with color and race in these stipulations over and over again. Will the next step be that in order to be "consistent" under the statute we must now decree that these religious schools shall teach all religions, and not discriminate against anyone on religion: make the Jewish schools teach Christianity, make the Roman Catholic schools teach Protestantism, make the Protestant school teach atheism to the satisfaction of Madalyn Murray? If the IRS can enter into these religious sanctuaries, and the sanctuary which belongs only to the people under the Constitution, and introduce a question of discrimination on one point, they can certainly do it on another point of the same sentence. We are witnessing, as I said, a devastating, revolutionary assault upon religion and upon Christianity. The walls are falling down.

In my own case, our Christian school was started after prayer and Bible reading was put out of school. When Madalyn Murray won her case, we decided the time had come that if they could not pray and they could not read the Bible, could not recite the Ten Commandments, we had better get a school going where these things would be possible. This we did. And in my church we have an annual budget, which is subscribed in an annual Every Member Canvass. This is the way the church has been operating for over 45 years. On its benevolence side, it has a sizable contribu

tion as a church to our school, which is run and operated by our church. All contributions are taken up Sunday in envelopes for the church, placed on the collection plate as an act of worship, and then each month from the church's treasury the money is paid out for the operation of the school. How in the world will the IRS refuse to permit tax exemption on the contributions to the Collingswood Church? Well, they will do it because according to their judgment there is confusion at this particular point. The churches will be at the mercy of the bureaucrats in Washington. Their financial policies and structures will be regulated from Washington in order to collect taxes.

But I think, finally, the impact of all this can be seen on the political level. A new crew now occupies many of the bureaus in Washington. Many of them are these younger men, on the second and third levels. They belong to the anti-war groups, those that supported Hanoi in the sixties. Some of our popular columnists have been naming them and pointing them out in recent weeks, in the various Washington departments. The one thing that these liberals and leftists have to deal with is the ideology in the country which blocks the progress of their revolutionary, socialistic goals, and what are the strong forces that inhibit them? The Bible, the Biblebelieving Christians, and the fact is that these Christians in the country that are going into these schools are among those who are against abortion on demand. They were against giving away the Panama Canal. There is a strong patriotism in their schools. They are against E.R.A. They want the family and the teachings of the Bible concerning the place of the woman in relationship to her husband to be maintained. They are against the betrayal of Taiwan and the building up and financing economically and industrially of the Communist world. This hard, firm belief in the United States has got to be broken and the place to break it is to destroy Christian schools! The parents must be forced to put their children back into the public schools with their humanism, with their devastation of character! Any school that is religious exists as a domain which has written over it: “Hands off" to Uncle Sam."

One reads this 11-page amendment with a realization that what these men in the bureau are trying to get at is what is in the hearts of these particular people when they started their schools, and they want to ascertain as to whether they started their schools for racial ends, to get away from the integration of the public schools, and they think that perhaps they have found some sort of instrument to pry into the human heart of these schools. Thus, their appraisals as to the growth of the student body and things of that sort. Entire areas have been left so open, so broad, so subjective, so meaningless to those who read it, that those who administer it can give it a particular ideological stamp and brand, using their power to crush and to destroy contrary opinion and dissent that may arise in the country on great political issues.

Gentlemen of the Congress, in the name of our God—and we do have “In God We Trust" over the Senate of the United States and on our coins-I appeal to you to nullify, to countermand, to do what is necessary to stop this intrusion into the dominion that the First Amendment has protected for all of us who want to believe something and who desire to teach it to the youth. I do not hesitate to say that with the public schools like they are there is little hope for the country. But with the Christian schools developing and growing as they are, there is hope that at least we can try to have some law and order based upon the fear of God in the hearts of students.

STATEMENT OF ROBERT E. JONES, DIRECTOR OF FIELD SERVICES, AMERICANS UNITED FOR SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE

Dear Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, we are meeting today to deal with a particularly difficut issue-whether or not the Internal Revenue Service can practicably and constitutionally limit tax exemption under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 to private schools which operate on a racially nondiscriminatory basis.

At the outset let me affirm that this organization supports the intent of the Revenue Procedure, or regulations, under discussion. We hold no brief for those private school entrepreneurs who have established nonpublic schools, whether secular or religious, for the purposes of avoiding public school desegregation.

Since the Brown v. Topeka decision of 1954, 25 years ago, this nation has attempted to deal with the problem of breaking up the old dual segregated public school system which existed in many communities and states of the country. One of the favorite devices for avoidance of public school desegregation has been the establishment of all-white "academies," many of them bearing the label of "Christian" schools, which have attracted pupils from families fearful of desegregation.

On December 6 last year, Americans United testified that we "are sympathetic to efforts aimed at reducing or eliminating discrimination in our society" and that we have long "opposed any form of direct or indirect government aid to nonpublic schools... at least in part on the ground that such aid would benefit institutions which, in varying degrees, divide students by religion, race, social class and in other ways.

However, in our December 6 testimony we found that there were certain constitutional problems which the proposed Revenue Procedure encountered, notably that of "excessive government intrusion into the internal affairs of religious bodies." The constitutional problem stems from the guarantee, in the First Amendment, of free exercise of religion, and would become acute when applied to religiously-oriented private schools.

To reiterate, from our December testimony: "Religiously-oriented private schools, as the Supreme Court has acknowledged in a series of rulings against tax aid for such schools, are generally integral parts of the religious mission of the sponsoring religious body. Their curricula tend to be permeated with a particular denominational point of view. Their student bodies, faculties, and administrations tend to be religiously homogeneous.

In studying the revised Revenue Procedure, we note that IRS has met some of the objections raised in the December hearings by Americans United and other groups. In Section 3.03(b) on page 4, it seems clear that IRS has displayed sensitivity to the problem which Jewish or Amish schools might encounter, for example, where "special curricula... by their nature are of interest only to identifiable groups which are not composed of a significant number of minority students." This is certainly an improvement over the earlier Procedure.

Also, the revised Procedure displays sensitivity to the well-established systems of religious education, as for example, the Roman Catholic parochial school systems in Section 3.03(b) also on page 4 in paragraph three and following:

"If a particular school which is part of a system of commonly supervised schools would be treated as not having significant minority student enrollment under the foregoing provisions, it may nevertheless be considered to have a significant minority student enrollment if all the following conditions are met:

"1. Taking into account all schools operated by the system within the community, the school system, in the aggregate, has significant minority student enrollment; "2. The schools within the community serve designated geographical areas, which designations are based on considerations other than race; and

"3. There is no evidence that the school system operates on a racially discriminatory basis, such as through the operation of a dual school system based on race.' Presumably the latter two paragraphs would take into account the parish school concept. We wonder, however, if criteria set forth on pages 6 and 7 of the Revenue Procedure, 3.03(c)(13) would not contradict the aforesaid, i.e.:

"Facts tending to indicate that the formation or substantial expansion of a school was related in fact to public school desegregation in the community include: *

"(13) The school in practice limits enrollment to students from a geographic area (or areas) with few or no minorities, and this limitation coincides with a public school desegregation plan that involves exchanges of students between such area or areas and one or more other areas that have a substantial school age minority population."

These changes from the original version of the Revenue Procedure are encouraging but still fall short of addressing wholly, the constitutional problem. A large church school system, which may have within the system individual schools predominantly white, without significant minority student enrollment, are effectively removed, it would seem, from coverage.

But what of the church-related schools which are related to a single congregation, which are individual schools, not part of a "school system?" We do not believe that IRS has met the constitutional test in applying its regulations to such schools. IRS has still not met the question of excessive government intrusion into the affairs of schools which are an integral part of the religious mission of the individual churches which sponsor them.

The proposed IRS Procedure would place a serious burden on the school operated by a single church congregation for the religiously-oriented education of its members' children. Effective minority recruitment, scholarships, tuition waivers, special minority-oriented curricula and the like might be quite beyond its means. Should it then be denied its tax exempt status?

Further, how would the IRS deal with the many religious private schools which are integral parts of a church and which have no separate fundraising, budgeting, or accounting mechanisms? Could the IRS remove the tax exempt status of a small Christian or Jewish congregation which operates a school in its basement as part of