have a chilling effect on the First Amendment right to the fr It would also have the effect of establishing, as governmental stitutions that follow the orthodox government line on public ute is restricted to race, it would establish a clear preceden measures on matters of church belief and practice. (5) As a general principal of government, the taxing power lated to support social policies of any kind, as distinguished fi As John Marshall declared in the case of McCulloch v. Maryla is the power to destroy." The kind of Congressional enactmen tion proposes, a tax law that imposes an affirmative action schools, is the kind of program that the government could us social objectives now reserved to the people or to the states. OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR CHARLES GRA I would like to commend Chairman Dole on his swift sche this controversial issue. To have delayed would have created e than currently exists. I think all of us would agree that pa have created a very unfortunate situation which needs to be cl a hurry to legislate we should not lose sight of gigantic consti dealing with and should thus take the necessary time to ca responsible way. The comments of the Administration witnesses will be most I hope these representatives will dispell all of the confusion with their best assessment of what future action Congress ne Congress and the public need a clarification of the Administra 501 (C)(3) status for private schools with racially discriminat tional issue for good reason. The resolution of this issue requ cate line between two cherished Constitutional freedoms. One, zen to equal opportunity and protection under our nation's la equal protection coupled with the Thirteenth Amendment co about any federal policy which involves racial discrimination right to be free of invidious distinctions based solely on race VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibiting racial discrimi sisted programs. The other Constitutional prohibition involved tained within the opening words of the first amendment, "Co law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting th of". The motivation for many of our Nation's founders in cros to escape religious tyranny. Freedom to chose and practice state interference is a central theme of American democracy. In my view, one of the times these Constitutional freedoms conflict is when the government needs to determine whether is discriminating on the basis of race. It seems clear to me requires that a private, secular school can not receive tax ex nates on the basis of race. There is no justification for grantin secular private schools which engage in racial discriminat Black Americans to gain equal access to educational institutio v. Board of Education in 1953. I have no interest in hindering have made in this critical area by reverting to a system of segre nanced with the help of federal tax exemption. If legislation is necessary to resolve this conflict, my primary co legislation which tells the government how it can constitutionally d er or not a private religious school is racially discriminatory. I think that a policy is developed which allows the IRS to make a deter racial discrimination without becoming embroiled in the issue of ex er or not an underlying religious belief is racially discriminatory. ence that a policy is developed which looks at whether the school applicants equal educational opportunities, without ever examining of the religion. Once again, I must commend Chairman Dole for holding a series this issue to provide all interested parties with a full and fair op heard. This legislation touches important Constitutional freedoms Americans, and the comments of these witnesses should help us de solution to this difficult problem. STATEMENT BY SENATOR GARY HART Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to make a brief stateme mittee as you begin your hearings on the issue of tax-exempt stat schools that practice racial discrimination. I commend Chairman Dol the committee to act quickly on this issue and for working in good resolve the controversy over the Federal Government's position on this Mr. Chairman, I believe the Administration's confusing policy rev issue of the last few weeks have been unfortunate and unnecessary. T an insensitivity not only to the law and the progress made on civil rig quarter century but more important, an insensitivity to the funda values which have been the foundation for such progress. The new President Reagan has now proposed and which is now pending before tee only adds further to the unnecessary confusion. Current Federal law is clear. As the U.S. Commission on Civil Right out, the Constitution, title IV of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and the Inte Code authorize, indeed require the IRS to deny tax-exempt status to pr which discriminate on the basis of race. The courts have already interp al law in this manner. For this reason, I have submitted, with Senator Durenberger and Ser han and 26 other cosponsors a resolution which will put the Congre record against tax-exempt status for private schools that practice racial tion. The concurrent resolution states the sense of the Congress that cu al law clearly authorizes and requires the Internal Revenue Service exempt status and deductibility of contributions to private schools that on the basis of race. Mr. Chairman, I urge the committee to seriously consider this resol alternative to the legislation pending before you. The point which this makes about the adequacy of current Federal law reflects the view of th mission on Civil Rights and a number of civil rights organizations. By ad resolution Congress would make a strong statement that current Federal has been clear on mandating that tax-exempt status be denied to priv that discriminate on the basis of race. Again, I appreciate the Chairman providing me this opportunity to statement. TEXT OF SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 59 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), Whereas, the Congress provided the legislative basis for denying tax exe private schools that discriminate because of race when it passed the Civil of 1964. Whereas, in 1971, the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia Green v. Connally that: "The Internal Revenue Code provisions on char emptions and deductions must be construed to avoid frustrations of Feder Under the conditions of today they can no longer be construed so as to I private schools operated on a racially discriminatory premise the support emptions and deductions which Federal tax law affords to charitable orga and their sponsors," and the Supreme Court of the United States has affir decision. PREPARED FOR THE MITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS AND THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE BY THE STAFF OF THE OINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION effect of racially discriminatory policies on tax private schools. The third part briefly describe Code provisions relating to tax-exempt status for tibility of contributions to schools. The fourth chronological order, developments regarding th discriminatory policies on tax-exempt status for cluding court decisions and Internal Revenue procedures. The fifth part describes court decis exempt status of Bob Jones University and G Schools, Inc. Finally, the sixth part of the pam Administration's legislative proposal relating to o status to private schools which have policies of ra (1) |