I was talking to an old friend today about Russia, which eventually led us to the 1950’s. Seemed like a good time to bring up the 501(3)(c) thing, so I asked.
It’s hard to gather information on why it was needed. The Senate was debating the revised Tax Code (huge, messy and filled with filibusters), Sen. Johnson moved the amendment and it was adopted. No debate on the floor, or in a committee. No mention in the Times. I think I’ve mention that before.
My friend (who’s old enough to remember the period) said that it had to do with the Communist threat. Seems a little odd when you consider Johnson’s term as president, but dealing purely with the years before, it makes sense.
The 50’s gave rise to the Evangelical movement (only half the country regularly went to church in the ’40’s, by the 70’s it was three quarters), Billy Graham was getting big. One of his messages was that the way to combat communism was to be Born Again. Ministers who suggested that Christianity and communism could peacefully exist were immediately labeled Communists. Obviously this isn’t a good way to govern (witch hunts leading to another atom bomb drop), so you wouldn’t want churches running around labeling politicians Communists instead of quietly prudent. There has to be a gray area. Anyway, my friend said that he remembers it as being a really ugly time to open your mouth in public. So that’s the deal. I wouldn’t have made it a diary, but it’s too much for a comment and it’s not like there’s a lot going on.
Oh, before everyone starts yelling about how nuts some were in DC about Communism, keep in mind that this amendment was adopted by the same body that censured McCarthy. Again, odd for Johnson to vote in favor when you consider his attitude during the Vietnam War …
…President Lyndon Johnson railed against “the bunch of commies” running The New York Times and complained about the newspaper’s criticism of the war…
It’s also worth pointing out that this is the time period that is responsible for blending Christianity and patriotism. Damn Commies.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
BY: JohnInDenver
IN: Labor Day Weekend Open Thread
BY: 2Jung2Die
IN: Labor Day Weekend Open Thread
BY: MichaelBowman
IN: Labor Day Weekend Open Thread
BY: Duke Cox
IN: Who’s Paying For These Racist Anti-Harris Sign Stunts?
BY: davebarnes
IN: Labor Day Weekend Open Thread
BY: notaskinnycook
IN: Labor Day Weekend Open Thread
BY: 2Jung2Die
IN: Labor Day Weekend Open Thread
BY: notaskinnycook
IN: Labor Day Weekend Open Thread
BY: Colorado Pols
IN: Who’s Paying For These Racist Anti-Harris Sign Stunts?
BY: JohnInDenver
IN: Labor Day Weekend Open Thread
Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!
Interesting diary.
The nonprofits, churches, hospitals, and charities, were essential in helping America become strong. They provided services that the government in the 1800’s couldn’t provide.
Tocqueville mentioned the strength of nonprofits in early America. He wrote that Americans were unique in building up this sector of their culture to the benefit of all.
In 1913 the IRS gave nonprofits tax exempt status, the 501c3 designation. However, as you state, in ’54 Johnson was able to propose an amendment that denied nonprofits the ability to lobby.
http://www.ombwatch.org/articl…
It sounds like the 501c3s of the time were equivalent to today’s 527s.
Nonprofits today face a mixed bag. Everyone knows about church leaders advocating for elected officials or for specific legislation. Technically, this is illegal for a 501c3, but they easily get around it by creating a nonprofit with a (c)(4) or (c)(6) designation. These are allowed to do limited lobbyig.
Also, (c)(3) organizations are allowed to lobby, they can’t lobby for specific candidates or legislation, except in certain circumstances. They are allowed to lobby for educational purposes, say to help legislators understand the importance of TANF funding for legal immigrants.
Aristotle and I were wondering the history before the election, no one seemed to know.