OCR Text |
Show More Liberty Disappears By HARLEYL. LUTZ , ' Professor of Public Finance, Princeton University When the laws for the taxation of incomes and estates were amended, in 1934, so as to deny tax exemption for contributions and gifts to re- 14, vs . iA ligious, educa-tional educa-tional and charitable organizations, or-ganizations, if such organizations organiza-tions were engaged, en-gaged, in substantial sub-stantial degree, in propaganda or other attempts at-tempts to influence influ-ence legislation, legisla-tion, the door was opened wide for the exercise of arbitrary ar-bitrary administrative admin-istrative j ud g-ment, g-ment, The law ulinjj to the improvement of the quality qual-ity of our legislation in perfectly proper ways, or else they were willing will-ing to lump all fact-flnding and research re-search institutions together with the lobbyists, on the assumption that any activity which tended to influence legislation is subversive propaganda. The. most casual examination of the flood of bills passed by federal and state legislatures every year would reveal that there is an enormous need of improvement, in both the form and the quality of these enactments. Instead In-stead of refusing to allow deduction, for tax purposes, of contributions to the agencies which are capable of promoting legislative improvement, the tax laws should be changed so as to stimulate and encourage the increase in-crease of funds available for such a worthy purpose. The distinction between propaganda, propa-ganda, as the term is popularly understood, un-derstood, and the scientific attitude is clear enough. The propagandist is an advocate of a particular plan, system "or scheme. He admits only its real or alleged good points and ignores its defects. Or he stresses only the defects de-fects of the plan he is attacking without with-out recognizing its possible good qualities. qual-ities. That is, he takes a wholly onesided view, and he will use any means to gain his end. On the one hand, the scientific attitude at-titude is one which weighs all of the evidence, considers all of the facts, examines the case from every side. A finding thus arrived at may favor or reject a particular scheme, but Ihe announcement of such a finding, supported sup-ported by the pros and cons of the evidence, is not propaganda. The difference is like that which exists between the lawyer who is concerned with winning his client's case, and who will supress, if possible, pos-sible, all evidence that does not promote pro-mote this result, and the judge, who is concerned with the truth of the issue is-sue and not with the victory of one litigant or the other. The lawyer's argument ar-gument at the trial may be propaganda, propa-ganda, but the judge's decision is not. As the tax law now stands, it is as if Congress had recognized no distinction distinc-tion at all between the methods and aims of the trial lawyer and those of the judge on the bench. gave no definition of "propaganda" and the lax regulations have passed , over the whole question of what constitutes con-stitutes an attempt to influence legislation. legis-lation. It would seem as if there were need for some kind of distinction between be-tween proper and improper ways of influencing legislation. To deny that independent foundations and re-search re-search agencies shall utilize their resources re-sources for the advancement of the general well being through the publication pub-lication of findings which may contribute con-tribute to that result by an improvement improve-ment of legislation is to assert that Congress possesses, in its member-ship, member-ship, all wisdom and all knowledge as to what is best for the country. Yet the effect of the tax law is to discourage dis-courage gifts to such organizations, once the tax authorities have found them guilty of influencing legislation. For Ihe prospective donors are not allowed to deduct such gifts in making mak-ing tax returns. Since the whole question of what constitutes an attempt to influence legislation is left to the discretion of the tax officials, there are vast possibilities pos-sibilities of favoring or of penalizing various institutions. Pressure of this sort becomes an effective way of muzzling muz-zling economic and social research. Those who put this particular amendment into the tax laws either overlooked the possibility that some agencies may be capable of contrib- |