On the heels of the previous post about intolerant progressives came my awareness of the news that both chambers of the Virginia General Assembly, dominated by Democrats, passed bills that would eliminate long-standing tax exemptions for the United Daughters of the Confederacy, a group that was founded in 1894 for female descendants of Confederate soldiers. The group’s mission was and is to honor Confederate ancestors through memorial preservation—an increasingly difficult job—and charity work. It is currently exempt from paying property taxes and recordation taxes, which are charged when property sales are registered.
This week the State House of Delegates passed a bill revoking the group’s exemptions as well as the property tax exemptions for two other Confederate heritage groups, the Stonewall Jackson Memorial Inc. and the Confederate Memorial Literary Society.
To state the obvious, the three non-profit groups have been targeted because many legislators don’t like their beliefs and activities. Don Scott, the Democratic speaker of the Virginia House of Delegates, said it was important to revoke the exemptions from “organizations that continue to promote the myth of the romantic version of the Confederacy.”
How dare they?
Admittedly, the exemptions being eliminated (if Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin signs the bill into law) are unusual. The tax code’s section on the recordation tax lists categories of entities that are eligible for exemptions, such as hospitals and corporations. The United Daughters of the Confederacy’s Virginia division is the only organization singled out by name for the break. Still, it is quite possible that the proposed law would wipe out the group.
A 1950 deed giving the group land in Richmond for its headquarters. stipulated that if the group could not maintain the grounds and the building, it would lose its right to the property, “including all improvements thereon,” and it would would revert to the state. Two years later, the legislature approved the organization’s exemptions now being threatened. Susan McCrobie, the Daughters’ historian, says that the exemptions and the deed had been extended together by the state, so revoking the exemptions might compromise the deed, causing the property and the building to revert to the state.
The rhetoric around the legislation makes it pretty clear that if the organizations stood for, say, floral displays or veterans benefits, they would be left alone with the tax exemptions in place. On the other hand, it is also clear that the groups’ original tax exemptions were probably rooted in the state’s nostalgia for a way of life gone with the wind, and romantic notions of the land of cotton where old times were not forgotten. Delegate Alex Askew, who introduced the House bill, said that his bill was “not about trying to take them down,” but that “it’s just more about what we want to express in the commonwealth and how our policies reflect who we are currently.”
So is this censorship of an unpopular opinion and part of the Left’s attempt to erase the history of the Confederacy, or a long overdue revocation of Virginia’s support for groups that celebrate an insurrection to protect the brutal institution of slavery?
Your Ethics Alarms Ethics Quiz of the Day is…
Should Gov. Youngkin sign the bill into law?
Ethics Alarms 
Do the Democrats have veto proof majorities in both houses? If It’s going to become law anyway then he might as well sign it and save himself the political headache. If not, then he should probably veto it and say that this is not about nostalgia for the Confederacy but about a concern he has for targeting groups that one political party does not like for destruction.
If there is any reason to believe that this is targeting groups the Democrats don’t like, the governor shouldn’t sign it, veto-proof majorities or not. Decisions shouldn’t be made based on whether or not they can be put in force.
If the Daughters cannot keep up the property – something that is possible if they are no longer tax exempt and must use funds earmarked for upkeep for said taxes – it could be argued that the state is seeking to seize the property of people it doesn’t agree with.
That’s not a good precedent at all.
It’s a different form of asset forfeiture, when you think about it, and that has fallen somewhat out of favor lately. If it’s no longer ok to take the ill-gotten property of drug dealers, then how is it ok, however roundabout, to take the property of those you don’t agree with?
“Decisions shouldn’t be made based on whether or not they can be put in force.”
Perhaps not, but the question of what kind of political heat a decision is going to draw does factor in. If he vetoes this, he is going to catch heat from the left and it’s going to haunt him if he tries for higher office.
If he casts it as vetoing what he thinks would be a bad precedent that could be used against other groups who fall out of favor with the dominant political party, then he might have cover.
Disney and DeSantis was different, I think, that was DeSantis fighting back against an organization that had specially favored status and was abusing that status in an attempt to bully him and his supporters. There’s a lot of real estate between a tiny group like the Daughters and a company that you can’t turn on the computer without seeing.
This is just another attempt to erase history and gin up division, as well as reminding the feeble minded that we in the South all secretly yearn to reinstate the Confederacy. The governor should not sign the bill, but I’ll be surprised if he doesn’t. I also won’t be surprised when a successful response is organized to financially support the UDC. Nothing makes us want something like our betters telling us we can’t have it. I have studied both the “Lost Cause Mythology” and the “Righteous Cause Mythology” extensively, and neither is an honest examination of the complexities of the war. But we’re not allowed to talk about that.
Virginia north of Roanoke, as far as I can tell, is just a big D.C. suburb, with similar values and biases. I think most Virginians would rather leave well enough alone. All “heritage organizations” are suffering declining membership and will be gone soon enough. Of course that’s not soon enough for the flag cancellers and monument topplers.
Isn’t is a conflict of interest for the state to revoke a tax-exemption so that they can seize the property? I would call that a conflict of interest.
Yes he should veto the law. The Daughters of the Confederacy do not celebrate an insurrection that advocated slavery. The group honors their ancestors who, at the time believed they were fighting to protect their homeland. Very few of the dead confederates owned slave or advocated for the institution of slavery. Most were farmers who worked the land themselves and lived hand to mouth.
Don Scott, the Democratic speaker of the Virginia House of Delegates, said it was important to revoke the exemptions from “organizations that continue to promote the myth of the romantic version of the Confederacy.”
Perhaps he needs to understand what the groups actually do instead of showing his ignorance. How will you feel if the woke amass enough power the suggest the following:
. . . it was important to revoke the exemptions from “organizations that continue to promote the myth of the romantic version of the individual rights.” I would not be surprised if there are some who would like to extinguish the tax exempt status of FIRE or Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression.
Such a statement is not implausible given that we are under continuous bombardment with respect to what we can say without reprisal, what we can believe without being sued, and if we can defend ourselves and others from immediate threats to life and property.
The Daughters of the Confederacy maintain graves of confederate veterans. I have participated in the cleaning of such markers at Mt. Olivet cemetery in Frederick, MD. When that occurs there is no fanfare, no battle flags or any other visual demonstration of who the group is. Much of the activities of the National chapter appear to be focused on genealogical research, historic preservation and cemetery maintenance based on what I read in the magazine that comes to my wife.
Is Virginia in such bad shape financially that it has to take the tax exemption away from a group with no paid staff and relies on the contributions of an ever smaller group of descendants? Maybe those who are hell bent on teaching children that whites are oppressors while simultaneously claiming to be tolerant and inclusive should take a lesson from the veterans who last met in 1938 75 years after they sought to kill each other at Gettysburg. They found it beneficial to shake hands and accept each other.
Could this be compared to Desantis taking away Disney’s tax exemption? Maybe some of the same principles apply.
It is my understanding that Walt Disney had something of a reciprocal agreement with the state: stay out of Florida’s politics, and Florida will grant you tax-exempt status. When Disney Corp. took a vocal public stance on some of Florida’s legislation regarding public education standards, the exemption was rescinded.
If the above is true, then the situation with The Daughters of the Confederacy appears to be different.
To state the obvious, the three non-profit groups have been targeted because many legislators don’t like their beliefs and activities.
What, precisely are their beliefs and activities that are so offensive to many legislators?
To state the obvious, the three non-profit groups have been targeted because many legislators don’t like their beliefs and activities.
What, precisely are their beliefs and activities that are so offensive to many legislators?
They aren’t trying to suppress a group they disagree with or trying to seize land. Those are just happy byproducts of their real goal –
Get something to smear Youngkin with.
He either vetoes, and they can sideways smear him in his primaries for not advocating for tradition and heritage.
Or he vetoes, and they can directly smear him for supporting the confederacy and slavery.
Three-quarters of a century is a bit too late to contest a legal real estate transfer; they’d have it by adverse possession, anyway. Charity tax status is often pretty lenient, and historic preservation and education are valid categories. They obviously want to suppress and/or punish those who hold currently unapproved viewpoints. Could this not be a First Amendment case? (Not that the dems care much about that right anymore. They’d probably revoke the status for synagogues or churches supporting Israel now if they thought they could.)
The dems hold the thinnest possible majorities in both the VA House of Delegates and Senate (51-49 & 21-19) They gained that majority in the House last year, and actually lost a seat in the Senate. Youngkin should be safe with a veto
If I were Youngkin, I would move in another direction and take this opportunity to speechify against too much taxation altogether. His staff could find all kinds of different organizations/categories deserving of tax relief. When the dems become epileptic, he can just say “cut the pork boys so that our citizens keep more of their hard-earned money.” This is what conservative governors should be doing anyway.