I’m in the middle of the (lengthy) process of applying for a job with the IRS. It’s nothing in any way exciting, just seasonal data entry at a regional office. I’ve already filled out six or so different forms, been fingerprinted, and taken a typing test: now I get to fill out a few more forms and go in for “further processing”. I’m assuming that they’ve done some manner of background check (eg, run my fingerprints to make sure I’m not a convicted felon, etc).
Purely theoretically, if they found out that I was an official member of the communist party*, would they not hire me? What if I came up “clean”, got the job, and then “became” a communist, and they found out - would I get fired? Keep in mind it’s not as if I’d be dealing with sensitive material - I’d be typing numbers from tax forms into a computer for eight hours at a stretch.
If so: what’s the rationale for that? I’d think that blatently discriminating on the basis of political affiliation would be a no-no.
For the record, I am not a member of the communist party.*
**Not yet, anyway.
The same question was asked during the McCarthy era, specifically what basis in law the communist witch hunt trials had (given that freedom of thought, association and expression is in the 1st Amendment). I would imagine the answer now is the same as it was then: because they can.
Saying that I don’t know if they actually do exlude people based on political belief, but I would have thought even if they didn’t that being a communist is the one political affiliation that wouldn’t be tolerated.
I have been cleared (Minimal Background Investigation) by the IRS and AFAIK they did not ask anyone about my political affiliation. That information is not on any of the forms that you fill out. The questions that the investigators ask are fairly standard and generally relate to financial problems, alcohol or drug problems, or illegal activity. I have also been cleared at the Full Field Background Investigation level by US Customs. They all use the same forms to collect data, mostly the same questions by investigators, although the criteria may vary somewhat (e.g., the IRS is absolutely intolerant if you failed to file your taxes).
I have also been interviewed about a dozen times by investigators doing clearances on other people for Customs and DOD, and political affiliation has never been mentioned.
That does not prove that information on political activity is never sought or considered, but there is no reason to think they do.
(This might be different for an intelligence agency clearance.)
(I had a DOD Secret many years ago but that’s a rather perfunctory clearance process; I don’t think they interviewed anyone.)
I should add that although they don’t ask about political affiliation per se they might be interested if you appeared to have a relationship with a foreign government, for example. Letters to Castro might get some attention.
Belonging to any political party should be fine, but if you use your job as a data entry clerk to further the cause of Uncle Joe Stalin, you’d be in violation of the Hatch Act.
There was the wide spread belief that the communist party advocated the violent over through of non communist governments. I am not really going to debate weather or not this was really part of their platform or not.
When I joined the military all they wanted to know was whether I had ever been a member of “a group that sought the violent overthrow of the US Government”. This was pre 9/11, so YMMV.
They weren’t trials, they were hearings. The McCarthy hearings were to determine the extent of Communist infiltration in the government, the HUAC hearings, which the McCarthy hearings often get confused with, were to determine Communist infiltration in Hollywood.
In terms of the trials of communists and fascists under the Smith Act, the legal justification was the Smith Act, which made it illegal to promote the violent overthrow of the government, or to belong to an organization that promoted the violent overthrow of the goverment.
The Smith Act was found unconstitutional in 1957, btw, in Yates v US.
I didn’t say they were trials in the correct meaning, I meant they were “witch hunt trials” i.e. legal proceedings with no real basis in law, logic or jurisprudence. Also, whatever they may have been called, people were ordered to attend them (like a trial), made to give evidence (like a trial) and the hearings often led to a pronouncement of “guilt” over whether someone had or had not been a communist or been involved with communism which sometimes ended in people eventually being imprisoned (like a trial). Not just an issue of semantics, I think.
No one was imprisoned for have been a member of the Communist Party. They were imprisoned for contempt of Congress for refusing to testify; or in the Alger Hiss case, for perjury.
And, of course, had anyone who was asked “are you know or have you ever been a communist or associated with communists” then answered “Oh yeah, I’ve been a communist for years and all my friends are communists” they would have walked out of the hearing without a problem and never been troubled again. :rolleyes:
They would have suffered social consequences, and in the case of some of the McCarthy hearings, might have lost their jobs, but off the top of my head, I can’t think of anyone who cooperated with either of the hearings and suffered legal prosecution as a result of doing so.
I once applied for a job at a defense company, working on advanced design torpedos. I had to fill out the forms to apply for a security clearance. They asked me to list all organizations of any type that I had ever been a member of, but with an exception for “political” groups.
So I commented to the HR person that “this seems like I would have to list the 4-H club I belonged to as a farm boy, but if I was a member of the Communist Party, I could leave that off.” He said “Yeah, but if you’re a member of the Communist Party, the FBI already knows that!”. And that’s probably true.
I am almost sure that Title VII the Civil Rights Act of 1964 specifically allows hiring discrimination against Communist Party Members - in that they are specifically excluded from the Hiring Protections ( ‘*unlawful Employment practices’ * section f in the link). I am very ready to stand corrected - I certainly am not a Civil Rights Lawyer – that is simply my, possibly flawed, understanding
Regarding the FBI they certainly still (1/26/05) ask on the applications and it is still (1/26/05) a crime to lie about now or ever havinbg been a mamber of the Communist Party https://www.fbijobs.com/privacy.asp
I’m not a lawyer of any kind, but I think that that 1964 law has been amended. Communists were defined as subversives in the aptly named Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950. But the specific part tying communism to subversion (50 USC 781) was repealed in 1993.
I was asked the same when I underwent a very cursory background check for a summer internship with a U.S. Attorney’s Office (1990) and again when I applied to take the state bar exam (1992). Don’t think communism, as such, was mentioned either time.
They would have suffered absolutely no LEGAL consequences. It was not and is not illegal to be a member of the Communist Party, any more than it is not illegal to belong to Al Qaida or the KKK. However, if you get up in front of Congress and declare that you’re a member of Al Qaida or the KKK, people are going to be upset by that.
You certainly could be charged with crimes you commited on behalf of those organizations…perjury, obstruction of justice, conspiracy, murder, contempt of congress, espionage, treason, money laundering, racketeering, or whatever.
The Hollywood version of the story is that people totally unconnected with the CPUSA were called, and were compelled to falsely testify that their innocent friends were CPUSA members, and that people who refused to lie were sent to jail. But the reality is that the people called really were former CPUSA members, and the people they were required to name really were former CPUSA members. No one was imprisoned merely for being a CPUSA member, people were sent to jail for refusing to tell the truth. Of course, being publicly exposed as a former Communist could have extra-legal consequences, just like being publicly exposed as a former member of the Klan.
