Filed under: Democrat Corruption, Domestic Policy, Election 2012, Election 2014, Progressivism, Statism | Tags: 'Till After the Election, Chicago Politics, Hiding the Truth
With all the revelations about ObamaCare, the terrifying escalation of costs for an individual health care policy and the accompanying drastically larger deductibles, Democrats are plainly worried about the 2014 midterms. So the Obama administration is back to its old tried and true tricks.
Health and Human Services plans to delay the start of the second year of Obamacare enrollment by one month to allow insurers more time to set rates after assessing their plan experiences during 2014, a department official said Thursday night.
The decision means that sign-ups for the 2015 plan year would begin on Nov. 15, 2014 and end on Jan. 15, 2015 instead of the Oct. 15-Dec. 7 window previously announced. The date change, first reported by Bloomberg, also lengthens the enrollment period by a week. Doing so would give companies more opportunity to account for individuals, particularly young adults, who come in late during the plan’s first year, which has gotten off to a rocky start. The goal is premiums that more accurately reflect costs for those insured.
The new calendar would move the start of the 2015 open enrollment season to shortly after the November midterm elections.
This is nonsense. Insurers calculate the changes from the previous year every year in setting new rates. They haven’t forgotten how to do it just because of Kathleen Sebelius. So far the federal government has been unable to convince healthy young consumers to buy comprehensive health insurance they don’t need, to pay for everyone else. This will force premium increases on everyone else to pay for the lack of the young. Letting people know how much the ObamaCare policies they are being forced to buy are going to cost them just before an election is, um, unfortunate timing. Which of the Chicago bunch was it who said “elections are too important to be left to chance?”
Employer-provided group health insurance is where costs will either skyrocket, or consumers will be kicked out of their group coverage altogether. There’s going to be a lot of outrage when it hits home for company employees.
I used to consider government departments as often inept as all bureaucracies are, but not as agencies involved in attempting to change election outcomes by manipulating data and calendars and changing regulations. Americans traditionally and rightly don’t place a lot of trust in their government. They really do work for us — and you have to keep an eye on your employees.
This president, however, has gone to extraordinary lengths to politicize government departments to achieve his political aims. What the long-term damage to the country will be, we will learn in coming years. That there will be long-term damage is assured.
Filed under: Democrat Corruption, Economy, Election 2012, Liberalism, Media Bias, Politics | Tags: A Pattern of Lies, The Chicago Way, Winning is Everything!
The Obama administration has faked the census numbers that are used to compile unemployment statistics, in the period before the 2012 election.
In the home stretch of the 2012 presidential campaign, from August to September, the unemployment rate fell sharply — raising eyebrows from Wall Street to Washington.
The decline — from 8.1 percent in August to 7.8 percent in September — might not have been all it seemed. The numbers, according to a reliable source, were manipulated.
Granted, these numbers are careful estimates, but the figures are used by economists, financial institutions, hedge funds, state/private pension funds, and other governments base policy, predictions, expectations and invest real dollars based on those numbers. It is, as Joe Biden would say, a big #*!# deal! A knowledgeable source says the deception went beyond one employee, and escalated at the time President Obama was seeking reelection in 2012, and continues today.
Headline: 23 Million Unemployed is Not a Recovering Economy!, 10/7/2012
The labor participation rate is down to 1981 levels. Of the 114,000 new jobs last month, only 104,000 were in the private economy. The number that had a lot of people suspicious was the giant 873,000 leap in employment as measured by “the household survey.” That’s the biggest one-month increase in nearly 30 years, which does deserve an explanation. …
A lot of knowledgeable people were wondering if the Obama administration was, um, cooking the books. Robert Gibbs, former press secretary, appeared on the Sunday shows to say he was ‘shocked, shocked, that anyone would think that the administration manipulated the numbers. And yes, it is shocking that anyone would think that, but that is the kind of suspicion that this president’s lawlessness and executive orders and presidential proclamations have led us to.
Other things going on in October 2012: “The White House has moved to prevent defense and other government contractors from issuing mass layoff notices in anticipation of sequestration, notices which they must, according to law, send to workers deemed reasonably be likely to lose their jobs sixty days before they will be let go. The White House wants defense contractors to keep the layoffs secret and the contracting agencies would cover any potential litigation costs or employee compensation costs that could follow. The spending cuts would take effect January 2, 2013—$109 billion.”
And there was this one: Obama Economy Fashion Statement 10/7/2012, which I rather liked. There was also Benghazi, Obama performed horribly in a debate, and the Democrats interviewed the man who picked up the garbage from the Romney’s La Jolla house, and the CBO reported another $1 trillion+ deficit for 2012. Military Times reported a concerted effort to keep military votes from being counted or even received. “Mr Obama claims we are adding jobs every month, but for every person added to the labor force, ten drop out. That is not progress.
It would seem that promises of “If you like your plan, you can keep your plan” and “if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor,” are not an isolated aberration, but a longstanding pattern of lies. What is important for Liberals is winning, and you do what is necessary to make that happen. For the man who was elected to the Senate on the basis of miraculously having “sealed” divorce records opened for public perusal, it’s just what we should have expected.
October 12, 2012: Jack Welch, famed former CEO of General Electric provoked outrage when he suggested that the White House had manipulated September job numbers for political gains. Chris Matthews was simply beside himself. But Jack Welch was right!
Filed under: Democrat Corruption, Election 2012, History, Humor, Media Bias, Politics, Progressivism | Tags: Phony Scandals?, Shall We Count the Ways?, What You Said
(Click to Enlarge)
“…with an endless parade of distractions, political posturing
and phony scandals, Washington has taken its eye
off the ball. And I am here to say this needs to stop.
This needs to stop.”
Filed under: Democrat Corruption, Economy, Election 2012, Election 2014, Energy, History, Liberalism, Politics, Progressivism, Taxes | Tags: Committed to Job Creation, Creating Jobs, Pivot to Jobs Again
Filed under: Democrat Corruption, Election 2012, Law, Media Bias, Politics, Pop Culture, Progressivism, The United States | Tags: George Zimmerman, Sanford Florida, Trayvon Martin
The nation is focused on the Zimmerman trial, with people passionately rooting for one side or the other. This is a court of law, and the outcome will be decided by Florida law, the evidence presented, and the decision of the jurors — not by emotions aroused in the community. Theoretically, we left that behind with the witch trials and frontier justice. How did it get to be such an emotional matter?
The Department of Justice played a major behind-the-scenes role in organizing protests against George Zimmerman. The Department deployed their unit called the Community Relations Service to Sanford, FL, to organize and manage rallies against George Zimmerman. Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act request on April 24, 2012: Among their findings as reported by Bryan Preston:
- March 25 – 27, 2012, CRS spent $674.14 upon being “deployed to Sanford, FL to work marches, demonstrations, and rallies related to the shooting and death of an African-American teen by a neighborhood watch captain.”
- March 25 – 28, 2012, CRS spent $1,142.84 “in Sanford, FL to work marches, demonstrations, and rallies related to the shooting and death of an African-American teen by a neighborhood watch captain.”
- March 30 – April 1, 2012, CRS spent $892.55 in Sanford, FL “to provide support for protest deployment in Florida.”
- March 30 – April 1, 2012, CRS spent an additional $751.60 in Sanford, FL “to provide technical assistance to the City of Sanford, event organizers, and law enforcement agencies for the march and rally on March 31.”
- April 3 – 12, 2012, CRS spent $1,307.40 in Sanford, FL “to provide technical assistance, conciliation, and onsite mediation during demonstrations planned in Sanford.”
- April 11-12, 2012, CRS spent $552.35 in Sanford, FL “to provide technical assistance for the preparation of possible marches and rallies related to the fatal shooting of a 17-year-old African-American male.” – expenses for employees to travel, eat, sleep?
The Community Relations Service’s stated mission is conducting “impartial mediation practices and conflict resolution, ” but engaged instead on the side of anti-Zimmerman protesters. American taxpayers might object to taxpayer funds directed to paying government employees to organize racially charged demonstrations. Organizing protests and street theater to obtain desired ends is what community organizers do.
Lots of protests in March and April, and across many parts of the country , Maryland, Michigan, Chicago, Alabama white people were assaulted, at least 14 known attacks, by blacks claiming anger over the death of Trayvon Martin. Race hustlers have mad the most of it, and there have been calls for riots if Zimmerman is acquitted. This was all in the Spring of 2012. Is it possible that protests were encouraged to boost discord before the election? The death toll for African-American children and teenagers in Chicago keeps mounting, but I haven’t read of any protests or demonstrations in Chicago.
Daniel Greenfield, writing as Sultan Knish, has an interesting analysis of the case, but very class-based. I’m not particularly comfortable with the idea of an America divided up by “class” — we have always been an opportunity society with people starting off poor as they complete their schooling and begin to make their way in the world and moving through the classes. I’ll leave the divisions to the IRS. We have kids born in the projects who rise to sit on the Supreme Court or become movie stars, famous ball-players, musicians, generals, corporate CEOs and famous neurosurgeons.
It was said by investigators, at the time of the arrest, that there was not enough evidence to charge George Zimmerman with Second Degree Murder, but the Justice Department insisted on the more serious charge.
You will notice in the photograph at the top that not only are all the signs printed, but everyone has a printed Trayvon tee shirt. Why was the trial all about race? And who benefited from the protests and demonstrations?
Filed under: Democrat Corruption, Economy, Election 2012, Law, Politics, Progressivism, The United States | Tags: Abolish This Agency, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, It's Not Always About Race
Soft tyranny. What do you call it when your world is being transformed by political correctness, diversity, sustainability— all those meaningless words that provide political cover for accusations of racism, sexism, exclusion, discrimination, judgmentalism, and of course that amorphous fairness.
We have kindergarteners suspended from school for pointing “finger guns” and saying ‘pow!’ Little children questioned by the police for offenses such as bringing a one inch GI Joe gun to school, or biting a pop tart into the shape of a gun (or the state of Idaho). A high-school student is threatened with a year in jail for wearing an NRA tee shirt. This is not “zero tolerance of guns” to protect our children. It’s a sickness. Anyone who is unable to tell the difference between a “finger gun” and a Glock needs some serious psychiatric help.
What roused my ire in particular is lawsuits filed by the federal government’s Equal Employment Opportunity Commission against Dollar General and a BMW facility in South Carolina for the alleged unfair use of criminal background checks for job applicants.
The EEOC last year issued new guidelines that cautioned businesses against rejecting minority applicants who have committed a crime and recommended that businesses eliminate any policies that “exclude people from employment based on a criminal record.” Such screening, you see, might discriminate against African Americans. How about such screening discriminating against people who might commit a crime? So don’t do any background checks, just cross your fingers and hope for the best.
However, the update was issued out of concern that employers might disproportionately exclude minorities from getting hired because more African Americans and Hispanics are getting arrested and going to prison, according to the guideline report.
While the percentage of working-age Americans with a criminal record has increased significantly over the past 20 years, African Americans and Hispanics are arrested two to three times as much compared with the rest of the U.S. population, according to a commission report at the time of the vote.
I’m not sure that you can legislate fairness. That won’t keep them from trying.
Filed under: Capitalism, Democrat Corruption, Domestic Policy, Economy, Election 2012, Law, Politics, Taxes | Tags: The Chicago Way, The Internal Revenue Service, Winning at All Costs
The New York Times is still willing to plump for the story of a couple of rogue agents in the Cincinnati office for the unlawful targeting of conservative groups. They are simply wrong, deliberately so, in still trying to blame it all on the couple of rogue agents in the Cincinnati office. Elijah Cummings (D-My), ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has now stated that” the case is solved”—and it’s time for the nation to”move on.” The about face by Mr. Cummings is a disturbing indication of the administration’s desire to get this mess swept under the rug as quickly as possible.
Only days earlier, he was calling for a “thorough investigation” to restore “truth and trust”, and wanted to get to the bottom of whatever transpired at the IRS.
We now know that Washington was deeply involved. We have letters from Lois Lerner, director of exempt organizations and IRS attorney Carter Hull. Cincinnati officials have claimed that they were “micromanaged” by officials in D.C. Now a top official in Washington — Holly Paz— has told congressional investigators that she was involved in 20 to 20 of the cases. Her signature is also on letters to clients.
Holly Paz, a senior IRS supervisor in Washington DC admitted to targeting Tea Party applications for tax-exempt status. She was personally involved in scrutinizing up to 30 Tea Party applications., including some requests that sat around for more than a year without department action.
She has been placed on “administrative leave” which seems to mean staying at home with full pay. Paz described an agency in which IRS Supervisors in Washington worked closely with agents in the field, but didn’t fully understand what those agents were doing. She said agents in Cincinnati talked about handling “tea party ” cases, but she thought the term was merely shorthand for all applications from groups that were politically active, conservative and liberal.
She was only among the first to be interviewed. More to come. Mr. Cummings said “The witch hunt needs to end.”
It is clearly not a witch hunt. There has been a serious erosion of the public trust. A new poll reveals that tow-thirds of American voters believe that the IRS specifically targeted conservative groups as part of an effort to punish political opponents.
Perhaps the thinking is that if President Obama is just out of the country for most of the next month, and concern with the Syrian revolution, maybe people will lose interest and forget all about it, and move on to the next item of interest. Is it possible that the administration does not understand what a serious breach of trust and ethics this whole thing is? The president has been quite casual about going around Congress, ignoring the law, and doing what he chose. This one is too big, and too disturbing.
Filed under: Capitalism, Democrat Corruption, Domestic Policy, Election 2012, Freedom, Intelligence, National Security, Politics | Tags: Overcriminalization, Overregulation, The Public Trust
How much should we worry about all these scandals? Professor William A. Jacobson tackles that question, and says “when everything is a crime, government data mining matters.” President Obama, who was elected on the idea that he was going to end the dissension in Washington, and bring people together, has quite clearly been unusually divisive. He has been clear that he believes that “bipartisanship” is when Republicans agree with his ideas.
When the IRS scandal proves that calling yourself a “patriot”, expressing interest in the Constitution, or in smaller government can lead the IRS to descend on you with all their authority, casts suspicion on accounts of how the government data mines phone records and email and search messages from internet companies. When Senator Dianne Feinstein insists that the data mining has prevented large attacks, her paranoia about guns and lack of sound information make her statements on data mining seem untrustworthy. The level of regulations and mandates emanating from this administration speak constantly of a forceful, authoritarian approach to the public, which is directly oppositional to Americans understanding of individual liberty.
We have all read of the criminalization of life, the attack by the EPA on someone who has allowed rainwater to collect on their land, the attempts by the EPA to regulate trickles of water from snowmelt under their Congressional authority to make sure that navigable waters are clean. The case of the Gibson Guitar Company shows that government regulators can attack your business and nearly destroy it even when you are obeying all the applicable laws. Overcriminalization is rife, and is becoming a matter of concern.
The United States has implacable enemies. The president’s insistence that he has decimated al Qaeda is not convincing. We continue to be attacked, and data mined from telephone calls between known terrorists or emails between this country and terrorist havens are probably essential to learning about potential attacks. We need intelligence, and good intelligence means trying to find out what the bad guys are doing. They must be found in the general population, and they don’t usually wear tee shirts labeled “bad guy.”
Where should we draw the line? Obama’s response is that we should trust the government. He is advocating a shield law to protect reporters against the sort of harassment that his attorney general and the FBI practiced against Fox News and the Associated Press. He is outraged that the IRS went after his political opponents, and fired the acting Head of the IRS who was scheduled to leave that office shortly, anyway. Victor Davis Hanson spells out the situational ethics practiced by the president. Read that one closely. Obama’s declarations vary from one day to another. Words are designed to please the listener, but have no permanent intent. Americans want to believe their president, but Obama has squandered that trust.
Ironically, the very success of economic and political freedom reduced its appeal to later thinkers. The narrowly limited government of the late nineteenth century possessed little concentrated power that endangered he ordinary man. The other side of the coin was that it possessed little power that would enable good people to do good. And in an imperfect world there were still many evils. Indeed, the very progress of society made the residual evils seem all the more objectionable. As always, people took the favorable developments for granted. They forgot the danger to freedom from a strong government. Instead, they were attracted by the good that a stronger government could achieve — if only government power were in the “right” hands.
……………………………………………….Milton and Rose Friedman
Filed under: Democrat Corruption, Domestic Policy, Election 2012, Media Bias, Politics, Progressivism, Statism, The United States | Tags: americans for prosperity, Hating Conservatives, President Barack Obama
To understand the current scandals, the big ones — the IRS targeting of conservative groups, the Verizon telephone hacking, and the Prism cyberhacking of nine major internet companies servers for data — you have to understand some basic differences between the two major political parties. No, Republicans are not pure as the driven snow and the Democrats are not (quite) pure evil. Get real. They are all politicians whose primary interest is being reelected.
Democrats don’t just disagree with Conservatives, they hate them. They want them defeated utterly and completely so they are not there anymore and the Democrats are totally in charge and don’t have to suffer disagreeing people who keep dragging up studies and examples of why Democrats’ ideas won’t work, who get all stuffy about spending money, are unfailingly mean, don’t understand the need to help the poor, and don’t want to repay blacks for all their years of suffering.
Republicans do disagree with Democrats, about almost everything. This is what the founders intended. Republicans would prefer to win the arguments, but they do recognize that the arguing serves a purpose. I have never seen any indication anywhere, ever, that Republicans want to do away with Democrats, or ban them permanently from government. The ultimate goal of Democrats is winning. They want power. Republicans want a free society and smaller, more efficient government.
With the current scandals, Democrats insist that there is no paper trail, nor no “smoking gun” to connect President Barack O’Blameless to the scandals. Of course not. Obama does not like meetings, avoids them whenever possible, and prefers to make speeches. Why do you think he has all those Czars?
There might not be a paper trail, but Obama “spent months in 2010 warning Americans about the ‘threat’ to democracy posed by conservative groups, right at the time the IRS began targeting these groups.” The only useful thing produced by the inspector general’s audit of the IRS was the timeline, as laid out in the Wall Street Journal by Kim Strassel.
It was August 9, 2010 when the IRS first issued its “Be On the Lookout” list, flagging key conservative words and issues. The president named a group that he was obsessed with — Americans for Prosperity (founded by the Koch Brothers). “Right now all around this country there are groups with harmless-sounding names like Americans for Prosperity, who are running millions of dollars of ads…And they don’t have to say who exactly the Americans for Prosperity are. You don’t know if it’s a foreign-controlled corporation.”
Aug. 11: DCCC sends out fundraising emails warning about “Karl Rove inspired shadow groups.”
Aug. 21: Weekly radio address: “shadowy groups with harmless-sounding names. …You don’t know if it’s a foreign-controlled corporation…The only people who don’t want to disclose the truth are people with something to hide.”
Aug. 23: The New Yorker’s Jame Mayer: Hit piece on Koch brothers titled “Covert Operations: in which she accuses them of funding ‘political front groups.’”
Aug. 27: White House economist Austan Goolsbee accused Koch Industries of being a pass-through that does “not pay corporate income tax.” Inspector General investigates how Goolsbee got that confidential tax information.
Same week: Democrat Party files complaint with IRS claiming Americans for Prosperity is violating tax exempt status.
Sept. 16: Obama in CT, says “foreign-controlled entity” might be funding “millions of dollars of attack ads”
Sept 20: Obama in Philadelphia; “nobody knows who is behind conservative groups.”
And it continued. IRS employees in the Cincinnati office are now telling investigators that they took their orders from Washington DC. With this kind of commentary coming continually from the president and his spokespeople, you might not have the presidential signature on a formal order, but people probably got the idea. That’s how politics worked in 2010.
If you want to know something about shadowy dark secret groups, just Google “Democracy Alliance.”
Filed under: Democrat Corruption, Domestic Policy, Economy, Election 2012, Law, Politics, Taxes | Tags: Democrat Denial, The IRS Scandal, The Problem of Permit Power
In theory, Democrats should be as disturbed by the IRS scandal as Republicans. Yes, most of the IRS politicized tax enforcement was directed at the Tea Party, anything with names like “patriot” or “liberty” or “freedom,” “Constitution,” nefarious names that clearly indicate right-wing extremism, for quite obviously if Republicans regain a majority, there’s tit for tat, or turnabout’s fair play or plain old “payback,” not that they would, but they might. Democrats are more concerned with the immediacy of the attacks on the Obama administration, which cannot, by definition, do anything wrong.
We have the “so-called scandals” which just deny the whole thing, but that’s not likely to work, so they have switched to the concept that the real IRS scandal is the use by conservatives of 501(c) tax status as a shield for political advocacy. The 501 (c) designation is supposed to be, they say, for “social welfare,” not anything “partisan.”
Professor Richard Epstein points out that the criteria for Section 501 (c)(4) organizations are open-ended. Few complex organizations are operated exclusively for any single purpose, and many applicants have different ideas of what counts as “social welfare.”So you have loose standards and thousands of applications.
The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administrations reported on May 14 that the Exempt Office of the IRS actions were not politically biased, but were attributable to the confusion of lower staff members who for three years, had never quite understood their job assignments. This is what we politely called, in my childhood, “road apples.” The delays and nitpicking questions were specifically designed to hold off approval until after the November 2012 elections.
Epstein says that the larger disease of which IRS misbehavior is only a symptom, is something that has taken root in many of the major administrative agencies in the United States — permit power.
Private individuals are not allowed to engage in certain activities or to claim certain benefits without the approval of some major government agency. The standards for approval are nebulous at best, which makes it hard for any outside reviewer to overturn the agency’s decision on a particular application.
That power also gives the agency discretion to drag out its review, since few individuals or groups are foolhardy enough to jump the gun and set up shop without obtaining the necessary approvals first. It takes literally a few minutes for a skilled government administrator to demand information that costs millions of dollars to collect and that can tie up a project for years. That delay becomes even longer for projects that need approval from multiple agencies at the federal or state level, or both.
Professor Epstein offers the mission statement of the FDA as an example” “The FDA is responsible for protecting the public health by assuring the safety, efficacy, and security of human and veterinary drugs, biological products, medical devices, our nation’s food supply, cosmetics and products that emit radiation.” Absolutes are unattainable, and there is a whole universe of gray area there. How safe is safe enough, how deadly are side effects, how many trials are needed. The mission statement allows the agency to slow down, for years, any approval or disapproval.
501(c)(3) organizations are barred from partisan campaign activities. Media Matters for America, a left-wing agitprop organization uses that cover for its daily attacks on conservatives. The Center for American Progress, which was supposed to be the left-wing think tank to match the Heritage Foundation has both 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) designations and has never had so much as a non-partisan thought pretty much demolishes the “social welfare” argument. Under the 501(c)(4) designation, organized labor had spent, as reported by the Journal in July 2012 $4.4 billion on politics and lobbying since 2005, mostly funded by union dues. Democrats always include a carve-out for unions in their proposals to require disclosure of political spending, and demonstrates why they are so furious about the Supreme Court Citizens United decision.
“Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.“
Filed under: Capitalism, Democrat Corruption, Election 2012, Politics, Progressivism, Taxes, The United States | Tags: Absolute Denial/Can't Remember, Internal Revenue Service Scandal, Who Knew? Who Ordered?
Did Barack Obama personally order the IRS to attack Republican groups, deny them
501 (c)(4) status, get their names and the names of everyone even slightly associated with them —The committees want to know how far the rot reaches. Is this only recent? And who ordered what done?
Kim Strassel of the Wall Street Journal points out that the IRS scandal started at the top. The president is fully in denial mode, noting that the IRS is an “independent” agency, but it isn’t necessary for President Obama to pick up the phone. In full view for five years, Obama has publicly suggested that conservative political groups were engaged in nefarious deeds. He has publicly called out by name political opponents he would like to see pressured into invisibility.
On Aug. 21, 2008, the Conservative American Issues Project ran an ad highlighting the ties between candidate Obama and Bill Ayers, formerly of the Weather Underground. The Obama campaign and supporters were furious, and they pressured TV stations to pull the ad — a common-enough tactic in such ad spats.
What came next was not common. Bob Bauer, general counsel for the campaign (and later general counsel for the White House), on the same day wrote to the criminal division of the Justice Department, demanding an investigation into AIP, “its officers and directors,” and its “anonymous donors.” Mr. Bauer claimed that the nonprofit, as a 501(c)(4), was committing a “knowing and willful violation” of election law, and wanted “action to enforce against criminal violations.”…
In early August 2008, the New York Times trumpeted the creation of a left-wing group a(a 501(c)(4) called Accountable America. …the group—as the story explained —would start by sending “warning ” letters to 10,000 GOP donors, “hoping to create a chilling effect that will dry up contributions.” The letters would alert “right-wing groups to a variety of potential dangers, including legal trouble, public exposure and watchdog groups digging through their lives.”
Sen. Max Baucus, Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee on Sept. 26, 2010, wrote to the IRS commissioner Dough Shulman asking him to survey major 501(c)(4) organizations to ensure that political campaign activity was not the organizations primary activity, and investigate their major donors.
Two years later, on Feb. 16, 2012, seven Democratic Senators (Bennet, Franken, Merkley, Schumer, Shaheen, Udall and Whitehouse wrote to Shulman to ask if the IRS is investigating whether political groups were improperly posing as “social welfare organizations” to receive the 501(c)(4) status, and asked the IRS to “impose a strict cap on the amount of political spending by tax-exempt, nonprofit groups,” and prevent them from “abusing the tax code.”
“And 2010 was the year Democrats went full-bore pressuring the IRS to investigate nonprofit politicking which resulted in the IRS targeting Tea Party and other nonprofit applicants who were ideological opponents. Letters from 10 high-profile Democrats…pressured the IRS to investigate nonprofit politicking, even threatening legislation to change IRS standards if the IRS didn’t act.”
“The IRS is behaving “passively,” complained Carl Levin to Shulman in July 2012, adding “How long after a complaint to the IRS does a compliance review begin?” Sen. Levin also asked Shulman to look into a dozen groups, including Americans for Prosperity, 60 Plus Association, Patriot Majority USA and Club for Growth.”
Former commissioner Doug Shulman testified last Wednesday that back in March 2012, there was “absolutely” no special targeting of conservative groups going on. “At no time, to the best of my memory, was I ever given the impression that these [IRS employees] were only [looking closely] at conservative groups.
So there you go. Nobody knows anything, Everybody denies everything. Your Government at work.
ADDENDUM: I should perhaps mention that Democrats profess to be extremely concerned that anything groups like the Tea Party do, should be concerned with “social welfare activities” and not anything political, especially not political fundraising. The amusing part is that the Center for American Progress has both 501 (c)(3) and 501 (c)(4) organizations devoted to fundraising from social welfare organizations like the Democracy Alliance. And the Center for American Progress is certainly not political, are they? Nah.