ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   D.C. (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=30)
-   -   U.S. Issues Senate Dems Have as Much to Explain as the IRS (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=273086)

petegz28 05-15-2013 11:59 AM

Senate Dems Have as Much to Explain as the IRS
 
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/...criticizing-it

With Washington gripped by a trio of exploding scandals this week – from Benghazi to government spying on news outlets to thug tactics by the Internal Revenue Service – Senate Democrats seem to be hoping that if they just yell loud enough then voters will overlook a key role they played in at least one of them.


They quickly sensed the political toxicity associated with Friday's admission by the IRS that they selectively targeted conservative organizations for special government scrutiny, and so Democrats didn't waste any time springing into action. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus of Montana, for example, vowed congressional hearings and called the IRS actions "an outrageous abuse of power and a breach of the public's trust."

He was joined by a chorus of other Democrats including Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire who called it "completely unacceptable," Kay Hagan of North Carolina who called it "disturbing and troubling," and Mark Pryor of Arkansas who tweeted that he's "working to get to bottom of this so we can fire those responsible & ensure this never happens again."

Fortunately, voters won't need to look very far.The willful ignorance and revisionist history demonstrated by Senate Democrats on this issue has been breathtaking, even by Washington standards.

Over the last three years, Democratic senators repeatedly and publicly pressured the IRS to engage in the very activities that they are only now condemning today. At the same time, Republicans repeatedly and publicly warned against this abuse of government power and pointed to a series of red flags that strongly suggested conservative political organizations were being targeted by the IRS. Those warnings were deliberately ignored by the Obama administration and Democratic leaders in Congress.

As the New York Times reported back in 2010 :


With growing scrutiny of the role of tax-exempt groups in political campaigns, Congressional Republicans are pushing back against Democrats by warning about the possible misuse of the Internal Revenue Service to audit conservative groups….And the Republicans are also upset about an I.R.S. review requested by Senator Max Baucus, the Montana Democrat who leads the Finance Committee, into the political activities of tax-exempt groups. Such a review threatens to "chill the legitimate exercise of First Amendment rights," wrote two Republican senators, Orrin G. Hatch of Utah and Jon Kyl of Arizona, in a letter sent to the I.R.S. on Wednesday. ... Democrats dismissed the Republicans' complaints as groundless.


You read that correctly.

The same Democratic chairman of the Senate Finance Committee who this week is calling for hearings into IRS activities, specifically called on the IRS to engage in that very conduct back in 2010. And he wasn't the only one. Just last year, a group of seven Senate Democrats sent another letter to the IRS urging them to similarly investigate these outside political organizations.

As the New York Times also reported just one week before they sent this letter:


The Internal Revenue Service is caught in an election-year struggle between Democratic lawmakers pressing for a crackdown on nonprofit political groups and conservative organizations accusing the tax agency of conducting a politically charged witch hunt.

Voters in New Hampshire may be interested to learn that Jeanne Shaheen was among the signatories of that letter urging action by the IRS.

So lost amid the hubbub surrounding the news that the IRS engaged in McCarthyite tactics to target specific political groups, and their subsequent apology for those tactics, has been the fact that the lobbying campaign from Senate Democrats actually worked.

From Max Baucus to Chuck Schumer to Jeanne Shaheen, key Senate Democrats publicly pressured the IRS to target groups that held differing political views and who, in their view, had the temerity to engage in the political process. The IRS listened to them and acted. And other Democrat senators like Kay Hagan and Mark Pryor said and did nothing about it.

Perhaps their strategy of distraction may work in the short-term with a Washington press corps pulled in a multitude of different directions, but Senate Democrats have a serious political problem that will haunt them as they head into an already-difficult election cycle. When these Senate Finance Committee hearings come to pass it would be a remarkable act of bravery and candor for one of these IRS bureaucrats to appropriately ask Max Baucus and others why they're not sitting at the witness tables next to them, instead of continuing in their charade of faux outrage.

Because Senate Democrats today have just as much explaining to do as the IRS.

petegz28 05-15-2013 12:05 PM

So of course we get...

Charlie Rangel: Obama answers not enough

Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.) said Wednesday that he believes President Barack Obama owes the American public explanations for both the seizure of Associated Press phone records by the Department of Justice and the IRS targeting of conservative groups.

“I don’t think anyone truly believes that the president has given us a sufficient answer for America, much less the press,” Rangel said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.” “I think this is just the beginning and the whole idea of comparing this with Nixon, I really think is just, it doesn’t make much sense. But the president has to come forward and share why he did not alert the press they were going to do this. He has to tell the Americans, including me: What was this national security question? You just can’t raise the flag and expect to salute it every time without any reason and the same thing applies to the IRS.”


The White House has said Obama wasn’t involved in either the IRS decision to target conservative groups — a position backed up by an inspector general report released Tuesday — or in the DOJ’s decision to broadly subpoena phone records for 20 Associated Press phone lines in three cities.

Rangel is a member of the House Ways And Means Committee, which will hold a hearing on why the IRS gave tougher scrutiny to conservative groups’ non-profits applications on Friday morning.

“In Watergate, Senator Baker said it all, everybody uses this: ‘What did he know and when did he know it?’” Rangel said. “I am confident that the President is angry as hell about this, as he should be. The IRS is no place for partisanship


But Rangel, a staunch Obama ally, said the press should give Obama time to sort out what happened.

“We have to give him an opportunity to root out any wrongdoing, whether it’s just negligence or criminal,” Rangel said. “But, for right now, to say that the president should be doubted? No. He has to come forward and give more of an answer than he has done.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/0...#ixzz2TNyzyqXX

LiveSteam 05-15-2013 12:11 PM

I knew all this shit would come to a head sooner than later
& now that its here
PBJPBJPBJPBJ

Taco John 05-15-2013 12:21 PM

This is a huge weakness in the IRS system. It inhibits free association while infringing on first amendment rights. Why should any of these groups had to register in the first place? So that government can collect their money? To need this sort of governmental permission of form and organize goes against the grain of the first Amendment.

A flat tax doesn't even fix this matter. We need to shift to a consumption tax, and get the federal government out of the business of approving what and how Americans can organize.

Garcia Bronco 05-15-2013 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taco John (Post 9684467)
This is a huge weakness in the IRS system. It inhibits free association while infringing on first amendment rights. Why should any of these groups had to register in the first place? So that government can collect their money? To need this sort of governmental permission of form and organize goes against the grain of the first Amendment.

Honestly that's all that needs to be said on the matter.

blaise 05-15-2013 02:31 PM

The left wing talking points are already materializing - the theme seems to be that Tea Party organizations deserved scrutiny and that they're the ones being hypocritical. Problem solved, it was all the Tea Party's fault to begin with.

The_Grand_Illusion 05-15-2013 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taco John (Post 9684467)
This is a huge weakness in the IRS system. It inhibits free association while infringing on first amendment rights. Why should any of these groups had to register in the first place? So that government can collect their money? To need this sort of governmental permission of form and organize goes against the grain of the first Amendment.

A flat tax doesn't even fix this matter. We need to shift to a consumption tax, and get the federal government out of the business of approving what and how Americans can organize.

I agree too, scrap the IRS and the current tax system. Replace with something more restrictive so politicians can't pimp out other people's money for power.

TGI

ghak99 05-15-2013 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taco John (Post 9684467)
We need to shift to a consumption tax, and get the federal government out of the business of approving what and how Americans can organize.

I'd gladly get behind some form of a simple consumption tax.

The hell with "tax reform", it's way too damn complicated and corruptible for any group of politicians to even begin to fix it. I want the whole ****ed up system wiped from the face of the earth and replaced with something simple and obvious.

cosmo20002 05-15-2013 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taco John (Post 9684467)
This is a huge weakness in the IRS system. It inhibits free association while infringing on first amendment rights. Why should any of these groups had to register in the first place? So that government can collect their money? To need this sort of governmental permission of form and organize goes against the grain of the first Amendment.

A flat tax doesn't even fix this matter. We need to shift to a consumption tax, and get the federal government out of the business of approving what and how Americans can organize.

They don't need permission. You made this up.

Garcia Bronco 05-15-2013 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cosmo20002 (Post 9684851)
They don't need permission. You made this up.

They do to operate as tax exempt. Which is what this is about. Read up...come back and try to defend this. It can't be just explained away. Especially when like groups on the other side were getting their' approved. Including the Presidents brother.

DaveNull 05-15-2013 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taco John (Post 9684467)
This is a huge weakness in the IRS system. It inhibits free association while infringing on first amendment rights. Why should any of these groups had to register in the first place? So that government can collect their money? To need this sort of governmental permission of form and organize goes against the grain of the first Amendment.

A flat tax doesn't even fix this matter. We need to shift to a consumption tax, and get the federal government out of the business of approving what and how Americans can organize.

No...they have to register so that the government can't tax the money they receive.

They could operate as a regular corporation if they wanted, but then the money coming into the organization would be taxable. It's really not that hard to figure out.

Garcia Bronco 05-15-2013 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaveNull (Post 9684910)
No...they have to register so that the government can't tax the money they receive.

They could operate as a regular corporation if they wanted, but then the money coming into the organization would be taxable. It's really not that hard to figure out.

Which is obviously an unfair advantage.

cosmo20002 05-15-2013 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garcia Bronco (Post 9684868)
They do to operate as tax exempt. Which is what this is about. Read up...come back and try to defend this. It can't be just explained away. Especially when like groups on the other side were getting their' approved. Including the Presidents brother.

Yes, but he didn't say that. So when you say "read up" you must be talking to him.

I don't defend it, but it should be noted that none of the political social welfare groups had their applications denied.

Comrade Crapski 05-16-2013 01:03 PM

Harry and Charlie are reading the writing on the wall; The next mid-term elections are going to be a bigger blood bath for the communists than they were in 2010.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:10 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.