Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

IRS documents show liberal groups vetted like Tea Party: Democrats

Posted by   + Show Post

 

IRS documents show liberal groups vetted like Tea Party: Democrats

By Kim Dixon

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Liberal-leaning "Occupy" groups received similar tax scrutiny from the Internal Revenue Service as conservative "Tea Party" groups, according to documents released on Friday by a Democratic lawmaker, who said the IRS had been subjected to one-sided attacks.

Representative Elijah Cummings, the top Democrat on the House of Representatives' Oversight and Government Reform Committee, released documents from 2010 and 2012 used by IRS staff reviewing tax-exempt applications that suggest the key word "Occupy" was in the same category for added review as Tea Party applications.

"Occupy Wall Street" and similar left-leaning groups have sprouted up in recent years to protest corporate power.

Cummings blasted the chief of the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA), who issued a report two months ago that said the agency targeted conservative terms like "Tea Party" and "Patriot" when examining applications from non-profit political groups seeking federal tax exemption.

"This investigation ... has been characterized by one-sided and partial information leading to unsubstantiated accusations with no basis in fact," Cummings said in his letter to Representative Darrell Issa, the top Republican on the panel.

Cummings called for TIGTA's chief, J. Russell George to be summoned before the committee.

The IRS documents released by Cummings add another wrinkle to the Tea Party targeting inquiry that has triggered the worst crisis in years at the tax collecting agency.

Two months ago, the affair burst into view when an IRS official acknowledged that conservative groups seeking tax exempt status were inappropriately targeted, after agency officials had denied to lawmakers that the groups had received such treatment.

The scandal led President Barack Obama to oust the IRS chief from his job. Other IRS officials were also removed. The use of the targeting, or "BOLO" lists, was suspended and the FBI, as well as congressional committees, are conducting investigations.

Documents released by Cummings include a May 3, 2013 email between George and his deputy for investigations, with the deputy concluding after a search of 5,500 IRS emails there was no indication of political motivation in the Tea Party searches.

The potential use of liberal terms to select applications for added scrutiny came up last month when another Democratic lawmaker, Representative Sandy Levin, released several BOLO lists with terms like "Progressive."

TIGTA said in a letter to Levin that although liberal terms were on BOLO lists, there was no indication that they received the same added review and delay as Tea Party and other conservative groups.

The inspector general noted that in many BOLO lists, the word "historical" was used next to progressive, suggesting it was not an active issue.

Cummings released internal documents, including emails and Power Point presentations that showed words like "Occupy" were actively being used as late as February 2012.

One document suggests "Progressive" was used during a July 2010 training, along with "Tea Party," as key words that indicated potential political activity.

Groups seeking tax exemption under federal law may engage in limited amounts of political activity, depending on the type of exemption sought. This and the vagueness of the rules often make it difficult for IRS agents to tell which groups overstep and become ineligible for tax exemption.

The scandal led President Barack Obama to oust the IRS chief from his job. Other IRS officials were also removed. The use of the BOLO lists was suspended and the FBI, as well as congressional committees, are conducting investigations.

by on Jul. 12, 2013 at 10:26 AM
Replies (11-20):
katy_kay08
by on Jul. 14, 2013 at 12:02 AM

As I said when this story first broke, I think all groups applying for tax exempt status should be reviewed thoroughly and if they are political in nature should get flagged for more stringent review...regardless of which side of the spectrum they fall on.  

Friday
by HRH of MJ on Jul. 14, 2013 at 12:03 AM


Quoting grandmab125:

 It's being ignored, because this is old so-called news.  And Elija Cummings is full of crap.

Quoting Friday:


Quoting sweet-a-kins:

This is in the republican Playbook

Now when election time comes up they can mention this, fast and furious, Benghazi and all the other made up "scandals" the rubes will only remember the lies and not the actual truth behind them..

That way, we spend months debunking their made up bullsh*t and not talking about any real issues or solutions


Quoting Happymamax2:

The "liberal" media must have missed that one!  Strangely enough, as soon as that came out, the whole "scandal" got no more press mania....

I notice they are ignoring this post.

Fascinating.

 

Yeah, yeah, we know anyone who disagress with you is full of crap. Blah, blah, blah.

 


Thank God......it's Friday!!!

Friday
by HRH of MJ on Jul. 14, 2013 at 12:04 AM


Quoting katy_kay08:

As I said when this story first broke, I think all groups applying for tax exempt status should be reviewed thoroughly and if they are political in nature should get flagged for more stringent review...regardless of which side of the spectrum they fall on.  

Agreed.

 


Thank God......it's Friday!!!

grandmab125
by Gold Member on Jul. 14, 2013 at 12:15 AM

 Yesterday's IRS news bulletin was a bit perplexing.  It was no real surprise that the agency had used inappropriate 'BOLO' lists more widely and for longer than we'd previously known.  Sweeping malfeasance and subsequent dishonesty is par for the course with them at this point.  What was intriguing, though, was the apparent revelation that the IRS had also used key words like "progressive" and "occupy" during their screening process.  This begged the question, why didn't these facts come to light much earlier?  Liberals and the IRS have been eager to tamp down the festering controversy for weeks, all while insisting that the abuse wasn't politically motivated -- a tale few Americans believe.  If the wrongful targeting affected both sides of the spectrum, that would have represented solid evidence for the 'innocent incompetence' defense.  As I've written previously, pleading ineptitude boosts conservatives' case that the federal government has become too sprawling and unaccountable, but it's still less damaging than leaving a general impression of deliberate partisan malice.  Are we to believe that as the latter assumption calcified in the public's imagination, the IRS and its defenders chose not to disclose the other side of the story?  Remember, lefty groups had already stated that they weren't targeted, evidence abounds that left-leaning applications sailed through while righty applications languished, the Inspector General's report clearly showed a distinct ideological imbalance, and Stephen Miller conceded under oath that right-leaning groups were exclusively victimized by the practice.  The IRS admitted and apologized for their disparate treatment of conservatives, for crying out loud.  So why, after all of that, are we finally being informed that liberal groups were ensnared in the scandal, too?  National Review's Eliana Johnson cuts through the fog and makes some important distinctions that help illuminate the truth:

A November 2010 version of the list obtained by National Review Online, however, suggests that while the list did contain the word “progressive,” screeners were in fact instructed to treat “progressive” groups differently from “tea party” groups. Whereas screeners were merely alerted that a designation of 501(c)(3) status “may not be appropriate” for applications containing the word ”progressive” – 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from conducting any political activities – they were told to send those of tea-party groups off IRS higher-ups for further scrutiny.  That means the applications of progressive groups could be approved on the spot by line agents, while those of tea-party groups could not. Furthermore, the November 2010 list noted that tea-party cases were “currently being coordinated with EOT,” which stands for Exempt Organizations Technical, a group of tax lawyers in Washington, D.C. Those of progressive groups were not. 


So the terms employed during initial screening processes did include words like "progressive" (although from what we know about the original 'BOLO' lists, they were overwhelmingly skewed toward conservative descriptors), but only conservative applications were marked for additional scrutiny -- including micromanagement from Washington.  This abuse led to plainly uneven outcomes along ideological lines, as reported by USA Today:

In February 2010, the Champaign Tea Party in Illinois received approval of its tax-exempt status from the IRS in 90 days, no questions asked. That was the month before the Internal Revenue Service started singling out Tea Party groups for special treatment. There wouldn't be another Tea Party application approved for 27 months. In that time, the IRS approved perhaps dozens of applications from similar liberal and progressive groups, a USA TODAY review of IRS data shows. As applications from conservative groups sat in limbo, groups with liberal-sounding names had their applications approved in as little as nine months. With names including words like "Progress" or "Progressive," the liberal groups applied for the same tax status and were engaged in the same kinds of activities as the conservative groups. 


Zero Tea Party conservative groups' applications were approved for more than two years, as dozens of lefty groups were rubber-stamped.  Yes, it seems as though the word "progressive" appeared on some of those 'BOLO' lists (see update below), but the screening and approval process went on as usual for those groups.  Not so for the other side, against whom Beltway managers directed added scrutiny, onerous follow-up questionnaires, and interminable delays.  Also bear in mind two other elements of the IRS scandal: The targeting of conservative donors, and the wildly improper (and illegal) leaking of conservative groups' confidential donor lists to their political adversaries.  When liberals can provide evidence that the IRS shipped, say, a private roster of Planned Parenthood's donors to the Susan B. Anthony List, then we'll talk.  That's a hypothetical.  In reality, the IRS was actually instructing pro-life groups not to picket Planned Parenthood clinics under penalty of law, and inquiring as to the contents of their prayers.  Some on the Left are seizing on yesterday's developments as "proof" that conservative "conspiracy theories" have at last been debunked, or whatever.  Nice try.  Johnson's piece, plus reams of additional evidence, belie that spin.  I repeat: The IRS apologized for its wrongful actions against conservative groups.  It's not a conspiracy theory if the harmed party elicits an apology from the culprit, based on the culprit's own internal review.



UPDATE
- The DC's Patrick Howley points out another significant difference:

The term “progressive” appeared on a heavily redacted November 2010 ”Be On the Lookout” (BOLO) list released this week by Ways and Means Democrats. The term was used to help the IRS identify political activity that “may not be appropriate” among 501(c)(3) charities eligible for tax-deductible contributions. However, the targeting of conservative groups largely focused on applicants for 501(c)(4) “social welfare organization” status, which shields groups from having to disclose their donors. The scrutinized “progressive” applications were not required to be sent to a special IRS unit for additional review — but tea party and conservative applications were subjected to extra scrutiny by 12 different working groups within the IRS. Tea Party groups were also marked for extra scrutiny in the same document...Ways and Means Democrats did not call any progressive victims of IRS targeting at the committee’s hearing on IRS victims.  “I do want to note that the minority was given the opportunity to call a witness, but did not present a witness that had been affected by taxpayer activity — by IRS activity. So, that’s why there is no minority witness at the table today,” Camp said at the June 4 Ways and Means hearing, in response to Democratic Rep. Ron Kind’s complaint that no progressive victims were present at the hearing. Camp later said at the hearing that he welcomed potential progressive victims to come forward, but that no progressive groups had done so by June 4.


Committee Democrats now claim the targeting was bipartisan, so there's no "scandal" to see here.  If liberal organizations were equally -- or somewhat equally -- swamped with inappropriate questions, hyper scrutiny from IRS headquarters, and massive delays, why couldn't Cummings' brigade produce a single witness to testify to those facts?  And were any IRS working groups formed to review liberal organizations' applications?  The agency mobilized twelve such units for scrutinizing conservatives.

sweet-a-kins
by Emerald Member on Jul. 14, 2013 at 12:39 AM
Yes, all of your replies are

Quoting grandmab125:

 This, is full of crap.....


Quoting sweet-a-kins:

This is in the republican Playbook

Now when election time comes up they can mention this, fast and furious, Benghazi and all the other made up "scandals" the rubes will only remember the lies and not the actual truth behind them..

That way, we spend months debunking their made up bullsh*t and not talking about any real issues or solutions



Quoting Happymamax2:


The "liberal" media must have missed that one!  Strangely enough, as soon as that came out, the whole "scandal" got no more press mania....


 

Posted on CafeMom Mobile
grandmab125
by Gold Member on Jul. 14, 2013 at 12:43 AM
1 mom liked this

 No, sweets....that would be the description of all of your posts.

Quoting sweet-a-kins:

Yes, all of your replies are

Quoting grandmab125:

 This, is full of crap.....


Quoting sweet-a-kins:

This is in the republican Playbook

Now when election time comes up they can mention this, fast and furious, Benghazi and all the other made up "scandals" the rubes will only remember the lies and not the actual truth behind them..

That way, we spend months debunking their made up bullsh*t and not talking about any real issues or solutions



Quoting Happymamax2:


The "liberal" media must have missed that one!  Strangely enough, as soon as that came out, the whole "scandal" got no more press mania....


 

 

grandma B

LiliM
by on Jul. 14, 2013 at 3:40 AM
The IRS thinks we are all stealing. And crooks. And frauds.

Groups looking for tax breaks even more so.

Ever do an audit? Prove, in triplicate, your innocence. You're guilty until the IRS tells you otherwise.

If Bush was still in office we'd see the progressive side complaining.
NWP
by guerrilla girl on Jul. 14, 2013 at 7:20 AM
That's because there was no scandal.

Quoting grandmab125:

 This, is full of crap.....


Quoting sweet-a-kins:

This is in the republican Playbook

Now when election time comes up they can mention this, fast and furious, Benghazi and all the other made up "scandals" the rubes will only remember the lies and not the actual truth behind them..

That way, we spend months debunking their made up bullsh*t and not talking about any real issues or solutions



Quoting Happymamax2:


The "liberal" media must have missed that one!  Strangely enough, as soon as that came out, the whole "scandal" got no more press mania....


 

NWP
by guerrilla girl on Jul. 14, 2013 at 7:23 AM
I know right!? I've said from the beginning of all this crap that its silly to complain they were targeting political groups when it was thier job to do so.

Quoting cjsbmom:

The more I learn about this, the more I think the IRS was doing its job. They are supposed to fully vet any organization that has applied for non-profit status that may have a political agenda. Non-profits are not allowed to practice politics. At least not 501(c)(3) nonprofits, which are what is at issue here. 

Seasidegirl
by Gold Member on Jul. 14, 2013 at 7:51 AM

Doesn't surprise me at all. Having worked in the nonprofit sector almost my entire adult life, I have seen first-hand the JOKES that get and keep nonprofit status. The government actually needs to be stricter about approving the status. I know one woman who created a nonprofit as a personal tax shelter for herself and her husband. They just pour their personal funds into the "organization," get the tax write-off, don't pay taxes on that money and it cycles right back around to them (and the woman's hobby).

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)



Featured