Thursday, February 27, 2014

Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, February 27, 2014


Folks... read this.

Yes... Jonathan Turley's latest testimony before Congress.

The topic: Enforcing the President's Constitutional Duty to Faithfully Execute the Laws."

We're losing our country, people. It's not my imagination.

Just... please... read the testimony.

5 comments:

William R. Barker said...

* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303426304579401513939340666?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop&mg=reno64-wsj

The mainstream press has justified its lack of coverage over the Internal Revenue Service targeting of conservative groups because there's been no "smoking gun" tying President Obama to the scandal.

This betrays a remarkable, if not willful, failure to understand abuse of power.

The political pressure on the IRS to delay or deny tax-exempt status for conservative groups has been obvious to anyone who cares to open his eyes. It did not come from a direct order from the White House, but it didn't have to.

First, some background: On Jan. 21, 2010, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Citizens United v. FEC upholding the right of corporations and unions to make independent expenditures in political races. Then, on March 26, relying on Citizens United, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the rights of persons (including corporations) to pool resources for political purposes. This allowed the creation of "super PACs" as well as corporate contributions to groups organized under Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code that spend in political races.

The reaction to Citizens United was no secret. Various news outlets such as CNN noted that "Democrats fear the decision has given the traditionally pro-business GOP a powerful new advantage."

The 501(c)(4) groups in question are officially known as "social-welfare organizations." They have for decades been permitted to engage in political activity under IRS rules, so long as their primary purpose (generally understood to be more than 50% of their activity) wasn't political. They are permitted to lobby without limitation and are not required to disclose their donors. The groups span the political spectrum, from the National Rifle Association to Common Cause to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund.

If forced out of 501(c)(4) status, these nonprofit advocacy groups would have to reorganize as for-profit corporations and pay taxes on donations received, or reorganize as "political committees" under Section 527 of the IRS Code and be forced to disclose their donors.

Now consider the following events, all of which were either widely reported, publicly released by officeholders or revealed later in testimony to Congress. These are the dots the media refuse to connect:

• Jan. 27, 2010: President Obama criticizes Citizens United in his State of the Union address and asks Congress to "correct" the decision.

• Feb. 11, 2010: Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) says he will introduce legislation known as the Disclose Act to place new restrictions on some political activity by corporations and force more public disclosure of contributions to 501(c)(4) organizations. Mr. Schumer says the bill is intended to "embarrass companies" out of exercising the rights recognized in Citizens United. "The deterrent effect should not be underestimated," he said.

• Soon after, in March 2010, Mr. Obama publicly criticizes conservative 501(c)(4) organizations engaging in politics.

* In his Aug. 21 radio address, President Obama warns Americans about "shadowy groups with harmless sounding names" and a "corporate takeover of our democracy."

• Sept. 28, 2010: Mr. Obama publicly accuses conservative 501(c)(4) organizations of "posing as not-for-profit, social welfare and trade groups." Max Baucus, then chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, asks the IRS to investigate 501(c)(4)s, specifically citing Americans for Job Security, an advocacy group that says its role is to "put forth a pro-growth, pro-jobs message to the American people."

• Oct. 11, 2010: Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) asks the IRS to investigate the conservative 501(c)(4) Crossroads GPS and "other organizations."

* TO BE CONTINUED...

William R. Barker said...

* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)

• April 2011: White House officials confirm that Mr. Obama is considering an executive order that would require all government contractors to disclose their donations to politically active organizations as part of their bids for government work. The proposal is later dropped amid opposition across the political spectrum.

• Feb. 16, 2012: Seven Democratic senators — Michael Bennet (CO), Al Franken (MN), Jeff Merkley (OR), Mr. Schumer (NY), Jeanne Shaheen (NH), Tom Udall (NM. and Sheldon Whitehouse (RI) — write to the IRS asking for an investigation of conservative 501(c)(4) organizations.

• March 12, 2012: The same seven Democrats write another letter asking for further investigation of conservative 501(c)(4)s, claiming abuse of their tax status.

• July 27, 2012: Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) writes one of several letters to then-IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman seeking a probe of nine conservative groups, plus two liberal and one centrist organization. In 2013 testimony to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, former IRS Acting Commissioner Steven Miller describes Sen. Levin as complaining "bitterly" to the IRS and demanding investigations.

• Aug. 31, 2012: In another letter to the IRS, Sen. Levin calls its failure to investigate and prosecute targeted organizations "unacceptable."

* NOW... PAY PARTICULAR ATTENTION...

• Dec. 14, 2012: The liberal media outlet ProPublica receives Crossroads GPS's 2010 application for tax-exempt status from the IRS. Because the group's tax-exempt status had not been recognized, the application was confidential. ProPublica publishes the full application. It later reports that it received nine confidential pending applications from IRS agents, six of which it published. None of the applications was from a left-leaning organization.

* HMM...???

• April 9, 2013: Sen. Whitehouse convenes the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism to examine non-profits. He alleges that non-profits are violating federal law by making false statements about their political activities and donors and using shell companies to donate to super PACs to hide donors' identities. He berates Patricia Haynes, then-deputy chief of Criminal Investigation at the IRS, for not prosecuting conservative nonprofits.

• May 10, 2013: Sen. Levin announces that the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations will hold hearings on "the IRS's failure to enforce the law requiring that tax-exempt 501(c)(4)s be engaged exclusively in social welfare activities, not partisan politics." Three days later he postpones the hearings when Lois Lerner (then-director of the IRS Exempt Organizations Division) reveals that the IRS had been targeting and delaying the applications of conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status.

• Nov. 29, 2013: The IRS proposes new rules redefining "political activity" to include activities such as voter-registration drives and the production of non-partisan legislative score-cards to restrict what the agency deems as excessive spending on campaigns by tax-exempt 501(c)(4) groups. Even many liberal nonprofits argue that the rule goes too far in limiting their political activity — but the main target appears to be the conservative 501(c)(4)s that have so irritated Democrats.

• Feb. 13, 2014: The Hill newspaper reports that "Senate Democrats facing tough elections this year want the Internal Revenue Service to play a more aggressive role in regulating outside groups expected to spend millions of dollars on their races."

In 1170, King Henry II is said to have cried out, on hearing of the latest actions of the Archbishop of Canterbury, "Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?" Four knights then murdered the archbishop. Many in the U.S. media still willfully refuse to see anything connecting the murder of the archbishop to any actions or abuse of power by the king.

William R. Barker said...

* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304026804579409551405115662?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop&mg=reno64-wsj

The constant mischief of the progressive Left is hurting the nation's morale.

There are few areas of national life left in which they are not busy, and few in which they're not making it worse.

There are always more regulations, fees and fiats, always more cultural pressure and insistence.

The president brags he has a pen and a phone. He uses the former to sign executive orders. It is not clear why he mentioned the latter since he rarely attempts to bring legislators over to his side.

(Who exactly is he calling?)

Gallup in December had 72% of those polled saying big government is a bigger threat to the future than big business and big labor — a record high.

Rasmussen this week had only 32% of those polled saying the country is headed in the right direction, with 61% saying we're on the wrong track. Both numbers fluctuate, but the right track is down two points since this time last year and the wrong track up three.

Gallup also had only 39% of respondents saying they saw America in a positive position, with less than half thinking it will be better in five years.

None of these numbers are new, exactly, as they reflect long-term trends. But they never lose their power to startle. The persistent blues, the lack of faith, the bet that things won't get better — it just doesn't sound like America.

* YES IT DOES! IT SOUNDS LIKE THE NEW AMERIKA! IT SOUNDS LIKE OBAMA'S AMERIKA! IT IS OBAMA'S AMERIKA!

* AS TO REAGAN'S AMERICA... (*SHRUG*) I FEAR IT'S DEAD AND BURIED.

We are suffering in great part from the politicization of everything and the spread of government not in a useful way but a destructive one.

Everyone wants to help the poor, the old and the sick; the safety net exists because we want it. But voters and taxpayers feel bullied, burdened and jerked around, which again is not new but feels more intense every day.

Common sense and native wit tell them America is losing the most vital part of itself in the continuing shift of power from private to public. Rules, regulations, many of them stupid, from all the agencies — local, state, federal — on the building of a house, or the starting of a business. You can only employ so many before the new insurance rules kick in so don't employ too many, don't take a chance! Which means: Don't grow. It takes the utmost commitment to start a school or improve an existing one because you'll come up against the unions, which own the politicians. It's all part of the malaise, the sclerosis.

* TO BE CONTINUED...

William R. Barker said...

* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)

So is the eroding end of the idea that religious scruples and beliefs have a high place that must culturally and politically be respected. The political-media complex is bravely coming down on florists with unfashionable views. On twitter Thursday the freedom-fighter who tweets as @FriedrichHayek asked: "Can the government compel a Jewish baker to deliver a wedding cake on a Saturday? If not why not." Why not indeed. Because the truly tolerant give each other a little space? On an optimistic note, the Little Sisters of the Poor haven't been put out of business and patiently await their day in court.

In the dark screwball comedy that is ObamaCare, the Congressional Budget Office revealed last month the law will provide disincentives to work. Don't worry, said Nancy Pelosi, people can take that time and go become poets and painters. At first you think: Huh, I can do that, I've got a beret. Then you think: No, I have to earn a living. Then you think, poor hardworking rube that you are: Wait a second, I'm subsidizing all this. I've been cast in the role of Catherine de Medici, patroness of the arts. She at least had a castle, I just get a bill!

The IRS is coming up with new rules making it harder for independent groups to organize and resist the constant messages and claims of government. Meanwhile it warns taxpayers they must be able to prove they have insurance coverage when they file their 2014 taxes or they'll face a fine (or tax, or fee), which the government has decided to call a "shared responsibility payment." It is $95 per adult and $47.50 per child to a maximum of $285, or 1% of your household income, whichever is higher. People already enraged by canceled coverage, higher premiums, huge deductibles, lost doctors and limited networks, fume. And the highest-ranking Democrat on Capitol Hill, Majority Leader Harry Reid, goes to the floor of the Senate to say of the ObamaCare horror stories that "all of them are untrue." They're "stories made up out of whole cloth." spread by "the multibillionaire Koch brothers."

Imagine that — you have real problems caused by a bad law, and Mr. Reid tells you that what you are experiencing in your own life is a lie made up by propagandists. He sounded like Lenin. There is no cholera in the new Russia.

The NSA is a real and present threat to your privacy, HHS actually never has to come up with a true number on ObamaCare enrollments or costs, and at the EPA no one talks anymore about why Al Armendariz, a top regional administrator, felt free to brag in a 2010 speech that his "philosophy of enforcement" could be compared to the practice by ancient Roman soldiers of crucifying random victims. When it surfaced, he left the agency. Did his mindset?

People feel beset because they are.

William R. Barker said...

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304026804579409334134278544?mod=WSJ_Opinion_AboveLEFTTop&mg=reno64-wsj

For years, polling data has shown that Americans hold the U.S. Congress in low esteem, with the Members' approval often sinking into the teens. So guess which American institution is on course to join them? It's our colleges and universities. Congress at least admits it's doing a poor job. The colleges don't.

This surprising result emerged this week in a news report in the Chronicle of Higher Education, which noted the vast disconnect in two recent surveys on the value colleges are providing:

"The survey, conducted by Gallup in partnership with the Lumina Foundation, indicates that just 11% of business leaders 'strongly agree' that today's graduates have the skills and competencies that their businesses need.

In contrast, a recent Gallup survey found that 96% of college and university chief academic officers said they were 'extremely or somewhat confident' in their institution's ability to prepare students for work-force success."

As the famous movie line put it, what we seem to have here is a failure to communicate.

The Gallup-Lumina survey revealed that 88% of business leaders would like to have more collaboration with the schools, presumably to help improve the mismatch between knowledge learned and skills needed.

Among the general population, the survey found a remarkable amount of common sense. Some 95% think one needs a certificate or degree beyond high school, and 75% know employers are looking at the actual skills a college degree confers. These people understand the realities of the new American workplace. Whether welding materials or writing code, one needs higher skills. Asked if higher education institutions need to change to meet these needs, 89% said yes.

We're going to guess that most U.S. college administrators aren't as oblivious as that 96% we're-doing-fine figure suggests. But they do have something in common with government: Many have become terrible bureaucracies and hard to change.