The IRS Scandal: Deliberate and Partisan

We now know that Obama Administration actions were intentional and partisan when the Internal Revenue Service targeted, harmed, and intimidated conservative and tea party organizations. Keep in mind the timetable while reading this – that the plot against conservatives inside the IRS was gearing up in March 2010 and in full force in September 2010, according to recently released Lois Lerner emails. Also keep in mind that Lois Lerner previously worked enforcement at the Federal Election Commission.

The Obama Administration offered excuses that disparate treatment of conservatives was a result of confusion or accidental mishandling by lower-level staff. Yet these excuses are contradicted by IRS real-world behavior. In actual practice, the IRS and FEC attacked conservatives while giving liberal political organizations the green light to freely intervene in partisan political campaigns.

On July 26, 2011, Christine O’Donnell’s ChristinePAC filed a complaint with the Internal Revenue Service against Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington (CREW). ChristinePAC documented how CREW violated its 501(c)(3) tax-deductible status – far more restrictive than 501(c)(4)) tax-exempt status – and that the IRS must revoke CREW’s tax-deductible status.

Yet the IRS has let CREW get away without even any slap on any wrists. Since 2011, if the IRS were so hot about election campaign activity by tax exempts, wouldn’t the IRS have jumped on this complaint like wet on water?

Please set aside whether you like or don’t like Christine O’Donnell. What matters here is the lack of any enforcement action against liberals by the IRS from July 2011 until today. The IRS has done nothing to stop really, amazingly obvious abuses of the law by liberal organizations. The dramatically different treatment of liberals and conservatives now reveals that the IRS actually did intend to attack conservatives and favor liberals all along.

Also, forget about whether you think criticisms of O’Donnell were right or wrong. A 501(c)(3) tax-deductible organization cannot directly campaign for the defeat of a candidate regardless of whether that candidate is you or your favorite candidate or someone you might not like. Outrageous violations are overlooked… but only when the offenses are committed by liberals. If you knew what I know, you would support O’Donnell. But until they lie about you or lie about your favorite candidate, you can’t fully understand. Similarly, the IRS is enthusiastically embracing what was done to tea party organizations. New proposed regulations further confirm guilt by the IRS. The IRS is in the process of creating new regulations which would enshrine the abuse. The IRS cannot claim that the treatment of conservatives was a screw-up, and then throw their arms around those same practices.

Congressional investigations have now established that the new regulations were already being planned as far back as 2010, at the same time that the IRS was persecuting tea party organizations. In fact, Lois Lerner discussed in emails pursuing the new regulations “off plan”– which former employees confirm means undisclosed and outside of normal channels.

But let’s help everyone understand this. Spread the word. A 501(c)(4) organization is tax exempt. That only means that donations are not considered income for the purpose of income taxes. If you want to donate to some cause, should your donation be taxed as income? That’s what we’re talking about. That’s the only thing we are talking about with a 501(c)(4).

By contrast, a 501(c)(3) tax-deductible organization allows donors to deduct their donations from their own income tax returns. So clearly, a 501(c)(3) lives under much stricter limitations concerning political involvement than the 501(c)(4) tax-exempt organizations you keep hearing about.

A 501(c)(4) is allowed to engage in political discussion, advocacy, and action, including lobbying on legislation, as its primary purpose. A 501(c)(3) can only engage in “educational” activity, which can include education on political issues, the U.S. Constitution, government, history, etc.

But “political” does not mean “electioneering.” The key term “political” might have nothing to do with election campaigns. Discussion of what policies are best for the social welfare of the country is political, but not electioneering

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.