What was Istook trying to do?
I really like the guy in general.....
What was his goal?
Was is Istook, or one of his staff members? Earlier reports were that this action was taken by staff.
Shoulda know it was one of our own. What the Sam Hell was he thinking?
Is he planning on running for Senate somewhere, or knows someone who is and wants the returns?
Sure would like to see the Kerry family returns, but not like this.
How about if we look at their tax records?
How would they like that?
this incident is a shocking disgrace.
If it is him he's got to go. What the hell was he thinking?
If it was his staff he's got to clean house immediately. What the hell were they thinking?
Omnibus bills are a dumb idea.
Maybe I'm just jaded by politics, but I honestly thought something like this was already possible. Surely, if (for example) terrorism is suspected with one or more individuals, law enforcement and government officials would have been able to get the tax info regardless of this provision introduced by Istook?
Somebody mentioned Istook's name earlier, before Drudge posted this. No source was given.
I wonder if he was set up? If the bill is that big, how did the people who complained about it find it and object to it, unless they knew about it from a leak from Istook's office, or maybe even fed it to them?
Pure speculation at this point, I suppose.
found at: http://www.dailyinterlake.com/articles/2004/11/21/ap/headlines/d86gjb980.txt
Lawmakers Hold Out Hope for Intel Bill
Posted: Sunday, Nov 21, 2004 - 05:05:12 pm PST
By JIM ABRAMS
SNIP
But there will be a delay in getting President Bush's signature. The hang-up is because of a single line in the bill that would have given two committee chairmen and their assistants access to people's income tax returns.
The Senate approved a resolution nullifying the idea; House leaders promised to pass it on Wednesday. Then, the spending bill will head to the White House.
"I have no earthly idea how it got in there," Frist said on "Fox News Sunday." "But, obviously, somebody is going to know, and accountability will be carried out."
Frist referred to the bill Saturday night as the "Istook amendment," and congressional aides said it was inserted at the request of Rep. Ernest Istook Jr., R-Okla.
Istook, chairman of the House Appropriations transportation subcommittee, said in a statement Sunday that the Internal Revenue Service drafted the language, which would not have allowed any inspections of tax returns. "Nobody's privacy was ever jeopardized," the statement said.
There are many Republicans who have become RINOS and not because they are liberal.
Don't you just love it when "they" call for an investigation on who did it? (Which by the way, whoever did it should pay) whoever signs onto something like this should pay too, wonder if they ever thought of that??
Istook now denies his remarks, but Kochendorfer stands by his statement.
Strange stuff... (But there were a lot of strange things related to the OKC bombing...)
As far as I'm concerned, "the jury's still out" on Istook.
Leaders of the House Ways and Means Committee can already do this (look at returns)?
"The provision, written by the IRS, was intended to give top appropriators the same oversight authority now afforded to leaders of the House Ways and Means Committee, Scofield said."
found at: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/printstory.mpl/nation/2911481
Nov. 21, 2004, 3:22PM
Spending measure OK minus provision
Senators express concern over an attachment allowing for an IRS inquiry; NASA gets boost
By GEBE MARTINEZ
SNIP
"It's not my fault," said Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, as he pounded his lectern with his fist in frustration with the last-minute snag that threatened to derail the bill.
"It's a terrible way to do business," Stevens said, agreeing with other Republicans who said they were surprised by the income tax return language and had no intention of snooping on U.S. taxpayers.
"We would never use that. We did not seek this authority. We are as appalled (as Democrats)," Stevens said.
Senate Democrats who inadvertently discovered the income tax wording blamed House members for what they said was a "breathtaking arrogance of power."
"This arrogant provision is open to enormous abuse and takes us back to some of the worst days of American government," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.
House leadership aides said the controversy was a knee-jerk reaction to a misunderstanding of the provision, which was inserted by Rep. Ernest Istook, R-Okla., whose House Appropriations subcommittee oversees the IRS.
"It was not any surprise," said John Scofield, spokesman for the House Appropriations Committee.
"The Senate was in the room when it was negotiated."
The provision, written by the IRS, was intended to give top appropriators the same oversight authority now afforded to leaders of the House Ways and Means Committee, Scofield said.
He added that in two instances, the House Appropriations Committee was denied access to IRS facilities even though the panel oversees spending.
SNIP
Is Istook the Ron Artest of congress?
Well, I suspect some big wheel said "Wouldn't it be nice if we could ...?" The energentic staff then went to work with the "Your wish is my command" mentality and proceeded to stick the "nice" language into the bill. Lesson: If you are a big wheel be careful what you wish because some sycophant will run off to do it. Most big wheels learn this lesson in their first management job. But then again, politicians by and large have never held management or any other jobs.
I'm guessing that Istook did it to point out how ridiculous it is for Congress to vote on such a HUGE omnibus bill without anyone actually having the time to read the darned thing. Maybe he was trying to make a point that, frankly, needs to be made.