Posted on 08/03/2016 6:01:11 AM PDT by Kaslin
The “October Surprise” this election cycle may come not from one of the presidential candidates, but from an unlikely source – the Internal Revenue Service. The ramifications of such a move are all bad, especially for conservative-oriented groups, and will reverberate far beyond any one candidate or political party. Whether the Congress has the backbone to head off this IRS attack on free speech is very much an open question; a spending restriction placed earlier on IRS funding is set to expire at the end of this Fiscal Year – September 30th – just in time for an October Surprise.
It is well-known that the IRS has long sought to silence or intimidate conservative-oriented organizations. Its effort in this regard is institutional and goes back several years, and was not shut down with the forced 2013 resignation of disgraced IRS director Lois Lerner. In fact, the powerful tax- and information-collecting agency now has its gunsights set not on a particular individual or organization, such as Citizens United, but rather on free speech as a whole.
According to the Tax Revolution Institute, a government watchdog organization that has been keeping a close eye on these First Amendment-violating efforts by the IRS, a proposed rule change to how certain non-profit organizations are classified, may very well be in the works for implementation this October.
The problematic rule, REG–134417–13, was first presented in 2013 and set parameters on how and when 501(c)(4) and other non-profit organizations could lawfully engage in election-related, informational and educational communications. The publication of the regulation came on the heels of the highly-publicized IRS scandal targeting conservative organizations, and faced strong and immediate pushback, including by the Congress. Now, three years later, and perhaps concluding that such focus on the IRS has diminished or will be overshadowed by presidential politics, the Service appears ready to strike again.
Should the new rule look anything like what has been proposed previously, with one stroke of the pen the IRS would be able to reclassify heretofore clearly protected political speech as prohibited “electioneering.” A communication doing nothing more than mentioning the name of or position sought by a candidate – or simply showing their picture -- before a primary or general election, would be sufficient to bring the power of the IRS down on that offending organization. Also at stake is the donor privacy of those organizations.
In typical government Double Speak, the IRS justifies the rule change as necessary to help protect the “sanctity of elections.” In reality, and based on the past history of not just the IRS but other federal agencies as well, including the Federal Election Commission, it is easy to discern the true motive of such a proposal: silencing conservative critics of incumbent office holders and candidates.
Furthermore, it is no coincidence that the possible rule-change comes while Democrats on the Federal Election Commission attempt to silence conservative websites like the Drudge Report; and as Democrats such as Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders continue to campaign vocally on overturning Citizens United. It is all a part of the Left’s proxy war on conservative speech, which has flourished with the rise of New Media. The Left cheers when liberal non-profit and for-profit entities pillory Republicans on issues such as gay rights and gun control. However, when it comes to conservative organizations doing the same to individuals supported by the Left, it becomes an issue about the “corrupting influence” of money in politics; which makes the motivations for the IRS rule changes so transparent.
In recent years, the Right has dominated when it comes to establishing effective 501(c)(4) organizations, and the Left will stop at nothing to see such conservative audacity silenced. But, rather than having to admit their true intentions during debate in Congress, Democrats hope to sidestep this nuisance by employing the same regulatory schemes long-favored by President Obama to undermine gun rights, which in their view do not require congressional approval.
Make no mistake – this constitutes a battle for the soul of the First Amendment to our Constitution. Congress has it within its power to once again stymie this move by the IRS, through an appropriations “rider” as it did previously, or by defining “political advocacy” in a common-sense way so that the IRS is no longer able to undercut this most cherished and constitutionally protected right. We can only hope congressional Republican leaders will find the backbone to head off this devastating October Surprise.
Yea, that got the attention of many at the IRS.
I heard a group of reporters on Sirius radio the other day openly advocating for a leaker to come forward: "You would think that someone would be able to access some of the relevant portions and bring them forward."
Didn't seem to occur to them that they were talking about breaking the law.
Repealing the income tax would fix this problem.
On Day 1, President Trump should shudder the IRS, fire all the employees, and start again.
We had dinner with an old friend, last night, who now lives in Florida. He said his wife’s family ,which consists of many sisters, are all taking firearms courses and buying lots of guns. He and his wife plan to do the same.
Long past time for a tax revolt.
I think they are smart enough not to play their hand until after the election.
A tax revolt starts at the ballot box. And I don’t think that is going to be a driving issue in this election.
“hould the new rule look anything like what has been proposed previously, with one stroke of the pen the IRS would be able to reclassify heretofore clearly protected political speech as prohibited “electioneering.” A communication doing nothing more than mentioning the name of or position sought by a candidate – or simply showing their picture — before a primary or general election, would be sufficient to bring the power of the IRS down on that offending organization. Also at stake is the donor privacy of those organizations. “
I’d also like to see dozens or more of these groups tell the IRS to stick this regulation where the sun don’t shine, and just keep doing what they’re doing. You cannot outlaw free speech via a regular law, let alone a regulation.
The real “October surprise” will be those “lost e-mails” being released.
They bleed and die just ike us.
As JFK said about the CIA, it needs to be broken into a million pieces.
What a poorly written article. Can’t the author simply describe what the change is?
SWAT teams won't do them any good when we surround their buildings and dare them to come out.
I hate these people more than the devil.
Sure, like that has worked for over a hundred years.
Not at all. If the church has a leftist bent, they can invite leftists to preach their politics from the pulpit all day long. It's only when a church or synagogue dares to present conservative politics does the media go ape!
Mark
If we lived in a republic, every rule, regulation would have to be approved by congress and the president.
I thought a judge already leaked sealed Trump tax returns to the Washington Post.
Exactly, I was stuck listening yesterday morning to NPR discussing Trump’s lack of releasing his tax returns and he has been under audit...I guess for years!!!
The NPR guest was trying to explain that Trump releasing his tax returns would prove troublesome to most Americans as they do not understand the tax codes for business entities. And for Trump to release them he would then need a tax team to explain them to the average joe.
The whole time I am listening to this interview I am thinking...if that is the case ...then the tax code is way too complicated. Follow that up with ...let’s see an audit of the Clintons, but then they (IRS) would cover-up and wrong doings for them.
Doing the same thing over and over again is the definition of insanity too.
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.