Published: Wednesday, May 15 2013 3:20 p.m. MDT
it's curious that any media outlet would say, "The Internal Revenue
Service was acting in the public interest when it opted to train its auditing
power on the tea party and affiliated groups.”Is that
correct?Do we have freedom of speech in America or don't we?Are we to be "punished" if we speak against the President?Are the "agencies of government" to be let loose to keep us
"quiet".It is very disturbing to read that ANY media outlet
believes in "punishment" for "speaking" in America.
What is the IRS supposed to do? The IRS should, in theory, draw a
distinction between political groups and “social welfare” groups
across the spectrum. Any tax-exempt group that is organized under Section
501(c)(4) must fall into the latter category. That is, the group has to be
“primarily engaged in promoting in some way the common good and general
welfare of the community.Whether an organization is “primarily
engaged” in promoting social welfare is a “facts and
circumstances” determination.Relevant factors include the
amount of funds received from and devoted to particular activities; other
resources used in conducting such activities, such as buildings and equipment;
the time devoted to activities (by volunteers as well as employees); the manner
in which the organization’s activities are conducted; and the purposes
furthered by various activities.All told in 2012, some 2,774 groups
of all types applied for 501(c)(4) status. Of those, 2,324 were approved, eight
were denied, and 442 were held in limbo, neither approved nor denied. A number
of conservative groups found themselves in this last category.(Washington
Post "How is the IRS Supposed to Vet?..")
"Do we have freedom of speech in America or don't we?"Absolutely. But, organizations who delve into the political arena should not
be tax exempt.
"Absolutely. But, organizations who delve into the political arena should
not be tax exempt."Well, it looks like the IRS needs to take
away Media Matters and any union (SEIU, NEA, etc) tax exempt status.
Well, it looks like the IRS needs to take away Media Matters and any union
(SEIU, NEA, etc) tax exempt status."Great. I am all for it. I
am not selective. Are You?
Why is the IRS apologizing for doing its job? The reports say that nearly 300
entities were scrutinized and only 78 were "conservative." What about
the other 3/4 of them, which include liberal entities as well?
Most organizations delve into politics in one way or another. Some, like LaRaza,
get invited to the white House to help set policy. They also receive money from
the government each year. But you won't find the left leaning
organization on any IRS list. This was a per-planned attack against the other
political side. see "attacking the other side to win elections" by
This is the real problem. I'm not so disturbed that an agency of the
Goevenrment did this (stuff like this is going to happen from time to time).
What disturbs me is... SOME people think it's fine!This is not
fine.... no matter what political persuasion you are. Even President Obama and
the head of the IRS understand that this was not OK and have said as much and
apologized. This is NOT OK. This is how tyranny starts and is supported.
This is stuff that goes on in 3rd world dictatorships to keep the people down
and the Government up. This is the Government ignoring it's own
Constitution and supressing the people they are there to protect.It's not OK no matter what party you support.
"SOME people think it's fine!"Who? This act should be
met with jail time. I have seen no one defending it.
JoeBlow,Some of the people how have defended what the IRS did are:-Huffington Post’s executive businesses editor Peter Goodman (wrote the
oped piece defending what the IRS did)-Irony Guy, (said, "Why is the
IRS apologizing for doing its job")In comments on the numerous
articles that have been published recently on this topic there have been MANY
who have defended what the IRS did. Go back and read the comments.
I believe that there are far far too many "tax exempt" completely
political and partisan groups. Tax exempt status should NOT be
granted for that purpose.We should investigate and DENY tax exempt
status to any and all political groups.The problem with the IRS
issue is that they 1) focused more on conservative groups2)
covered it up.These things are blatantly wrong.But, they
absolutely should be scrutinizing these types of groups, whether right or left
leaning.How bout this. Lets get rid of ANY and ALL tax exempt
organizations. That would solve the problem.
JoeBlowI agree with your last post. Your 2 points described the problem
perfectly IMO.I also agree with your 2 conclusions1. It's
not OK no matter what side was being singled out for IRS abuse.2. No
political groups should be tax exempt.I think even political parties
should not be tax exempt. Heck political hegimony is big business... we should
at least get a little slice of all that action (in the form of taxes). Imagine
all the taxes we could collect if we taxed all political contributions. The
money raised by the Obama campaign alone could have gotten us out of debt
(without even having to target small segments of our society for special
tazes)!Tax contributions to ALL political groups! I like that.One disagrement... I think charities should still be tax exempt.
Because some people need an incentive to give, and charities just help lessen
the load the government has to do. So it makes no sense to take their funds
away and give them to the government (where overhead is even higher).
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments