É sabido há muitos meses nos Estados Unidos que a administração Obama perseguiu rivais político por meio da agência que recolhe imposto de renda (IRS). Infelizmente, no Brasil, as pessoas só falam da atuação da administração Obama espionando os líderes políticos mundiais.
Os inimigos que Obama perseguiu com a IRS envolvem até organizações cristãs que lutam contra o aborto, passando especialmente por organizações liberais que lutam por um estado menor (ligadas ao movimento conhecido como Tea Party).
O jornal Wall Street Journal falou do assunto, mostrando que a administração Obama pretende continuar tentando silenciar organizações rivais.
IRS Targeting and 2014
By Kimberley A. Strassel
President
Obama
and Democrats have been at great pains to insist they knew
nothing about IRS targeting of conservative 501(c)(4) nonprofits before
the 2012 election. They've been at even greater pains this week to
ensure that the same conservative groups are silenced in the 2014
midterms.
That's the big, dirty secret
of the omnibus negotiations. As one of the only bills destined to pass
this year, the omnibus was—behind the scenes—a flurry of horse trading.
One of the biggest fights was over GOP efforts to include language to
stop the IRS from instituting a new round of 501(c)(4) targeting. The
White House is so counting on the tax agency to muzzle its political
opponents that it willingly sacrificed any manner of its own priorities
to keep the muzzle in place.
And now back to our previously scheduled outrage over the
Chris Christie
administration's abuse of traffic cones on the George Washington Bridge.
The fight was sparked by a new rule that the
Treasury Department and the IRS introduced during the hush of
Thanksgiving recess, ostensibly to "improve" the law governing
nonprofits. What the rule in fact does is recategorize as "political"
all manner of educational activities that 501(c)(4) social-welfare
organizations currently engage in.
It's
IRS targeting all over again, only this time by administration design
and with the raw political goal—as House Ways and Means Chairman Dave
Camp (R., Mich.) notes—of putting "tea party groups out of business."
Congressional
sources tell me that House Appropriations Chairman
Hal Rogers
(R., Ky.) had two priorities in the omnibus negotiations. One was
getting in protection for groups that morally oppose ObamaCare's
contraception-coverage requirement. The other was language that would
put a hold on the IRS rule.
The White
House and Senate Democrats had their own wish list, including an
increase in funding for the International Monetary Fund, the president's
prekindergarten program and more ObamaCare dollars.
Yet
my sources say that throughout the negotiations Democrats went all in
on keeping the IRS rule, even though it meant losing their own
priorities. In the final hours before the omnibus was introduced Monday
night, the administration made a last push for IMF money. Asked to
negotiate that demand in the context of new IRS language, it refused.
That's
a lot to sacrifice for a rule that the administration has barely noted
in public, and that then-acting IRS Commissioner
Danny Werfel
claimed last fall when it was introduced is simply about
providing "clarity" to nonprofits. It only makes sense in a purely
political context. The president's approval ratings are in the toilet,
the economy is in idle, the ObamaCare
debate rages on, and the White House has a Senate majority to preserve.
With one little IRS rule it can shut up hundreds of groups that pose a
direct threat by restricting their ability to speak freely in an
election season about spending or ObamaCare or jobs. And it gets away
with it by positioning this new targeting as a fix for the first round.
This
week's Democratic rally-round further highlights the intensely
political nature of their IRS rule. It was quietly dropped in the runup
to the holiday season, to minimize the likelihood of an organized
protest during its comment period. That 90-day comment period meantime
ends on Feb. 27, positioning the administration to shut down
conservative groups early in this election cycle.
Mr.
Camp's committee has meanwhile noted that Treasury appears to have
reverse-engineered the carefully tailored rule—combing through the list
of previously targeted tea party groups, compiling a list of their main
activities and then restricting those functions.
And
an IRS rule that purports to—as Mr. Werfel explained—"improve our work
in the tax-exempt area" completely ignores the biggest of political
players in the tax-exempt area: unions. The guidance is directed only at
501(c)(4) social-welfare groups—the tax category that has of late been
flooded by conservative groups. Mr. Obama's union foot soldiers—which
file under 501(c)(5)—can continue playing in politics.
Treasury
is also going to great lengths to keep secret the process behind its
rule.
Cleta Mitchell,
an attorney who represents targeted tea party groups, in early
December filed a Freedom of Information Act request with Treasury and
the IRS, demanding documents or correspondence with the White House or
outside groups in the formulation of this rule. By law, the government
has 30 days to respond. Treasury sent a letter to Ms. Mitchell this week
saying it wouldn't have her documents until April—after the rule's
comment period closes. It added that if she didn't like it, she can
"file suit." The IRS has yet to respond.
Mr. Camp has now authored stand-alone legislation to rein in the IRS, though the chance of Majority Leader
Harry Reid
(D., Nev.) allowing a Senate vote is approximately equal to that of the press corps paying attention to this IRS rule.
So that puts a spotlight on newly sworn-in IRS Commissioner
John Koskinen,
who vowed during his confirmation hearing to restore public trust
in the agency, and now must decide whether to aid in a new and
blatantly political abuse of IRS powers. The White House is using the
agency to win an election this fall. They gave the proof this week.
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário