This is Not a Smidgen

Would you bench your star player during the big game? Would you send the smartest guy in the room out for coffee while you are trying to solve a problem? Would  you refuse to allow the lead IRS scandal investigator to testify before a Congressional Oversight Panel that is overseeing... the IRS scandal investigation?

Well, in the crazy messed up, cats and dogs living together, diet Dr. Pepper tastes like regular Dr. Pepper, knowing the difference between butter and 'I Can't Believe It's Not Butter' world we live in the answer to at least one of the aforementioned questions is, YES!

Most Transparent White House... EVA!!

This news comes shortly after the FBI's internal investigation that was led by an interestingly hand picked DOJ civil rights attorney, and Obama donor, gave the Internal Revenue Service a clean bill of health after the Investigator General's office charged them with singling out Tea Party organizations for political gain.

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) had asked Justice attorney Barbara Bosserman to appear before the panel on Feb. 6, 2014. Rep. Jordan received a response from Deputy Attorney General James Cole saying she would not be available.

Rep. Jordan wrote back to Deputy Attorney General Cole asking him to reconsider.

“The committee recognizes that there may be particular law-enforcement aspects of the investigation that the department is unwilling to discuss publicly. However, there is no legitimate basis for a blanket refusal to answer questions about an apparent conflict of interest and the overall integrity of the investigation,” Jordan wrote in his letter.

I tried this tactic once, I was assigned to read a book and write a book report for my English Literature class back in grade school. I refused to subject myself to the oral presentation part of the book report on grounds that having to orate a scripture that was clearly intended to be consumed through the written word would make the piece of work that was my report loose some of it's intrinsic meaning and profoundness. The Teacher gave me and 'F'.

Last Sunday, Obama gave a grade of 'A+' to the investigation saying that there was not a “smidgen of corruption” surrounding the IRS scandal before a national audience during the Super Bowl pregame. Unfortunately for his narrative, there is a decent amount of evidence that suggests otherwise. Back door dealings to re write 501(c)(4) rules. The White House knowing 5 months before the election of the investigator generals findings. And a narrative that dates back decades that depicts a systematic use of the IRS to dissuade conservative groups. 

On a side note, how about that prediction of Obama before the big game? The only thing he was willing to predict about the outcome was that "It's going to be close." Talk about a guy that doesn't have a clue until after it's reported in the papers.

Another Scandal, Did Anyone Notice?

While the nation continues its non-discussion discussion about the Zimmerman trial, congress continues to be hard at work proving that Washington is dysfunctional and untrustworthy. I suppose you have to un-hide some dirty laundry before you have a chance to clean it, but something tells me that these revelations will go right back into the hamper before you know it.

Today's big secret was the response that my Senator Chuck Grassley received from the Treasury Department, in response to a written request for information, the Treasury department has admitted for the first time that since 2006, confidential tax records of several political candidates and campaign donors were improperly scrutinized by government officials.

Finding some space in his calendar between not voting on any white house appointees and not disclosing his own financial records for the sake of public information, Senator Grassley wrote another letter to Eric Holder, asking to explain why the Justice Department chose not to prosecute any of the cases. The Iowa Republican told The Washington Times that the IRS “is required to act with neutrality and professionalism, not political bias.” 

The good Senator has given Mr. Holder and the Justice Department until July 26th to respond to his call for legal action against those who, you know, broke the law. Of course well have to wait and see if this Justice Department raises a finger to uphold said laws, or if they will simply decree that this is a political attack and ignore it.

If I sound just a little jaded about the entire system, it's because I'm very jaded and can't compose myself in the manner that I would like to anymore. Everything is politically motivated. Senator Grassley even said in his letter that he would like to know what group(s) the 4th individual was associated with so the American people can determine if this was politically motivated or not. Nothing like accusing the other side of political motivations to place a haze over your own political motivations.

When you get to the point where it is proven that your government is gathering data on you, building profiles about you based on your behavior, can kill American citizens without any due process, uses almost every branch of government as a political tool, and then we, as a populace do not hold them accountable. I refer you back to our last attempt to through a congress with a 21% approval rating at the time of the election. We re-elected over 90% of them.

So this is my open letter to Senator Grassley and Eric Holder. Prove to me that you give a d@mn. Restore my faith in this country, cause right now it is waning. I find myself rooting for the Mannings and the Snowdens and rooting against the Grassleys and the Holders. I would start by not having so many laws on the books that are used to hide the secret laws on the books, to stop acting like a hero when you seek the truth and then seek out those who know the truth like they are villains. To be candid when the facts don't lead them to where you want them to go, and to admit it when you are wrong on premise, rather then defend yourselves by finding the insignificant loopholes. And lastly, to just be a little humble that 7 out of 8 Americans think you are bad at your job, yet you still have a job at all. 

The Reprobates of Good Intentions

Constantly, the question arises when critiquing benefits that are payed out to Americans and the costs that are passed on to the taxpayers, as well as the role and efficiency of the government to distribute those benefits. Questions like, "Are you against helping people that can't help themselves? What about people that are truly hurt? What about people that perhaps got hurt from serving this country?"

Rarely, is it a point of denying something to a person who truly earned it, it is rather a disgust at the behemoth system in which atrocities are not only a necessary evil, but rather a reoccurring norm.

Last week, an IRS contractor by the name Braulio Castillo was asked to testify to congress about the use of receiving preferential treatment to disabled veterans. Mr. Castillo is the President and CEO of Strong Castle Inc. A company who provides IT solutions to the IRS and well as other financial branches of the federal government. He's been so well renowned at his work that in 2012, under Braulio’s leadership, Strong Castle, Inc. (under former name Signet Computers, Inc.) received in the ballpark of $500 million in business contracts from the federal government and was named the IRS Office of IT and Treasury Departmental Offices (Main Treasury) Small Business of the Year, which in turn led to the nomination and subsequent award for overall Treasury Small Business of the Year. All while battling a foot injury that he received while serving his country almost 27 years ago. An injury that in the opinion of the VA, left him at 30% disability rating.

"Exactly!" You may say at this point. "These are the kind of heroes, and the kind of American dream stories that make all these programs worth it!"

I should probably take a moment to point out a little bit of information that I passed over, Mr. Castillo's injury that was suffered while actively serving was obtained by twisting his ankle at military prep school, over a decade before applying for Disabled status. He also went on to play college football as a quarterback. He never saw active combat. He also claimed his foot had been broken, but the Oversight Committee said x-rays taken at the time did not reflect a fracture. The VA did award him disability status and currently sends him a monthly check.

Where there any laws broken here? Probably not. He may truly be in pain in his ankle from time to time, I myself had a bought of tendinitis my ankle that was quite annoying, but as Congresswoman Tammy Duckworth pointed out during the hearing, the system is clogged up, we can not filter out the good, honest requests from people who may truly need a helping hand, from the opportunists who fit the letter of the law when it is passed. The best filter we currently have is the people themselves. We need them to be honest and forthright about the help that they need against the perks that they want.

It makes debating this issue so hard. If we clamp down on the requirements we risk leaving a true veteran out in the cold. If we add layers of scrutiny we prompt additional suffering and frustration to those who have already paid their dues, sometimes quite literally with a pound of flesh. I see the anger arise when you confront someone who has allowed their moral compass point them in the direction of easy money. In Mr. Castillo's case, he's also benefited from opening his business in Chinatown. A place designated by the government as a "Hubzone". Meaning that his geographical location also awarding him additional endorsements when bidding on government contracts for his tech company. 

I could be all wrong about Mr. Castillo, but watch the video, see how he defends himself with doctors notes, and bumbles when asked about his football playing days. Then ask yourself if you are still believe that government aid programs are beyond reproach. I applaud Rep. Duckworth for calling a spade a spade, and challenge her and her colleagues to continue to root out people that exploit the letter of the law at the expense of making people like myself jaded at the system.

IRS Is Playing By It's Own Rules

The IRS is acting like a rogue agency with little regard for the rule of law, but you already knew that. 

What may interest you is that I'm not talking about the targeting of 501(c)4's that have the word tea party, conservative, or 9/12 in their name. 

"You must mean the medias scant coverage to its theft of 60 million medical records, now the subject of a class action lawsuit." you say.

"Yup, that's not being covered a whole lot." I reply. "But that's still not what I'm concerned about." 

What is scaring me is that the press have been all but silent regarding the highly illegal IRS scheme to fund Obamacare’s federal insurance exchanges.

In states such as my dear sweet Iowa, we are still in the works for creating one of the exchanges to allow people to purchase a healthcare plan as part of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as Obamacare.  Many states are outright refusing to set these state level exchanges up since the Supreme Court ruling that a states medicaid reimbursements from the federal government can not be tied to a states creation of just such an exchange or expansion of medicaid benefits. It's because of this little factoid that a year ago, the IRS finalized a regulatory ruling to the effect that it will issue tax credits through Obamacare’s federal insurance exchanges. 

Why is that such a big deal? Well, much like when Spike Lee tries to call a technical at a Knicks game, the IRS has been granted no legal authority, by the Affordable Care Act (PPACA) or any other act of Congress, to issue such credits. In fact, the ruling flouts the explicit language of Obamacare.

The ACA law stipulates that all such assistance must emanate from state-run exchanges. Even if the federal government sets up an exchange in a state that has declined to do so, it wouldn't be authorized to issue tax credits. And because 27 states have refused to set up exchanges, this restriction will cripple Obamacare. Without the ability to dole out tax credits and subsidies in more than half of the states, the Beltway bureaucrats attempting to implement the much-despised “reform” law will be hamstrung.

The estimated tab for this little administrative ruling, according to testimony given to the House ways and means committee by the president of the Tax Foundation, could be in the ballpark of $800 Billion dollars. Or, about $254 a second. Also take a moment to notice the date that this near trillion dollar abuse of power by the IRS was published. A shame that the country was distracted so on that day. Chris Mathews would call this coincidence racist.

This is obviously an unprecedented and dangerous power grab. And it gets worse, this arbitrary IRS rule will allow it to tax employers whom Congress did not authorize the agency to tax. Just as Obamacare stipulates that tax credits can only be issued through state-run exchanges, it also says that employer mandates can only originate from these entities. Therefore, the IRS isn’t legally authorized to fine non-compliant businesses in a state that has refused to set up an exchange.

Yet it clearly intends to do so. As it did with the tax-exempt applications of conservative groups and the confidential medical records of millions of U.S. citizens, the IRS plans on going rogue. Even Jar Jar Binks would hesitate to call in granting this kind of power to a group of unelected bureaucrats. And, because of the harm this feature of the rule will inflict on many businesses, it has generated several lawsuits. The most promising of these was filed last month in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by a group of small businesses challenging the rule as an extralegal expansion of Obamacare.

The IRS is one of the most powerful agencies in the unelected and largely unaccountable fourth branch of the U.S. government, otherwise known as the administrative state. Most of the civil servants working in the various monuments to the bureaucracy around the country are honorable and earnest, even in Cincinnati, and in many ways there are some good aspects to Obamacare. This, along with the Tea Party scandal and leaking of medical records is more broadly symptomatic of the fundamental flaws inherent to the modern size and scope of our federal government. Its unyielding desire to have a say in every aspect of our lives comes with an insatiable need for revenue and tax collection enforcement. The result is a supremely powerful IRS. Any entity as large as the IRS will have bad apples. The problem is that the IRS’s authority empowers a bad apple to have a loud booming voice in the way that countless American taxpayers live their daily lives.