Published on Apr 4, 2014
IRS Commissioner John Koskinen announced at the National Press Club on Tuesday, that the IRS has postponed a proposed rule change that would have banned all political speech in 501(c)(4) groups. The IRS received more than 150,000 citizen comments, far more than on any previous proposed rule change. It is interesting to note that Koskinen’s announcement consisted of about three paragraphs of an hour-long speech. This clip contains the portion of Commissioner Koskinen’s speech that deals with this issue.
The complete press release from Senator Cruz:
Sen. Cruz: Americans Are Making DC Listen
IRS announces record number of comments for anti-speech regulation
April 3, 2014
WASHINGTON, DC -– U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, released the following statement regarding IRS Commissioner John Koskinen’s remarks at the National Press Club on Tuesday.
“When Americans speak up, it makes a difference,” said Sen. Cruz. “A record number of Americans spoke out against a regulation being considered by the IRS to stifle free speech of 501(c)(4) political groups. As a result, it is unlikely those rules will be implemented this year. This is a substantial victory for the grassroots and should serve as motivation to continue pressuring the IRS to drop the rule completely.”
Specifically, Koskinen said:
Another recommendation by the IG was that the Treasury Department and the IRS should provide clearer guidance on how to assess the permissibility of 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations’ activities. So last November, Treasury and the IRS issued proposed regulations that are designed to clarify the extent to which a 501(c)(4) organization can engage in political activity without endangering its tax-exempt status.
While I was not involved in the issuance of this draft proposal, because it happened before I was confirmed as Commissioner, I believe it is extremely important to make this area of regulation as clear as possible. Not only does that help the IRS properly enforce the law, but clearer regulations will also give a better roadmap to applicants, and will help those that already have 501(c)(4) status properly administer their organizations without unnecessary fears of losing their tax-exempt status.
During the comment period, which ended in February, we received more than 150,000 comments. That’s a record for an IRS rulemaking comment period. In fact, if you take all the comments on all Treasury and IRS draft proposals over the last seven years and double that number, you come close to the number of comments we are now beginning to review and analyze. It’s going to take us a while to sort through all those comments, hold a public hearing, possibly repropose a draft regulation and get more public comments. This means that it is unlikely we will be able to complete this process before the end of the year (Bold emphasis, mine – A.D.B.).
The complete video of his remarks is available here. The relevant portion of the clip may be found at 16:50:
“Outdated” because it confilicts with liberalism. Here’s a senior at Harvard’s view:
In its oft-cited Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, the American Association of University Professors declares that “Teachers are entitled to full freedom in research and in the publication of the results.” In principle, this policy seems sound: It would not do for academics to have their research restricted by the political whims of the moment.
Yet the liberal obsession with “academic freedom” seems a bit misplaced to me. After all, no one ever has “full freedom” in research and publication. Which research proposals receive funding and what papers are accepted for publication are always contingent on political priorities. The words used to articulate a research question can have implications for its outcome. No academic question is ever “free” from political realities. If our university community opposes racism, sexism, and heterosexism, why should we put up with research that counters our goals simply in the name of “academic freedom”?
Instead, I would like to propose a more rigorous standard: one of “academic justice.” When an academic community observes research promoting or justifying oppression, it should ensure that this research does not continue.
And what is it called when one promotes the quashing of dissenting views that they find to conflict with their ideas?
Call is “social justice” or whatever you choose, it is plain old, Brand X “oppression”.
That’s right. Every oppresive regime in the history of our world has been intolerant of dissent and has taken action to quash it. Here we see the same old tired argument presented by a liberal to further the cause of liberalism. Don’t want to hear any dissenting voices, oh no.
And yet this newly trained “scholar” presents this as if it is a brand-new, brightly minted and spectacular idea. She’s a senior at Harvard and “is a joint history of science and studies of women, gender and sexuality concentrator”.
No kidding. What a surprise. There seems to be quite a concentration of potential oppressers in that particular field of study. There certainly seems to be a dearth of critical thinkers however (she probably comes from the school of “it hasn’t worked properly yet because I haven’t been in charge”). It’s a pity she didn’t take a run-of-the-mill world history course or two to see who else in the past has shared that bright idea with her. Past hell, there’s are entire countries which have implemented that exist now.
China, Cuba and North Korea come to mind.
Liberal Bias Cited
Sharyl Attkisson, an award-winning CBS News investigative reporter who doggedly pursued the Benghazi and Fast and Furious scandals, resigned from the network yesterday. Attkisson was reportedly frustrated by CBS News’ liberal bias. Read more at: heritage.org.
A man videotaping Baltimore County police as they arrested two people was approached by at least two different officers and not only angrily threatened with arrest, but told he had no rights.
The man asked the officers several times what he was doing wrong. When he tried to remind them “I have my rights,” things quickly went downhill, with one angry cop responding: “You just lost them.” continue reading at: ijreview.com.
FCC to monitor news rooms? Adds new meaning to “State Run Media.” Hammer and sickle!
The Obama FCC will start policing newsrooms recommending what the organizations should report on.
The Wall Street Journal: News organizations often disagree about what Americans need to know. MSNBC, for example, apparently believes that traffic in Fort Lee, N.J., is the crisis of our time. Fox News, on the other hand, chooses to cover the September 2012 attacks on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi more heavily than other networks. The American people, for their part, disagree about what they want to watch.
But everyone should agree on this: The government has no place pressuring media organizations into covering certain stories.
Unfortunately, the Federal Communications Commission, where I am a commissioner, does not agree. Last May the FCC proposed an initiative to thrust the federal government into newsrooms across the country. With its “Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs,” or CIN, the agency plans to send researchers to grill reporters, editors and station owners about how they decide which stories to run. A field test in Columbia, S.C., is scheduled to begin this spring.
Continue reading at: gatewaypundit.com.
Most of us are aware of the recent IRS targeting of conservative and tea party groups by delaying or denying their 501(C)(4) tax exempt status. Naturally, the Obama regime strongly denies this. In fact when interviewed by Bill O’Reilly of Fox News on Super Bowl Sunday, the president said that there was “…not even a smidgen of truth” to this allegation. Never mind that in May of 2013, the IRS admitted and apologized for this targeting.
So what the administration couldn’t to by statute, they now are attempting administratively by issuing new draconian regulations (see article and video below) that severely limit these organizations’ free speech. This is a classic example of if you can’t win the game, change the rules.
Because these proposed regulations do not apply to Gainesville Tea Party which is organized as a Limited Liability Corp. (llc), and not a 501(C)(4) corporation, some people believe we are immune from this governmental overreach. However, nothing could be further from the truth. This brings to mind a famous quotation from about 1946 which has been attributed to Martin Niemöller:
“First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out – Because I was not a Socialist. Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out – Because I was not a Trade Unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out – Because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me – and there was no one left to speak for me.”
An attack on anyone’s free speech is an attack on everyone’s free speech!
Click here to go to the Protect C4 Free Speech website to learn more about these proposed freedom killing regulations and what you can do to stop them (video).
Author’s note: There have been new developments in this saga since this was written. Please see these related posts:
Not a “smidgen” of corruption!
Very moving testimony: Catherine Engelbrecht, chairwoman of True the Vote, founder of King Street Patriots and President of Engelbrecht Manufacturing testifies before the House Oversight & Government Reform Subcommittee on Regulatory Affairs. She spoke about being targeted by the Obama administration. Shortly after applying for tax exempt status for her organizations, the Engelbrechts, their non-profits and their business were subjected to more than fifteen instances of audits and inquiries by the IRS, OSHA, the ATF and the FBI.
(Breitbart.com) One of the most high-profile victims of the IRS Tea Party targeting scandal is planning to unveil surprising new allegations about the top Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee at a hearing this morning.
By Matthew Boyle, Breitbart.com.
Catherine Engelbrecht, the head of election integrity group True The Vote and Tea Party group King Street Patriots, alleges Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) demanded information from her group in a similar manner to the IRS, according to her testimony. “Hours after sending letters, he would appear on cable news and publicly defame me and my organization,” Engelbrecht said.
The Tea Party leader is filing a formal ethics complaint against Cummings with the Office of Congressional Ethics, a panel of outside advisers who review allegations and refer those they consider to have merit to the official Hosue Ethics Committee. Read more.
Friday, January 31st, 2014
Washington, DC – House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R-MI) wrote to Treasury Department Secretary Jacob Lew and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Commissioner John Koskinen requesting all documents pertaining to 501(c)(4) rulemaking. Read the press release HERE
“They are going after the Obama critics with indictments. VA Gov. Now Dinesh D’souza. Holder unleashing the dogs…” – Matt Drudge
The new definition of hate speech:
zzzzz1) Any speech the Obama Regime hates!
Note: Click the graphic or click HERE to watch Dinesh DeSouza’s full length film.
Dinesh D’Souza is accused of giving too much money to a candidate who sought to replace former New York Sen. Hillary Clinton. Producer Gerald Molen tells The Hollywood Reporter the charges are politically motivated.
Conservative filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza, whose documentary 2016: Obama’s America took a critical look at President Barack Obama and was a surprise hit in 2012, will be arrested in New York on Friday for allegedly violating campaign-finance laws… Read more at: The Hollywood Reporter
A prominent First Amendment group has released their list of the top ten worst colleges for free speech.
The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) first began publishing the list two years ago and their last list was March 2012.
The list focuses on public schools because – as they state – if you are subject to speech violations and you attend Liberty University, you pretty much know what you’re getting into.
Also, the worst offender – and last one on the list – isn’t even a college at all, but has more influence on college decisions than just about anyone.
Here is FIRE’s list of the worst colleges in American for Free Speech: downtrend.com.
A federal judge ruled Monday that the National Security Agency’s bulk collection of phone records likely violates the Constitution, in a major setback for the controversial spy agency.
U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon granted a preliminary injunction sought by plaintiffs Larry Klayman and Charles Strange. However, he also stayed his decision “pending appeal,” giving the U.S. government time to fight the decision over the next several months. Continue reading at: foxnews.com.
County office bans criticism of Obamacare
Warns employee ‘controversial’ statements not allowed
Santa Clara County, Calif., officials have banned a 20-year employee from making “less than positive” remarks about Obamacare, because they can cause stress for listening co-workers.
The county made the stunning move when Norina Mooney was chatting with a co-worker about the Affordable Care Act, according to the Pacific Justice Institute, which is representing the woman. Read more at WND.com.