Here are two Congressmen who oppose building this pipeline.
Crony capitalism, indeed.
It isn’t enough that the Obama administration, and Democrats generally, are so terrified at the Conservative message that the President sicced his IRS on Conservative political entities in an effort to suppress their political speech as it was expressed as financial support for Conservative and Republican candidates in the 2012 elections.
Now they’re attempting to codify that suppression with a new Treasury rule for the IRS regarding what Democrats will permit 501(c)(4) entities to do in the coming elections.
Here is what a 501(c)(4) entity is, according to the Legal Information Institute:
(A) Civic leagues or organizations not organized for profit but operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare, or local associations of employees, the membership of which is limited to the employees of a designated person or persons in a particular municipality, and the net earnings of which are devoted exclusively to charitable, educational, or recreational purposes.
(B) Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to an entity unless no part of the net earnings of such entity inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual.
It’s that educational part that’s important: educating the public about political matters and about where politicians stand on those matters is, well, educational. It’s just that overt political activity can’t be the predominant activity of a (c)(4) entity. This is one of the outcomes of the Supremes’ 2010 Citizens United decision regarding the unconstitutional ban of a Hillary Clinton documentary in the runup to the 2008 Democratic Party primaries.
Here are excerpts from Treasury’s new proposed rule for executing that suppression:
1. Communications
Communications that are made within 60 days of a general election (or within 30 days of a primary election) and clearly identify a candidate or political party.
…
3. Activities Closely Related to Elections or CandidatesHolding an event within 60 days of a general election (or within 30 days of a primary election) at which a candidate appears as part of the program.
…
Treasury and the IRS are planning to issue additional guidance…public focus regarding the proportion of a section 501(c)(4) organization’s activities that must promote social welfare. Due to the importance of this aspect of the regulation, the proposed guidance requests initial comments on this issue.
This timing of activities, also, was addressed by the Supremes in Citizens United. Moreover, Treasury is moving to keep their follow-on rule regarding proportionality under the radar until after the 2014 elections, thus leaving the claimed ambiguity in place for further 2012-style IRS suppression of Conservative entities.
Clearly, Treasury is intent on facilitating the IRS’ ability to harass and to outright silence government-disapproved organizations—especially those impertinent enough to disagree with the administration.
All of this is in an election year, no less.
The full text of Treasury’s announcement concerning the rule can be seen via The Washington Post.
I have a new pamphlet out, A Conservative’s Thoughts on Rights and Duties, their Duality, and some Implications; a link to the Kindle version of it (the only version, currently) has been added to the sidebar at right.
I touched on rights and duties and their duality in my book A Conservative’s Manifesto, but only tangentially to a larger discussion of Conservative principles. However, an understanding of individual rights and individual duties, especially their nature as individual endowments rather than as attributes of groups of men or as grants from some men acting in a “government’s” name, forms a critical part of Conservative thought. Now, with us Americans broadly divided on what our rights and duties really are, or even whether the government should have them instead of us, is the time to expand on that peripheral discussion and to address the matter directly.
My central thesis is this: our inalienable rights and our inalienable duties, as endowments from and by our Creator, and as duals of each other, are a part of the fabric of our existence—both as individual rights and duties and in the capacity of those duals. Further, just as importantly, our inalienable rights and our inalienable duties are in each of us as individuals; they are not in groups of us, they are not in the whole of us as a nation. Each one of us is possessed of them entirely in ourselves.
This, of course, has implications for the role our government, and especially for the roles of “civil law” and “civil rights,” in our lives.
I hope you enjoy the pamphlet.
The Wall Street Journal has the sordid tale. A week and a half ago, Third Way Founder, Trustee, and Andrew Cuomo ex-aide Jon Cowan and Third Way Founder and Chuck Schumer ex-aide Jim Kessler wrote an opinion piece. The Third Way is a think tank that thinks from the Left.
Maybe you remember the op-ed: Cowan and Kessler used it to suggest that Americans aren’t quite as liberal some might think based on New York City’s strong election of someone like Bill de Blasio as mayor, that Social Security is nearly bust, and that wealth redistribution actually is pretty unpopular with most of us.
Well.
The Progressive Change Campaign Committee, et al., demanded among other things, that Congresswoman Allyson Schwartz (D, PA), walk away from Third Way. She’s a Third Way Honorary Co-Chair (along with other Progressive luminaries like Congressman James Clyburn (D, SC), Senator Chris Coons (D, DE), and HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius), and she also wants to be governor of Pennsylvania. Responding to her instructions, she denounced the op-ed, in the WSJ‘s words, “faster than you can say Reeducation Camp.” (Although she’s still listed by Third Way as an Honorary Co-Chair.)
Not to be outdone, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D, MA) sent letters to six large banks which she regulates from her perch on the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, and in those letters she demanded those banks disclose all their donations to think tanks.
Don’t talk, PCCC and Warren are saying to these miscreants. Just read from the script we’ve given you. When we want your opinions, we’ll give them to you.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D, NV) and Chuck Schumer (D, NY) have their knickers in a twist because Senate Republicans successfully blocked the accession to the DC Circuit Court of President Barack Obama’s nominee, Cornelia Pillard. These two, and their…colleagues…are upset over what they claim are Republican political blocks.
No, guys. Obama is making nakedly political nominations. He should stop playing politics with the nation’s courts.
Additionally, as part of their panty-wadding, Reid and Schumer are threatening, again, to do away with the filibuster altogether:
Republicans are inching closer and closer to that line. I’d hope they’ll turn back[.]
Senate Democrats can’t do this under Senate rules and the current party split in the Senate, though, except by trotting out Vice President Joe Biden to make a dishonestly tendentious parliamentary ruling on what the Senate’s rules actually say.
The politics don’t get any more naked than that.