The IRS’s rank and file may not be understanding their problem. Yet.

Maybe I am just being too idealistic, but I have a real problem with this Tim Carney theory about why IRS targeted conservative groups:

There’s a fairly innocent — and fairly probable — explanation for what the IRS did, and it boils down to the natural suspicion people have of those with opposing views.

The public servants figuring out which groups qualified for 501(c)4 “social welfare” non-profit status were mostly Democrats surrounded by mostly Democrats. Democrats received 75 percent of the campaign contributions I could trace to employees of the IRS Cincinnati office over the last three election cycles. In the 2012 election, every donation traceable to this office went to President Obama or liberal Sen. Sherrod Brown.

This is an environment where even those trying to be fair could develop a disproportionate distrust of the Tea Party.

…and my problem is not with Tim Carney.  It’s with the whining IRS agents who emailed querulous apologies for their fellows’ actions.

  • Ooh, most government employees only vote Democrat because the Democratic party is big government! Doesn’t matter. Don’t bring politics into your job.
  • Ooh, the IRS union only gives money to Democrats for the same reason!  Doesn’t matter. Don’t bring politics into your job.
  • Ooh, that mean old Grover Norquist [me: :rolls eyes:] and the rest of the Right are being horrid to us!  Doesn’t matter. Don’t bring politics into your job.
  • Ooh, those awful Republican elected officials Boehner, Boustany, and Issa keep getting into our business!  Doesn’t matter. Don’t bring politics into your job.
  • Ooh, the way that those Tea Party hussies were dressed groups were talking they were totally asking for it!  Doesn’t matter. Don’t bring politics into your job.

But I guess that this advice of mine is coming too late.  And may even put me at increased risk for an audit.  And that last bit is the problem.  We have previously tolerated government bureaucrats largely being of one political party because they have largely been wise enough not to push the issue in any but an essentially incremental fashion.  But apparently this has changed, under Barack Obama… and here’s a little secret: no government bureaucracy can in fact survive except under at least the forbearance of both American political parties.  And it is not currently in the Republican party’s best interests to extend that forbearance to the Internal Revenue Service.

Bottom line: the bureaucrats can police themselves, or they can have us police them for them.  Either way will be fine.

Moe Lane

7 thoughts on “The IRS’s rank and file may not be understanding their problem. Yet.”

  1. A quibble, Mr. Lane.
    Do the gutless D.C. wing of the Republican party know that it’s not in their best interest to remove forbearance from the IRS, DOJ, FDA, EPA, et al?
    I see plenty of evidence that main street gets it .. but other than a few voices, Cruz, Lee, Johnson *maybe* Rubio, etc., the gutless D.C. insiders don’t seem to get it.

    1. Well, Boehner did a “The question is, who is going to jail?” mike drop on the subject, so here’s hoping. 🙂

      1. Sending a couple apparatchiks to club fed is a nothing if the rules the apparatchiks live by don’t change.

  2. It’s the civil suits that’ll do it acat. Getting fired or going to jail for a few years is no big deal for them. But losing hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars is something else. In the case of the 15 IRS agents who stole the medical records in California your talking billions of dollars. There goes the plush federally funded retirement, not to mention the house, the spouse, the kids college money, etc. The lawsuits have only started to roll out.

    1. Love to believe it, Catseyes, but ..
      What’s to stop a widespread rash of Dems, say mid-2017, clogging the courts with suits against anyone and everyone who decides against their requests? Because .. must be political .. right?
      No, the problem is how to slap the Dems back to behaving (not *being*, just *behaving*) like rational folk.

  3. The softening up of the Hatch Act does not cover violations prior to 2013. Let’s use it to clean house of those employees who used their jobs to advance their partisan political positions.

Comments are closed.