Did they or didn’t they?
For weeks, we’ve been hearing whispers that the Internal Revenue Service’s screening process which targeted certain tax exempt organizations included not only “Tea Party” terminology but those on the other end of the political spectrum, as well. Those whispers have now become roars. Democrats in the House claim that the IRS has provided information that proves that the term “progressives” was used as an identifier on the now infamous “Be On the Look Out” (BOLO) lists. Members of the Ways and Means Committee Democratic staff also officially verified that the list of those of organizations reviewed by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) included organizations considered to be liberal.
One of the organizations on the 2010 BOLO list (downloads as a pdf) was, in fact, flagged because it appears to be “anti-Republican” and used the word “blue” to equate to progressive; in a letter to J. Russell George, Inspector General for Tax Administration from Rep. Sander Levin (D-MI), at least seven instances of the term “progressive” were noted on BOLO lists (downloads as a pdf). Other organizations flagged included those which indicated support for traditionally liberal issues like “green energy” (downloads as a pdf) and “medical marijuana.”
This seems to validate the point that key terms other than those related to “Tea Party” issues were used as screening criteria. Lots of organizations, it would appear, were targeted for inappropriate reasons. Case closed?
Ranking Democrats in the House say not so fast. The 50-page audit released by the Inspector General at the order of Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) of the House Oversight Committee doesn’t have a single mention of language targeting progressive groups. Not one.
When asked why that was the case, a spokeswoman for the Inspector General had a simple, but disturbing, answer: it was outside the scope of the audit requested by Issa. The office was asked to investigate the targeting and treatment of Tea Party groups. And that’s exactly what they did – and nothing more.
Not only did the audit not address issues outside of the Tea Party group context, answers issued by the Inspector General at the House Oversight Committee hearing on May 22 now seem uncomfortably nebulous. When asked if there was at least one organization targeted for being liberal, George said:
For the purposes of the audit that we conducted, which was to determine whether they were looked for in the context of political campaign intervention, there were no others.
Rep. Levin finds the omission troubling and has requested an additional hearing with the Inspector General to find out more.
House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI) isn’t likely to acquiesce, as he has said the mere appearance of the word “progressives” on a BOLO list doesn’t prove that those organizations were subjected to the same level of scrutiny as Tea Party groups.
I’m not sure how holding more hearings at this point will help the IRS – or the public – move forward from the scandal. I also don’t think that issuing statements back and forth will help sort any of this out. It is now clear that the scandal has landed on practically everyone’s political missive, conservatives, and liberals alike. I think we can all agree that this matter has been handled badly from start to finish – and not just by the IRS. Congress has shaped and bent this story to fit its own agenda. Instead of playing politics – hiding some facts and over-exposing others – it would be great if we could simply focus on how to make it right.
