GOP rep: If the left cares so much about tax exemption being abused, why is Obama’s OFA group seeking exemption?

posted at 6:01 pm on June 4, 2013 by Allahpundit

Via Liberty News, why Issa and company haven’t been hammering this point since the first hearing on the IRS scandal, I’ll never understand. One of the left’s most persistent defenses of the agency over the past month, long before the memo came down about “GOP overreach,” is that the IRS was simply overzealous in a good cause. Too many groups are abusing tax exemption under section 501(c)(4), a provision designed for “social welfare” groups, by engaging in electoral activities while keeping their donors hush-hush. Here’s what the IRS says about the section:

The promotion of social welfare does not include direct or indirect participation or intervention in political campaigns on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public office. However, a section 501(c)(4) social welfare organization may engage in some political activities, so long as that is not its primary activity.

You can do a little politics on the side, but you can’t have it as your main purpose and you certainly can’t go to bat for a particular candidate. Which brings us to Aaron Schock and today’s hearing: If the left is so worried about penny-ante tea-party groups operating as political wolves in social-welfare sheep’s clothing, why is Obama’s own personal political water-carrying outfit, Organizing for Action, also seeking 501(c)(4) status? Per John Sexton, not only are they a tool for Obama in pushing his policy platform, they make no bones about it:

Statement of Purpose

Organizing for Action is a nonprofit organization established to support President Obama in achieving enactment of the national agenda Americans voted for on Election Day 2012. OFA will advocate for these policies throughout the country and will mobilize citizens of all parties and diverse points to speak out for speedy passage and effective implementation of this program, including gun violence prevention, sensible environmental policies to address climate change and immigration reform. In addition, OFA will encourage the formation of chapters that will be dedicated at the grassroots level to this program, but also committed to identifying and working progressive change on a range of issues at the state and local level. In carrying its work, OFA will operate as a “social welfare” organization within the meaning of section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code.

They operate Obama’s own Twitter feed, which he himself uses occasionally to tweet. They also refuse to voluntarily disclose employer and occupation information for their donors, which makes it much harder to tell which special interests are bankrolling O’s agenda. A “social welfare” group working openly for the president, under his aegis, is the definition of 501(c)(4) abuse, and yet at the moment OFA slogs on in the name of gun-grabbing, amnesty, and other good ideas. Why? Their tax-exempt application will, I trust, be DOA when it finally hits the IRS’s desk. Right?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Because their hypocrites who need to rationalize their suppression of other people’s political rights.

rob verdi on June 4, 2013 at 6:04 PM

If the left cares so much about tax exemption being abused, why is Obama’s OFA group seeking exemption?

Because Fascism! – HAL

nobar on June 4, 2013 at 6:06 PM

Oh my, the IRS better green-light their Section 501(c)(4) status right away pronto, no questions asked! It’s FOR AMERICA, you wingnuts!!!!

MikeHu on June 4, 2013 at 6:08 PM

It’s not just the Islamic Retribution Service,
it is the Kapitaal PoPos too :

Questions asked:
** Is the purpose of your event to promote government accountability?
My answer was yes. This was also indicated on the application
** Have you ever had an event on Capitol grounds before? If so, when was the last one?
My answer was yes and March of 2012.
** Have you ever had any opposition to your cause show up at these events in the past?
My answer – possibly. If there was any opposition it was a small amount. Nothing ever escalated beyond civil conversation.
** Do you know of any opposition that will be at your June 19th event?
My answer – not at this time because we haven’t publicized the event yet because we wanted to make sure we secured the permit first.
** Have you invited any members of Congress to the June 19th event?
My answer – I have informed some Members of Congress, but official invites have not been extended because we are waiting for approval of the permit.
** Does your organization have any social media sites like Twitter or Instagram? I know that you have a Facebook page.
My response – yes we do, but I’m not sure why this is relevant to the application.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/06/capitol-police-to-tea-party-show-us-your-websites-or-forget-your-rally/#disqus_thread

burrata on June 4, 2013 at 6:10 PM

Speaking of leftist hypocrites

Schadenfreude on June 4, 2013 at 6:10 PM

FASCISTS.

tom daschle concerned on June 4, 2013 at 6:11 PM

O bama
f lukes
A America

Schadenfreude on June 4, 2013 at 6:11 PM

wait, are members of the GOP allowed to point stuff like this out? I am pretty sure that this violates the McCain branch of the GOP’s gentlemen’s agreement with the democrats, that they can break the law and we will be mercilessly prosecuted under those same laws.

joeindc44 on June 4, 2013 at 6:12 PM

Their tax-exempt application will, I trust, be DOA when it finally hits the IRS’s desk. Right?

Heh. You’re funny, AP!

KS Rex on June 4, 2013 at 6:12 PM

Schock is quite good here.

AshleyTKing on June 4, 2013 at 6:13 PM

Darrell Issa……the new Ken Starr???

Pick the target………Alinsky would be proud of Axelrod and the Lefties building attacks on Issa.

Did Valerie Jarrett direct the attacks???

PappyD61 on June 4, 2013 at 6:13 PM

More 501(c)(4) organisations that escaped IRS scrutiny:

The Center for American Progress Action Fund

Priorities USA

MoveOn.org

ActBlue

NARAL Pro-Choice America, Inc.

The National Organisation for Women

The SEIU

The AFL-CIO

People For the American Way

Democracy 21

Health Care for America Now (HCAN)

American Bridge 21st Century

People Before Profits

Colour of Change

ProgressNow
.
.
Here are some 501(c)(3) organisations, who likewise escaped IRS tyranny:

The Barack H Obama Foundation

Media Matters for America

Center for American Progress

Democratic Socialists of America

Center for Progressive Leadership

Progressive Majority

Voters for Choice

NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation

The ACLU Foundation

The ACLU

The American Task Force on Palestine

CAIR

North American Islamic Trust

LaRaza

People For the American Way Foundation

Americans United for Separation of Church and State

The Muslim Brotherhood

Emily’s List

Democracy Alliance

The Southern Poverty Law Center

Atlantic Philanthropies

Pro Publica

The Center for Community Change

United For Peace And Justice

The National Lawyers Guild

Socialist Party USA

The Ruckus Society

CREW

ANSWER

CodePink

Resist We Much on June 4, 2013 at 6:14 PM

Stop confusing the issue with facts!

– The Left

Liam on June 4, 2013 at 6:15 PM

Did Valerie Jarrett authorize the IRS actions from the White House?

Who did the IRS guy visit 100+ times?

PappyD61 on June 4, 2013 at 6:15 PM

If the Left didn’t have Double-Standards, it wouldn’t have standards at all.

Chip on June 4, 2013 at 6:16 PM

Just abolish the corporate income tax and we won’t have to worry about all this bullsh!t.

Mark1971 on June 4, 2013 at 6:16 PM

Who did the IRS guy visit 100+ times?

PappyD61 on June 4, 2013 at 6:15 PM

Easter Bunny,
Tooth Fairy,
Yeti,
Big Foot,
Loch Ness,
trolls ….you name it, he visited them.

burrata on June 4, 2013 at 6:18 PM

IRS: What book have you read?
OFA: Das Kapital.
IRS: tax exempt status approved.

rbj on June 4, 2013 at 6:22 PM

How does a congressional liberal reconcile their conscience each morning…despicable cretins, everyone of them…MADDENING.

hillsoftx on June 4, 2013 at 6:22 PM

why Issa and company haven’t been hammering this point since the first hearing on the IRS scandal, I’ll never understand

that makes two of us

cmsinaz on June 4, 2013 at 6:25 PM

How does a congressional liberal reconcile their conscience each morning…despicable cretins, everyone of them…MADDENING.

hillsoftx on June 4, 2013 at 6:22 PM

The only thing libs can’t reconcile is if they let another liberal be compelled to live by liberal rules.

Liam on June 4, 2013 at 6:25 PM

MikeHu on June 4, 2013 at 6:08 PM

+1

cmsinaz on June 4, 2013 at 6:27 PM

Probably should start a conservative nonprofit named United Community of Gun Control Advocates Progressing Forward just to see how quickly nonprofit application is approved. Gun control, of course, doesn’t mean what they probably assume it means.

Fenris on June 4, 2013 at 6:27 PM

How does a congressional liberal reconcile their conscience each morning…despicable cretins, everyone of them…MADDENING.

hillsoftx on June 4, 2013 at 6:22 PM

They are all criminals. They have no morals or conscience.
That is pretty much the profile for anyone in the democratic communist party.

redguy on June 4, 2013 at 6:28 PM

joeindc44 on June 4, 2013 at 6:12 PM

+1

cmsinaz on June 4, 2013 at 6:28 PM

Probably should start a conservative nonprofit named United Community of Gun Control Advocates Progressing Forward just to see how quickly nonprofit application is approved. Gun control, of course, doesn’t mean what they probably assume it means.

Fenris on June 4, 2013 at 6:27 PM

Yes, like Rick Perry’s idea of gun control.

redguy on June 4, 2013 at 6:29 PM

Did Mayor Bloomberg’s “Governors against things that go ‘boom’” organization get this 501(c)(4) status? If so,how many hours did IRS take before approving it?

kurtzz3 on June 4, 2013 at 6:31 PM

A “social welfare” group working openly for the president, under his aegis, is the definition of 501(c)(4) abuse, and yet at the moment OFA slogs on in the name of gun-grabbing, amnesty, and other good ideas. Why?

That’s clearly different, and it’s racist to even ask the question.

/

Their tax-exempt application will, I trust, be DOA when it finally hits the IRS’s desk. Right?

LOL

AP, you so crazy.

Midas on June 4, 2013 at 6:32 PM

IRS : Do you hate America and it’s Constitution and freedoms ?
OFA : Yes
IRS : Do you promise to be funded by jihadies and drug cartels ?
OFA : Yes
IRS : Do you promise to destroy the USA ?
OFA : Yes
IRS : OK, status granted . Remember us for a bonus !

burrata on June 4, 2013 at 6:32 PM

Probably should start a conservative nonprofit named United Community of Gun Control Advocates Progressing Forward just to see how quickly nonprofit application is approved. Gun control, of course, doesn’t mean what they probably assume it means.

Fenris on June 4, 2013 at 6:27 PM

Not long, if this case is any indication…

For the benefit of anyone who still doubts the aggressively partisan nature of this IRS effort at crushing the First Amendment, Chris Moody at Yahoo News has a fun little story about a proudly “free-market, free-enterprise, full-spectrum conservative” group called Media Trackers, run by former Republican National Committee staffer Drew Ryun, who came up with a clever way to get past the Democrat apparatchiks at the Tax Exempt Organizations unit:

Eight months passed without word from the agency about the group’s application, Ryun said. In February 2012, Ryun’s attorney contacted the IRS to ask if it needed more information to secure its nonprofit status as a 501(c)3 organization. According to Ryun, the IRS told him that the application was being processed by the agency’s office in Cincinnati, Ohio—the same one currently facing scrutiny for targeting conservative groups—and to check back in two months.

As directed, Ryun followed up with the IRS in April 2012, and was told that Media Trackers’ application was still under review.

When September 2012 arrived with still no word from the IRS, Ryun determined that Media Trackers would likely never obtain standalone nonprofit status, and he tried a new approach: He applied for permanent nonprofit status for a separate group called Greenhouse Solutions, a pre-existing organization that was reaching the end of its determination period.

The IRS approved Greenhouse Solutions’ request for permanent nonprofit status in three weeks.

Resist We Much on June 4, 2013 at 6:32 PM

They are all criminals. They have no morals or conscience.
That is pretty much the profile for anyone in the democratic communist party.

redguy on June 4, 2013 at 6:28 PM

Most of the GOP at the hearings are way too mild temperament. We need someone to grab a cordless mic, walk-up to these IRS folks and go full Trey Gowdy on them at a distance Leo Durocher would be proud of.

hillsoftx on June 4, 2013 at 6:34 PM

Resist We Much on June 4, 2013 at 6:14 PM

Leftists and Dem voters, including the Legacy Media, would be outraged if they had any integrity and class. But they’re not. That’s one of the many, many reasons why I can’t bring myself to respect Lefties. Not after all these years of observing their crap.

visions on June 4, 2013 at 6:35 PM

redguy on June 4, 2013 at 6:29 PM

Shhhh be vewy vewy quiet, we’re hunting leftists.

Resist We Much on June 4, 2013 at 6:32 PM

Heh.

Fenris on June 4, 2013 at 6:36 PM

Here are some 501(c)(3) organisations, who likewise escaped IRS tyranny:

The Barack H Obama Foundation

That one not only won approval in record time, it also received (illegal) retroactive status for two years!

But it makes sense that an organization run by Barry Obama’s crooked Kenyan half brother, for the purposes of laundering U.S. drug and other criminal-enterprise money into the pockets of the Kenyan Obamas, would get such quick approval (and such quick and illegal retroactive status).

After all, organizations that front for crime syndicates are this administration’s definition of “social welfare.”

AZCoyote on June 4, 2013 at 6:37 PM

Annnyhooo…what was Mr.Aaron Schock saying in this video ?
I couldn’t hear anything because I was too busy looking at him
[ ya ya ...I know ;-) ]

burrata on June 4, 2013 at 6:44 PM

Annnyhooo…what was Mr.Aaron Schock saying in this video ?
I couldn’t hear anything because I was too busy looking at him
[ ya ya ...I know ;-) ]

burrata on June 4, 2013 at 6:44 PM

Yeah I thought that was a pretty nice tie too.

Bishop on June 4, 2013 at 6:51 PM

Resist We Much on June 4, 2013 at 6:14 PM

Nice compilation. Thanks.

notropis on June 4, 2013 at 6:54 PM

“A “social welfare” group working openly for the president, under his aegis, is the definition of 501(c)(4) abuse,…”

It’s the definition of Tyranny…

… and the true face of the Left and the Democrats.

Pretty, isn’t it…?

Seven Percent Solution on June 4, 2013 at 6:54 PM

OFA: Describe the content of Barack Obama’s prayers.

BobMbx on June 4, 2013 at 6:56 PM

Their tax-exempt application will, I trust, be DOA when it finally hits the IRS’s desk. Right?

Ummm, weren’t they already approved?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organizing_for_Action

jawkneemusic on June 4, 2013 at 6:57 PM

BobMbx on June 4, 2013 at 6:56 PM

Heh.

notropis on June 4, 2013 at 6:58 PM

Because the left always takes its misinterpretation of what it thinks are the worst excesses of the right, and uses that as an instruction manual for how to proceed itself, in the interest of “fair play.” How else could anyone explain MSNBC or Keith Olbermann? These are not the creations of someone hoping to make either a profit or a prophet.

calbear on June 4, 2013 at 7:02 PM

“Overzealous for a good cause” -> oversight -> not bad.

“Overreaching” -> a little too much oversight -> ???

Leftists will often deny you the same thing they demand for themselves.

Axeman on June 4, 2013 at 7:13 PM

Now would be a good time to get into the pitchforks and torches business. I’m looking for an angel investor.

crosspatch on June 4, 2013 at 7:14 PM

Maybe make some flags — crossed pitchforks with a torch in the center.

crosspatch on June 4, 2013 at 7:16 PM

ActBlue

Resist We Much on June 4, 2013 at 6:14 PM

Blue?? As in “Blue State Blue”–Democrat Blue? Wow, they only want what’s best for America, like Dems getting elected!!

How do you get clearance for a non-political non-profit when your name points to a political party?!?!

You just have to love the rocket scientists who came up with that name.

Axeman on June 4, 2013 at 7:17 PM

If the Left didn’t have Double-Standards, it wouldn’t have standards at all.

Chip on June 4, 2013 at 6:16 PM

Hey, the left has a lot of standards–TWO for every issue!

Axeman on June 4, 2013 at 7:19 PM

why Issa and company haven’t been hammering this point since the first hearing on the IRS scandal, I’ll never understand.

All part of the setup. If I’m Issa, I would be getting ready to invite representatives from a handful of the more liberal 501(c)4 organizations (the SEIU and MoveOn.org I think would suit well) and ask them to reconcile their agenda and budget to their tax-exempt status, just for the sake of contrast.

Schock is good here, but he let the cat out of the bag a bit early. Hammering some union fatcat (and by proxy, the Democrats he helped put in office) about their budget versus the scrutiny of their membership, donors, and agenda would provide sound bites until the 2020 election.

Sgt Steve on June 4, 2013 at 7:22 PM

If I’m Issa, I would be getting ready to invite representatives from a handful of the more liberal 501(c)4 organizations (the SEIU and MoveOn.org I think would suit well) and ask them to reconcile their agenda and budget to their tax-exempt status, just for the sake of contrast.

Sgt Steve on June 4, 2013 at 7:22 PM

Not a bad strategy but he should get smaller commmie groups (more akin to the size of the groups that spoke today) and grill them on their experience on getting exempt status. Did it take them three years without a decision? Did they get a 20-page follow-up questionaire? Were they told that they needed to cede First Amendment rights to get exempt status? Did they have to provide their donor lists and were those lists leaked to opposition groups?

In short compare apples to apples and show that there truly was a conspiracy where liberal groups got exempt status with no scrutiny and the conservative ones were essentially rejected automatically.

Happy Nomad on June 4, 2013 at 7:32 PM

Blue?? As in “Blue State Blue”–Democrat Blue?

Axeman on June 4, 2013 at 7:17 PM

It used to be that red was the color of Commies and Nazis, which most closely resembles liberals. I used to play a lot of board games, and Americans were always blue while the enemy was always red. Somewhere along the line, the LSM switched around the colors.

I wonder why…

Liam on June 4, 2013 at 7:37 PM

Somewhere along the line, the LSM switched around the colors.

I wonder why…

Liam on June 4, 2013 at 7:37 PM

You hit it exactly. I forget which election it was but the choice was deliberate. Presidential returns would be displayed with Dems in blue and the GOP in red precisely because they didn’t want to have the commies show up in red. I’ve often thought he right should demand the right to pick its own color. I’m thinking perhaps neon green or international orange (the color of life vests and other emergency gear).

Happy Nomad on June 4, 2013 at 7:42 PM

If I’m Issa, I would be getting ready to invite representatives from a handful of the more liberal 501(c)4 organizations (the SEIU and MoveOn.org I think would suit well) and ask them to reconcile their agenda and budget to their tax-exempt status, just for the sake of contrast.

Sgt Steve on June 4, 2013 at 7:22 PM

Not a bad strategy but he should get smaller commmie groups (more akin to the size of the groups that spoke today) and grill them on their experience on getting exempt status. Did it take them three years without a decision? Did they get a 20-page follow-up questionaire? Were they told that they needed to cede First Amendment rights to get exempt status? Did they have to provide their donor lists and were those lists leaked to opposition groups?

In short compare apples to apples and show that there truly was a conspiracy where liberal groups got exempt status with no scrutiny and the conservative ones were essentially rejected automatically.

Happy Nomad on June 4, 2013 at 7:32 PM

Elementary investigation tactics.
You know that, and we know that; but will Issa do it?

AesopFan on June 4, 2013 at 7:49 PM

You hit it exactly. I forget which election it was but the choice was deliberate. Presidential returns would be displayed with Dems in blue and the GOP in red precisely because they didn’t want to have the commies show up in red.

Or, more nefariously, to facilitate the continued misleading propaganda that the Nazis were conservatives instead of socialists (e.g., that all nationalists and fascists are right-wing); that the Republicans were slavers instead of abolitionists; and so forth.

I’ve often thought he right should demand the right to pick its own color. I’m thinking perhaps neon green or international orange (the color of life vests and other emergency gear).

Happy Nomad on June 4, 2013 at 7:42 PM

Let’s start a poll.
I’m a bit partial to hunter green.

AesopFan on June 4, 2013 at 7:54 PM

How do you get clearance for a non-political non-profit when your name points to a political party?!?!

You just have to love the rocket scientists who came up with that name.

Axeman on June 4, 2013 at 7:17 PM

Did you miss the Democratic Socialists of America and the Socialist Party USA on the list of 501(c)(3)s?

Of course, THEY are REAL ‘social welfare’ organisation, unlike Iowa for Life.

/

Resist We Much on June 4, 2013 at 9:26 PM

ActBlue

Resist We Much on June 4, 2013 at 6:14 PM

Blue?? As in “Blue State Blue”–Democrat Blue? Wow, they only want what’s best for America, like Dems getting elected!!

How do you get clearance for a non-political non-profit when your name points to a political party?!?!

You just have to love the rocket scientists who came up with that name.

Axeman on June 4, 2013 at 7:17 PM

It’s much more outrageously partisan than you describe. It’s a nonprofit that builds campaign donation websites for Democratic candidates.

blammm on June 4, 2013 at 9:32 PM

If the left cares so much about tax exemption being abused, why is Obama’s OFA group seeking exemption?

Well, because q3c4iotj c235g 9iuik46 lothok- 0]=]=4rt, r4gujhsnneo rf.
ergjiiog xb ngb-0ewjrgg,k,t99fg/rnlwefZxwv.
Awqvop rn35yp gfna99y57j knorwty ha9835yn, 4ghiioer qQE217JN SFVsdv0.
There.
Does that clear it up for you?

Amendment X on June 4, 2013 at 10:18 PM