[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 66 (Monday, May 13, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3359-S3360]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
IRS TARGETING INVESTIGATIONS
Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, late last week we learned of the apology by
the Internal Revenue Service official about the targeting of certain
information and applications for 501(c)(4) organizations in this
country. Certainly the indication is that because of certain words
generally considered to suggest that organization has conservative
leanings, those organizations were targeted for different or additional
treatment at the Internal Revenue Service. It was indicated there was
an apology offered. This became a significant topic of conversation
over the weekend by certain elected officials, certainly by my
colleagues in the Senate but by the American people as well.
Last Wednesday, May 8, before this revelation was known, the
Appropriations Subcommittee for Financial Services was holding its
hearing--usually an annual affair--in which we were discussing the
appropriations request in the President's budget for the Treasury
Department. That gave me the opportunity to visit with Secretary Lew.
Of course, the Internal Revenue Service is a component of the Treasury
Department. My conversation with Secretary Lew during that hearing
dealt with a related topic.
While I have great objection to targeting any group--liberal,
conservative, Republican, Democratic-leaning--certainly the ability for
us to examine an application is important. But none of us would expect
or consider it to be appropriate that the Internal Revenue Service
would treat one application different from another based upon its
apparent political leanings.
While that is terrible enough, I also want to point out the topic I
raised with the Secretary, Treasury Secretary Jack Lew, last Wednesday.
This comes from media reports and from complaints by organizations. The
reason this seems so important is the admission that conservative
groups were treated differently or one group was treated differently
from another within the Internal Revenue Service lends credibility to
press reports and to complaints by organizations across the country
about their treatment by the IRS.
My questions to Secretary Lew, some of them that day but also
submitted in writing since then, deal with a number of instances in
which it was reported by an organization or a press report that the
Internal Revenue Service improperly disclosed information about donors
to 501(c)(4) organizations. Last April, the IRS apparently improperly
disclosed schedule B donor lists on the form 990 of an organization
called National Organizations for Marriage. It is an a 501(c)(4) group.
While the form 990 is publicly available, tax laws and IRS regulations
make clear that the schedule B--that is the donor list on the 990 is
not to be released for 501(c)(3)s or (c)(4)s.
The issue was raised. The organization complained. It was reported in
the
[[Page S3360]]
press. Part of my inquiry to Secretary Lew is what has transpired since
that point in time. Have the employees at the Internal Revenue Service
who released this information been challenged for their actions? Have
they been admonished? Have they been treated appropriately for what
clearly seems to be an inappropriate release of private taxpayer
information?
The second example was the IRS turned over several applications for
nonprofit status, including the pending applications for tax-exempt
status, for several groups. They were released and ended up in the
hands of an organization called ProPublica. Again, while the
applications for nonprofit status are available to the public after an
exemption is granted, they are protected as tax return information
while that application is pending. This organization then published
that information, despite that that is what I understand to be a
felony. Publishing unauthorized tax returns or return information is a
felony punishable by up to 5 years in prison or a fine up to $5,000 or
both. Again, my question of the Treasury Secretary is that I have not
been able to confirm any action has been taken, any recommendation from
the Treasury Department, the Justice Department, that anybody be
prosecuted for publishing private taxpayer information.
Finally, we learned earlier this year, again, of something described
as an inadvertent IRS disclosure related to releasing one page of the
schedule B showing donors to the Republican Governors Association.
These are alarming in and of themselves and become more significant to
me, having learned that there is a bias, a treatment different of one
taxpayer over another at the IRS. While it is important for us to
determine, and I am anxious to read the inspector general's report as
to the findings about what occurred with the singling out of certain
organizations for a different kind of treatment at the IRS, I also
think it is important for us to pursue the issue of the release of
information that comes from one organization's filing that is
inappropriate to release and ultimately its being used by an
organization that apparently has a different political perspective than
the one whose application is pending.
Again, I would raise this issue that now we know something is wrong
at the IRS, there is more to be discovered as we look at how this
information was released. Were people who released it punished? Is
there any pending criminal action against the individuals who published
this information?
I am surprised by the circumstance we find ourselves in. I never
would have expected this from the Internal Revenue Service, which must
be, needs to be, and has to be above the political fray.
The IRS can never be an instrument of any political party, of any
administration, or of any political philosophy. All Americans have the
right to assume that the IRS, which has great powers and consequences
upon the taxpayers of this country, is operating in a neutral, fair,
and appropriate manner.
The circumstances now present themselves in a way that we have to
wonder about more than just these three examples. These three examples
are ones now worthy of additional concern by Members of the Senate,
and, even more importantly, by the IRS and individuals within the
administration who are responsible for the management and governance of
the Internal Revenue Service and the Treasury Department.
I have submitted a series of questions to Secretary Lew. As a member
of the Appropriations Committee responsible for the Internal Revenue
Service's appropriations, I look forward to seeing what those answers
are and to make certain appropriate action is taken in regard to
individuals who apparently have violated the public trust, with the
understanding that all of us expect the privacy the Internal Revenue
Service is to provide.
Once again I want to outline that while we learned something over the
weekend that is very troublesome, there may be much more to this story
that has yet to be told, and I am anxious to see the answers that come
from the Treasury Department in regard to the Internal Revenue Service.
In fact, I encourage all Members of the Senate to reach the same
conclusion--no matter their political leaning or philosophical bent,
whether Republican or Democrat--that the Internal Revenue Service with
its tremendous enforcement capabilities and the tremendous consequences
it has to the American people in the decisions it makes always be above
the political fray.
I thank the Presiding Officer for the opportunity to be on the Senate
floor today to outline an extended concern I have about actions at the
Internal Revenue Service. I anxiously wait for the Treasury Department
to respond and provide answers to our subcommittee, committee, and the
full Senate.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. MURPHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in
morning business.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________