[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 25 (Tuesday, February 11, 2014)]
[Senate]
[Page S860]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                            IRS REGULATIONS

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, the two parties have engaged in a lot 
of big debates over the past several years, and no one, obviously, 
should be surprised by that. The President came into office vowing to 
fundamentally transform the country, and a lot of us have had big 
problems with the policies he has tried to implement in pursuit of that 
goal. But there are some things we should all agree on, and one of them 
is this: No President--no President of either party--should use the 
power of the Federal Government to punish his ideological opponents. 
That is why, when the targeting of conservative groups by the IRS came 
to light after the last Presidential election, just about everybody 
denounced the Nixonian tactics up and down and loudly declared that it 
should never be allowed to happen again. They knew that this kind of 
targeting represented a direct attack on our most fundamental 
freedoms--on our abilities to organize and educate and engage in the 
democratic process. And while the abuse may have been aimed at 
conservatives this time, it is easy to see how it could one day be used 
against organizations of any ideological hue.
  So America's culture of civic engagement simply has to be defended--
by all of us. Yet, with the passage of time, that is not what we have 
seen. Instead of putting safeguards in place to protect our civil 
liberties, the Obama administration is now dragging the IRS back in the 
opposite direction. It is now pushing a regulation that would actually 
entrench and encourage the harassment of groups who dare to speak up 
and engage in the conversation. It is trying to intimidate into silence 
those who send donations to civic groups too.
  Predictably, the Obama administration has tried to spin these 
regulations as some sort of ``good government'' measure, as reforms 
initiated in response to the IRS scandal, but, of course, we know that 
is simply not true. In recent days we learned that these regulations--
regulations designed to suppress free speech--have been in the works 
for years.
  So let's be clear. All of this is simply unacceptable. After 
denouncing the abuse last year, I believe it is shortsighted of our 
friends on the other side not to oppose these rules forcefully today. 
The path this administration is embarking on is a dangerous one with 
the slipperiest of slopes. Left-leaning civic groups should be just as 
alarmed about what these regulations could mean for them in the future 
as what the rules almost certainly will mean for conservative groups 
today. That is why some, such as the ACLU, have begun to speak out 
against these regulations.
  Last week I joined several of my colleagues in sending a letter to 
the new Commissioner for the IRS that laid out these concerns. We 
reminded Commissioner Koskinen that he was confirmed with a mandate to 
reform the IRS and return the agency to its actual mission--processing 
tax returns, not suppressing speech. We expect him to fulfill that 
mandate--to prove his reformist credentials--by halting the regulations 
immediately and to enact new rules that would stop similar harassment 
from occurring in the future. This is something the Commissioner can 
and must do now. He needs to realize this isn't some issue to move past 
but a serious threat to be confronted.
  Commissioner Koskinen could go down in history as a hero, as did the 
IRS Commissioner who stood up to Nixon and said no to harassment of 
political opponents. I want to believe that this is the choice he will 
make, that he wants to be remembered as a strong and independent public 
servant rather than some political pawn. But we can't be sure what he 
will do, and the American people need a backup plan in case he decides 
his fealty lies with the opponents of free speech rather than with 
them.
  That is why today I, along with Senators Flake, Roberts, Hatch, and 
others, have introduced legislation that would prevent the IRS from 
enacting regulations that would permit the suppression of First 
Amendment rights. It aims to return the agency to its mission and get 
it out of the speech police business altogether--a goal that should be 
a bipartisan one.
  This is something worth fighting for. It is something I hope 
Commissioner Koskinen will work with us to achieve. But if he does 
not--if he does not--he should know we are prepared to go to the mat to 
defend the First Amendment rights of our constituents and our 
neighbors--and that we will continue to do so until those rights are 
safe once again.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________