Public employees, especially those in leadership positions, become scapegoats for politics. The scapegoating by Republicans of an iconic figure is a strategy, not problem solving.
I think we need to realize these people invest a great deal of their lives and aspirations into public service. They need to be valued and not a toy for politics. In many instances the people are lucky to have them and that should never be under appreciated, hence, unions to provide a grievance process to actually find a path through the weeds. It happens in private industry as well when a boss decides he isn't the problem so much as his employee(s). But, that is not the case here.
I think there is a lot to this 'so called' scandal. The depth of the issue is beyond the scandal. The scandal characterizes Republicans as a victim. That is a convenient lie. There is a lot of money involved with these groups and it is very odd to think such wealthy organizations actually need the non-profit status yet alone be considered a charity.
Yes, I am stating these organization never deserved the tax designation in the first place. If the Supreme Court is hapless our tax structure should not be.
This method of applying non-profit to political entities allows corporations to benefit. The organizations for the sizable treasuries they hold don't really need the status so much as the money. So these political organizations provide a great benefit to Wall Street tax returns, not their operational status. That is more the issue than any other here.
There is no real measure of their success in being a charitable organization under 501(c)4. When one looks at other large foundations that carry this designation it is completely obvious the benefit society receives for their charitable tax status.
In the case of political organizations can we actually say that is true? There is no measure of the QUALITY of their work in relation to the benefit society receives. The messages these organization frequently purport to be important are lies and misdirected truths taken out of context. They seek to victimize candidates by societal discrimination based in social bias rather than sincere issues people face, ie: The Willy Horton problem. The Willy Horton advertisement did a terrible thing, it provided a greater fear of African Americans instilled in the American psyche that still carries scars on our people today.
How is the USA suppose to justify placing any burden on the IRS if the definition of benevolence is not directed to the 501(c)4 designation. Those designations are suppose to be benevolent and not victimizing. It is time the Congress address the status of the entire designation and how to better craft the clarity of it without stating, "...shame, shame..." on those at the IRS. Scapegoating might make the Republicans feel better and get that 'feel good feeling' but it doesn't resolve the underlying problem.
I thank Ms. Learner, regardless of the ugly outcome, for all she has strived to do at the IRS. Absolutely no one from the government writing the darn regulations has made it easy. I would like to entertain Ms. Learner be part of a commission to reform IRS laws and return function to our tax structure. I have a great deal of confidence in her loyalty to the USA and how best to bring about meaningful change.
Perhaps the US Treasury Secretary should be worrying more about IRS regulations than currently seems to be his focus.
