IRS Intentionally Or Unintentionally Creates Sebellius Shield

After ten years, statements made about John Kerry and Hillary Clinton have returned to haunt a conservative group.  Statements made by the Patrick Henry Center during the 2004 campaign about Hillary Clinton and John Kerry have been cited as reasons by the IRS to revoke its tax exempt status.

The Patrick Henry Center responded that critical statements made by its group could be open to interpretation, were not made in an open forum, and could not have played a role in elections in 2004 and afterward.

Although Clinton was not officially a candidate for president in 2004 or 2005, she did come under the umbrella of potential candidate.  Being proposed as a candidate, in the eyes of the IRS, makes a person a candidate.  At that point, no tax exempt foundation can engage in criticism against them.

This interpretation brings serious consequences to policy debate.  Last week, some floated Kathleen Sebelius as a possible Democratic challenger in the Kansas US Senate race.   For the past year, Sebelius served as the public face of the floundering Obamacare website.  According to the IRS, the mere fact that some want her to run for office makes criticism of the former Cabinet secretary out of bounds.

Since then, Sebelius has downplayed notions of a Senate run.  Still, the tax exempt foundations must remain careful.  Has she really rejected a run, or is she playing "reluctant tribune?" Criticize now, and if Sebelius changes her mind, you lose your tax exempt status.

This issue comes up at the same time as another organization defends its speech before the US Supreme Court.  The Susan B. Anthony List, a pro-life organization, has challenged an Ohio law barring "false" political speech.  Ohio's law, much like a similar federal statute revoked a long time ago, invites subjective interpretation of "truth" and "lies."

Laws intended to create boundaries for political speech and money that finances it only invite subjective and unfair interpretations.  They also impede the flow of dialogue about some of the country's most important policy and public choices.

The Fed, good or bad?

Even with a Finance degree I am just starting to learn about the monetary system in our country. Here are a couple of articles that I will be reading. The question I find fascinating is this: Congress is given the power to print, i.e. "create" money. However this is actually being performed by the Federal Reserve Bank (and I thought they just played with my interest rates...). So, instead of printing our own money, the government is outsourcing this task to the Fed, then selling bonds (think of this as getting a loan) from the same bank. That's all well and good, but those bonds (loans) come with interest. Who pays the interest accumulated? You and I pay it in the form of taxes. Some of what I read indicates that this is as much as 40% of your income taxes going to pay interest on these "loans".

Quick summary, the government needs money so it borrows money from the federal reserve that will be paid back with interest. The federal reserve then asks the government to print the money that they need to loan to the government. Then the Fed charges interest to the government which is paid by your tax dollar.

Wouldn't it be better to simply tell congress to print their own money and stop outsourcing this job for an interest based charge? If you were taught like I was, you were taught that this was done to avoid a conflict of interest on the part of a politician leading he/she to print a bunch of money shortly before election day. Everyone is happy in November, then the country faces huge inflation. Although this isn't much different from the Fed creating a bunch of money on behalf of that politician it does take the accountability off of the Fed and pass the interest on to some of our countries wealthiest families. Afterall, who do you think owns America's banks.

Two possible solutions, First, the Fed should charge a one time fee for its money printing services each year. The job should be left out to bid and awarded to the best company for the job. I am fully aware that this company will make money and they most likely won't be the lowest bidder, it is politics after all. Then again, it would be easy for Americans to find out that they were paying billions if not trillions each year for a private company to decide how much money we should print this year. Keep in mind that the actual printing is done by the government, the Fed is just getting paid for saying how much to print and what interest rate they will charge for that determination. That is the kind of clarity we need from our government right now.

Possible Second solution, get rid of the system. Congress, print your own money and face the people every two or six years if you screw this up! Don't whine that it is too touchy for elected officials to be involved with, so are tax increases, public health care, national defense, and a host of other topics but our elected officials seem to manage to get involved in those areas...what's one more? Roll up your sleeves and earn that lifelong paycheck.

This whole issue is just complex enough to ward off most nosy taxpayers that would question the system. Combine this with the fact that the Federal Reserve Bank, The IRS, and the income tax were founded in the same year, things are a little fishy. Tack on the fact that purchasing the bonds created in the system provides a tax incentive (perhaps a nice word for bribe) to investors who might question the system and we have all the makings of a nice conspiracy. I look forward to reading more about this topic. I hope it turns out to be the best possible solution to the difficult job of determining monetary policy, but it is our job to constantly question those that serve as our representatives and even those that they partner with. I have a few links to articles that I will be reading below. God Bless

http://www.maxexchange.com/ybj/chapter2.htm

http://www.justiceplus.org/bankers.htm

http://www.scribd.com/doc/63639/The-Federal-Reserve-is-Privately-Owned-by-Thomas-D-Schauf

http://batr.org/markets/federalreserve.html

http://www.reformation.org/federal-reserve.html

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul53.html

http://www.bigeye.com/griffin.htm

http://www.maxexchange.com/ybj/chapter18.htm