The other IRS scandal
  • Missing from much coverage is the relevant recent history—the role of the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision and how it prompted a deluge of requests from new organizations seeking tax-exempt status under tax code Section 501(c)(4) as “social welfare” organizations—despite the fact that many of these are blatantly political operations.

  • Congress requires the IRS to review every application for tax-exempt status to weed out organizations that are partisan, political, or that generate private gain. Congress has imposed this requirement on the IRS, and its predecessor agencies, since 1913.

  • When it comes to 501(c)(4) organizations, what the IRS is supposed to do is draw a distinction between groups that are “primarily engaged” in politics and groups that really are primarily engaged in “social welfare”—somehow “promoting the common good and social welfare of the community.” It’s kind of mushy. Brad Plumer has a good explainer about this on The Washington Post’s Wonkblog.

  • The first scandal here, meanwhile, is that the social welfare tax exemption is being used by existing 501(c)(4) organizations, including some very large ones, to promote partisan political interests—the very activity Congress has explicitly prohibited for a century. The New York Times, after a weak political piece on Saturday, had a clear and useful explainer about this on Tuesday.

  • Also worth pointing out: None of the organizations that the IRS scrutinized as a result of the ill-considered screening-by-name regime was denied tax exempt status.

  • The second—and widely ignored—scandal in this unfolding story is that the IRS is drowning. Congress is demanding that the agency do more and more with less and less, as we have reported here and elsewhere. As David Levinthal reported Tuesday at the Center for Public Integrity:

The IRS’ Exempt Organizations Division, which finds itself at the scandal’s epicenter, processed significantly more tax exemption applications in fiscal year 2012 by so-called 501(c)(4) “social welfare” organizations — 2,774 — than it has since at least the late 1990s.

That compares to 1,777 applications in 2011 and 1,741 in 2010, he reported.

Meanwhile, in real terms the IRS budget has been cut 17 percent per capita since 2002, even as Congress has piled on other new duties, such as hunting for offshore accounts, dealing with the complexities of the Affordable Care Act, and other expanded obligations.

erinkilkenny:

17 year Cicada emergence .gif, because I had to see it animate.

erinkilkenny:

17 year Cicada emergence .gif, because I had to see it animate.

Have you ever felt like you’re being cheated? Lost in Criterion joins two lost souls in Sid and Nancy.

Alex Cox’s 1986 biopic on the elder punk and his tumultuous relationship with Nancy Spungeon offers a great showcase of Gary Oldman’s acting talents and a larger than life look at a couple of people who were already striving to be larger than life. I could have done with a few fewer layers, personally. But let’s save that for this week’s episode.

Anonymous asked: Wow, is that picture really you? You look like a bigger cunt then I thought.

That was a picture of Michael J. Fox on the cover of AARP magazine.

thefrogman:

Drawn by Mike Jacobsen [website | twitter | store]

thefrogman:

Drawn by Mike Jacobsen [website | twitter | store]

(Source: inappropriatedino)

For some reason this made me sad.

For some reason this made me sad.

Reducing Inequity in Forensic Exams Following Sexual Assault

wagonwheel:

My friend’s lab is working on detecting abrasions on women of color in cases of intimate partner abuse, and the project is being crowd sourced. Check it out. 

…this is the real scandal: the nakedly transparent flouting of the tax laws by groups claiming to be nonpolitical and nonpartisan. Count on the media in Washington to entirely miss that obvious point.
It’s important to review why the Tea Party groups were petitioning the I.R.S. anyway. They were seeking approval to operate under section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code. This would require them to be “social welfare,” not political, operations. There are significant advantages to being a 501(c)(4). These groups don’t pay taxes; they don’t have to disclose their donors—unlike traditional political organizations, such as political-action committees. In return for the tax advantage and the secrecy, the 501(c)(4) organizations must refrain from traditional partisan political activity, like endorsing candidates…. Particularly leading up to the 2012 elections, many conservative organizations, nominally 501(c)(4)s, were all but explicitly political in their work.In every meaningful sense, groups like Americans for Prosperity were operating as units of the Republican Party. Democrats organized similar operations, but on a much smaller scale. (They undoubtedly would have done more, but they lacked the Republican base for funding such efforts.) So the scandal—the real scandal—is that 501(c)(4) groups have been engaged in political activity in such a sustained and open way.
Muslims to Tea Party: Welcome to our world

But some in the Muslim community might have a question – why are conservatives so surprised (and outraged) by this news when Muslim nonprofits and their leaders have been under intense scrutiny for over a decade? And when so many Muslim groups and individuals have faced scrutiny simply for the religion they follow?

latimes:

disneyparksphotoproject:

New strategy, let the Wookie spin
photographer: MR Gif 
location: Star Wars Weekends - May 9 to June 9, 2013 

Wookie + .gif = instant Friday reblog.

latimes:

disneyparksphotoproject:

New strategy, let the Wookie spin

photographer: MR Gif

Wookie + .gif = instant Friday reblog.

Hope the Komen folks understand that the bow tie isn’t going back to them but into my Adam Scott cosplay box.

Hope the Komen folks understand that the bow tie isn’t going back to them but into my Adam Scott cosplay box.