A “Higher” Calling for the IRS?

Posted by Jay Netherton on June 19, 2013

Picture of the IRS building from: http://www.flickr.com/photos/iceninejon/1470401797/

Across Constitution Avenue en route to the Sculpture Garden in downtown Washington, D.C., there stands a building with a faded, almost camouflaged inscription above its windows. Stop to stare with a slight squint and the inscription can be deciphered as a short quote of some sorts. This is nothing out of the ordinary, as many such buildings in the area boast lavish engravings and poetic words beautifully crafted across their marble faces.

However, in light of our nation’s recent events, this single quote must give pause to its readers. This single, eight-word quote once hidden in simplicity amongst hundreds of others now seems to scream for attention from the stone on which it was carved.

The quote is from former Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., and rests on the side of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) headquarters. It reads,

Taxes are what we pay for a civilized society

Picture from a Tea Party protest of the IRS’s unfair and unlawful targeting practices.

A year ago, the initial irony of this statement may have merely conjured a smirk or a scoff from us taxpayers who have seen a grim horizon of ever-increasing taxes and more government encroachment into our everyday lives. However, the recent IRS scandal of targeting conservative non-profit and Tea Party organizations begs a second glance at Holmes’ words and a second thought to their implications.

Taxes are a fact of life. As much as we loathe that dreaded day in the middle of April and cringe at the sight of deductions from our paychecks, most reasonable Americans understand that taxes (should) be used by the government for the betterment of its people. In a civilized society like America, citizens pay for the privilege of highway systems, Social Security (whether their own or someone else’s it seems), and now, controversially, healthcare.

Notice, however, that Holmes qualifies his statement with the word civilized. Unfortunately, the extreme subjectivism of this word creates an elusive and seemingly elastic definition, as history can attest. Even still, perhaps what can be agreed upon is that a civilized society must demonstrate consistency and fairness with the rules and laws that the society itself has put into place. This must be especially true for the highest realms of authority.

So then, what happens when these realms abuse their authority, toss civility to the way side, and contradict the very laws and limitations that have been established to restrain themselves from governmental hubris? A second component of a civilized society, accountability, must step in. The checks and balances system of our government was designed for this very purpose. No single branch has complete authority, and everyone must answer to someone.

Apparently these principles are not shared by our current governing authorities.

The IRS has been caught red handed. Both parties have denounced its targeting of conservative groups and the current administration has pledged to hold the tax-payer-funded “service” accountable for its actions. However, we have seen quite the opposite. Our country’s administration claimed to have no knowledge of the IRS’s actions until they saw the news of it along with the rest of the nation. What’s more, one of the employees who has been directly linked to the scandal was given a promotion after the news broke.

Civilized? Accountability? Nowhere to be seen.

And yet Holmes’ words still stand. Appropriately faded, easily overlooked, and passed by many. This is not a call to disband taxes. To say that the IRS’s actions debunk the civilized foundation of America and therefore we have grounds to refuse to comply with their laws is not the point. This is merely a reminder that the country we pledge our allegiance to, the country that generations have died for, and the country that our leaders serve is not exempt from nor is it above its own laws. And when unlawful acts are committed, the one whom the people voted as their leader must take a forceful stand against such incivility.

Perhaps it is time those inside the IRS’s walls step outside its doors, turn around, and look up.

Miss Utah & the Case for Education Reform

Posted by Courtney Mattison on June 17, 2013

Could a better education have prevented Miss Utah from this embarrassing moment that went viral on Twitter and YouTube? We can’t be certain, but we do know there are problems with the education system in this country.

Somewhere in her “umm…” filled answer, Miss Utah was trying to connect the problem back to what she believed was the root of it all: education.

Currently, some education reformers and the federal government are pushing Common Core national education standards. In fact, the federal government is coercing states to adopt the standards by tying federal dollars to implementation. Unfortunately, Common Core standards make about as much sense for states as Miss Utah’s answer in the Miss USA pageant last night.

Common Core takes away local and state control in favor of one-size-fits-all standards for students. Rather than a local, student-focused reform approach, Common Core is centered around rigid federally controlled government standards that many believe won’t actually improve student performance.

Just ask states like Kentucky and New York that are struggling to implement the standards. Implementation problems for both states are detailed by The Heritage Foundation here. As we start to see Common Core implemented in some states, we will likely see teachers, parents and students who are just as lost as the Miss USA audience was last night.

Portrait of a Whistleblower: Justin Hopson

Posted by Jay Netherton on June 14, 2013

Edward Snowden, Sherron Watkins, and Justin Hopson. What do these three names have in common? While the first two are widely recognized as two of the most consequential “whistleblowers” in American history (Snowden leaking the NSA reports and Watkins exposing the Enron scandal), perhaps lesser known is the story of former New Jersey policeman and current South Carolina resident Justin Hopson. Hopson’s story can be found in the Post and Courier.

After a mere eleven days into his rookie year with the New Jersey Police State Police Department, Hopson was faced with a choice that would change his life forever.

During a routine pull-over, Hopson witnessed his training officer arrest a woman for drunk driving…while she was riding in the back seat. Hopson refused to support the charge, confronted his training officer, and eventually brought his case to court in 2003.

There was no grey area.

But Hopson’s integrous choice to stand for justice was not a popular one amongst his peers.

He claimed that he was then targeted by an organized, secret society within the state police called the Lords of Discipline that harassed him regularly. Hopson also said he was physically beaten, his car was vandalized, and he received threatening notes left outside his station. Nevertheless, Hopson stood his ground and paved the way for the largest internal investigation of the department in state history.

Finally, in 2007, the state court found seven officers guilty of harassment but said they found no evidence of the Lord of Discipline’s existence, despite multiple victims’ reports of their activity, and made a settlement agreement with Hopson.

Despite this, there is a larger principle at stake here than simply innocent or guilty, settlement or no settlement. The conviction to do the right thing is a value that the majority of Americans nowadays seem to have deemed old fashioned. In an age where corporate criminals and whistleblowers alike seem to garner similar reactions from the media, incentives for “old- fashioned” ethics are not exactly enticing.

However, regular people like Justin Hopson who possess the fortitude to go against the grain in support of a higher purpose that transcends any job description or social norm are the same kind of regular people who founded the freedoms that set America apart from so many other nations.

It’s not a matter of clout, it’s not a matter of recognition, it’s a matter of caring. Dare to be “old fashioned” and stand for something greater yourself.

Whether it’s in your community, your neighborhood, your church, your family, act with integrity. Justin Hopson

If you are in a situation to speak up on the state or local level and need support, then please see the Freedom Foundation of Washington’s resources or contact your state-based freedom center.

Forced Unionization Hurts Families

Posted by Rachel Kopec on May 8, 2013

Kevin’s lunch has to be ground up by a food processor, and his dad shaves, bathes and dresses him every day. He and his sister were born with disabilities that leave them unable to take care of themselves.

Their parents, Robert and Patricia Haynes, care for their daily needs. The Haynes are two people out of about 60,000 who are home healthcare providers.

One day, a caseworker who regularly checks in on the Haynes family told them they were going to be unionized.

Patricia responded, “Why? I don’t need to be in a union.”

There was an opportunity for unions to forcibly collect dues directly out of people’s paychecks and raise money without even having to provide services.

Robert Haynes was employed with the Detroit Police Department for 25 years, so he understands the role of a union. One large purpose of a union is to negotiate wages and working conditions on your behalf. Robert and Patricia’s employers are listed as their disable children and their workplace is their home. Are the unions going to negotiate with their kids?

For Robert, “This is not pro-union or anti-union… we don’t belong in a union.”

Like many others who forcibly have union dues collected from their paychecks, the Haynes family deserves a choice to not join a union.

To learn more about policies that give families like the Haynes a choice, visit The Mackinac Center for Public Policy’s website MIWorkerFreedom.org and watch the below video.

Montana Ranches in Jeopardy

Posted by Rachel Kopec on April 25, 2013

Tom DePuydt is the third generation to be a part of the land. His grandfather homesteaded in Montana 100 years ago.

Like Tom, Rose Stoneberg’s great-grandmother had a homestead in Montana. Stewardship of the wildlife and the land is a part of her family history.

If we take care of the land it takes care of us. Tom DePuydt

Montana ranchers like Tom and Rose are fighting to save the “Treasure State” legacy—a legacy that is under siege. Natural resources have always provided from Montanans, and Montanans have always stewarded the land. However, the federal government and outside resources are separating the ranchers from the land and its resources.

Montana is land rich and cash poor because they are not allowed to responsibly use their lands and resources for their benefit.

Even as they sit on unimaginable wealth above and below the beautiful landscapes, they have the second lowest wages per job on the nation. They have been cut off from our wealth by people who either don’t understand or don’t care about the human toll of pressing their values on Montana families.

To learn more about the problem and get involved, visit Montana Policy Institute.

Misti Chastain: Tales of Tyranny

Posted by Rachel Kopec on April 24, 2013

Misti Chastain was a 10-year-old when she first saw her dream ranch. Twenty years later she bought that land and turned it into a dream ranch for those who need it most.

But her dream was almost thwarted when the county government tried to force senseless regulations on her property.

Chastain owns a horse ranch outside of Olympia, Washington, where she rescues horses and hosts children with special needs. Her work there has been lauded by local teachers and community leaders.

One day, she received a letter from Thurston County that threatened to close her ranch down. It listed 11 property violations, which allegedly stemmed from a neighbor’s complaint. She was charged with building a swimming pool without a permit (it was already there when she moved in) and having a well too close to her garage.

Even worse, it limited her to only have six horses on her thirty acres— a regulation that was not even in county land codes. This forced Chastain to put some of her prized horses down.

I’m getting rid of horses. I’m saying goodbye to kids. I’m closing down programs. It was devastating.

A turning point came when she saw signs around that said “Stop Thurston County from Taking Our Property.”

She called the number on the sign, which led to the Freedom Foundation’s Glen Morgan. Morgan provided the information that restored her will to fight the county officials.

She testified and invited county officials to look around her property—and she invited her friends with video cameras. The county decided that there was nothing wrong with her property, and Chastain was vindicated.

Chastain’s is not an isolated case. Many people suffer under oppressive government regulations on their property or businesses. Glen Morgan warns citizens in Chastain’s position that “your silence will not protect you.” She shined the light of day on what government was doing to her, and she changed her situation.

If you don’t stand up against government grabbing power and squashing individual opportunity when you see it happening around you, then you may just become a victim of it yourself one day.

Do you have a story to share about government’s oppressive reach into your life? Share it on our Facebook page or contact the freedom-protecting think tank in your state.

Power of Protest

Posted by Rachel Kopec on April 4, 2013

If you’ve ever sacrificed your Saturday to attend a political rally or protest, you’ve probably wondered if your effort really made a difference.

Protests throughout history have had major influence on changing political structure. The Boston Tea Party, French Revolution, Tienanmen Square, Vietnam anti-war protests, and Civil Rights marches are just a few that come to mind.

Recently, we’ve seen two large activist waves in the United States: the Tea Party and Occupy movements. During the 2009-2010 Tea Party uprising, many activists spent hours building a network of protestors, engaging online, educating others, and donating to the cause. But was the Tea Party really the catalyst for the sweeping political change that occurred in 2010?

Photo Credit: Jacquelyn Martin/AP

A new study on the effects of the Tea Party shows strong evidence that protests can build political movements that ultimately affect policy decisions.

The study defines the Tea Party movement as a conservative-libertarian political movement in the United States that has organized protests and supported candidates for elected office since 2009. It broke onto the scene on Tax Day, April 15, 2009, through coordinated rallies around the country.

The study was conducted by the Harvard Kennedy School, the Department of Economics at Stockholm University, and the American Enterprise Institute. Their findings point to the power of protest:

We find that the 2009 Tax Day Tea Party protests increased turnout in favor of the Republican Party in the subsequent Congressional elections, and increased the likelihood that incumbent Democratic representatives decided to retire prior to the elections. Incumbent policymaking was also affected, as representatives responded to large protests in their district by voting more conservatively in Congress. In addition, we provide evidence that these effects were driven by a persistent increase in the movement’s strength. Protests led to more grassroots organizing, to larger subsequent protests and monetary contributions, and to stronger conservative beliefs…

The research found that bigger the protest, the more powerful the results. Even one more person showing up had a multiplier effect:

For every protester, Republican votes increased by seven to fourteen votes.

This goes to show that participating with a community of activists is a powerful impetus for political change, and even revolutionary change. Making a stand for what is right is important in and of itself, but it is encouraging to have evidence that shows that it actually makes a difference.

Read the whole study here and share this post with an activist friend who needs encouragement!

Is the sequester all that bad for states?

Posted by Rachel Kopec on February 28, 2013

Tomorrow, March 1, 2013, the dreaded and overly dramatized sequester will occur.

President Obama has called the sequester a “meat-clever approach” to cutting the budget. News reports and the president have been telling us that the TSA will shrink and result in longer airport lines this summer, national parks will close down some of their campgrounds, and the military will be crippled. Further, he has been traveling the states saying that essential state services will also be cut, such as education or law enforcement.

The sequester has forced us to look at government spending a little bit closer to discern the myths from the facts. The good news is that when we dig in, we find these four facts to be true:

States should not depend upon federal dollars to provide essential services, such as education and public safety.
Sequestration will only cut 2.4 percent of a $3.6 trillion budget. Even with the cuts, total spending in 2013 will exceed what was spent in 2012.
The President knew that sequestration was coming, and he has had the opportunity to work with Congress to cut other non-essential spending in lieu of what he now calls the “meat-clever approach.”
Even after the defense cuts, we will be spending more on the military now than during the height of the Cold War.

Nobody wants essential services cut, but the hard truth is that the federal government should not be holding the purse strings for any of these services to begin with. Education and public safety should be funded and managed at the state level.

The Texas Public Policy Foundation reported that in January the Texas House of Representatives convened the Committee on Texas Response to Federal Sequestration to prepare for the cuts. After listing the various state programs that might feel the impact of federal budget cuts, the committee concluded its report with this warning about “becoming too dependent on the federal government”:

“The situation we find ourselves in with sequestration should serve as a cautionary tale to consider carefully how much we expand programs on the state level utilizing federal dollars. As recent events demonstrate, the federal government could pull funding at any time and Texas would be left to deal with the ramifications.” Why the Sequester Won’t Be So Bad for Texas

Given the massive national debt, it is more important now than ever for states to take control of their fiscal houses. It’s just common sense– something that Washington politicians know very little about.

George Washington: The Reluctant President

Posted by Rachel Kopec on February 18, 2013

Today is not just another federal holiday, but it is a day we celebrate one of our greatest war heroes and founding fathers. George Washington was not only our first victorious commander in chief, but he also set a precedent for limited executive power. He foresaw the threat that concentrated power can hold.

When he was commissioned by the Continental Congress as Commander in Chief of the Continental Army on June 19, 1775, Washington wrote this in a letter to his wife Martha:

“You may believe me, my dear Patsy, when I assure you, in the most solemn manner, that, so far from seeking this appointment, I have used every endeavor in my power to avoid it, not only from my unwillingness to part with you and the family, but from a consciousness of its being a trust too great for my capacity, and that I should enjoy more happiness in one month with you at home than I have the most distant prospect of finding abroad.”

His dream was not conquest or personal glory. A humble, private life suited him.

On February 4, 1789, the 69 members of the Electoral College made George Washington the only chief executive to be unanimously elected (cited from The Smithsonian Magazine).

On the way to begin his presidency, he wrote in his private diary:

“About ten o’clock, I bade adieu to Mount Vernon, to private life, and to domestic felicity and, with a mind oppressed with more anxious and painful sensations than I have words to express, set out for New York…with the best dispositions to render service to my country in obedience to its call, but with less hope of answering its expectations.”

Washington almost retired after one term, but decided to run for a second for the good of the country. He sensed that the factional division between Alexander Hamilton’s Federalists and Thomas Jefferson’s Democratic-Republicans would be too much for the young country to bear.

He famously set the tone for a two-term presidency when he refused to run for a third term in 1796.

Throughout his presidency, Washington expressed great humility and even anxiety that he was not good enough for such a monumental job. He truly viewed his position as one of public service and sacrifice, and he had no desire to be an empire builder.

George Washington’s example of leadership is one that should be emulated by business leaders, community leaders, and, most importantly, every commander in chief elected to serve the people of the United States.

Change Starts in Your Community

Posted by Rachel Kopec on February 15, 2013

Congress ended 2012 with a 15 percent average approval rating — its lowest yearly average in history, according to Gallup. Congress began 2013 with only a 14 percent approval rating. Perhaps not surprisingly, Congress is less liked than genocidal warlord Genghis Khan, cockroaches, and rock band Nickelback. (Statistics from HuffPost Politics)

We are clearly frustrated with Congress. Frustrated that the national debt is more than $16 trillion dollars and that Washington politicians seem to care more about pleasing special interests than the people they represent back home. The Tea Party and Occupy movements both reflect this sentiment, and they endeavored to make a radical change to the system.

Changing Congress or the White House is a monumental and worthy task to take on, but practically speaking it is difficult for those of us with day jobs. This does NOT mean we should become apathetic or give up on influencing policy. Rather, we can direct our time and talents toward making an impact on our spheres of influence.

Discover your sphere of influence:

What are your talents and abilities?
How much time do you have?
What issues do you care about?
Who can come alongside you? Friends, community organizations, advocacy organizations, policy groups, etc.
What level of government do you need to influence to make a change? This could be your school board, city council, state government, etc.

Jason Moore, a concerned citizen turned political influencer from Odessa, Texas, focused on his sphere of influence and made a big change in his state. Jason owns his own masonry building and has five children, but he was concerned with the education his children were receiving in public schools and the wasteful local government spending on a “Taj Majal”-style building.

He knew his sphere of influence and took action. Jason became a government watchdog and began doing his own investigative reporting, and eventually he created CitizenWatchdogs.com. He vigilantly attends city, county and school board meetings with his camera in hand to hold public officials accountable on how they are spending tax payer dollars. His recently educated the public on the large local debt in Texas ($322 billion) and the local bond initiatives that were on the November ballot.

If you can’t change city hall, then you can’t change Congress. Jason Moore

Besides becoming a citizen watchdogs, there are other ways to directly effect state and local policy. One powerful tactic is to put an initiative on the ballot. Ballot initiatives can be filed by any citizen, at any time. They give you a way to propose laws directly and allow citizens to vote yes or no, without any politicians playing middle man (via Watchdog Wire).

There are many steps to getting an initiative on the ballot and successfully campaign for it. This free e-booklet by Leslie Graves breaks the process into 14 manageable steps:

You hold the power to change your local and state government if you take a good look at your sphere of influence and educate yourself on the political process.

Pages:12 3 4 5 »

We The People

Equipping Today's Revolutionaries

Blog