Original Post: Weasel Zippers
Product of government school education?
Looks like geography lessons may be in order for the U.S. Senate.
Louisiana Democrat Mary Landrieu made an embarrassing gaffe Thursday during a debate on the Senate Floor, stating that South Dakota borders Canada.
The Southerner seemed to have overlooked the state’s northern neighbor, North Dakota.
The comment came during a floor discussion on an amendment regarding a security fence, presented by South Dakota Republican John Thune.
She was trying to express her opposition to Thune’s proposal about constructing a 350-mile double layered fence along the Mexico border, saying that she places more trust in the opinion of Arizona Sen. John McCain — because McCain’s state borders Mexico.
“A smart fence which is what Senator McCain and I want to build – since he’s from Arizona, I think he knows more about this than the Senator from South Dakota, who only has a border with Canada that is quite different.”
Landrieu, 57, chairs the Senate Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee.
Her office did not respond to a request for comment about the buzz over the mistake.\
This isn't the first time a Democrat lawmaker has made huge blunders in regards to basic geography. Remember how much flak they gave Sarah Palin for her Russian comment? Peggy West doesn't know where Arizona is. Maybe Democrat policy is so screwed up because they don't know where things are. As though they're detached from reality.
Tuesday, June 25, 2013
Wednesday, June 19, 2013
DO DRONES SPY ON U.S. SOIL? FBI DIRECTOR SAYS ‘YES’ BUT IN A ‘VERY, VERY MINIMAL WAY’
Original Post: The Blaze
Liz Klimas
FBI Director Robert Mueller told the Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday, yes, the government does use drones over U.S. soil for surveillance — but not too much.
When asked by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) about the use of unmanned aircraft, Mueller said “Our footprint is very small. We have very few,” according to Wired.
ederal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director Robert Mueller testifies during a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee June 19, 2013 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. Mueller confirmed that the FBI uses drones for domestic surveillance during the hearing on FBI oversight. Grassley pressed, asking about their purpose, to which Mueller said they were for surveillance. Surveillance on U.S. soil?
“Yes, in a very, very minimal way, and seldom,” Mueller said.
The Huffington Post reported Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) expressing privacy concerns over the use of drones and calling them “the greatest threat to the privacy of Americans.”
In terms of privacy protections built into the drone program at the moment, Mueller said the program itself “is very narrowly focused on particularized cases and particularized needs,” which he called “the principal privacy limitation we have.”
He did say the bureau was in the “initial stages” of developing privacy guidelines though.
In May of this year, Attorney General Eric Holder revealed that the Obama administration had killed four Americans using drones in Yemen and Pakistan. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) also showed letters sent by Holder that said “the President has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil, and without trial.”
The FAA was charged with drafting new regulations that would open up the skies of America to more private, commercial and military drone use by 2015.
Liz Klimas
FBI Director Robert Mueller told the Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday, yes, the government does use drones over U.S. soil for surveillance — but not too much.
When asked by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) about the use of unmanned aircraft, Mueller said “Our footprint is very small. We have very few,” according to Wired.
ederal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director Robert Mueller testifies during a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee June 19, 2013 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. Mueller confirmed that the FBI uses drones for domestic surveillance during the hearing on FBI oversight. Grassley pressed, asking about their purpose, to which Mueller said they were for surveillance. Surveillance on U.S. soil?
“Yes, in a very, very minimal way, and seldom,” Mueller said.
The Huffington Post reported Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) expressing privacy concerns over the use of drones and calling them “the greatest threat to the privacy of Americans.”
In terms of privacy protections built into the drone program at the moment, Mueller said the program itself “is very narrowly focused on particularized cases and particularized needs,” which he called “the principal privacy limitation we have.”
He did say the bureau was in the “initial stages” of developing privacy guidelines though.
In May of this year, Attorney General Eric Holder revealed that the Obama administration had killed four Americans using drones in Yemen and Pakistan. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) also showed letters sent by Holder that said “the President has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil, and without trial.”
The FAA was charged with drafting new regulations that would open up the skies of America to more private, commercial and military drone use by 2015.
Homeland Security graduates first Corps of Obama’s Brown Shirts – Homeland Youth
Original Post: From The Trenches World Report
It Makes Sense Blog October 7, 2012. Vicksburg. The federal government calls them FEMA Corps. But they conjure up memories of the Hitler Youth of 1930’s Germany. Regardless of their name, the Dept of Homeland Security has just graduated its first class of 231 Homeland Youth. Kids, aged 18-24 and recruited from the President’s AmeriCorp volunteers, they represent the first wave of DHS’s youth corps, designed specifically to create a full time, paid, standing army of FEMA Youth across the country.
On September 13, 2012, the Department of Homeland Security graduated its first class of FEMA Corps first-responders. While the idea of having a volunteer force of tens of thousands of volunteers scattered across the country to aid in times of natural disasters sounds great, the details and timing of this new government army is somewhat curious, if not disturbing.
The first problem one finds with this ‘new army’ is the fact that they are mere children. Yes, 18 is generally the legal age a person can sign a contract, join the military or be tried as an adult. But ask any parent – an 18, 20 or even a 24 year-old is still a naïve, readily-influenced kid.
The second problem with this announcement and program is its timing. Over the past two years, President Obama has signed a number of Executive Orders suspending all civil and Constitutional rights and turning over management of an America under Martial Law to FEMA. Also in that time, domestic federal agencies under DHS, including FEMA, have ordered billions of rounds of ammunition as well as the corresponding firearms. Admittedly, these new weapons and ammunition aren’t to be used in some far-off war or to fight forest fires in California, but right here on the streets of America.
Individuals around the US have begun reporting the site of strange, new, heavily-armed FEMA fighting vehicles. What would a disaster relief agency like FEMA need with 2,500 brand new GLS armored fighting vehicles? According to the agency’s own mandate, as well as President Obama’s recent Executive Order, the answer is ‘population control’ during a time of Martial Law.
One set of images made available by Rense.com shows trailer after trailer carrying these new DHS and FEMA armored fighting vehicles, complete with machine gun slots. They’re labeled with the usual backward American flag and the title, ‘Homeland Security’. Below that and the DHS logo, it also reads, ‘Immigration & Customs Enforcement’. Joining those markings, the black vehicles with white lettering also display ‘POLICE/RESCUE’ on one side and ‘Special Response Team’ on the other.
FEMA Deputy Administrator Rich Serino gave the keynote address at the ‘Induction Ceremony’ for the inaugural class of FEMA Corps members. According to the DHS website, ‘Corps members assist with disaster preparedness, response, and recovery activities, providing support in areas ranging from working directly with disaster survivors to supporting disaster recovering centers to sharing valuable disaster preparedness and mitigation information with the public.’
Serino describes what the first FEMA Corps class has accomplished so far, as well as where they’ll be going next:
‘Yesterday, we welcomed 231 energetic members into the first ever FEMA Corps class. The members just finished off their first month of training with our partners at the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) and are one step closer to working in the field on disaster response and recovery. They will now head to FEMA’s Center for Domestic Preparedness to spend the next two weeks training in their FEMA position-specific roles. Once they complete both the CNCS and FEMA training, these 231 dedicated FEMA Corps members will be qualified to work in one of a variety of disaster related roles, ranging from Community Relations to Disaster Recovery Center support.’
Unlike most local disaster response teams who are volunteers, training periodically and only showing up when there’s a disaster, the FEMA Corps will be a paid, full time, standing army of government youth. FEMA Deputy Administrator Sarino goes on to explain, ‘The new members, who range in age from 18-24 years old, will contribute to a dedicated, trained, and reliable disaster workforce by working full-time for ten months on federal disaster response and recovery efforts.’
In closing his announcement of the first graduating class of FEMA Corps Youth, Sarino describes his and the agency’s vision of the future, one where ‘FEMA Corps sets the foundation for a new generation of emergency managers’.
As we detailed in the August 28 Whiteout Press article ‘History of DHS Ammunition Purchases’, federal emergency management agencies are looking more and more like a military army every day.
The federal government’s procurement website actually lists DHS’ requests for bids to supply it with ammunition and military weaponry. All of the orders listed in the above article, including the orders for hundreds of millions of rounds of ammunition, are publicly available at http://www.fbo.gov.
One look at a chart of DHS ammunition purchases over the past decade reveals a drastic spike in orders of bullets recently, totaling in the billions of rounds. Other charts available online show a similar drastic spike in the purchases of accompanying weaponry by the Department of Homeland Security.
What is the US federal government preparing for? And why does it feel it needs an army of brainwashed youth, millions of guns, thousands of armored fighting vehicles and literally billions of rounds of ammunition, just to provide relief to the American people during a natural disaster? Any historian will tell you it sounds more like the arming of the Hitler Youth than an army of first responders fighting forest fires and hurricanes.
It Makes Sense Blog October 7, 2012. Vicksburg. The federal government calls them FEMA Corps. But they conjure up memories of the Hitler Youth of 1930’s Germany. Regardless of their name, the Dept of Homeland Security has just graduated its first class of 231 Homeland Youth. Kids, aged 18-24 and recruited from the President’s AmeriCorp volunteers, they represent the first wave of DHS’s youth corps, designed specifically to create a full time, paid, standing army of FEMA Youth across the country.
On September 13, 2012, the Department of Homeland Security graduated its first class of FEMA Corps first-responders. While the idea of having a volunteer force of tens of thousands of volunteers scattered across the country to aid in times of natural disasters sounds great, the details and timing of this new government army is somewhat curious, if not disturbing.
The first problem one finds with this ‘new army’ is the fact that they are mere children. Yes, 18 is generally the legal age a person can sign a contract, join the military or be tried as an adult. But ask any parent – an 18, 20 or even a 24 year-old is still a naïve, readily-influenced kid.
The second problem with this announcement and program is its timing. Over the past two years, President Obama has signed a number of Executive Orders suspending all civil and Constitutional rights and turning over management of an America under Martial Law to FEMA. Also in that time, domestic federal agencies under DHS, including FEMA, have ordered billions of rounds of ammunition as well as the corresponding firearms. Admittedly, these new weapons and ammunition aren’t to be used in some far-off war or to fight forest fires in California, but right here on the streets of America.
Individuals around the US have begun reporting the site of strange, new, heavily-armed FEMA fighting vehicles. What would a disaster relief agency like FEMA need with 2,500 brand new GLS armored fighting vehicles? According to the agency’s own mandate, as well as President Obama’s recent Executive Order, the answer is ‘population control’ during a time of Martial Law.
One set of images made available by Rense.com shows trailer after trailer carrying these new DHS and FEMA armored fighting vehicles, complete with machine gun slots. They’re labeled with the usual backward American flag and the title, ‘Homeland Security’. Below that and the DHS logo, it also reads, ‘Immigration & Customs Enforcement’. Joining those markings, the black vehicles with white lettering also display ‘POLICE/RESCUE’ on one side and ‘Special Response Team’ on the other.
FEMA Deputy Administrator Rich Serino gave the keynote address at the ‘Induction Ceremony’ for the inaugural class of FEMA Corps members. According to the DHS website, ‘Corps members assist with disaster preparedness, response, and recovery activities, providing support in areas ranging from working directly with disaster survivors to supporting disaster recovering centers to sharing valuable disaster preparedness and mitigation information with the public.’
Serino describes what the first FEMA Corps class has accomplished so far, as well as where they’ll be going next:
‘Yesterday, we welcomed 231 energetic members into the first ever FEMA Corps class. The members just finished off their first month of training with our partners at the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) and are one step closer to working in the field on disaster response and recovery. They will now head to FEMA’s Center for Domestic Preparedness to spend the next two weeks training in their FEMA position-specific roles. Once they complete both the CNCS and FEMA training, these 231 dedicated FEMA Corps members will be qualified to work in one of a variety of disaster related roles, ranging from Community Relations to Disaster Recovery Center support.’
Unlike most local disaster response teams who are volunteers, training periodically and only showing up when there’s a disaster, the FEMA Corps will be a paid, full time, standing army of government youth. FEMA Deputy Administrator Sarino goes on to explain, ‘The new members, who range in age from 18-24 years old, will contribute to a dedicated, trained, and reliable disaster workforce by working full-time for ten months on federal disaster response and recovery efforts.’
In closing his announcement of the first graduating class of FEMA Corps Youth, Sarino describes his and the agency’s vision of the future, one where ‘FEMA Corps sets the foundation for a new generation of emergency managers’.
As we detailed in the August 28 Whiteout Press article ‘History of DHS Ammunition Purchases’, federal emergency management agencies are looking more and more like a military army every day.
The federal government’s procurement website actually lists DHS’ requests for bids to supply it with ammunition and military weaponry. All of the orders listed in the above article, including the orders for hundreds of millions of rounds of ammunition, are publicly available at http://www.fbo.gov.
One look at a chart of DHS ammunition purchases over the past decade reveals a drastic spike in orders of bullets recently, totaling in the billions of rounds. Other charts available online show a similar drastic spike in the purchases of accompanying weaponry by the Department of Homeland Security.
What is the US federal government preparing for? And why does it feel it needs an army of brainwashed youth, millions of guns, thousands of armored fighting vehicles and literally billions of rounds of ammunition, just to provide relief to the American people during a natural disaster? Any historian will tell you it sounds more like the arming of the Hitler Youth than an army of first responders fighting forest fires and hurricanes.
Teen Faces Year in Jail and $500 Fine After Wearing NRA Shirt to School
Original Post: Reason
Zenon Evans
Back in April, Logan Middle School in West Virginia found itself at the center of controversy when it suspended Jared Marcum, called the police, and had the eighth grader arrested. The teen's crime? Wearing a t-shirt that had a picture of a rifle and text that said, “NRA: Protect your right."
The teenager, who has no previous criminal record, went before a judge last week. He was officially charged with obstructing an officer, which carries a potential penalty of a $500 fine and up to one year in jail. WOWKTV reports:
We obtained official court documents from both sides of this case. On one hand, he arresting officer from the Logan City Police Department, James Adkins, claims that when Jared refused to stop talking, that hindered his ability to do his job, hence, the obstruction charge. On the other side, Ben White points out that nowhere in the arresting officer's petition, does it mention Jared ever making any threats or acting in a violent manner.
"Jared didn’t do anything wrong," his lawyer said. "Officer Adkins could have done something differently," he added. The boy's stepfather, Allen Lardieiri, expressed his disbelief that the situation ever progressed this far. He said, "I don't' see how anybody would have an issue with a hunting rifle and NRA put on a t-shirt, especially when policy doesn't forbid it.”
Marcum insists that at the core of his legal trouble is a fight for constitutional rights. "What they're doing is trying to take away my rights, my freedom of speech and my second amendment,” Marcum said after being arrested. Lardieri stood by statement, reiterating that “what happened here in Logan can reverberate outside of Logan. This isn’t over and neither are our rights.”
The Logan County Board of Education's dress code can be found here. Although the school system forbids “clothing and accessories that display profanity, violence, discriminatory messages or sexually suggestive phrases” as well as advertisements for any alcohol, tobacco, or drug product,” there is no mention of firearms of any kind or the NRA.
Zenon Evans
Back in April, Logan Middle School in West Virginia found itself at the center of controversy when it suspended Jared Marcum, called the police, and had the eighth grader arrested. The teen's crime? Wearing a t-shirt that had a picture of a rifle and text that said, “NRA: Protect your right."
The teenager, who has no previous criminal record, went before a judge last week. He was officially charged with obstructing an officer, which carries a potential penalty of a $500 fine and up to one year in jail. WOWKTV reports:
We obtained official court documents from both sides of this case. On one hand, he arresting officer from the Logan City Police Department, James Adkins, claims that when Jared refused to stop talking, that hindered his ability to do his job, hence, the obstruction charge. On the other side, Ben White points out that nowhere in the arresting officer's petition, does it mention Jared ever making any threats or acting in a violent manner.
"Jared didn’t do anything wrong," his lawyer said. "Officer Adkins could have done something differently," he added. The boy's stepfather, Allen Lardieiri, expressed his disbelief that the situation ever progressed this far. He said, "I don't' see how anybody would have an issue with a hunting rifle and NRA put on a t-shirt, especially when policy doesn't forbid it.”
Marcum insists that at the core of his legal trouble is a fight for constitutional rights. "What they're doing is trying to take away my rights, my freedom of speech and my second amendment,” Marcum said after being arrested. Lardieri stood by statement, reiterating that “what happened here in Logan can reverberate outside of Logan. This isn’t over and neither are our rights.”
The Logan County Board of Education's dress code can be found here. Although the school system forbids “clothing and accessories that display profanity, violence, discriminatory messages or sexually suggestive phrases” as well as advertisements for any alcohol, tobacco, or drug product,” there is no mention of firearms of any kind or the NRA.
Thursday, May 23, 2013
Obama administration targets Fox News reporter in 'chilling' echo of AP probe
Original Post: CS Monitor
By Husna Haq
Associated Press reporters are not alone. One week after news broke that the Justice Department secretly obtained phone records from AP, more news has emerged about the Obama administration’s campaign to silence leaks.
Gary Pruitt, CEO of the Associated press, told CBS's "Face the Nation" this weekend that the Justice Department’s investigation is already silencing AP sources. This time, it’s new details about a 2010 Justice Department investigation into a Fox News correspondent who reported government secrets on North Korea. The twist is that in the Fox News case, the government is suggesting that the reporter broke the law and criminal charges could result.
The news points to how the Obama administration is going to unprecedented lengths to defend secrets – prosecuting more government leakers under the 1917 Espionage Act than all prior administrations combined.
Anecdotal evidence suggests the crackdown is having an effect, with AP saying some of its sources are falling silent. But that success could come at the expense of the newsgathering and investigative-reporting process that the Founding Fathers saw as a crucial check on federal power.
The Fox News case, in particular, suggests the “criminalization of investigative journalism,” writes Glenn Greenwald in The Guardian, a British newspaper.
According to a Washington Post report Sunday, Fox News chief Washington correspondent James Rosen reported in June 2009 on a CIA analysis that suggested North Korea may respond to UN sanctions with more nuclear tests. The story was published online the same day that a confidential report on the matter was released to select officials in the intelligence community, including a State Department security adviser, Stephen Jin-Woo Kim.
Detecting a connection, FBI investigators built a case alleging Mr. Kim leaked information to Mr. Rosen. To do so, they used every tool in their arsenal: analyzing security badge access records to track Rosen’s comings and goings from the State Department, tracing the timing of his calls to Kim, even subpoenaing his personal e-mails. Ultimately, FBI agents concluded Kim did, in fact, leak information to Rosen using a complex, if clumsy, system of communication including aliases and coded signals.
In his report, FBI investigator Reginald Reyes said evidence suggested Rosen had broken the law, “at the very least, either as an aider, abettor and/or co-conspirator.”
While details on the case are forthcoming, it is not a crime for journalists to report classified information, except in rare circumstances. Furthermore, government seizure of media records is tightly circumscribed under the government’s Code of Federal Regulations.
The AP and Fox News cases renew concerns about the potential stifling effect government investigations have on reporters and their sources.
“Search warrants like these have a severe chilling effect on the free flow of important information to the public,” said First Amendment lawyer Charles Tobin in the Washington Post report. “That’s a very dangerous road to go down.”
Jane Mayer of The New Yorker goes further: “It's a huge impediment to reporting, and so chilling isn't quite strong enough, it's more like freezing the whole process into a standstill,” she told the New Republic.
As a case in point, Gary Pruitt, CEO of the AP, told CBS’s "Face the Nation" this weekend that the Justice Department’s investigation is already silencing AP sources.
“Already, officials that would normally talk to us and people we talk to in the normal course of news gathering are already saying to us that they're a little reluctant to talk to us,” he said. “They fear that they – they will be monitored by the government.”
Perhaps the most serious implication, however, is that the investigations threaten to jeopardize the very practice of investigative journalism, already endangered by budget cuts and the 24/7 news cycle.
“Under US law, it is not illegal to publish classified information,” writes The Guardian's Mr. Greenwald. “That fact, along with the First Amendment's guarantee of press freedoms, is what has prevented the US government from ever prosecuting journalists for reporting on what the US government does in secret. This newfound theory of the Obama DOJ – that a journalist can be guilty of crimes for 'soliciting' the disclosure of classified information – is a means for circumventing those safeguards and criminalizing the act of investigative journalism itself.”
By Husna Haq
Associated Press reporters are not alone. One week after news broke that the Justice Department secretly obtained phone records from AP, more news has emerged about the Obama administration’s campaign to silence leaks.
Gary Pruitt, CEO of the Associated press, told CBS's "Face the Nation" this weekend that the Justice Department’s investigation is already silencing AP sources. This time, it’s new details about a 2010 Justice Department investigation into a Fox News correspondent who reported government secrets on North Korea. The twist is that in the Fox News case, the government is suggesting that the reporter broke the law and criminal charges could result.
The news points to how the Obama administration is going to unprecedented lengths to defend secrets – prosecuting more government leakers under the 1917 Espionage Act than all prior administrations combined.
Anecdotal evidence suggests the crackdown is having an effect, with AP saying some of its sources are falling silent. But that success could come at the expense of the newsgathering and investigative-reporting process that the Founding Fathers saw as a crucial check on federal power.
The Fox News case, in particular, suggests the “criminalization of investigative journalism,” writes Glenn Greenwald in The Guardian, a British newspaper.
According to a Washington Post report Sunday, Fox News chief Washington correspondent James Rosen reported in June 2009 on a CIA analysis that suggested North Korea may respond to UN sanctions with more nuclear tests. The story was published online the same day that a confidential report on the matter was released to select officials in the intelligence community, including a State Department security adviser, Stephen Jin-Woo Kim.
Detecting a connection, FBI investigators built a case alleging Mr. Kim leaked information to Mr. Rosen. To do so, they used every tool in their arsenal: analyzing security badge access records to track Rosen’s comings and goings from the State Department, tracing the timing of his calls to Kim, even subpoenaing his personal e-mails. Ultimately, FBI agents concluded Kim did, in fact, leak information to Rosen using a complex, if clumsy, system of communication including aliases and coded signals.
In his report, FBI investigator Reginald Reyes said evidence suggested Rosen had broken the law, “at the very least, either as an aider, abettor and/or co-conspirator.”
While details on the case are forthcoming, it is not a crime for journalists to report classified information, except in rare circumstances. Furthermore, government seizure of media records is tightly circumscribed under the government’s Code of Federal Regulations.
The AP and Fox News cases renew concerns about the potential stifling effect government investigations have on reporters and their sources.
“Search warrants like these have a severe chilling effect on the free flow of important information to the public,” said First Amendment lawyer Charles Tobin in the Washington Post report. “That’s a very dangerous road to go down.”
Jane Mayer of The New Yorker goes further: “It's a huge impediment to reporting, and so chilling isn't quite strong enough, it's more like freezing the whole process into a standstill,” she told the New Republic.
As a case in point, Gary Pruitt, CEO of the AP, told CBS’s "Face the Nation" this weekend that the Justice Department’s investigation is already silencing AP sources.
“Already, officials that would normally talk to us and people we talk to in the normal course of news gathering are already saying to us that they're a little reluctant to talk to us,” he said. “They fear that they – they will be monitored by the government.”
Perhaps the most serious implication, however, is that the investigations threaten to jeopardize the very practice of investigative journalism, already endangered by budget cuts and the 24/7 news cycle.
“Under US law, it is not illegal to publish classified information,” writes The Guardian's Mr. Greenwald. “That fact, along with the First Amendment's guarantee of press freedoms, is what has prevented the US government from ever prosecuting journalists for reporting on what the US government does in secret. This newfound theory of the Obama DOJ – that a journalist can be guilty of crimes for 'soliciting' the disclosure of classified information – is a means for circumventing those safeguards and criminalizing the act of investigative journalism itself.”
IRS asked pro-life group about 'the content of their prayers'
Original Post:Washington Examiner
During a House Ways and Means Committee hearing today, Rep. Aaron Schock, R-Ill., grilled outgoing IRS commissioner Steven Miller about the IRS targeting a pro-life group in Iowa.
“Their question, specifically asked from the IRS to the Coalition for Life of Iowa: ‘Please detail the content of the members of your organization’s prayers,’" Schock declared.
“Would that be an inappropriate question to a 501 c3 applicant?” asked Schock. “The content of one’s prayers?”
“It pains me to say I can’t speak to that one either,” Miller replied.
After Schock pressed him further, Miller explained that although he couldn't comment on the specific case, it would "surprise him" if that question was asked.
The report comes from the Thomas More Society, a national public interest law firm for religious liberty.
Sign Up for the Politics Digest newsletter! From their report:
Coalition for Life of Iowa found itself in the IRS’s crosshairs when the group applied for tax exempt status in October 2008. Nearly ten months of interrogation about the group’s opposition to Planned Parenthood included a demand by a Ms. Richards from the IRS’ Cincinnati office unlawfully insisted that all board members sign a sworn declaration promising not to picket/protest Planned Parenthood. Further questioning by the IRS requested detailed information about the content of the group’s prayer meetings, educational seminars, and signs their members hold outside Planned Parenthood.
During a House Ways and Means Committee hearing today, Rep. Aaron Schock, R-Ill., grilled outgoing IRS commissioner Steven Miller about the IRS targeting a pro-life group in Iowa.
“Their question, specifically asked from the IRS to the Coalition for Life of Iowa: ‘Please detail the content of the members of your organization’s prayers,’" Schock declared.
“Would that be an inappropriate question to a 501 c3 applicant?” asked Schock. “The content of one’s prayers?”
“It pains me to say I can’t speak to that one either,” Miller replied.
After Schock pressed him further, Miller explained that although he couldn't comment on the specific case, it would "surprise him" if that question was asked.
The report comes from the Thomas More Society, a national public interest law firm for religious liberty.
Sign Up for the Politics Digest newsletter! From their report:
Coalition for Life of Iowa found itself in the IRS’s crosshairs when the group applied for tax exempt status in October 2008. Nearly ten months of interrogation about the group’s opposition to Planned Parenthood included a demand by a Ms. Richards from the IRS’ Cincinnati office unlawfully insisted that all board members sign a sworn declaration promising not to picket/protest Planned Parenthood. Further questioning by the IRS requested detailed information about the content of the group’s prayer meetings, educational seminars, and signs their members hold outside Planned Parenthood.
MPS, Wisconsin rank high in per-pupil spending
Original Post:JS Online
By Erin Richards
Among the country's largest metropolitan districts, Milwaukee Public Schools maintained its status as fourth-highest in per-pupil spending in 2011, while Wisconsin also ranked in the top third of states that spent the most per student that year.
And while per-pupil spending in MPS and in Wisconsin increased between 2010 and 2011, average per-pupil spending nationwide dropped — marking the first decrease in per-student public education spending since 1977, according to a new report from the U.S. Census Bureau.
The national data lags behind the current environment in Wisconsin, where education spending was cut dramatically as part of Gov. Scott Walker's 2011-'13 budget. The effect of those cuts — and whether that brings Wisconsin in line with what other states have done — won't be seen until this time next year, when the Census Bureau releases comparisons for student spending in the 2012 fiscal year.
Essentially, the latest report shows that most other states were cutting education spending before Wisconsin started doing the same.
"From what I can gather here, there was all this uproar after Governor Walker's first budget and all the school cuts, and these data seem to show that in a sense, we were a bit late to the party," Dale Knapp, research director for the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance, a nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization, said Tuesday.
Backers of public education may argue in favor of Wisconsin holding out on cutting spending on students.
The new figures released Tuesday show MPS spent $14,244 per student in 2011, up from $14,038 in 2010, when the district was also ranked fourth-highest in per-pupil spending among the nation's 100 largest districts by enrollment.
Wisconsin spent $11,774 per student on average in 2011, up 3.6% from $11,364 in 2010, according to the report.
On average nationwide, the 50 states and the District of Columbia spent $10,560 per student in 2011, down half a percent from $10,615 per pupil in the 2009-'10 school year.
The current spending figures place Wisconsin 16th out of 50 states and the District of Columbia in terms of per-pupil spending, up from the previous year's rank of 18th nationwide.
The data used in the report, Public Education Finances: 2011, came from a census of all 15,345 school districts in the country, according to the report.
The report reflects the last year of former Gov. Jim Doyle's state budget, where districts' revenue limit authority — or the total amount districts could boost property taxes and state aid per student — was limited to an increase of $200 per pupil.
Under Walker's 2011-'13 budget, education spending was cut by $834 million. To restrict property taxes from replacing the drop in school aid, the governor's budget reduced districts' revenue limit authority by 5.5%, meaning a drop of about $550 in the per-pupil revenue limit.
MPS officials have taken issue with the census figures, which show a more inflated picture of per-pupil spending because they include many federal dollars that may not be going toward the district's classroom operations.
For example, MPS officials said Tuesday that they believe the census figures include federal dollars that went toward providing services to low-income students in nonpublic schools, such as the private schools participating in the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program, or voucher program.
"This raises questions about whether the number can be used to accurately reflect how much money MPS spends on its own students," MPS spokesman Tony Tagliavia said in a statement.
"In addition, because of the voucher program, we are likely providing services to more nonpublic students than a typical large urban district," he added.
Tagliavia also called the 2010-'11 data "significantly outdated" and not relevant to any current conversations about school funding. He also noted the district made significant changes to its budget after the reduction in state funding.
The census report notes that spending on adult education in Wisconsin cannot be separated in the figures. Other states have other caveats.
MPS prefers to look at per-pupil spending in terms of only state aid and property taxes for each pupil — leaving out the federal dollars. Tagliavia noted that for 2012-'13, that was $6,442 per student in general aid and $3,473 per student in property taxes, adding up to a combined $9,915 per pupil.
Knapp, from the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance, said the census figures are still the best national figures available to compare school systems to one another.
And he said the 2012 numbers will be even more interesting.
"We know Wisconsin had a big cut then, so we'll be able to see that compared to what other states were doing in 2012," he said. "Were other states cutting some more, or were they leveling off?"
By Erin Richards
Among the country's largest metropolitan districts, Milwaukee Public Schools maintained its status as fourth-highest in per-pupil spending in 2011, while Wisconsin also ranked in the top third of states that spent the most per student that year.
And while per-pupil spending in MPS and in Wisconsin increased between 2010 and 2011, average per-pupil spending nationwide dropped — marking the first decrease in per-student public education spending since 1977, according to a new report from the U.S. Census Bureau.
The national data lags behind the current environment in Wisconsin, where education spending was cut dramatically as part of Gov. Scott Walker's 2011-'13 budget. The effect of those cuts — and whether that brings Wisconsin in line with what other states have done — won't be seen until this time next year, when the Census Bureau releases comparisons for student spending in the 2012 fiscal year.
Essentially, the latest report shows that most other states were cutting education spending before Wisconsin started doing the same.
"From what I can gather here, there was all this uproar after Governor Walker's first budget and all the school cuts, and these data seem to show that in a sense, we were a bit late to the party," Dale Knapp, research director for the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance, a nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization, said Tuesday.
Backers of public education may argue in favor of Wisconsin holding out on cutting spending on students.
The new figures released Tuesday show MPS spent $14,244 per student in 2011, up from $14,038 in 2010, when the district was also ranked fourth-highest in per-pupil spending among the nation's 100 largest districts by enrollment.
Wisconsin spent $11,774 per student on average in 2011, up 3.6% from $11,364 in 2010, according to the report.
On average nationwide, the 50 states and the District of Columbia spent $10,560 per student in 2011, down half a percent from $10,615 per pupil in the 2009-'10 school year.
The current spending figures place Wisconsin 16th out of 50 states and the District of Columbia in terms of per-pupil spending, up from the previous year's rank of 18th nationwide.
The data used in the report, Public Education Finances: 2011, came from a census of all 15,345 school districts in the country, according to the report.
The report reflects the last year of former Gov. Jim Doyle's state budget, where districts' revenue limit authority — or the total amount districts could boost property taxes and state aid per student — was limited to an increase of $200 per pupil.
Under Walker's 2011-'13 budget, education spending was cut by $834 million. To restrict property taxes from replacing the drop in school aid, the governor's budget reduced districts' revenue limit authority by 5.5%, meaning a drop of about $550 in the per-pupil revenue limit.
MPS officials have taken issue with the census figures, which show a more inflated picture of per-pupil spending because they include many federal dollars that may not be going toward the district's classroom operations.
For example, MPS officials said Tuesday that they believe the census figures include federal dollars that went toward providing services to low-income students in nonpublic schools, such as the private schools participating in the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program, or voucher program.
"This raises questions about whether the number can be used to accurately reflect how much money MPS spends on its own students," MPS spokesman Tony Tagliavia said in a statement.
"In addition, because of the voucher program, we are likely providing services to more nonpublic students than a typical large urban district," he added.
Tagliavia also called the 2010-'11 data "significantly outdated" and not relevant to any current conversations about school funding. He also noted the district made significant changes to its budget after the reduction in state funding.
The census report notes that spending on adult education in Wisconsin cannot be separated in the figures. Other states have other caveats.
MPS prefers to look at per-pupil spending in terms of only state aid and property taxes for each pupil — leaving out the federal dollars. Tagliavia noted that for 2012-'13, that was $6,442 per student in general aid and $3,473 per student in property taxes, adding up to a combined $9,915 per pupil.
Knapp, from the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance, said the census figures are still the best national figures available to compare school systems to one another.
And he said the 2012 numbers will be even more interesting.
"We know Wisconsin had a big cut then, so we'll be able to see that compared to what other states were doing in 2012," he said. "Were other states cutting some more, or were they leveling off?"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)