By Joe TrotterThankfully, the vast majority of investors care about shareholder value. As this proxy season continues to demonstrate, shareholders overwhelmingly agree that publishing additional disclosure information, and suffering through public spectacles from media-hungry activists trying to force companies to support their political views, just isn’t necessary.
By Kimberly A. Strassel…Bob Bauer, general counsel for the campaign (and later general counsel for the White House), on the same day wrote to the criminal division of the Justice Department, demanding an investigation into AIP, “its officers and directors,” and its “anonymous donors.” Mr. Bauer claimed that the nonprofit, as a 501(c)(4), was committing a “knowing and willful violation” of election law, and wanted “action to enforce against criminal violations.”AIP gave Justice a full explanation as to why it was not in violation. It said that it operated exactly as liberal groups like Naral Pro-Choice did. It noted that it had disclosed its donor, Texas businessman Harold Simmons. Mr. Bauer’s response was a second letter to Justice calling for the prosecution of Mr. Simmons. He sent a third letter on Sept. 8, again smearing the “sham” AIP’s “illegal electoral purpose.”Also on Sept. 8, Mr. Bauer complained to the Federal Election Commission about AIP and Mr. Simmons. He demanded that AIP turn over certain tax documents to his campaign (his right under IRS law), then sent a letter to AIP further hounding it for confidential information (to which he had no legal right).The Bauer onslaught was a big part of a new liberal strategy to thwart the rise of conservative groups.
By David Nather and Rachael Bade“Why weren’t more people fired?” Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) demanded at a hearing Tuesday on the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups, channeling the frustration of his colleagues.Turns out it’s not so easy.
By JOHN D. MCKINNON“My understanding is the new acting IRS commissioner asked for Ms. Lerner’s resignation, and she refused to resign,” said Sen. Charles Grassley (R., Iowa) in a statement. “She was then put on administrative leave instead.…She shouldn’t be in limbo indefinitely on the taxpayers’ dime.”
By Michael BeckelFederal law, in most cases, only permits political committees authorized by a candidate to use that candidate’s name — which super PACs, by definition, are not.
By Ellen P. AprillSome media reports, however, imply that the IRS cannot and should not ask any questions of applicants for exemption, that any inquiry invades privacy and violates the First Amendment. That implication is wrong. An organization that seeks an IRS acknowledgment of its exempt status subjects itself to scrutiny — scrutiny designed to ensure that the group in fact qualifies for the benefit of tax exemption.
Disclosure
EditorialMr. McConnell writes that the IRS scandal shows that political donors must be protected from possible “intimidation” by the government, that Washington is out to “target people because of their beliefs.” This is an awfully dark view of national government under any administration. Such practices are common in other countries but not in the United States. The IRS failure was an exception, and a bad one, but not the rule.
By THOMAS KAPLANAbout 140 major political donors, including more than 50 fund-raisers for President Obama, have signed a letter supporting public financing in New York — an idea that appears to have no support among the Republicans who share control of the State Senate.
By Rosalind S. HeldermanCuccinelli’s office had previously declined to confirm such a probe, but he acknowledged it after Herring released information about the review in response to Freedom of Information Act requests.The state probe is separate from an inquiry by the FBI into whether McDonnell (R) might have violated federal law by promoting a dietary supplement manufacturer in exchange for gifts from its chief executive.