Last night, the US House adopted an amendment authored by Rep. Bruce Braley (IA-01) that requires the federal government to devote at least $10 million to helping states enforce traffic laws that punish reckless drivers for illegally passing stopped school buses.  The amendment, "Kadyn's Amendment", was named in honor of Northwood, IA, resident Kadyn Halverson, who was killed in May 2011 after a pickup truck struck her while she was boarding her school bus.  More information can be found in the release below.

For YouTube video of Rep. Braley discussing the measure during House debate last night, visit this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?

For audio of Rep. Braley discussing the measure during his weekly press conference call today, visit this link: http://www.mydigitalmanager.

(NOTE: Original participants in today's press conference call might have noticed an echo during the call interfering with audio quality.  The audio recording linked to above does not have an echo in it - or has a markedly less pronounced echo - and should help correct any issues you might have had with the call's audio quality.)

Nebraska City, Neb. - America's forestland is a prized natural resource, and anyone can help plant much-needed trees in these vital areas by joining the Arbor Day Foundation.

Through the Replanting Our National Forests campaign, the Arbor Day Foundation will honor each new member who joins the Foundation in July by planting 10 trees in forests that have been devastated by wildfi res, insects and disease.

The cost for joining the Arbor Day Foundation is a $10 donation.

America's national forests face enormous challenges, including unprecedented wildfires that have left a backlog of nearly one million acres in need of replanting. The Arbor Day Foundation has worked with the United States Forest Service for more than 20 years to plant trees in forests in need.

Our national forests need protection because they provide habitat for wildlife, keep the air clean and help ensure safe drinking water for more than 180 million Americans.

"Keeping our forests healthy is vital to the health of people and the entire planet," said John Rosenow, founder and chief executive of the Arbor Day Foundation. "By planting trees in our national forests, we will preserve precious natural resources and the benefits they provide for generations to come."

To join the Arbor Day Foundation and help plant trees in our national forests, send a $10 membership contribution to Replanting Our National Forests, Arbor Day Foundation, 100 Arbor Ave., Nebraska City, NE 68410, or visit arborday.org/july.

###

After the resignation of Rev. Keith Ratliff as the President of the Iowa/Nebraska Conference of the NAACP, which followed the National Board's decision to support gay marriage as a civil right, I have been asked by several members of the media if I intend to stay on as Education Chair for the Iowa/Nebraska Conference of the NAACP.

I do not mean to diminish the issue, but over the past few years the advocates of marriage equality and the opponents of same-sex marriage have, through their actions, asserted this is the only issue that matters.

Period.

As Education Chair of the Iowa/Nebraska conference of the NAACP and, as a former Director of the Des Moines School Board, I have witnessed Iowa's academic crisis, especially the urban academic crisis, worsen to a near state of emergency.  Yet, most Iowans remain ignorant of the important data and proposed solutions to these solvable problems while the body politic and the media refuse to report, and at times, even acknowledge the severity of this crisis.

For example, Labor Day weekend 2010, the Culver Administration made available devastating findings naming every single school district , every single high school, and every single middle school except two, in Iowa's ten largest cities as "Officially Failing."

The Culver administration's tradition was to make available to the public annual academic updates over the holiday weekend when Labor Day celebrations and the opening of the Iowa and Iowa State football seasons dominated the media cycle.

This annual attempt to bury the decline in urban academic achievement was assisted by major media and legislators who, after being provided the data by me personally, still refused to report the findings.
Instead of sharing with Iowans tax dollar financed conclusions, major media rationalized why the numbers meant very little and key legislators simply denied or denounced the findings.

Meanwhile the number of stories on gay marriage in Iowa's leading publications, month after month, has far exceeded coverage of Iowa's most populated areas' failing education performances.
Issues like poverty, justice, and welfare dependency have been equally ignored by both media and the body politic in our state. These issues are inseparable from the caliber of education our students receive, especially in Iowa and Nebraska's urban districts.

As a long time education advocate I cannot walk away from the opportunity to continue making a difference in the lives of both the students in the Iowa and Nebraska education systems and the communities impacted by education.

Effective education especially improves an urban center's economy and reduces societal ills like poverty, incarceration rates, addiction and social welfare dependency. Poor, unaccountable education in urban areas has the opposite impact.

Politicians keep talking about creating jobs - nothing improves job security more than providing relevant education to this generation. Unfortunately many job applicants struggle with passing drug screens and filling out applications legibly.
Health and Human Services, Education and Justice - all areas ballooning in cost to taxpayers primarily due to the dismal education students receive - commands approximately 90% of Iowa's annual general fund appropriations.

Consideration of, discussion about, and any solutions to this vicious circle of dependency command significantly less attention and focus from media, lobbyists and politicians than does marriage equality versus same-sex marriage.

Part of the reason I was asked to serve as Education Chair of the Iowa/Nebraska Conference of the NAACP is my statewide advocacy for all children, including our state's white students, during my tenure as President of the State of Black Iowa Initiative.

Through our landmark statewide education hearings we made many discoveries. It surprised no one when we documented the crisis amongst Iowa's Black students.  The front cover of the 2001 State of Black Iowa Report reads:

A State of Emergency
On October 29, 2001, Dr. Eric Witherspoon, Superintendent of the Des Moines Independent Community School District, gave opening remarks at the State of Black Iowa Initiative's Des Moines hearing addressing Iowa's Black Academic Crisis. Soon after his presentation started, emotions were running high. An already grim picture of Black Iowa got progressively worse. Especially when he announced 81% of the Black students enrolled in the Des Moines School District live in poverty.
A floor, not a ceiling, the 81% figure only includes those students willing to claim their poverty status - not all the poor Black students in the district. And if it's this bad for Des Moines, it's worse in Davenport and Waterloo - Black communities much poorer than Des Moines' Black community. It also means the poverty level for children under five is approaching 90% in our state's largest Black community.

Our education hearings produced a number of things from national media coverage to a White House collaboration. It also, due to its thoroughness, unearthed an emerging white academic crisis that the powerful in this state were loathe to acknowledge.

While our education advocacy in general was enthusiastically embraced our pronouncement that the emerging white academic crisis rose to the level of a Civil Rights concern was all but ignored even when I took the data to federal education officials, state education and political leaders, and major media.

Then, the first real breakthrough on this issue took place.  Carol Hunter, Editor of the Des Moines Register's Editorial Board, asked me in the spring of 2006 to write a piece on the black academic crisis. I agreed to do so if she would also publish our work on the white academic crisis in this state.

Soon after she published my piece on the black academic crisis. Then, on December 28, 2006, she published the reprinted below piece on Iowa's white academic crisis.

The data driven commentary was dismissed by politicians, business leaders and educators as were subsequent warnings until my last year on the Des Moines School board when state reports confirmed the largest group in crisis were not kids on free and reduced lunch but affluent and middle class white kids. Despite the fact children of means were a super minority in our district - approximately a third - they comprised more than 50% of the district's dropouts.

I remember standing across from Central Campus on the lawn of WHO-TV saying to the stunned reporter, "Our dropouts look like you, not me."  While I did not take comfort in these findings I was pleased that after nearly a decade of sounding the alarm notice was finally being taken.

Then on November 1, 2011, a decade after I brought the issue to light, Jason Glass, the Director of the Iowa Department of Education, issued a solemn and ominous call to action stating, "White students, who make up about 80 percent of Iowa's student population, have fallen behind their white peers nationally. This problem persists across the assessed grade levels and content areas."

A decade of denial has endangered the future prosperity of our state. The untreated sickness not only has spread amongst our urban districts where high poverty and academic failure thrives, we find 68% of the students in Washington County on free and reduced lunch and less than 20% of our state's students college ready.

I am not going to abandon years of advocacy on the most critical issue facing our state - Education - just because advocates on all sides of the gay marriage issue have concluded no other concerns matter. They may not care about our kids, families, economy or the future of Iowa - I do.  I am going to continue this education advocacy as outlined in the white paper entitled "Restoring Our World Class Education Plan", linked here as a PDF.

Systemic solutions are critical, especially in light of the Nancy Sebring (former Des Moines School District Superintendent) revelations (not the sex), which lay bare the vulnerabilities of school boards and education systems to manipulations and the abuse of power both in Iowa and Nebraska.

Sebring's selection as the Omaha School District's Superintendent, in the face of her very public record of academic failure as superintendent in Des Moines, proves just how important continuing in this unique chairperson role is.

Recently my focus has been on improving what families themselves can do to improve their children's education accountability. It is not all the system's fault.  Parents must ultimately reclaim their authority. This void of parental participation contributes greatly to the poor education and basic preparedness of Iowa and Nebraska's children.

Going forward, the pressure on both the state departments of education, and our school district board of directors, must intensify.
Our children deserve no less, and will receive my best.

----
The commentary below orginally appeared in the Des Moines Register on December 28, 2006

Too many kids failing in school, whites included

Iowa View

There's been a welcome focus recently on the so-called achievement gap between this community's white students and students of color, who face severe academic challenges.

But so do white kids.

The federal No Child Left Behind law forced the disaggregation of academic data. The goal: to identify academic failure previously hidden in aggregated data. Now, for the first time in our nation's history, achievement data are readily available by racial and socioeconomic breakdowns.

Unfortunately, the law did not anticipate the manipulation of data, particularly relating to white kids. As a result, countless white kids in academic crisis are hidden, if not erased, by the education bureaucracy.

For example, the Des Moines school district reported 97.9 percent of its juniors (1,624 out of 1,659) in 2004-05 took the Iowa Test of Education Development. The school board praised then-Superintendent Eric Witherspoon's administration. The feds claimed victory for raising participation levels of kids tested. What has never been addressed is the fact that 2,624 sophomores were served by the district less than 12 months earlier. Of the 1,000 unaccounted-for students, nearly 70 percent of them were white.

In 2000-01, the Des Moines district served 2,301 white kids as freshmen, but 357, or 15.5 percent of them, never made it to a traditional four-year high school, instead attending night school or alternative-education programs. In 2000-01, 936 black, Latino, Asian and Indian kids were served as freshmen, with 108, or 11.5 percent, never reaching a traditional four-year school. Why is a higher percentage of white kids hidden from our traditional high schools than children of color?

The problem for white kids begins well before high school. According to the U.S. Department of Education's National Center for Education Statistics, only 37 percent of Iowa 's white kids by fourth grade in 2003-04 were proficient in reading and only 39 percent were proficient in math. That's a high point .

White kids of all socioeconomic classes from fifth grade through eighth grade experience massive academic declines. Internal Des Moines district tests show 20- to 40-point declines in reading, math or science among our non-poor white population from fifth through eighth grade. Schools like McCombs, Weeks and Hiatt see academic failure rates for white kids approaching 80 percent or more in reading, math or science.

By high school, failure has reached a critical mass. In 2000-01, 597 students, or 25.9 percent of the white freshmen served, failed to earn a single credit. The district served 2,301 white kids as freshman that year, but only 1,442, or 62.7 percent, of white students made it to the junior class.

The Des Moines school board reported 84 percent of the white freshmen from 2000-01 graduated in 2003-04. Yet the data actually show only 1,101, or 47.8 percent, of white students graduated in 2003-04. Our traditional high schools served 1,944 white freshmen in 2000-01, but only 1,068, or 54.9 percent, graduated in 2003-04.
At East, which served 450 white freshmen in 2000-01, 216 graduated, or 48 percent. At Hoover , there were 276 white freshmen and 170 graduates, or 61.6 percent. At Lincoln, 659 freshmen and 351 graduates, or 53.3 percent. At North, 235 freshmen and 108 graduates, or 46 percent. And at Roosevelt, 324 freshmen and 223 graduates, or 68.8 percent.

Even among our college-bound white students, recent reports document less than a third are prepared to perform postsecondary work at a competent level.

One of the tragic consequences of white supremacy is that it sacrifices many whites, especially children, to maintain the myth of superiority. Iowa was settled, after the Black Hawk purchase, by poor whites fleeing the economic consequences of slavery.

The late Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. died fighting for white workers in Memphis .
Racism is wrong. The sacrifice of white children to service a bureaucracy is wrong, too. All our children, including the white ones, deserve a voice and opportunity.

JONATHAN NARCISSE is president of the State of Black Iowa Initiative .

# # #

"A Salute to Our Veterans and Service Members Parade" will take place Sat., June 30

(DES MOINES) - Today, Gov. Terry Branstad announced additional details regarding this Saturday's "A Salute to Our Veterans and Service Members Parade."

 

This year's celebration is a salute to all veterans and service members and correlates with the official United States Department of Defense Commemoration of the 50th Anniversary of the Vietnam War and 60th Anniversary of the Korean War.

"It is important to honor our heroes here at home," said Branstad. "As a former member of the Army, and now Commander in Chief of the Iowa National Guard, I am proud of the men and women who represent our state on the battlefields across the world and when disaster strikes here on the home front."

The parade will kick off from the State Capitol and travel down Grand Ave. to disperse at Veteran's Auditorium/Community Choice Credit Union Convention Center. The parade route map can be viewed here.

Saturday's parade will officially begin at 10 a.m. with a fly-over by the 132nd Fighter Wing down Grand Ave. City of Des Moines police vehicles and official colors are scheduled to start the parade on the ground. There is no grand marshal for the event, rather a riderless horse will lead the parade participants. A riderless horse is a traditional entry to represent fallen soldiers. The governor will walk in the parade wearing his military uniform.

Spectators are invited to watch the free parade and honor Iowans for their service. Observers can expect to see a variety of parade entries included, but not limited to:

  • Veterans and Service members
  • Various military groups, battalions, bands, and vehicles
  • Budweiser Clydesdales
  • Wells Fargo Stage Coach
  • The Iowa Veterans Home Eagle Bus
  • American Red Cross
  • Secretary of State's Honor a Veteran
  • VFW Posts
  • Raccoon River Riders Equestrian Drill Team
  • Specially wrapped trucks from DMACC and Hy-Vee

The parade developed off a similar event that Gov. Branstad held in 1991 to welcome home soldiers from the first Iraq war. The Governor's office has been working in conjunction with the Iowa Department of Veterans Affairs and Iowa National Guard to coordinate the details of the parade.

 

 

# # #
CHICAGO - June 25, 2012. Governor Pat Quinn today acted on the following bills.

 

Bill No.: HB 3443

An Act Concerning: Insurance

Exempts religious organizations and the organization's members or participants from state insurance laws under certain conditions.

Action: Signed

Effective Date: Jan. 1

 

Bill No.: HB 4520

An Act Concerning: Regulation

Extends the sunset of the Professional Counselor and Clinical Licensed Professional Counselor Act by an additional 10 years. Raises the limit on fines for discipline under the act, and makes additional technical changes.

Action: Signed

Effective: Immediately

Bill No.: SB 2876

An Act Concerning: Insurance

Adds insurance consumer protections for individuals participating in arrangements between religious organizations and the organization's members.

Action: Signed

Effective Date: Jan. 1

 

Bill No.: SB 3249

An Act Concerning: Regulation

Exempts rental car, salvage auction and manufacturing companies from the Collateral Recovery Act.

Action: Signed

Effective Date: July 1

 

Bill No.: SB 3507

An Act Concerning: Revenue

Clarifies that state unemployment benefits are taxable by Illinois.

Action: Signed

Effective Date: July 1

 

###

Senator Chuck Grassley, ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, has been investigating the government law enforcement strategy of allowing guns to "walk" across the Mexican border to drug traffickers for the past 18 months.  He and his staff have obtained several key documents through their investigation.  Links to key documents with a description of the importance of each follows here.

1.     October 27, 2009, Draft DOJ Strategy for Combating Mexican Drug Cartels: Provided the policy guidance to ATF that "merely seizing firearms through interdiction will not stop firearms trafficking to Mexico."

2.    January 8, 2010, Briefing Paper: ATF briefing paper that explicitly states ATF's strategy to "allow the transfer of firearms to continue to take place."  It is unknown how high up in ATF and/or the Justice Department this briefing paper was provided.  A source other than the Justice Department provided it long after Senator Grassley started asking questions.  The Justice Department didn't produce it until June 13, 2011.

3.    January 27, 2011, Letter from Senator Grassley to ATF (initial letter): Senator Grassley's initial letter to DOJ asking if ATF was allowing gunwalking in any case, as whistleblowers had alleged.

4.    January 31, 2011, Letter from Senator Grassley to ATF: Senator Grassley's letter making clear that ATF whistleblowers had the right to talk to Congress and not be retaliated against.

5.    February 3, 2011, ATF Special Agent Memo: A memo from an ATF agent in Dallas who had previously been a part of Group VII in Phoenix, the ATF group responsible for Operation Fast and Furious.  The agent had substantiated the claims of other whistleblowers to Senator Grassley's staff, and the agent produced the memo to document what he had told staff.  It is known that some in ATF leadership received the memo but not known who else in ATF or the Justice Department received it.  The memo should have served as a red flag to the Justice Department not to send its February 4, 2011, letter the next day.  A source other than the Justice Department provided the memo to Senator Grassley long after he started asking questions.  The Justice Department has never produced this memo, only making it available to view in camera in November 2011.

6.    February 4, 2011, Letter from DOJ to Senator Grassley: Justice Department denied that ATF walked guns.

7.    March 9, 2011, Deputy Attorney General Cole reiteration of gunwalking policy: The Deputy Attorney General email represents the Justice Department's policy change that supposedly ended gunwalking, but doesn't necessarily address the problem of ATF's failing to seize guns that agents have probable cause to interdict based on information from cooperating gun dealers providing ATF with contemporaneous notice of sales.

8.    April 13, 2011, Letter from Senator Grassley to DOJ regarding gun dealer emails: This letter quoted and attached emails from a gun dealer who expressed concerns to what ATF had been asking him to do and, because he had "some very close friends that are US Border Patrol agents in southern AZ," wanted reassurances that the guns he had been encouraged by ATF to sell wouldn't "ever end up south of the border or in the hands of bad guys."  The emails show ATF assuring the gun dealer that ATF was monitoring the suspects, and organizing a visit of the Assistant U.S. Attorney to the gun dealer's store to "put [him] at ease."  This gun dealer was not the main gun dealer in Fast and Furious, but corroborated that gun dealer's testimony.  Senator Grassley's letter attaching these emails also asked, in light of these emails, if the Justice Department stood by its February 4, 2011, denial of gunwalking allegations.

9.    April 14, 2011, floor speech from Congressional Record with gun dealer emails: Introducing the above gun dealer emails into the Congressional Record.

10.    May 2, 2011, Letter from DOJ to Senator Grassley: The Justice Department's response doubling down in its denials of ATF gunwalking.

11.    June 15, 2011, testimony to the House in front of House Oversight and Government Reform Committee: Senator Grassley's testimony of his investigation to that point.  Summarizes details about the underlying Fast and Furious case.

12.    PowerPoint presentation from June 15, 2011, House Testimony:   Detailing the amount of guns sold in Fast and Furious.

13.    December 2, 2011, DOJ Letter to Senator Grassley and Chairman Issa - Retraction of DOJ's February 4, 2011 Letter: Letter finally withdrawing the Justice Department's assertion that gunwalking had not taken place, ten months after its initial denial and seven months after its reiteration of the denial.

14.    List of documents not produced by DOJ: On June 21, 2012, White House press secretary Jay Carney stated, "[W]e have provided Congress every document that pertains to the operation itself."  This list indicates just a sampling of documents that the Justice Department has never produced but that investigators are either aware exist or have confidentially obtained copies of from whistleblowers.

A new youth-driven campaign aims to end bullying where it begins: with kids and the choices they make.

"I Choose" (www.WhatDoYouChoose.org), available free to schools and communities, asks children and teens to adopt and embrace one of five words representing powerful social concepts: friendship, kindness, respect, compassion, love. In teacher-guided discussions, they analyze the meaning of their word and then strive to use it in daily interactions. When confronted with a choice involving peer relationships, they're asked to choose their word to put into action.

A Lance Armstrong "Livestrong"-style bracelet imprinted with "I choose (their word)" serves as both a reminder and a message to others.

"'I Choose' was developed with the help of the youth community at Yoursphere.com (kids-only social networking site). We asked who they thought could end bullying and 98 percent of respondents said 'kids can,' " says Mary Kay Hoal, the website's founder and president. "When we asked about the choices they thought would be effective in helping them end bullying, they chose these five."

The education initiative is the first for Yoursphere's non-profit arm, The Yoursphere Media Foundation and Coalition for Internet Safety Education and Reform (FCISER).

"Bullying is a global issue and cyber-bullying is at an all-time high," says Hoal, an Internet safety expert. "Unfortunately, a lack of funding and awareness has left many schools and communities without a solid bullying education program."

School and community representatives can apply for a free Anti-Bullying Challenge Starter Kit at WhatDoYouChoose.org. They'll receive an information packet, poster ("Bullying is a choice") and the "I Choose" bracelets.

"After the initial implementation of the challenge, we tell teachers and youth group leaders to periodically follow up with their students to analyze the impact that the program is having in their life at school and at home", Hoal says. "Have the students noticed a shift in the school or classroom culture? Did they stand up for someone they normally wouldn't have? This follow-through can be very empowering because it not only reinforces the fact that their choices matter, but it proves to the students that they can have a real impact."

The need is made painfully clear at the whatdoyouchoose website, where students can share stories and videos about their own experiences with bullying.

Maddie, 15, remembers bullies starting to leave nasty notes in her locker and binder when she was in seventh grade. They called her "fat,""ugly,""worthless." It got worse the following year, she writes.

"I started to believe them. ... So I stopped eating, not completely but to the point where I would eat so little a day, I was very very light-headed and sick by the end of the school day. ...I started wearing more makeup than I already was wearing and I was just a mess," she writes.

"To try to forget about the hurt and pain those people caused me, I turned to cutting myself. Not a good idea. I never told my parents because they were in the middle of getting divorced."

Maddie's doing better now, she writes, but the experience taught her how intensely painful and isolating life is for the victims of bullies.

Adults and children who've already chosen their words also have a place to share on the site. Nine-year-old Gladys chose kindness.

"I choose Kindness because it's like Love. Love shows up when Kindness comes around. So Kindness is like niceness and Love merged together," she writes.

"It's also like Friendship. If you're kind, people want to be your friend, right? ... It's also like Respect. ... If you're showing Respect, that is a sign of Kindness. And last, it's Compassion. If you're helping others, isn't that showing Kindness? Friendship, Respect, Love, and Compassion, ALL started with Kindness."

It's that kind of critical thinking that helps children remember they have a choice - and that with their choices they have the power to change people, Hoal says.

"'I Choose' is an important reminder to children that their choices do matter," Hoal says. "We want them to stop, think and remember."

About Mary Kay Hoal

Mary Kay Hoal is a nationally recognized Internet safety expert who provides technology tools and tips for parents at www.YoursphereForParents.com. She's the founder and president of www.Yoursphere.com, a social network site for ages up to 17 and social media outlet for youth-oriented organizations. Yoursphere Media Foundation and Coalition for Internet Safety Education and Reform is the website's charity arm. The 'I Choose' Anti-Bullying Challenge is its first education initiative.

June 21, 2012

 

Grassley presses Treasury Department and IRS to effectively implement whistleblower program 

WASHINGTON - Senator Chuck Grassley is asking for a complete accounting from the Treasury Secretary and IRS Commissioner of questions he's raised about the agencies' flawed implementation of the IRS whistleblower program enacted in 2006.  Grassley has placed a hold on nominees for two high-level Treasury Department positions until satisfactory responses are provided.

"The way the IRS and Treasury Department have handled the whistleblower program enacted more than five years ago is inexcusable.  Any improvements have been made only under duress and in response holds I've put on administration nominees, and those changes are far less than what ought to be the standard," Grassley said.  "The lack of progress is demoralizing valuable whistleblowers who often put their own livelihoods at risk to speak up about wrongdoing."

Grassley, who authored the 2006 overhaul of the IRS whistleblower program, said the IRS continues to go out of its way to limit the applicability of the updated statute at a disservice to honest taxpayers and good government.

"The 2006 legislation was intended to obtain valuable information about major tax fraud and prevent the IRS from shortchanging whistleblowers.  So far, the IRS is using questionable tactics like the Justice Department did when the False Claims Act was updated 25 years ago to limit whistleblower awards, including now saying that collections of penalties under the Bank Secrecy Act aren't eligible for whistleblower awards, for example," Grassley said.

Grassley made his latest request for information today in a letter to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and IRS Commissioner Doug Schulman.  It follows a June 15 response from the IRS to an April letter from Grassley and the IRS's release of several other documents, including a much delayed Whistleblower Annual Report to Congress and new timelines for processing whistleblower claims.  "Ironically, the sliver of good news is that the IRS admits it has trouble processing whistleblower claims in a timely manner.  Even so, the agency fails to establish accountability measures for its leaders and senior executives to pay out awards. Those checkpoints are clearly needed if the program is to work as Congress intended."

Grassley said the Treasury Secretary and the IRS Commissioner have an obligation to effectively administer the IRS whistleblower program.  The 1986 qui tam amendments to the False Claims Act, which Grassley also sponsored in Congress and which served as a model for the 2006 IRS whistleblower legislation, have recovered $30 billion to the federal treasury which otherwise would be lost to fraud by government contractors.

Grassley is a senior member and former chairman of the Senate Committee on Finance.  He is currently ranking member of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. He has pressed for effective implementation of the IRS whistleblower program during Senate hearings and through a series of oversight letters.  Click to read letters from April 2012, September 2011, and June 2010 and IRS responses from June 2012, November 2011, and November 2010.

Click here to read Grassley's June 21, 2012, letter to Geithner and Shulman.

-30-

Thursday, June 21, 2012

 

Sen. Chuck Grassley, ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, today made the following comment in response to the White House press secretary's statements this afternoon on Operation Fast and Furious.

 

"It's necessary to correct and clarify a few comments from the White House press secretary this afternoon on Fast and Furious.   His statement that the Administration has 'provided Congress every document that pertains to the operation itself' is hogwash.  Through my investigation, I know there are reams of documents related to 'the operation itself' that the Justice Department has refused to turn over to Congress.

 

"For example, the earliest known Fast and Furious briefing paper was sent to ATF leadership on December 2, 2009.  The Attorney General promised last summer that the Justice Department would send us all of the briefing papers.  However, the Justice Department never provided what is arguably the most important one.  The assertion that the Administration has given Congress every document related to Fast and Furious is just inaccurate.

 

"The accusation that I'm motivated by a desire for a 'political scalp' is baseless.  Yes, I want the responsible people held accountable.  An American agent died because of government policy and practice, and that can't go unanswered.  Whenever the government does damage, credibility demands telling the full story and taking appropriate action.  Inaction erodes trust in government.

 

"If my approach to congressional oversight were dictated by political gain, I wouldn't have voted to subpoena records from Alberto Gonzales and the Bush Justice Department over the firing of U.S. attorneys.  I wouldn't have voted to hold Bush White House officials in contempt in the same matter.  I wouldn't have voted to authorize subpoenas for documents on warrantless surveillance sought by the Democratic chairman of the Judiciary Committee.  These weren't popular moves with my fellow Republicans, but I thought they were right.  I'm committed to Congress' constitutional responsibility of oversight regardless of which party is in the White House.  Congress has the authority as elected representatives of the people to get the facts to inform our legislative duties under the Constitution.  Any administration of any party should respect that."

 

Links and documents describing the subpoena votes follow here.

 

http://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/Article.cfm?customel_dataPageID_1502=12258

For Immediate Release
March 22, 2007

Judiciary Committee Subpoena Vote

During a Judiciary Committee meeting this morning, Sen. Chuck Grassley asked that he be recorded in support of giving the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, in consultation with the ranking member, the authority to issue subpoenas to White House officials regarding the Committee's inquiry into the administration's dismissal late last year of U.S. attorneys.  Committee members voted by voice vote to give that authority to the Chairman.

 

"I wanted to express my support for getting the facts out on the table.  The sooner we do that, the better.  The executive branch - no matter who is President - is almost always extremely resistant to oversight requests from Congress.  For example, I've been very frustrated in my efforts of the last year to get information about the Food and Drug Administration's actions with regard to an antibiotic.  The FBI has continued to stonewall several of my requests.  Congress has a constitutional responsibility to conduct oversight.  I've worked to meet that responsibility both when the spotlight is on an issue and when it's not.  Congress' inquiries need to be legitimate oversight.  I want to make sure that we do the right thing for the American people."

 

 

 

http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/1207/Senate_Judiciary_approves_contempt_resolutions_against_Rove_Bolten.html

December 13, 2007

Categories:

 

·         Bad behavior

Senate Judiciary approves contempt resolutions against Rove, Bolten

The Senate Judiciary Committee has approved contempt resolutions against Karl Rove, the former top aide to President Bush, and Joshua Bolten, the current White House chief of staff. The vote was 12-7.

The criminal contempt resolutions now move to the Senate floor, although no action on them is expected until next year.

Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), ranking member of Judiciary, voted in favor of issuing the contempt resolutions, saying the committee's oversight responsibilities must be upheld.

Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) also supported the resolutions.

"It is a vote that I would prefer not to make," Specter said. "It is a vote I make with reluctance."

The House Judiciary Committee has also approved contempt resolutions against Bolten and former White House Counsel Harriet Miers, but Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has not set a date for a floor vote yet.

The committee subpoenaed Rove and Bolten over the summer as part of its probe into the firing of nine U.S. attorneys last year. Bush, citing executive privilege, refused to allow Rove and Bolten to testify or turn over documents to the panel. Bolten was subpoenaed in his role as custodian of White House records, while Rve called to testify over his knowledge on the role politics played in the firings.

Leahy said that he and Specter had working to modify the resolutions since they were first debated last week, but added that the panel must enforce its subpoenas if it is to be able to conduct effective oversight of the executive branch.

"The White House counsel asserts that executive privilege covers all documents and information in the possession of the White House," Leahy said, referring to White House counsel Fred Fielding. "They have further and claimed immunity even to have to appear and respond to this committee's subpoenas fr Mr. Rove and Mr. Bolten. And they contend that their blanket claim of executive privilege cannot be tested but must be accepted by the Congress as the last word."

Leahy called this stance "a dramatic break from the practices of every administration since World War II in responding to congressional committees."

Update: White House officials dismissed the Judiciary Committee vote as a political stunt, and they pointed out that Leahy had stated that the Justice Department under former President Clinton would not pursue criminal contempt citations against White House officials when it occurred back in 1999. The Justice Department has stated that it will not allow the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, Jeffrey Taylor, to pursue this case in court. Taylor would normally represent Congress in any legal battle with the White House.

"Senate Democrats are showing that they're more interested in headlines than serious legislation, and they should be fully aware of the futility of pressing ahead on this," said Dana Perino, White House spokeswoman, in a statement.

"It has long been understood that, in circumstances like these, that the constitutional prerogatives of the President would make it a futile and purely political act for Congress to refer contempt citations to U.S. Attorneys."

Perino added:"Senator Leahy may have summed it best in September 1999 when he said the following: 
'The criminal contempt mechanism, see 2 U.S.C. section 192, which punishes as a misdemeanor a refusal to testify or produce documents to Congress, requires a referral to the Justice Department, which is not likely to pursue compliance in the likely event that the President asserts executive privilege in response to the request for certain documents or testimony.'"

 

 

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2007/06/21/14147/nsa-docs-supoena/?mobile=nc

Breaking: Senate Judiciary Committee Authorizes Subpoenas For NSA Domestic Spying Documents

By Faiz Shakir on Jun 21, 2007 at 1:58 pm

The Senate Judiciary Committee just voted 13-3 to authorize chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) to issue subpoenas for documents related to the NSA warrantless surveillance program. Sens. Arlen Specter (R-PA), Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) voted with the Democrats on the committee to authorize the subpoenas for any legal opinions and advice the Bush administration has received regarding the NSA program.

The Center on Democracy & Technology has released a list of the seven "most wanted surveillance documents." See the full list here.

The confrontation over the documents "could set the stage for a constitutional showdown over the separation of powers." The Senate Judiciary Committee had previously scheduled to authorize subpoenas last week, but Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) blocked the Judiciary Committee from voting on the subpoenas.

On May 21, the Senate Judiciary Committee made at least its ninth formal request for the documents, but the Justice Department continued its stonewalling. Leahy issued the following statement about today's vote:

This stonewalling is unacceptable and it must end. If the Administration will not carry out its responsibility to provide information to this Committee without a subpoena, we will issue one. If we do not, we are letting this Administration decide whether and how the Congress will do its job. [...]

Why has this Administration been so steadfast in its refusal? Deputy Attorney General Comey's account suggests that some of these documents would reveal an Administration perfectly willing to ignore the law. Is that what they are hiding? [...]

Whatever the reason for the stonewalling, this Committee has stumbled in the dark for too long, attempting to do its job without the information it needs. We need this information to carry out our responsibilities under the Constitution. Unfortunately, it has become clear that we will not get it without a subpoena. I urge the adoption of the subpoena authorization.

The House Judiciary Committee has also threatened to subpoena the NSA documents. In a hearing last month, Principal Assistant Attorney General Alberto Gonzales Steven Bradbury refused the committee's request to turn over the papers, but refused to assert executive privilege in doing so.

 

-30-

Wednesday, June 20, 2012

WASHINGTON - Senator Chuck Grassley has asked President Obama for a description of the scope of the executive privilege claim made this morning for documents in the congressional investigation of the Fast and Furious program, where the government allowed as many as 2,500 guns to be illegally purchased and trafficked to Mexico.

In a letter to the President this afternoon, Grassley asked if the privilege was being asserted only with regard to documents called for by a subpoena from the oversight committee in the House of Representatives that may have involved communications with the President, or if the privilege was being extended to records of purely internal Justice Department communications, not involving the White House.

Grassley has questioned the last-minute assertion of executive privilege by the President regarding Fast and Furious.  "At no point in the last 18 months since I started asking questions has the Department of Justice hinted that there was a potential that the documents might be subject to executive privilege.  That includes a face-to-face meeting with the Attorney General last night," Grassley said.  "If it were a serious claim, the administration would have and should have raised it last night, if not much earlier."

In fact, some White House emails involving the Fast and Furious program already have been turned over to congressional investigators, including messages between White House National Security staffer Kevin O'Reilly and William Newell, Special Agent in Charge of Phoenix field division for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives.

The congressional investigation began with Senator Grassley's inquiry into whistleblower allegations first made in January 2011 that the government had allowed the transfer of the illegally-purchased weapons later found at the scene of the murder of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.  The Department of Justice denied the allegations to Senator Grassley for 10 months before being forced to withdraw its denial in face of evidence to the contrary.

"We owe no less to the family of Brian Terry than our best effort to get to the truth," Grassley said.  "That has been my primary goal all along.  It is what motivated the whistleblowers to risk their careers, and it is why I will continue to insist on answers."

The Iowa senator said the House committee investigating the gun-walking operation was forced to subpoena documents due to stonewalling by the Department of Justice and that the contempt citation is "an important" procedural mechanism in our system of checks and balances.  "Congress has a constitutional responsibility to determine what happened so that there's accountability and this kind of disastrous government program never happens again," he said.

Click here to see a copy of Grassley's letter to Obama today.  The text of the letter is below.

 

June 20, 2012

President Barack Obama

The White House

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20500

 

Dear Mr. President:

This morning, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform began considering a contempt citation against Attorney General Holder for his refusal to deliver documents related to Operation Fast and Furious.  As you know, two guns that federal law enforcement allowed to be illegally purchased and trafficked to Mexico as part of that operation were found at the murder scene of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry on December 14, 2010.  I have been seeking documents related to this matter from the Justice Department since January 2011.

At the last minute before the House Committee proceedings began this morning, I received notice that you were claiming executive privilege.  After 18 months of investigation and interaction with Justice Department officials on this matter, this was the first indication that anyone at the Department or the White House believed the documents being sought were subject to executive privilege claims.  Last week, I questioned the Attorney General about a specific example of a document that I and the House Committee have been seeking and whether there could be a legitimate claim of executive privilege over that document and others like it.  The document I referenced is an internal email from the then-Acting Director of ATF to people at ATF and DOJ headquarters.

The Attorney General was not clear in response to my question whether he believed that executive privilege could be asserted with regard to that document or others like it.  Rather than executive privilege, the Attorney General talked about "deliberative process."  He indicated a willingness to provide that document and others like it, if the possibility of contempt were to be taken off the table.  Yet this morning, it appears that you may be claiming executive privilege over the very same type of document?internal Justice Department communications not involving the White House?that the Attorney General said he was willing to provide.

Can you please provide a more precise description of the scope of your executive privilege claim? Are you asserting it only with regard to documents called for by the subpoena that may have involved communications with you?  Or are you extending your claim to records of purely internal Justice Department communications, not involving the White House?  Please provide a more detailed description of the documents that you are or are not asserting executive privilege to protect.

 

Sincerely,

Charles E. Grassley
Ranking Member

 

cc:        Darrell Issa

Chairman

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

U.S. House of Representatives

Pages