The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Justice was published in the Senate section on pages S4524-S4525 on June 15.
The Department is one of the oldest in the US, focused primarily on law enforcement and the federal prison system. Downsizing the Federal Government, a project aimed at lowering taxes and boosting federal efficiency, detailed wasteful expenses such as $16 muffins at conferences and board meetings.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, 1 week ago today, the personal financial information of several prominent Americans was made public in only the latest leak of sensitive data from the Internal Revenue Service. To put it another way, it appears that an anonymous source committed a felony by releasing the confidential information of American citizens, which a media outlet then published. Now, the way this leak has been covered in the press may not suggest it, but the most alarming part isn't whose information was involved; it is how it was allowed to happen at all--at all.
The American people know that having the personal information they give to the IRS made public isn't just a fear reserved for the highest earners. On multiple occasions in the last decade, individuals and organizations alike have had to watch as their filing details wander far from the IRS's databases. And it goes beyond pay stubs. The IRS holds massive storage of sensitive details, from healthcare expenses, to retirement savings, to charitable contributions. They hold addresses, information about dependents, and associations with organizations that may not be tax-deductible.
Needless to say, there are good arguments for paring back the scope of what information this Agency is allowed to collect in the first place. But here is the bottom line: American taxpayers are required by law to comply with invasive disclosure requirements, and they are doing it with less and less confidence that the Federal Government will honor their trust.
A fundamental piece of our Nation's social contract is fraying, but just how worried you should be about it apparently depends on your personal politics. The precise circumstances of this latest leak have not yet been made clear, but the recent history of IRS negligence and outright political targeting tells conservatives to be especially worried.
As our colleagues remember all too well, years ago, the State of California's database of private donor data for over 1,000 nonprofit organizations was made public illegally. A few years later, confidential IRS donor information from a conservative organization's tax filings was published. To no one's surprise, that information made its way into the hands of liberal groups with opposite views on key issues. Of course, we are talking about the same IRS that made slow-
walking requests and filings from conservative organizations a matter of internal policy under the last Democratic administration.
So these situations all have two things in common: first, a blatant political agenda aimed at advancing the cause of the political left, and second, the utter absence of criminal charges against the leakers--
no charges against the leakers.
So let's be clear. As soon as sensitive personal information is leaked, the damage is already done. The genie can't be put back in the bottle, and the Federal Government has proven far too often that it is at best, incapable and at worse, unwilling to protect taxpayers' data from misuse by the political left. That is why I have been outspoken in support of efforts to reduce taxpayers' exposure to unnecessary IRS collection in the first place.
But every time a leak goes without serious investigation and criminal prosecution, basic public trust in our tax system suffers, and that fraying trust may eventually be irreparable. That is why I joined Ranking Member Grassley and Ranking Member Crapo to demand that the Department of Justice and the FBI immediately investigate last week's leak and aggressively pursue criminal charges against those who are responsible--actual consequences as a matter of justice and as a practical deterrent. The Federal Government owes taxpayers nothing less.
Unfortunately, thus far, the Biden administration hasn't just neglected to aggressively prosecute overt discrimination; in some cases, it is actually trying to promote it.
Take the massive spending package Democrats rammed through in the name of COVID relief. The spending bill was billed as urgent, but its authors apparently had time to bake in a provision directing relief funds to restaurants on the basis of race and sex and another directing funds to farmers on the basis of race. So we are talking about blatantly unconstitutional discrimination.
Fortunately, the independent judiciary has stepped in to stop it. Over the last few weeks, multiple Federal courts have struck down these provisions, including an appeals panel led by Judge Amul Thapar from my home State of Kentucky. But these are hardly the only instances in which Washington Democrats have tried to impose their own radical preferences on ordinary Americans
____________________
