Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Non Hunting > Politics
2nd Federal Agency Accused of Bias Against Conservative Groups >

2nd Federal Agency Accused of Bias Against Conservative Groups

Politics Nothing goes with politics quite like crying and complaining, and we're a perfect example of that.

2nd Federal Agency Accused of Bias Against Conservative Groups

Old 06-04-2013, 12:31 PM
  #1  
Super Moderator
Thread Starter
 
CalHunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern California
Posts: 17,416
Default 2nd Federal Agency Accused of Bias Against Conservative Groups

WTH is going on here???


EPA accused of singling out conservative groups, amid IRS scandal

By Eric Shawn
Published June 04, 2013
FoxNews.com




It's not just the IRS.



A second federal agency is facing a probe and accusations of political bias over its alleged targeting of conservative groups.



The allegations concern the Environmental Protection Agency, which is being accused of trying to charge conservative groups fees while largely exempting liberal groups. The fees applied to Freedom of Information Act requests -- allegedly, the EPA waived them for liberal groups far more often than it did for conservative ones.



The allegations are under investigation by the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which is also holding hearings on the Internal Revenue Service targeting of conservative groups.



"I don't think it is fair at all. It is not fair to the American taxpayer -- the American taxpayer should expect and demand that the EPA treats everyone equally in regard to these requests," said Pennsylvania Republican Rep. Tim Murphy, a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee. "This cannot be tolerated. As we see more federal agencies with this kind of bias, it is and should be a concern for all of us."



Research by the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), a conservative Washington, D.C., think tank, claims that the political bias is routine when it comes to deciding which groups are charged fees. Christopher Horner, senior fellow at CEI, said liberal groups have their fees for documents waived about 90 percent of the time, in contrast with conservative groups that it claims are denied fee waivers about 90 percent of the time.
"The idea is to throw hurdles in our way," charged Horner, who says he decided to look into the fee structure after the EPA repeatedly turned down his group for waivers.



"In 20 cases of ours, since the beginning of last year, we were expressly denied, or denied by them simply refusing to respond, in 18 out of 20 cases," said Horner, explaining that the batting percentage for fees waived in favor of liberal groups is overwhelming.



"Earth Justice was batting 17 out of 19, the Sierra Club was the worst, at 70 percent granted, 11 out of 15. You add up some other groups and we found that 75 out of 82 groups granted, because these are the groups that the EPA has decided are the favored groups."



The EPA has denied any favoritism.



Acting EPA Administrator Bob Perciasepe told the House Energy and Commerce Committee on May 16 that "our policy is to treat everybody the same," and the agency is considering pursuing an investigation.



In a statement to Fox News, the EPA said: "The Office of Inspector General received from the Environmental Protection Agency the official request to look into this matter just over a week ago, so the request is currently under review by the OIG at this early stage."



But Horner, who has studied federal government agency practices as the author of "The Liberal War on Transparency: Confessions of a Freedom of Information 'Criminal,'" says that charging fees or denying information requests is a underhanded method that government agencies use to try and stymie the free flow of information or political dissent.



"This is no different than denying a group that you don't agree with ... whether you are the IRS or the EPA, their tax-exempt status," said Horner.



"You're talking about essentially making or breaking them, or at a minimum, snuffing out their ability to pursue their objectives."
Murphy said treating groups differently is simply not right.



"We are hoping that the acting administrator of the EPA can already send a message out to his people that this will not be tolerated," Murphy said. "It is wrong. Similar with the people with the IRS who testified that, 'well some of things may not be illegal,' they can still be wrong. People expect their government to not be acting in these ways, but to be fair and just and truthful in these informational quests and in their investigations."



Follow Eric Shawn on Twitter: #EricShawnonFox.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...#ixzz2VHVrquu6
CalHunter is offline  
Old 06-04-2013, 03:08 PM
  #2  
Dominant Buck
 
Fieldmouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 36,318
Default

You are seeing the 2 societies were are living in. The people and the government folks. The federal government has grown too large all too powerful taking on roles it's not suppose to do. There is no good reason government spending is above single digits when compared to GDP.

Unfortunately, it will only get worse. We are one step away from a national DNA database. Cops now are authorized to get DNA samples from you at a traffic stop. It won't be long they will require a sample for "insurance" purposes of course. This will lead to the national DNA database.
Fieldmouse is offline  
Old 06-04-2013, 04:47 PM
  #3  
Nontypical Buck
 
Lunkerdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 2,182
Default

We are one step away from a national DNA database. Cops now are authorized to get DNA samples from you at a traffic stop.

Whoa, whoa whoa!!! That's not anywhere near close to what I've heard about the recent SCOTUS decision... Please fill me in.
Lunkerdog is offline  
Old 06-04-2013, 05:26 PM
  #4  
Dominant Buck
 
Fieldmouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 36,318
Default

Originally Posted by Lunkerdog View Post
Whoa, whoa whoa!!! That's not anywhere near close to what I've heard about the recent SCOTUS decision... Please fill me in.
Well, there are those familiar with the law and traffic stops. However, your traffic ticket is a form of arrest. Your signature is an agreement to appear or pay a fine in some states instead of being taken down to the station and be formally booked. Arrest is an arrest as I see it. How long before some liberal lawmakers decide a DNA sample for their database is needed? It's for the communities' good, saves lives and 5 men in robes said at the time of arrest is ok.
Fieldmouse is offline  
Old 06-04-2013, 05:36 PM
  #5  
Nontypical Buck
 
FlDeerman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: DeFuniak Spr.Florida
Posts: 4,329
Default

The EPA has been trying to destroy America for the past five years.Remember King Obama saying his policies would raise electric bills by a large amount?His EPA has been doing it's best to destroy the coal industry.
FlDeerman is offline  
Old 06-04-2013, 06:05 PM
  #6  
Boone & Crockett
 
Charlie P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 19,137
Default

Cops now are authorized to get DNA samples from you at a traffic stop.
Not true, but it is as you see it.
Charlie P is offline  
Old 06-04-2013, 06:11 PM
  #7  
Dominant Buck
 
Fieldmouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 36,318
Default

Originally Posted by Charlie P View Post
Not true, but it is as you see it.
If you say so, Charlie.
Fieldmouse is offline  
Old 06-04-2013, 06:17 PM
  #8  
Dominant Buck
 
Fieldmouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 36,318
Default

FYI Charlie. Getting a speeding ticket is a form of arrest. Evidence "A" , a local law firm explaining your options on a ticket.

http://www.redlichlaw.com/traffic/ny...ng-ticket.html

The last point of interest here is the "Arrest Type" box. This one is listed as "1 - Patrol". Generally this means the officer is basing the arrest on visual estimation of your speed. Type 2 is radar. L is for laser. Types 5 and 6 involve accidents, either with personal injury or property damage.
5 people in black robes just ruled that it is constitutional to take DNA samples from everyone who is arrested. So tell me again, where am I wrong?
Fieldmouse is offline  
Old 06-06-2013, 03:48 PM
  #9  
Nontypical Buck
 
Lunkerdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 2,182
Default

5 people in black robes just ruled that it is constitutional to take DNA samples from everyone who is arrested. So tell me again, where am I wrong?
Okay, so it seems to me that your saying that a precedent has been set, and as things move forward that precedent is just going to be pushed further, and further.

If I'm right in assuming what your point is, I certainly have no argument against it. I mean it's not like we've never seen that happen before... Are you a Verizon customer???
Lunkerdog is offline  
Old 06-06-2013, 03:57 PM
  #10  
Typical Buck
 
Catus Magnus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: NC
Posts: 501
Default

Originally Posted by Fieldmouse View Post
You are seeing the 2 societies were are living in. The people and the government folks. The federal government has grown too large all too powerful taking on roles it's not suppose to do.
the man makes some good points here
Catus Magnus is offline  

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.