The Fair Tax is a part of a progressive scheme to advance the welfare state. Analyzing its “prebate” (i.e., the monthly check to all households) reveals the many ways the Fair Tax seeks to over-compensate the “poor” for any Fair Tax they might pay, and thereby increase wealth redistribution.

The Fair Tax sales pitches are often short and superficial; they shy away from providing details. They rely heavily on asserting the Fair Tax will produce certain economic results and that their economic studies “prove” the truth of those assertions – they hope that Americans have been dumbed down sufficiently so that they fail to understand the simple truth that no economist can predict or insure anything and that all they can produce are well documented, mathematically reasonable theories about what will happen. There is an old joke – if you want 10 different economic forecasts, ask 9 different economists. Fair Tax sellers make many claims that appear superficially logical, but break down under deeper analysis. In sum, the Fair Tax is an economic “house of cards” that will collapse of its own weight.

Even eliminating the prebate cannot save the Fair Tax– it would still destroy our 70% retail-sales-sensitive economy with its in-your-face 40-70% retail sales tax that will generate the mother of all taxpayer rebellions.  My executive summary of the Fair Tax can be viewed here:  FT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4-25-13

The post The so-called “Fair Tax” appeared first on WatchdogWire.

Last week’s breaking news revealed that the Department of Justice secretly seized private and personal phone records of Associated Press reporters. At the same time, we learned that IRS bureaucrats were deliberately targeting and harassing conservative groups such as Tea Party, Patriot, and Jewish groups. Now we just uncovered that the White House and IRS are paying close attention to our professional reporters over at Watchdog.org.  Read more here.

If the government can silence whistleblowers, uncover secret sources, and harass those who disagree with their political point of view, then how can they be held accountable?  We need YOUR help to ensure that our system of checks and balances remains in place.

Please consider taking action in one of the following areas:
1. Expose the TRUTH. Talk to a tea party or Jewish group in your area about their dealings with the IRS. Ask them for e-mail and phone records. Get names, dates, and quotes to back up your story. E-mail us and we’ll publish it on Watchdog Wire.

2. Get Local.  Read this article by our citizen journalist Lea Sylvester who wrote about an Alabama Tea Party group in her community that received pushback from the IRS. You can do this too!  Start researching and reaching out to groups in your local area, and report back to Watchdog Wire.

3. Support our cause.  Pitch in $5, $10, or $15 to help us continue our commitment to Watchdog Journalism, and train citizens like you to keep a watchful eye on government.

Thank you for helping us protect Freedom of Speech in America.

In Liberty,

Erik Telford
Vice President, Franklin Center

P.S. We must ensure that Freedom of the Press is upheld and respected in our great Republic. Help support our mission today.

The post Help Protect Freedom of Speech in America appeared first on WatchdogWire.

Bankrupting America is, according to its website, “an educational project that explores the policies hindering economic opportunity and growth in America. The project focuses on the causes of the country’s current economic downturn and the future implications of careless policy-making.” It’s produced many informative videos and infographics, many which I’ve shared here or on Quick Takes.

Now, Bankrupting America has a free app for your iPhone. Besides providing a convenient way to read Bankrupting America’s content and view videos, it’s also a way to report government waste. That’s what I did last week.

Using my iPhone to submit a tip concerning government waste to Bankrupting America.

Readers in Wichita may be aware that the city may not open the “Waltzing Waters” fountain this year, citing the water shortage. This compounds the waste of the purchase of the fountain and the building of its stage with its non-use.

So when I was near downtown Wichita I used the Bankrupting America app to take a picture and submit my tip. It was easy to do, and resulted in this article on Bankrupting America. Note that the editors at BA took my tip as just that — a starting point. They then did their own research to write the article.

Initiatives like this are helpful in keeping a watchful eye on government spending and waste. The city will freely and liberally spend taxpayer funds promoting the goodness of the Waltzing Waters and everything else City Hall does. Local newspapers, television, and radio may report on waste, but this legacy media can’t report on everything that needs highlighting. Citizens like yourself can now step up and fill in the gap.

The resulting article at Bankrupting America.

The post Bankrupting America: There’s an app for that appeared first on WatchdogWire.

According to Watchdog.org’s Virginia Bureau, the case, known as McBurney v. Young, came about when Rhode Island resident Mark McBurney and California business owner Roger Hurlbert filed FOIA requests with the state of Virginia and Henrico County in Virginia, respectively, and were both subsequently denied.

Claiming their constitutional rights had been violated, the men sued, and were denied by the 4th Circuit of U.S. Court of Appeals in Richmond before taking the case to the Supreme Court.

Now Virginia and two other states, Arkansas and Tennessee, have the constitutional grounds to prohibit out-of-state residents of their state from making FOIA requests. This has made waves among stakeholders of public records access across the nation, garnering attention and concern from national media outlets and organizations advocating for open government.

The main concern with the ruling lies in the belief that Virginia can now freely choose to discriminate against out-of-state requests, purposely ignoring the increasingly interconnected nature of information throughout the United States.

“The policy of Virginia is that, what happens in Virginia government stays in Virginia,” Bill Maurer, an attorney with the Institute for Justice, told Watchdog.org. “That’s simply an unrealistic viewpoint in an interconnected country as large as ours.”

Others fear that even those states with existing open records laws on the books may take advantage of the McBurney v. Young ruling and hinder records access for out-of-state residents.

“If it’s OK to discriminate against requesters who are coming from out of state, it invites other states to do the same thing,” Leah Nicholls, an attorney for the D.C. public interest law firm Public Justice, told Watchdog.org.

For now, one readily available course of action for open-government advocates seems to be through state legislatures, but efforts to open government so far have not fared well.

Steps were taken in Virginia to open up the FOIA process even before the Supreme Court ruled on McBurney v. Young, but the legislation stalled in committee. Meanwhile legislation shielding correspondence and working papers of Virginia legislative aids from FOIA requests made its way to Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell’s desk.

Although some groups are looking to expand surrogate networks for filing FOIA requests, it will be quite an undertaking to expand such networks.

Aside from how this will affect out-of-state individuals such as McBurney and Hurlbert, will this ruling make it harder for citizen journalists to investigate? Does this ruling indicate a bias toward established media outlets? Could this prompt other states to begin rolling back their standing open records laws?

The post Supreme Court says states can deny FOIA requests for public records appeared first on WatchdogWire.

The House proposed a partisan $34.33 billion budget with new taxes and the Senate proposed a bi-partisan $33.21 billion budget with no new taxes. That is a difference of more than $1 billion.  It is the largest difference they have had to deal with. Instead of focusing exclusively on the budget, Gov. Inslee wants the special session to take on policy issues other than the budget. In fact, he has placed a priority on some of the most controversial bills that failed to pass in the regular session.

The issues on the Governor’s agenda are background checks for the sale of guns, funding college tuition for the children of illegal immigrants, tougher laws on drunk driving, and a bill mandating that all insurance policies cover abortion.

Inslee’s experience is from the other Washington where they have not agreed on a budget since 2009. Budget negotiations in D.C. traditionally become a Fiscal Cliff or Sequester drama.   It goes like this: budget discussions hang in limbo due to hot button political disagreements. So far, Washington State has tried to avoid that game. We do not need it here, and we do not want it here.

Our legislators debated the controversial policy issues on Inslee’s agenda already and did not agree at all. In the case of the abortion insurance mandate bill, a motion to bring it up for a vote was defeated twice. An opportunity to take up these old issues will come again next year.

The cost of a special session in Olympia is something taxpayers want to keep to a bare minimum.  It is estimated that a 30 day “Special Session” cost around $300,000 two years ago, but today it will cost much more (and was unnecessary in the first place).

Voters who want their elected representatives to make the budget the priority in this “Special Session” may contact legislators at the legislative Hotline at 1-800-562-6000 and tell them to stay on topic and not focus on unrelated issues. Or you can email them by clicking here.

The post Should WA State Legislators do a D.C. Thing? appeared first on WatchdogWire.

This bill makes it legal for private employers to offer workers the option of putting in extra hours and, rather than getting paid for it that week, bank the hours to take paid time off later – providing it doesn’t cause undue stress to the work schedule – without having to use up their vacation days. Currently companies are prohibited from offering this option because of provisions in the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.

This bill creates another option for the families stressed with balancing work, family and quality time, as well as caring for sick children or elderly parents.  And, it offers employers an opportunity to be more flexible in how they can work with their employees.  Addressing this legislation, Roby made the following remarks (see video here):

While we may not be able to legislate another hour into the day, we can help working Americans better balance life’s demands by offering more flexibility for time away from work.. What this bill doesn’t do is change the 40-hour work week or how overtime pay is calculated. The same protections that have been a part of labor law for decades remain, and we’ve added additional protections against coercion or unfair treatment. This bill also doesn’t add government regulation to the workplace – we have enough red tape as is…A more flexible workplace isn’t a new concept. In fact, many employees in the public sector enjoy this benefit right now. That’s because in 1985 Congress passed a law allowing local and state governments to offer their employees the option of comp time. (Roby’s full comments can be read at Investor’s Business Daily).

The National Partnership for Women & Families opposes the measure. Judith L. Lichtman, the organization’s senior advisor, testified against the bill before the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, saying, “it would leave workers with neither pay nor time” and “magnifies the power imbalance between employer and employee.” She argued that H.R. 1406 “offers a false, flawed choice that would make times even tougher for workers and their families.”  Since the legislation gives workers more power over their time and what form of “pay” they prefer– either in monetary ways or in compensation time– the argument Lichtman makes is weak.

The AFL-CIO is vehemently opposed to the legislation as well (See AFL-CIO commentary.)  The more an employee works, the more money the employee earns. This means more money for a union’s treasury. It is as simple as that. We’ve seen ugly when unions showed their “caring,” “compassion” and “fairness” during demonstrations at the statehouse in Wisconsin.

The post Alabama Congresswoman Roby Resurrects Workplace Fairness Legislation appeared first on WatchdogWire.

Nope, it’s YouTube, the world’s third most visited website after Facebook and Google. And although you may be most familiar with YouTube for its funny cat videos, more images are shared via YouTube every day than any other form of media in the world.

Thus, for citizen journalists, there is perhaps no more powerful tool than YouTube, which allows anyone with a video camera and Internet connection to share sights and sounds with the entire world. That’s why it’s important to get familiar with shooting video to improve your stories. No one’s expecting you to be Steven Spielberg, but learning a few tricks of the trade could help take your story viral.

Tip #1: Get the Right Equipment

If you have a smartphone, you already have the basic equipment you need to film events. The iPhone’s built-in video camera isn’t ideal for larger productions, but it’s always in your pocket and at the ready when a story starts to develop. For example, the FBI asked citizens in Boston to send them any smartphone videos they had taken of the bombing, and it was a citizen’s iPhone, not CNN’s cameras, that showed footage Boston Police’s heart-pounding shootout with the terrorists to the world.

Smartphone cameras are great for spur-of-the-moment video shoot–for instance, if you run into a politician and want to ask him a quick question. But if you’re planning a video shoot ahead of time, use a handheld camera, which will give you better quality footage. These can be a bit expensive, but most people own one, so ask a friend if you don’t have one.

You can make your video even more professional by adding a tripod (which will give your video stability) and a handheld microphone, which will improve sound and is great for interviewing subjects.

Tip #2: Shoot Like a Pro

Once again, no one’s expecting you to be Speilberg, but a quick lesson in shooting can lead to much higher quality footage. Two things you’ll always want to be concerned with are light and sound: Will your video be bright enough, and will your subject be audible?

When possible, always shoot in a well-lit area. If you find someone who agrees to do a video interview, move them to the brightest place possible before turning your camera on. Also, make sure to always keep the source of light behind the camera, so that it’s shining on your subject. If the light is in the background, you’ll have trouble with shadows.

You’ll also want to pick a relatively quiet place to shoot. Sometimes (at crowded events, for example) background noise is unavoidable–this is where your microphone comes in. If you’re interviewing, make sure the subject is holding the microphone close to their mouth.

While shooting, make sure the camera stays steady so that your video isn’t wobbly. If you have a tripod, you won’t have to worry about this, but if you don’t, hold the camera close to you for extra control and use the palm of your hand to steady the bottom of the camera.

Tip #3: Never Stop Shooting

What do Bob Etheridge and Phil Hare have in common? Both were members of Congress who voted for Obamacare. Both were considered “safe” for re-election in 2010 by most pundits. And both lost to previously unknown citizen candidates: a registered nurse and a pizzeria owner, respectively.

Why did Etheridge and Hare lose? Because they made big mistakes (assaulting a college student and professing not to care about the Constitution), and a citizen happened to have a camera rolling when they snapped. Take a look:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Click here to view the embedded video.

If you’re filming a politician, you never know when a juicy quote is coming, so don’t turn off your camera after they’ve answered your question. Keep the camera on them until they’re out of your sight. Part of holding politicians accountable is about seeing all sides of them, and sharing their flaws with fellow citizens. If not for the power of video, Etheridge and Hare may well both be still in office.

Tip #4: Obey the Law, but Not Necessarily the “Rules”

There’s a key distinction here: you always need to follow the law when it comes to filming, but you can push back against “no video please” requests from nervous politicians. There are some areas where the law prohibits video recording, and there’s nothing you can do about this (although if it seems unjust, you can always write about the law!) But in other cases, filming is perfectly legal, even if people in power don’t want your camera in the room. Most city council and school board meetings are considered part of the public record, and you have the right to film them.

One of the most famous examples of “no video please” involved Baron Hill, a Congressman from Indiana who refused to allow high school students to film his town hall meetings for their civics class–because he didn’t want it ending up on YouTube. Hill then went off on a rant about how no one could tell him how to run his office, and sure enough, it ended up on YouTube:

Click here to view the embedded video.

This was a perfect case of filming being legal, even though Hill was trying to discourage it. The YouTube video went viral and contributed to Hill’s defeat later that year.

Tip #5: Edit and Share

Video editing can sound daunting, but Microsoft and Apple both include simple, user-friendly editing programs on most new computers. Once you’ve transferred video from your camera to your computer, follow the editing program’s steps to get your video ready to share. This is the time where you’ll cut out parts of your video that aren’t as interesting or relevant: shorter videos are easier to watch on YouTube, so trim your footage down to its main points.

You’ll need a YouTube account to upload your video, but that’s the only hurdle you’ll have to jump through. Give your video a catchy, newsy title: “School Board Clashes Over Taxpayer Funding” is better than “May 2013 School Board Meeting.” Once it’s uploaded, make sure to use other social platforms like Facebook and Twitter to share it with other citizens!

Your Turn

Video is the ultimate equalizer in journalism: your smartphone or handheld camera may not be as sophisticated as professional news cameras, but it shoots the same way, and if you’re in the right place at the right time, you can catch footage that no one in the media can. Keep your camera rolling, and let the stories come to you!

The post TIP SHEET: Tell Your Story With Video! appeared first on WatchdogWire.

When President Barack Obama told business owners “You didn’t build that,” it set off a bit of a revolt. Those who worked hard to build businesses didn’t like to hear the president dismiss their efforts.

Underlying this episode is a serious question: What should be the role of government in the economy? Should government’s role be strictly limited, according to the Constitution? Or should government take an activist role in managing, regulating, subsidizing, and penalizing in order to get the results politicians and bureaucrats desire?

Historian Burton W. Folsom has concluded that it is the private sector — free people, not government — that drives innovation: “Time and again, experience has shown that while private enterprise, carried on in an environment of open competition, delivers the best products and services at the best price, government intervention stifles initiative, subsidizes inefficiency, and raises costs.”

But some don’t agree. They promote government management and intervention into the economy. Whatever their motivation might be, however it was they formed their belief, they believe that without government oversight of the economy, things won’t happen.

But in Wichita, it’s even worse. Without government, it is claimed that not only would we stop growing, economic progress would revert to a previous century.

Mayor Carl Brewer made these claims in a 2008 meeting of the Wichita City Council.

In his remarks (transcript and video below), Brewer said “if government had not played some kind of role in guiding and identifying how the city was going to grow, how any city was going to grow, I’d be afraid of what that would be. Because we would still be in covered wagons and horses. There would be no change.”

When I heard him say that, I thought he’s just using rhetorical flair to emphasize a point. But later on he said this about those who advocate for economic freedom instead of government planning and control: “… then tomorrow we’ll be saying we don’t want more technology, and then the following day we’ll be saying we don’t want public safety, and it won’t take us very long to get back to where we were at back when the city first settled.”

Brewer’s remarks are worse than “You didn’t build that.” The mayor of Wichita is telling us you can’t build that — not without government guidance and intervention, anyway.

Many people in Wichita, including the mayor and most on the city council and county commission, believe that the public-private partnership is the way to drive innovation and get things done. It’s really a shame that this attitude is taking hold in Wichita, a city which has such a proud tradition of entrepreneurship. The names that Wichitans are rightly proud of — Lloyd Stearman, Walter Beech, Clyde Cessna, W.C. Coleman, Albert Alexander Hyde, Dan and Frank Carney, and Fred C. Koch — these people worked and built businesses without the benefit of public-private partnerships and government subsidy.

This tradition of entrepreneurship is disappearing, replaced by the public-private partnership and programs like Visioneering Wichita, sustainable communities, Greater Wichita Economic Development Coalition, Regional Economic Area Partnership (REAP), and rampant cronyism. Although when given a chance, voters are rejecting cronyism.

We don’t have long before the entrepreneurial spirit in Wichita is totally subservient to government. What can we do to return power to the people instead of surrendering it to government?

Wichita Mayor Carl Brewer, August 12, 2008:

“You know, I think that a lot of individuals have a lot of views and opinions about philosophy as to, whether or not, what role the city government should play inside of a community or city. But it’s always interesting to hear various different individuals’ philosophy or their view as to what that role is, and whether or not government or policy makers should have any type of input whatsoever.

“I would be afraid, because I’ve had an opportunity to hear some of the views, and under the models of what individuals’ logic and thinking is, if government had not played some kind of role in guiding and identifying how the city was going to grow, how any city was going to grow, I’d be afraid of what that would be. Because we would still be in covered wagons and horses. There would be no change.

“Because the stance is let’s not do anything. Just don’t do anything. Hands off. Just let it happen. So if society, if technology, and everything just goes off and leaves you behind, that’s okay. Just don’t do anything. I just thank God we have individuals that have enough gumption to step forward and say I’m willing to make a change, I’m willing to make a difference, I’m willing to improve the community. Because they don’t want to acknowledge the fact that improving the quality of life, improving the various different things, improving bringing in businesses, cleaning up street, cleaning up neighborhoods, doing those things, helping individuals feel good about themselves: they don’t want to acknowledge that those types of things are important, and those types of things, there’s no way you can assess or put a a dollar amount to it.

“Not everyone has the luxury to live around a lake, or be able to walk out in their backyard or have someone come over and manicure their yard for them, not everyone has that opportunity. Most have to do that themselves.

“But they want an environment, sometimes you have to have individuals to come in and to help you, and I think that this is one of those things that going to provide that.

“This community was a healthy thriving community when I was a kid in high school. I used to go in and eat pizza after football games, and all the high school students would go and celebrate.

“But, just like anything else, things become old, individuals move on, they’re forgotten in time, maybe the city didn’t make the investments that they should have back then, and they walk off and leave it.

“But new we have someone whose interested in trying to revive it. In trying to do something a little different. In trying to instill pride in the neighborhood, trying to create an environment where it’s enticing for individuals to want to come back there, or enticing for individuals to want to live there.

“So I must commend those individuals for doing that. But if we say we start today and say that we don’t want to start taking care of communities, then tomorrow we’ll be saying we don’t want more technology, and then the following day we’ll be saying we don’t want public safety, and it won’t take us very long to get back to where we were at back when the city first settled.

“So I think this is something that’s a good venture, it’s a good thing for the community, we’ve heard from the community, we’ve seen the actions of the community, we saw it on the news what these communities are doing because they know there’s that light at the end of the tunnel. We’ve seen it on the news. They’ve been reporting it in the media, what this particular community has been doing, and what others around it.

“And you know what? The city partnered with them, to help them generate this kind of energy and this type of excitement and this type of pride.

“So I think this is something that’s good. And I know that there’s always going to be people who are naysayers, that they’re just not going to be happy. And I don’t want you to let let this to discourage you, and I don’t want the comments that have been heard today to discourage the citizens of those neighborhoods. And to continue to doing the great work that they’re doing, and to continue to have faith, and to continue that there is light at the end of the tunnel, and that there is a value that just can’t be measured of having pride in your community and pride in your neighborhood, and yes we do have a role to be able to help those individuals trying to help themselves.”

Click here to view the embedded video.

The post Wichita Mayor: Without government, there would be no change appeared first on WatchdogWire.

Numerous calls were made to the Internal Revenue Service by representatives within that organization. The President of Wetumpka Tea Party, Becky Gerritson, said, “…We called every three months and they just kept saying that they were backed up…”

“In February, 2012, we received an IRS letter stating that the application could not be processed until attached questionnaire was answered and submitted.” The questionnaire received was eight pages long and contained approximately 55 questions. The letter demanded unconstitutionally intrusive information, including donor lists, member resumes,and more. The group contacted The American Center for Law and Justice.The ACLJ took their case, along with approximately 29 other conservative groups targeted by the IRS all across the nation. More information can be found at The ACLJ.

There is no evidence that any groups other than conservative groups, patriot groups or Tea Party groups received such “preferential” treatment. No other group such as Moveon.org, The Tides Foundation or other “progressive” groups received such delays and intimidation tactics. Despite the apology by the Internal Revenue Service, stating “…it was limited to low-level IRS agents…” the ACLJ maintains this is not completely correct.

Alabamians deserve to know that this is happening to conservative groups within their state. Indeed, all Americans deserve to know what appears to be more intimidation and attempts to thwart anyone who might take opposition to the current administration’s policies and procedures. In the case of The Wetumpka Tea Party, those attempts were unsuccessful, as that group has been active in giving a voice to Alabamians in all areas from legislative process to expressing the desire of the public relevant to legislation.

The post Alabama Tea Party Group Targeted by Internal Revenue Service appeared first on WatchdogWire.

Benghazi dominated the headlines for weeks as the Administration continued to blame the attack on a little known video. From the talk shows to the major news organizations, they continued to deceive American citizens. While they were spinning this tale, they were other aspects of Benghazi, as well as Sebilius’ crime were missed under the radar. The State Department did not admit until October 9, 2012 that the attack on Benghazi was terrorist in nature. By then, Sebelius’ transgression had already been aired and covered up.

The Hatch Act:

limits certain political activities of most executive branch employees. For example, the law prohibits employees from engaging in political activity while on duty or in the Federal workplace. It also prohibits them from soliciting or receiving political contributions.

The U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) is the agency responsible for enforcing the Hatch Act. General information about the Hatch Act may be found on the OSC website.

Once Sebelius was caught violating the Hatch Act, she simply changed the event to “political” and the Democratic National Convention reimbursed the taxpayers event in order to “cover” her. The usual penalty for this crime would be immediate dismissal. Instead, Obama’s mouthpiece, Jay Carney reported that action had been taken by the Secretary and department to remedy what was the result of an unintentional error based on unscripted remarks. This decision not to punish her was made on September 14, 2012.

This is not the first time that Sebelius has been caught for similar acts. Ask the people of Kansas who have long watched Sebelius abuse her political power, and then weasel out of the consequences by making excuses for her bad behavior. This can only work if the mainstream news media are willing to cover her fraud, which was the case in Kansas and now in Washington, DC.

In 2007, as Governor of Kansas, Sebelius hosted a party at the official Governor’s Mansion at taxpayer-expense for late-term abortionist George Tiller and his entire abortion clinic staff of about 25 people. Tiller made large donations to Sebelius’ political campaigns and to the campaigns of her handpicked staff. At the time of the tax-funded party, Tiller was under criminal investigation by the Attorney General’s office in a high-profile case that generated much public controversy. Two months later, Tiller was charged with 19 criminal counts of violating the state’s post-viability abortion law.

Operation Rescue, a pro-life organization, obtained photos, then receipts, through an open records request that proved tax dollars paid for the event. Once caught cheating the American taxpayers, Sebelius was at first not sure how to respond to the scandal changing her story several times. Finally, she said that she had donated a dinner as a fundraiser to the Greater Kansas City Women’s Political Caucus Auction Reception, which was purchased by Tiller during a silent auction. There was never any indication that this was true. But that wasn’t the only time Sebelius had to rewrite history to excuse an ethical lapse.

There are numerous other times on record that she has made her own rules with no regard to law. During the Senate confirmation hearings for her appointment to HHS, there was a written request for the amount that Tiller had donated to her campaigns. She stated, under oath, the amount of $12,450 in her bid for Insurance Commissioner. It was later discovered in the Kansas Governmental Ethics Records that the actual amount was $38,450– a difference of $26,000. The same records indicated that some of the money had been used on her campaign for governor. Caught again, she filed a corrected report with the Senate Finance Committee and told them she had inadvertently failed to provide some contributions that led to an oversight of PAC contributions as well as contributions from Tillers business. She was given yet another pass and was named HHS Secretary and has continued with her less than ethical practices.

Now she is in the limelight again. In a new story written by Nicole Young, Senator Lamar Alexander is questioning the legality of her fundraising efforts to implement Obamacare. He has likened it to the Iran-Contra incident and said she should be investigated immediately.

Ms. Sebelius seem to have no intention of changing her unethical political habits. How many free passes are to many? How many times must a politician break the law before they actually have to pay the price for their actions? You tell us.

The post Sebelius Violation of Hatch Act Obscured Behind the Benghazi Tragedy appeared first on WatchdogWire.