Now we have the federal government itself saying the IRS needs to be brought to heel.
What's next? Will the White House counsel demand articles of impeachment be drawn up against the president for high crimes and misdemeanors?
I wouldn't hold my breath on that, but you can read the Government Accountability Office report that adds to the growing chorus saying the IRS is out of control and accountable to no one.
The need to rein in the IRS has never been more urgent. Today's technology makes it possible to track virtually everything a citizen of the United States does. Where you bought breakfast, who you talk to on the phone, your Christmas gift list – these are all a few keystrokes away from prying eyes.
Americans suspect the overreach of the Patriot Act and an NSA with its fetish for total information awareness. But the IRS already went there decades ago.
Under today's tax law, it is perfectly legal for the IRS to rummage through the electronic records of your every move – and they don't need a court order to do it.
Doctors warn of dangerous side effects when you combine prescription drugs. Adding the government's ever widening surveillance to the already-invasive mandate of the IRS is a prescription for tyranny.
It's bad enough that the IRS doesn't need to explain anything to a judge before stalking you. Even worse, there are for all intents and purposes no internal controls within the agency. An enterprising – or vengeful or just plain nosy – tax agent doesn't have to justify his snooping to anyone.
The Government Accountability Office is slamming the IRS for this lack of accountability within the sprawling agency. The GAO's investigation found the IRS kept shoddy records detailing how it chooses targets to audit, allows staffers essentially to freelance audit decisions and keeps officials in key positions much longer than its own rules allow, The Hill reports.
GAO says the nightmare scenario is real: An out-of-control IRS can use its proctoscope on tax-exempt groups "for examination in an unfair manner – for example, based on an organization's religious, educational, political or other views."
That's exactly what the IRS has been doing. Find yourself on the president's enemies list and the odds increase you'll find yourself under the IRS microscope. The IRS targeting of tea party groups is legendary, and it doesn't end there.
The Wall Street Journal reported how President Obama's re-election campaign named Romney donor Frank VanderSloot as "less-than-reputable." Within weeks of the smear job appearing online, the IRS chose him and his wife for an audit. (The Labor Department joined in the pile-on, too.) They were not alone.
When government employees are allowed to interpret and re-interpret the law on their own to suit their whims, the opportunities for wrongdoing are endless.
In 2011, donors to conservative groups were told they could be liable for a 40 percent "gift tax" on their contributions. In fact, the gift tax was never meant for contributions to organizations – it's used when parents give money to their children to avoid paying the federal estate tax.
The IRS never imposed the gift tax on the donors, but simply by sending the letters, the IRS likely had a chilling effect on donations to political organizations.
That's why groups across the political spectrum, from the ACLU, the NAACP and the Human Rights Campaign to Freedom Works and the Tea Party Patriots, are supporting the Fair Treatment for All Gifts Act, H.R. 1104.
Rep. Pete Roskam and Sen. Rob Portman introduced this legislation to reassert congressional control over the IRS. Their bill takes away the discretion of the IRS on how they treat donations to nonprofit political organizations and forbids the IRS from treating the donations as gifts.
H.R. 1104 passed the House unanimously. Now it is time for the Senate to act. Majority Leader McConnell says he wants to show that the Senate can govern. Passing the Fair Treatment for All Gifts Act would be a good start.
It is a small step for protecting free speech, and a giant leap for asserting congressional control on an out-of-control agency.