The IRS routinely discriminates against non-minority employees.  Retaliation and harassment of non-minorities repeatedly lands IRS in court.  Clinton's White House used the IRS to harass policital opponents.  IRS continues to harass whistleblower Jennifer Long 04/22/01.

ttl_final.GIF (24098 bytes)

Main
Story:
IRS Main Story
IRS

Case 5 - IRS Repeatedly Found Guilty of Reverse Discrimination!

irslogo.gif (2605 bytes)
To Serve
To Discriminate
To Retaliate

Judges Repeatedly Order IRS to Stop Racial Preferences, Harassment, Retaliation!

Back:
Go:  Horror Stories Menu.
Horror Stories Menu
Site
Main Site Index
Index

UPDATES as of April 18, 2001:

Apr. 18, 2001 The IRS harassment of Jennifer Long continues.  On March 22, 2001 IRS tried to prevent Ms. Long from getting her accounting license in Texas.  Retaliaton, much?  See April 18, 2001 Update: IRS Continues Retaliation against Jennifer Long.
Jul. 19, 1999 The IRS is ordered to harass conservative organizations such as the Heritage Foundation and the Institute for Justice.   Thus far, IRS has refused to reveal the names of persons who requested those audits.  Could it be the Clinton White House?  See July 19, 1999 Update:  IRS Harasses Conservative Non-Profit Organizations.
Apr. 22, 1999 IRS retaliates against agent Jennifer Long for being a whistleblower.  An investigation is under way into allegations her employer is attempting to fire her in retaliation for her testimony before the Senate about IRS abuses.  See Apr. 22, 1999 Update:  More IRS Retaliation Against Jennifer Long.
Feb. 16, 1999 Byrd v. Rubin settled for undisclosed cash; Injunction sought in new suit in the same court.  Submit your statement opposing IRS reverse discrimination!  See: Byrd v. Rubin, More IRS 02/16/99 Update, below.
Aug. 20, 1998 The reverse racism still continues!  See:  IRS in Oklahoma Continues Reverse Discrimination, (Aug. 20, 1998 and Aug. 28, 1998).  IRS ordered to pay $200,000 damages to white manager for reverse discrimination.
Oct. 1997 IRS agent Jennifer Long sued the IRS for reverse discrimination (retaliation?) after her testimony before the U.S. Senate about IRS abuse of taxpayers!  (See also Update Apr. 28, 1998, below.)
Agent Troncoso Another IRS agent (Angelo Troncoso) proved he was repeatedly denied promotions within the IRS because he was not one of IRS's "preferred minorities".  (See Troncoso)
Apr. 1997 A U.S. District Court Judge determined that four IRS employees in Louisiana were denied "equal protection and equal treatment" because they were not on the IRS "preferred minority" list!

 


Reverse Discrimination Widespread at IRS!
Courts Repeatedly Order IRS to Drop Racial Preferences.
Top:
GO:  Top of page

          In the past two and a half years, the IRS has lost several important "reverse discrimination" cases. In several of the cases, the IRS has been charged with retribution against non-minority employees who filed reverse discrimination complaints!  And the reverse discrimination cases against IRS continue to pile up!

          "In implementing equal employment policies, agencies (such as the IRS) have used quotas and timetables that ... contribute to the increases in discrimination charges" by non-minorities, according to U.S. Representative John Mica (R-Florida). (Parentheses added. Editor.)

IRS Ordered to Drop Reverse Discrimination: In April 1997 Federal District Court Judge Donald E. Walter (U.S. District Court for the Southwestern District of Louisiana) ruled that the IRS’s "affirmative action" policies had encouraged "institutional discrimination against white male employees".  The case, Byrd vs. Rubin, involved four white male employees who were able to show that the IRS passed them over for promotion in favor of less qualified minorities purely for racial reasons.

          The court ruled that "diversification" of the IRS’s pool of employees was not a compelling government interest and did not justify IRS’s race and gender preferences!

          Federal District Judge Donald E. Walter did not mince words. He added that the IRS’s racial and gender "diversity" policies were unconstitutional, and that the IRS policies amounted to racial quotas, racial guarantees or racial set-asides.

          This case is one of the few the government has been unable to prevent from going to court, and it has resulted in the IRS having to revamp their EEO guidelines.

          Non-minorities are still a long way from equal protection under the law at IRS, however. Responding to the Judge’s order, the IRS Commissioner weasel-worded a memo to his managers. His memo said, in part, that managers are now supposed to help employees "achieve parity at all grade levels which is reflective of the civilian labor force by eliminating barriers in recruiting, hiring, training and promoting minorities..." Conspicuously absent from the Commissioner’s memo was any mention of fair and equal treatment of non-minorities! The Commissioner’s memo also did not mention that qualifications, achievements, or experience were particularly important. This does not sound like the IRS has eased up on reverse discrimination, does it?

Byrd v. Rubin Update 02/16/99

          The court case, Byrd v. Rubin, in which Federal District Court Judge Donald E. Walter, ruled that IRS deprived white males of their 5th Amendment right was settled prior to trial for cash, the amount of which can't be revealed by the plaintiffs according to the settlement agreement.

          Two suits were subsequently filed against IRS by the same attorney, in the same court, challenging the same employment practice, i.e. a strategic initiative known as ERR-16 which was implemented in 1990 primarily to increase the representation of females and minorities at higher graded positions within IRS.  Injunctive relief has been requested in both of these suits, one of which is a class action, wherein 8 white males seek to represent all white male employees of IRS and those separated after 1-1-90.

          The Court has not ruled on the motion for class certification. Trial is presently scheduled for June 21, 1999.   Any federal employee interested in information regarding this suit, or having information they would like to share regarding federal employment preferences within IRS or any other federal agency may contact the plaintiff's attorney (see below).

You Can Help!  Our law firm represents 8 white male employees of the IRS in a suit seeking a class action on behalf of all white male employees of the Internal Revenue Service.   We now have pending a motion to certify the class and a motion for summary judgment. The case is set for trial on June 21, 1999.

          We are in a good position but we could use affidavits (signed and notarized statements) for our motions from current or former IRS employees, particularly managers who can state that managers were pressured to find ways to select minority or female candidates for promotion over more qualified white males.  If you can cite specific facts or individual cases of discrimination it would be even better.  We would like to have a box full of affidavits for the Judge to show him the discrimination is Service wide.

          Your notarized statements / affidavits should be mailed to:

                    Cody Mayo
                    820 Jordan, Suite 480
                    Shreveport, LA 71101

                    E-mail: Byrdmayo@aol.com
          (Note: U.S. Mail of your notarized statement is required!)


Agent Angelo Troncoso: One of the most glaring, recent examples of IRS’s reverse discrimination involves the case of IRS agent Angelo Troncoso. Top:
GO:  Top of page

          In court, Troncoso has proved that the IRS repeatedly passed him over in favor of more "favored" racial groups in spite of the fact that Troncoso was often ranked as the most qualified (according to IRS’s own personnel records). Troncoso documented one instance in which he was passed over for promotion by a person who was ranked 13 positions below him on the qualified list solely because the unqualified individual belonged to a preferred racial category.

          In reviewing the IRS’s history of reverse discrimination, U.S. Representative John Mica (R-Florida) said "If one agency’s policies are found to be unconstitutional, it is incumbent on the administration to make certain that all other federal agencies are not repeating those errors."  We'll see.


IRS Retaliates Against Whistleblower: Houston IRS Agent Jennifer Long was disgusted with the way IRS harassed innocent, low-income taxpayers. In September 1997 Agent Long told the powerful Senate Finance Committee all about IRS abuses. Top:
GO:  Top of page

          Jennifer Long even provided testimony to the Senate of cases in which citizens who were under investigation by the Houston office of the IRS killed themselves after prolonged, unnecessary and often illegal "tax harassment" by the IRS.

          Not coincidentally, in October 1997 Jennifer Long was forced to sue the IRS for reverse discrimination against her!  Jennifer Long is white.  Her supervisor is black.   Among the charges in her law suit, Jennifer Long maintains that white employees in the Houston IRS office - including herself - were consistently subjected to reverse discrimination by black managers and supervisors.  Long also says that her black supervisor "screamed at her and called her a lazy, stupid liar."

          Jennifer Long and her attorney maintain that her "reverse discrimination" law suit is unrelated to her Senate testimony about IRS abuses of taxpayers.  But it sounds an awful lot like retaliation by the IRS, don’t you think? 

See Also:   Text of Jennifer Long's Race Discrimination Lawsuit filed October 1, 1997) temporarily unavailable.  Try the following links:
http://www.contilaw.com/pleadings/Long.htm (posted Oct. 1997, currently unavailable)
http://www.contilaw.com/pleadings/Long%20v.%20IRS.htm (posted recently, currently
not working)

See especially:  April 18, 2001 Update (below).

Footnote: According to the EEOC’s own data, charges of reverse discrimination by non-minorities increased dramatically between 1991 and 1996. According to the Federal Times (11/24/97), in the year ending September 30, 1996 white federal employees had filed 11,295 complaints with EEOC, while blacks filed 9,339 race-based complaints!  (Federal Times based its report on EEOC's own published data.)

          It is no coincidence that Bill Clinton was in the White House overseeing this dramatic increase in reverse discrimination against non-minority employees.


Update Apr. 28, 1998:  The Senate Finance Committee is scheduled to convene four more days of hearings into IRS abuses today.  In an apparent effort to discredit and intimidate witnesses who are scheduled to testify against the IRS, it has been reported that the U.S. Treasury Department had been directed to "investigate" Jennifer Long's allegations, and to prove that they were false. Top:
GO:  Top of page

          Significantly, Treasury was unable to find evidence that Long's testimony had been falsified, so instead Treasury leaked a watered-down report to Democrats saying "Ms. Long's allegations could not be substantiated"!   Pretty weak, guys!

          Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) was quoted in the Washington Post as saying that the release of the Treasury report was "an attempt to intimidate witnesses that we were planning on having this week."   Stay tuned.

          See Also:  Apr. 22, 1999 Update: More IRS Retaliation Against Jennifer Long.


Update May 10, 1998:  The hearings are over and both the Republicans and the Democrats have sponsored "remedial legislation" to "fix" this rogue agency.   Sadly, but not surprisingly, the Senate Finance Committee failed to vigorously pursue the rampant reverse discrimination within the IRS.  Our recommendation to non-minority IRS workers:  keep filing those EEOC complaints!  Top:
GO:  Top of page

Update Aug. 20, 1998:  According to the Oklahoman On Line on 8/20/98, the IRS continues to "reverse discriminate" against troublesome, non-minority employees.  (See also Aug. 28, 1998 Update, below.) Top:
GO:  Top of page

          Ron James, collection division chief for the IRS Oklahoma/Arkansas district is black, and he is in the habit of retaliating against IRS employees who refuse to perform illegal acts, including illegally promoting less-qualified minorities within the district office over more-qualified "white" employees.  Mr. James doesn’t care much for his white employees, and he makes a habit of abusing his office to punish them. It seems that Mr. Ron James likes to practice a little racial revenge against "whites" to compensate for his perception of past discrimination against his "people".

          According to the Oklahoman On Line, Mr. James believes it is his god-given mission to "identify and respond to the under-represented groups (minorities) in the (IRS) work force."

          According to the testimony of revenue officer Kathy Howe, who had the displeasure of working for Mr. Ron James, many of the demands that Mr. James assigned to his subordinates were "either unethical or illegal."

           Three ex-employees of this IRS district office -- Mona Meier, Gary Hoeffken and Norma Woodward -- have charged Mr. Ron James with breaking anti-discrimination laws through his use of race as a determining factor in promotions. (Note: it seems that under oath, Mr. Ron James actually admitted that he instructed Ms. Norma Woodward that women were no longer an "under-represented minority" and that, therefore, other racial categories should automatically be given preference over "women" (presumably "white" women). Hmm. It does sound a tad discriminatory, doesn’t it?)

          Ms. Norma Woodward also testified that she refused to follow Mr. James’ order to promote a black employee over a white employee solely because of race. Ms. Woodward further testified that the "white" employee’s performance record was superior to that of the black employee whom Mr. James had ordered her to promote.

          Taxpayers beware! It also seems that Mr. Ron James was particularly fond of "property seizures" by the IRS, and that he made the number of property seizures accomplished by his agents a determining factor in their promotions!  Note: This is significant because Federal Law prohibits using the number of "property seizures" performed by an agent as a determining factor in employee evaluations and promotions.  It seems that even the Feds think that this form of "bounty hunting" against taxpayers is beyond the pale. Yet the IRS's rogue district manager, Mr. Ron ("I'm a minority and you can't touch me") James, persisted in disregarding Federal Law in order to pursue his own "bounty hunting" against innocent taxpayers.

          In spite of the testimony of several IRS agents to the contrary, Mr. James continued to deny that he tied employee evaluations to property seizures (which, as noted, would be contrary to Federal Law).

          Bonnie Carson, one of James’ revenue officers, testified that "He (James) just came right out and said (we) would be evaluated on how many (property) seizures we did, and if we didn’t have one in the previous year, we wouldn’t get a satisfactory rating."

          Incredibly, Mr. Ron James subsequently testified that he believed it was part of his job with the IRS to correct his perception of "rampant" racism against minorities. Mr. James failed to produce documentary evidence that such racism actually existed. Nonetheless, he continued to penalize his "white" employees for their race, apparently in order to correct his egocentric perception of past racial imbalances within the agency.

          Mr. James even had the arrogance to describe his racist style in the following way: "It’s my show!" (as quoted to the Oklahoman On Line.)  James continued his self-centered rant by claiming that his style is "autocratic with a participatory flair" (Implication: Mr. James’ style is "participatory" if you happen to be black, like him!)

          In a February 1998 deposition, Mr. Ron (promote ‘em if they’re black) James stated that he thought Mona Meier (one of the plaintiffs) "was one of the best of the managers" at the IRS office. Then, during the trial, Mr. James contradicted his sworn deposition by testifying that "I never thought she was" one of the best managers.

          Hmm. A tad schizophrenic, Mr. James? Have you been taking lessons from Mr. Bill "I did do it, but I also didn’t do it" Clinton?


Update Aug. 28, 1998:  On Thursday 8/27, the federal jury ordered the IRS to pay $200,000 to one of the three plaintiffs (all supervisors with the IRS office).   However, U.S. District Judge Robin Cauthron dismissed the charges by the other two supervisors who had claimed reverse discrimination and retaliation by their minority boss. Top:
GO:  Top of page

          The $200,000 award is to be paid by the IRS, not by Ron James, the black collection division chief for the IRS Oklahoma/Arkansas district.  Well, Mr. James, it looks like you slid by on this one, doesn't it?


Apr. 22, 1999 Update:  More IRS Retaliation Against Jennifer Long.   As reported by the Dallas Morning News on 04/22/99 Top:
GO:  Top of page

          "Ms. [Jennifer] Long said earlier this week that she was summoned from an audit on April 15 to a meeting with her superiors where she was given a lengthy memo alleging poor performance in June 1998. This was just a few months after she testified before Congress. The memo gave her 68 days to improve or face dismissal. Ms. Long has said that she got good performance ratings from 1993 to 1997.

          "Contacted Wednesday [4/21/99], Ms. Long said she didn't want to discuss the matter, but she did say that the memo threatening to fire her has been withdrawn until further notice. She continues her daily routine of performing IRS audits.

          "IRS Commissioner Charles Rossotti ordered an investigation last week after whistle-blower Jennifer Long, an IRS agent in Houston for 16 years, reported that her supervisors were taking steps to fire her. Ms. Long was a star witness in the Senate investigations of IRS abuse of taxpayers in the fall of 1997. She was the first agent to identify herself while testifying.

          "Deputy IRS Commissioner Bob Wenzel arrived Monday in Houston to review the case. Mr. Wenzel met Mr. Ellis in Houston, the regional commissioner said, and both thought it best that Mr. Ellis go on leave Tuesday."  (Dallas Morning News 04/22/99 by Bill Deener)
[former link *http://www.dallasnews.com/in-the-news-nf/biz101.htm]


July 12, 1999 Update:  More IRS Retaliation Against Conservative Organizations.  Based upon the Washington Times National Weekly Edition, July 12 - 18, 1999. Top:
GO:  Top of page

          The IRS under the Clinton administration has been busily harassing and attacking conservative, non-profit educational foundations, including several who directly oppose racial and gender quotas and preferences.  Other educational foundations who have incurred the wrath of Clinton's IRS include those which supply educational materials analyzing the faults inherent in Clinton's social, economic, and foreign policies.

          According to the Washington Times National Weekly Edition for July 12 - 18, 1999, the IRS has been busily performing excruciating ‘harassment’ audits against the Heritage Foundation, the Institute for Justice, the Freedom Alliance, Citizens Against Government Waste, and Citizens for a Sound Economy, among others.  These are all decidedly conservative organizations who operate under a tax-exemption known by its IRS code designation -- 501(c)3 -- which is reserved for tax-exempt, educational, non-profit organizations.

          Virtually all political stripes have established dozens of 501(c)3 organizations, promoting the complete range of political philosophy, ranging from extremely conservative to extremely liberal.

          By IRS definition, such organizations are prohibited from earning profits or distributing profits to shareholders; they are prohibited from endorsing specific political candidates; and they are also prohibited from attempting to influence specific legislation.  Beyond that, the IRS 501(c)3 designation prohibits very little else.  At least according to the law.

          Which leaves quite a wide range of latitude in the interpretation of the non-profit, educational missions of such organizations.

          But, given the IRS's targeted audits of largely conservative non-profits, the Landmark Legal Foundation, itself a 501(c)3, decided to examine the motivation for the IRS audits against these organizations.   Who ordered these audits against conservative foundations, and why?

          To find the answers, Landmark filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the names of all non-IRS personnel who had asked for audits of non-profit, tax exempt groups such as the conservative organizations listed above.

          What Landmark received back from the IRS was almost 9,000 pages of "heavily blacked out documents" -- blacking out info on a FOIA request is known in federal-speak as "redacting".  The info supplied by the IRS was so heavily redacted that the supplied documents were all but worthless.

          The IRS also has prohibited Ms. Terry Hallihan, in charge of the 501(c)3 branch of the IRS, from providing testimony pertaining to the identity of Congressmen, Congressional staffers, and other outside parties (such as the White House) who may have requested that the IRS conduct these audits of the conservative non-profits.  In an apparent effort to cover up the motivations for these audits, the Clinton Justice Department (Janet "Shoot First, Ask Questions Later" Reno) issued a protective order preventing Ms. Hallihan from providing testimony in this matter.

          However, the horse may already be out of the barn:  Ms. Hallihan has previously gone on record (at a 1997 conference) where she publicly stated that the IRS goes to extraordinary lengths to protect the identity of individuals requesting such audits.  At the 1997 conference, Ms. Hallihan said that IRS’s efforts to hide the identity of audit-requestors extends to an official IRS policy of shredding staff notes which may identify persons who requested such audits!

          The Washington Times correctly infers that the Clinton White House, and his Congressional supporters, are very suspect partisans in their abusive use of federal agencies to intimidate and silence perceived political enemies.  For example, the Washington Times cites the Clinton White House's abuse of the FBI in the White House's handling of Travelgate.  Also, dozens of "confidential" FBI files about Clinton’s perceived political enemies mysteriously appeared in the White House basement -- without explanation.  As far as anyone has been able to determine, there was no national security reason for those FBI files to have been in Clinton's White House basement.  Finally, the Washington Times cites Hillary Clinton’s unsubstantiated but well-documented ravings about a "vast right wing conspiracy" against her husband and his policies.

          Besides Richard M. Nixon's implicit assent in the Watergate burglaries against his perceived policital enemies, there is simply no other modern precedent for such bald and cynical abuse of federal power by a sitting President aimed at subverting the democratic process in order to advance his own, insular version of "what is right".  (Based on the Washington Times National Weekly Edition July 12 - 18, 1999)


April 18, 2001 Update:  More IRS Retaliation Against Jennifer Long.  Based upon the Washington Times April 18, 2001. Top:
GO:  Top of page

           "The Internal Revenue Service sought to thwart a whistleblower from getting her accounting license, prompting concern on Capitol Hill about possible retaliation.

          "The auditor [Jennifer Long] had testified at nationally televised hearings in 1997 that her agency harassed taxpayers.

          "IRS officials in February sent a routine form back to Texas licensing regulators about Houston-based agent Jennifer Long, declining to answer questions about her skill, character and integrity while alerting the regulators it was sending a "narrative" required for derogatory information.

          "The agency then drafted a three-page letter to the regulators dated March 22 that sharply criticized her work on multiple fronts including suggesting she mishandled audits.

          "The probes for unreported income were not adequate," said the letter, which was obtained by the Associated Press.

          "The Texas Board of Public Accountancy, however, granted Miss Long´s license before the IRS letter was sent.

          "Miss Long was the star witness at 1997 hearings before the Senate Finance Committee that examined charges of abuses by the IRS.

          "She was the lone agency worker to shun a voice disguise and protective screen used by fellow whistleblowers to conceal their identities.

          "In 1999, IRS officials sent her a termination notice but never fired her after members of Congress inquired about possible retribution."

See Also:  Jennifer Long's Whistleblower Role in IRS Hearings (Sept. 1997 - above)

[Last known link: http://www.washtimes.com/national/20010418-23931650.htm ]


End Case 5 - IRS Reverse Discrimination

 

Return to Horror Stories Menu

Main Site Index:

Top:
Go to Top of Page
MAIN NEWS
Index

by category
DONATE
Contributions are tax-deductible
HORROR
STORIES

and case studies
TERMS
and Definitions
SEARCH
Site
LEGAL HELP
Firms and Resources
LINKS MESSAGE
Board
GO:  Home Page
Home
Page Index
URL's and page names for site
Favorite
EDITORIALS

National opinion
DIRTY RACIAL
POLITICS

How Quotas are Enforced
EDITOR'S DESK
What's Hot!
RACIAL
PROFILING

D.O.J. Requires It!
EDUCATIONAL
TESTING

News Analysis
CENSUS 2000
Racism
ABOUT US

Copyright 2002 Adversity.Net, Inc., an IRS 501(c)(3) tax-exempt educational organization.  For problems or questions regarding this web contact editor@adversity.net    Last updated: April 18, 2001.

Go to Adversity.Net Home Page

*  We use the term reverse discrimination reluctantly and only because it is so widely understood.  In our opinion there really is only one kind of discrimination.