|Reverse Discrimination Widespread at IRS!
Courts Repeatedly Order IRS to
Drop Racial Preferences.
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
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
IRSs "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 IRSs pool of employees was not
a compelling government interest and did not justify IRSs race and gender
Federal District Judge Donald E. Walter did not mince words. He added that the IRSs
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 Judges 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 Commissioners memo was any mention of fair and equal
treatment of non-minorities! The Commissioners 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
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.
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
Your notarized statements
/ affidavits should be mailed to:
820 Jordan, Suite 480
Shreveport, LA 71101
(Note: U.S. Mail of your
notarized statement is required!)
|Agent Angelo Troncoso: One of the most glaring, recent examples of IRSs
reverse discrimination involves the case of IRS agent Angelo Troncoso.
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
IRSs 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 IRSs history of reverse discrimination, U.S. Representative John
Mica (R-Florida) said "If one agencys 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.
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, dont you think?
See Also: Text of Jennifer Long's Race Discrimination Lawsuit filed October 1, 1997) temporarily unavailable. Try the following links:
(posted Oct. 1997, currently unavailable)
(posted recently, currently not
See especially: April 18, 2001 Update
Footnote: According to the EEOCs 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.
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.
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!
|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.)
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 doesnt 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
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
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, doesnt 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" employees 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 didnt have one in the previous year, we wouldnt get a satisfactory
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
Mr. James even had the arrogance to describe his racist style in the following way:
"Its 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 theyre 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
Hmm. A tad schizophrenic, Mr. James? Have you been taking lessons from Mr. Bill "I did
do it, but I also didnt 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.
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
"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
|July 12, 1999
Update: More IRS
Retaliation Against Conservative Organizations. Based upon the Washington
Times National Weekly Edition, July 12 - 18, 1999.
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
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 IRSs 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 Clintons
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 Clintons 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)
2001 Update: More
IRS Retaliation Against Jennifer Long. Based upon the Washington Times
April 18, 2001.
"The Internal Revenue Service sought to thwart a
whistleblower from getting her accounting license, prompting concern on Capitol Hill about
"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
5 - IRS Reverse Discrimination