A Final Reflection on Our Real Treasure: PA Treasurer Joe Torsella’s Farewell Letter

On January 15, 2021, PA Treasurer Joe Torsella sent a letter to the PA General Assembly members. It was a farewell letter to the legislature reflecting back on his four-year term as Treasurer, his work with the legislature, his reelection loss last November, and the anti-democratic activities that occurred since then.  It is a powerful letter talking about the fragility of a democracy and what needs to be done to repair and strengthen it for the future.  Much like George Washington’s Farewell Speech, I believe that this letter should also be remembered and his thoughts taken to heart.  As he said in this letter, “In the wake of the events of the last few weeks and months, I find myself compelled to issue a warning and a call to action.”  This is that warning and call to action.

Page 1 of Treasurer Joe Torsella’s Farewell Letter

PAGE 1:

TREASURY DEPARTMENT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA HARRISBURG, PA 17120

JOSEPH M. TORSELILA TREASURER                                                       JANUARY 15, 2021

Dear Colleague:

Throughout my term as Pennsylvania State Treasurer, I have written regularly to share my views. And despite our inevitable disagreements, the ongoing “conversation” 1 have had with members of the legislature over the past four years ranks among the most gratifying experiences of my time in this public service, which has been among the greatest honors of my life.

I have always considered you, the members of the General Assembly, to be colleagues. And I have come to know many of you – in both parties – as friends. On the day I was sworn in four years ago, I was touched to see so many legislators in the audience from across the state and across the aisle, including the current representative and senator from Berwick, the town in Columbia County where I grew up (so long ago!). And for four years, when constituents who had grown understandably cynical would ask me about the divisiveness and dysfunction of politics, I relished being able to point to the spirit of that day – and to the long list of ways we in Harrisburg found to work together despite our differences.

Recounting the list of our joint achievements – creating Keystone Scholars, launching the ABLE program, dramatically improving financial transparency, collaborating on Act 5 pension reforms, helping Pennsylvanians weather the storm of COVID-19, and more – always made me feel proud to be a public servant and, more importantly, hopeful about the future of our democracy.

But in the wake of the events of the last few weeks and months, I find myself compelled to issue a warning, and a call to action. It is clear that we face a larger challenge: the ongoing threat to the legitimacy of our bedrock democratic institutions.

quote from Joe Torsella’s farewell letter

I remain mindful of the various financial challenges we face, and I would like for the last letter I write to you as Treasurer to focus on the important work of building on the progress we have made over the last four years. But in the wake of the events of the last few weeks and months, I find myself compelled to issue a warning, and a call to action. It is clear that we face a larger challenge: the ongoing threat to the legitimacy of our bedrock democratic institutions.

These days, I often find myself thinking back to the ten years I spent as founding President and CEO of the National Constitution Center, the years I spent representing our nation as an ambassador at the United Nations, and the countless times in both roles I…

Page 2 of Joe Torsella’s Farewell Letter

explained and boasted about the American experiment in self-government, which remains the most important and daring political innovation the world has ever seen.

I would extol the Founders’ understanding that constitutions are not magical guarantees of the “ordered liberty” they aspired to for the United States. They simply offer a prescription for habits of the democratic heart. When a citizenry internalizes those habits, constitutions work. When those habits are disregarded, those founding documents become meaningless pieces of paper,

Quote from Joe Torsella’s Farewell Letter

Ushering visiting tourists or even foreign heads of state through the Constitution Center, I would extol the Founders’ understanding that constitutions are not magical guarantees of the “ordered liberty” they aspired to for the United States. They simply offer a prescription for habits of the democratic heart. When a citizenry internalizes those habits, constitutions work. When those habits are disregarded, those founding documents become meaningless pieces of paper, like the beautiful, stirring, and utterly powerless and irrelevant constitution of the former Soviet Union.

And lingering at the exhibit on the election of 1800 – the first peaceful transition of power between two bitterly contending political parties in world history – I would describe that election as the moment when we Americans proved we had the hearts, not just the rhetoric, of a democratic republic, the first link in a chain that stretched all the way to the present day.

Now, for the first time in our history, that chain has been broken. What’s worse, duly elected public servants chose to break it. The insurrection at the U.S. Capitol last week – an organized and violent attempt to prevent Congress from carrying out its constitutional duty- represented the horrifying climax of an extra-legal effort to thwart the results of a free, fair, and legitimate election. And while the President may bear the most direct responsibility for the events of January 6, far too many elected officials have spent the last two months helping to spread the ugly and corrosive lie that the 2020 election was “fraudulent,” or “rigged,” or “stolen.”

Two things should be very, very clear.

First: The Pennsylvania electorate voted to elect Democrat Joe Biden president, to un-elect Democrat Joe Torsella, and to send a Republican General Assembly to work with Democratic Governor Tom Wolf. Any fourth grader can tell that’s not a “rigged” election; it’s Pennsylvanians having their nuanced, considered – if personally frustrating or disappointing to some of us – and sovereign say.

Writing as someone who lost in that election, trust that I am as unhappy about my result as you are happy about yours. But accepting with grace the results of this election – or any election – is perhaps the most important duty we seek when we run for office. For we may run to advance our views or those of our party, but we serve to represent all citizens, and we swear to uphold their constitution: the sacred compact we’ve made that elections are how we resolve our differences, even when they are as deep as those between Adams and Jefferson in 1800.

quote from Joe torsella’s farewell letter

Second: If you are reading this letter, it is because the election of 2020 sent you into office (for all of you in the house and the half of you in the senate who faced the voters.) Writing as someone who lost in that election, trust that I am as unhappy about my result as you are happy about yours. But accepting with grace the results of this election – or any election – is perhaps the most important duty we seek when we run for office. For we may run to advance our views or those of our party, but we serve to represent all citizens, and we swear to uphold their constitution: the sacred compact we’ve made that elections are how we resolve our differences, even when they are as deep as those between Adams and Jefferson in 1800.

Page 3 of Joe Torsella’s Farewell Letter

Page Three

At the Constitution Center, I would warn that democracies are strong -but also fragile. And at the UN, I watched countless nominal democracies-on-paper slide into something else in practice: autocracies at best, hotbeds of civil strife at worst. It is distressing and heartbreaking to observe that the actions of people with the gall to call themselves patriots have brought us closer to that precipice than ever before.

I won’t pretend that we all share an equal measure of responsibility for this danger. But I’ve said what I have to say to, and about, those who continue to fan the flames of misinformation, inviting further damage to our democracy.

But, fair or not, the responsibility for stopping this slide into chaos belongs to each of us.

quote from Joe torsella’s farewell letter

But, fair or not, the responsibility for stopping this slide into chaos belongs to each of us. As a (soon to be former) elected official, I’ve made more than my own share of mistakes. But I’ve also learned that each new day in office offered me a chance to redeem those mistakes. That is what all of us -public servants and citizens alike -have before us now.

We cannot ever erase last week’s stain on our democratic soul. We cannot unbreak this chain. But we can forge a new one. Maybe even a stronger one.

quote from joe torsella’s farewell letter

We cannot ever erase last week’s stain on our democratic soul. We cannot unbreak this chain. But we can forge a new one. Maybe even a stronger one. And in doing so, we can find not just redemption, but a new sense of purpose that might guide us through the stormy seas of this moment in our history.

It may seem trite or naive to suggest that there is opportunity in this crisis. But that suggestion is rooted not just in hope, but in history.

The Founders knew what to do because they had learned, the hard way, what not to do -from the examples of short-lived democracies in their history books, the mistakes of the British monarchy from which they declared independence, the early experiments in democracy made by the thirteen states, and their own abject failure to secure the blessings of liberty via their first attempt at a national government, the Articles of Confederation.

During the Civil War, our union was dealt a near-fatal -and similarly self-inflicted -blow. (Indeed, one of the most jarring images of this crisis is the sight of soldiers sleeping in the Capitol Rotunda for the first time since then.) But President Lincoln and a generation of public servants -few of whom entered politics expecting to determine the fate of democracy itself-stitched it back together, remaking the Constitution with the Reconstruction amendments. And generations later when Jim Crow revealed the ultimate shortcomings and hypocrisy of our efforts at reconciliation, we remade it once again through the Civil Rights movement.

There is a reason we can look back and admire the leadership displayed by those who have held elected office during times of turmoil -it is because only admirable leadership could have shepherded our country through.

Page 4 of Joe Torsella’s Farewell Letter

PAGE 4

Whatever brought each of us into public service, this is now the defining responsibility of our generation: reforging the chain of democracy, reimagining our civil compact, resurrecting the guardrails of public reason that allow citizens to converge around a shared understanding of facts, recommitting to respect the people’s sovereign will, and restoring the understanding that We the People must share a common purpose because we will share a common fate.

It is clearer than ever that the real treasure in Pennsylvania is not the $120 billion in our Treasury. It is our long and storied tradition of leadership in the American experiment of self-government

quote from Joe torsella’s farewell letter

As an elected representative of the thirteen million citizens of this Commonwealth, you have an opportunity and obligation to embrace that charge. It is clearer than ever that the real treasure in Pennsylvania is not the $120 billion in our Treasury. It is our long and storied tradition of leadership in the American experiment of self-government.  From our role in writing the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, to hosting the first national government, to defending the Union in the Civil War and evolving it during the Civil Rights movement, to answering the call of service and duty over more than two centuries, we Pennsylvanians have written countless chapters of the American story that I was so proud to boast of.

The American story is ours to continue, our nation’s precious legacy ours to restore.

quote from Joe torsella’s letter

I hope that we will prove equal to that example by coming together once again in spirit, renewing our bonds as one American family, and reclaiming our identity as the world’s greatest constitutional democracy under the rule of law. The American story is ours to continue, our nation’s precious legacy ours to restore.

I urge you to summon all your courage and wisdom to address this challenge. I will do my part as a citizen, and I wish you luck in doing yours as a public official. And I offer you my enduring friendship, support, and gratitude for doing so.

In service,

Joseph M. Torsella

State Treasurer

Women’s March Affects Entire World, All Ages

I participated in the march on Denver on January 21, 2017. Between 200,000 and 300,000 people were walking for democracy in Denver; we joined several million men, women, and children around the world who are standing up and fighting back for our rights and for our democracy. Here are three pictures I took while in Denver for the March.

And here’s another perspective on the Women’s Marches around the world from a fellow blogger.

Nel's New Day

I couldn’t stop laughing! A poll shows that Republican males believe that their lives are harder than those of women. Men make more money for the same work, have a far less chance of rape, don’t have their reproductive rights attacked, and do far more housework than men while holding a full-time job, but white men are the “low people on the totem pole” and “everybody else is above the white man,” according to an 81-year-old retired police captain. He complained that “everything in general is in favor of a woman. No matter what happens in life, it seems like the man’s always at fault.”

In this survey taken after the election, only 41 percent of GOP men think now is a good time to be a man. Although one-third of women feel unsafe because of their gender, only 20 percent of men understand that women feel this way. Thirty percent of women…

View original post 693 more words

The Conservative Pot of Anger

IRS Form 990 non-profit form

Form 990 – the IRS tax form used by recognized 501(c) non-profit organizations

For over a week now we have been hearing about the “scandal” within the IRS’s Tax-Exempt division.  Congress has been holding hearings, calling on current and past Commissioners to testify about the additional scrutiny given to Tea Party organizations.  A couple of days ago, I asked if this additional scrutiny was a scandal or not.

In addition to my comments that day, the Guardian has now brought up another issue that may be adding fuel to the conservative f(ire).  That fuel is a four-decade simmering anger at the IRS by the conservative religious right.  An anger fueled by both segregation and religion.

In 1954, the US Supreme Court declared in Brown v. Board of Education that segregation in education was unconstitutional. In 1964, Congress passed the Civil Rights Act that, which among other issues makes discrimination based on race in public accommodations and employment illegal. In 1967, the US Supreme Court declared in Loving v. Virginia that bans on interracial marriage were unconstitutional.  In 1970, the IRS changed their tax-exempt regulation on private schools to reflect these policies.

Bob Jones University had, under pre-1970 regulations been granted tax-exempt status.  In 1970, as a result of the change in regulations, the IRS notified Bob Jones University that they intended to revoke the university’s tax-exempt status because of their segregationist policy of initially not admitting blacks and then, later of not admitting or expelling students who entered into, engaged in, or advocated for interracial marriage or dating.

Bob Jones University felt that they had a “biblical” right to discriminate.  So they filed case after case to overturn the IRS revocation.  Finally in 1983, in Bob Jones University v. United States, the US Supreme upheld the IRS revocation of Bob Jones University’s tax-exempt status because of its segregationist policies.

The Justices disagreed with Bob Jones’ biblical interpretation of the competing First and Fourteenth amendments to the US Constitution.  In looking at both amendments, they first declared that there is strong governmental interest in ending discrimination:

[The] Government has a fundamental, overriding interest in eradicating racial discrimination in education 29 – discrimination that prevailed, with official approval, for the first 165 years of this Nation’s constitutional history. That governmental interest substantially outweighs whatever burden denial of tax benefits places on petitioners’ exercise of their religious beliefs.

Then, citing the aforementioned cases (and others), the Court held stated:

An unbroken line of cases following Brown v. Board of Education establishes beyond doubt this Court’s view that racial discrimination in education violates a most fundamental national public policy, as well as rights of individuals.

The Court then pointed out that this IRS regulation was still constitutional even after Bob Jones University opened its doors to people of all races.  The Justices reiterated the lower court decision, stating that the University remained racially discriminatory in its policies at the university in violation of the tax-exempt regulations:

Petitioner Bob Jones University, however, contends that it is not racially discriminatory. It emphasizes that it now allows all races to enroll, subject only to its restrictions on the conduct of all students, including its prohibitions of association between men and women of different races, and of interracial marriage. 31 Although a ban on intermarriage or interracial dating applies to all races, decisions of this Court firmly establish that discrimination on the basis of racial affiliation and association is a form of racial discrimination, see, e. g., Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967); McLaughlin v. Florida, 379 U.S. 184 (1964); Tillman v. Wheaton-Haven Recreation Assn., 410 U.S. 431 (1973). We therefore find that the IRS properly applied Revenue Ruling 71-447 to Bob Jones University. 32

The judgments of the Court of Appeals are, accordingly,

Affirmed.

I think that this article in the Guardian is correct.  It might just be another reason for the current tax-exempt status furor.  It seems that pulling the tax-exempt status of a religiously-based institution for its violation of our country’s stance for equality under the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution resulted in a simmering pot of anger just waiting for a bit more fire to bring conservatives to a full boil.

What do you think?  Please comment.  I’d be interested in hearing your opinion.

Special Report: IRS Scandal Shakes Washington (OR IS IT?)

I just read this blog by Michael J. Rosen about the extra scrutiny of conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status. I decided to repost his blog with three sets of comments. My comments give thought to three different sets of questions:

  1. What else besides what we’ve heard about might have helped lead to this “scandal?”
  2. Is it really a “scandal?” Do we know?
  3. Is this issue likely to go away soon?

What else might be behind this scandal?

Besides a lack of training and oversight that we’ve heard about, I think another part of this whole problem is the backlog of applications in the non-profit division of the IRS. I talked to them the other day about a non-profit I work with that is attempting to get its 501(c)4 status reinstated due to the 990-N issue. The agent I talked to said that they are getting over 5,000 applications every month and are working on them on a first come, first serve basis.

The IRS website says that with the small staff they have, there is an even greater backlog on applications than what the agent told me. Here’s that IRS statement.

“All [non-profit] applications are sent to the IRS Determinations Office in Cincinnati. This office receives approximately 70,000 applications for tax-exempt status of all kinds each year [that averages out to 5,833 new applicants each month]. This includes applications from section 501(c)(3) and section 501(c)(4) organizations. This office, which includes fewer than 200 people working directly on applications, is primarily responsible for working determination applications.”

The agent helped me to figure out the current status of this VERY SMALL non-profit that I’m working with (if it brings in $400/year for this group, it’s doing well). He told me that the records show that all of the paperwork at our end is basically complete, but the application won’t be reviewed until the office gets to the applications marked as “complete” as of September 2012 (when he says my group officially completed the paperwork). And, directing me to another section of the website, he pointed out that the office is currently working on applications from early May 2012 – i.e., over a 1 year delay in processing!

The aforementioned web page also goes into more detail, from the official IRS viewpoint, of what happened with the Tea Party organizations. It says that approximately 70 Tea Party groups were put into the in-depth “centralized” review; that out of a total of, currently, about 470 organizations being given similar treatment.

Is it a Scandal? Do We Really Know?

A scandal is defined as “a circumstance or action that offends propriety or established moral conceptions or disgraces those associated with it.” A political scandal is “an instance of government wrongdoing” that offends or disgraces those directly associated with that wrongdoing.
In this case, so far, it doesn’t appear to be a scandal that rises to the level of the White House. According to the Washington Post, based on increasing evidence, the IRS issue is very bad press for the Obama administration. According to their report,

If we believe the agency inspector general’s report, a group of employees in a division called the “Determinations Unit…” started giving tea party groups extra scrutiny, were told by agency leadership to knock it off, started doing it again, and then were reined in a second time and told that any further changes to the screening criteria needed to be approved at the highest levels of the agency.

The White House fired the acting director of the agency [this week] on the theory that somebody had to be fired and he was about the only guy they had the power to fire. They’re also instructing the IRS to implement each and every one of the IG’s recommendations to make sure this never happens again.

And from all the evidence obtained so far, there is no evidence of any connection between the “Determinations Unit” and the Obama administration. So unless there is a smoking gun hidden somewhere, there is no political scandal within the White House. Time will tell.

Is this issue likely to go away anytime soon?

No, I personally doubt that the issue will “go away” anytime soon.

Three reasons:

  1. partisan politics to continue attacking Obama’s executive branch;
  2. long history of spying and intrusiveness; and
  3. free-speech issues.

The first issue is purely partisan. Issues that Republicans think will make President Obama look bad are brought up again and again even when the public, to some extent (but not the base) has moved on. Has the Benghazi issue died? How many times will the Republican-dominated House vote to revoke Obamacare before they give up?

The second issue is spying and intrusiveness that, for the first time in a long time, concerns both sides of the aisle. There has been a long history of the feds, usually the FBI, targeting non-profits. Think of the Friends (Quakers) peace-related work for example or the Communist-baiting of the 1950s. Usually it’s the more progressive, left-leaning groups that are targeted. These groups have a long memory and I think may, in this case, support the concerns raised in this non-profit scrutiny case. And since there were progressive groups in this list of targeted non-profits, both sides have some ammunition to push back against the actions of the IRS.

The third is a First Amendment issue. Combine these IRS actions with the free press concerns over the Justice Department’s review of press reporters’ phone logs; both sides have screamed NO. What you have here are two different departments of the executive branch allegedly intruding on the First Amendment: one department—the IRS—may be attacking an individual’s free speech rights and another department—the Justice Department—may be attacking freedom of the press. Both protections are contained within the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

So no, based on all three routes of concern, I don’t think this issue will go away anytime soon.

Michael Rosen Says...

This week, the US Internal Revenue Service acknowledged and apologized for behavior that had long been rumored. The IRS improperly targeted for extra scrutiny conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status.

IRS logoThe IRS did not ultimately deny tax-exempt status to a single group receiving extra scrutiny. Some say this proves that the actions of the IRS were baseless.

The scandal has now shaken the nation’s capital:

President Barack Obama directed Jack Lew, Secretary of the Treasury, to request the resignation of Steven Miller, Acting IRS Commissioner.

Miller resigned and Lew accepted the resignation.

The Justice Department has initiated a criminal investigation.

Exercising its oversight responsibility, Congress has begun its own probe of the IRS scandal.

Obama addressed the nation on television saying, “It’s inexcusable and Americans are right to be angry about it and I am angry about it. I will not tolerate this kind of behavior in any agency, but particularly…

View original post 371 more words