H. Res. 565 
In the House of Representatives, U. S., 
May 7, 2014. 
Whereas in February of 2010, the Internal Revenue Service 
(‘‘IRS’’) began targeting conservative nonprofit groups 
for extra scrutiny in connection with applications for tax- 
exempt status; 
Whereas on May 14, 2013, the Treasury Inspector General 
for Tax Administration (TIGTA) issued an audit report 
entitled, ‘‘Inappropriate Criteria Were Used to Identify 
Tax-Exempt Applications for Review’’; 
Whereas the TIGTA audit report found that from 2010 until 
2012 the IRS systematically subjected tax-exempt appli-
cants to extra scrutiny based on inappropriate criteria, 
including use of the phrases ‘‘Tea Party’’, ‘‘Patriots’’, 
and ‘‘9/12’’; 
Whereas the TIGTA audit report found that the groups se-
lected for extra scrutiny based on inappropriate criteria 
were subjected to years-long delay without cause; 
Whereas the TIGTA audit report found that the groups se-
lected for extra scrutiny based on inappropriate criteria 
were subjected to inappropriate and burdensome informa-
tion requests, including requests for information about 
donors and political beliefs;
•HRES 565 EH 
Whereas on January 27, 2010, in his State of the Union Ad-
dress, President Barack Obama criticized the Citizens 
United v. Federal Election Commission decision, saying: 
‘‘With all due deference to separation of powers, last 
week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that 
I believe will open the floodgates for special interests— 
including foreign corporations—to spend without limit in 
our elections’’; 
Whereas throughout 2010, President Barack Obama and 
congressional Democrats publicly criticized the Citizens 
United decision and conservative-oriented tax-exempt or-
ganizations; 
Whereas the Exempt Organizations Division within the IRS’s 
Tax-Exempt and Government Entities Division has juris-
diction over the processing and determination of tax-ex-
empt applications; 
Whereas on September 15, 2010, Lois G. Lerner, Director of 
the Exempt Organizations Division, initiated a project to 
examine political activity of 501(c)(4) organizations, writ-
ing to her colleagues, ‘‘[w]e need to be cautious so it isn’t 
a per se political project’’; 
Whereas on October 19, 2010, Lois G. Lerner told an audi-
ence at Duke University’s Sanford School of Public Pol-
icy that ‘‘everybody’’ is ‘‘screaming’’ at the IRS ‘‘to fix 
the problem’’ posed by the Citizens United decision; 
Whereas on February 1, 2011, Lois G. Lerner wrote that the 
‘‘Tea Party matter [was] very dangerous,’’ explaining 
‘‘This could be the vehicle to go to court on the issue of 
whether Citizen’s [sic] United overturning the ban on 
corporate spending applies to tax exempt rules’’;
•HRES 565 EH 
Whereas Lois G. Lerner ordered the Tea Party tax-exempt 
applications to proceed through a ‘‘multi-tier review’’ in-
volving her senior technical advisor and the Chief Coun-
sel’s office of the IRS; 
Whereas Carter Hull, a 48-year veteran of the Federal Gov-
ernment, testified that the ‘‘multi-tier review’’ was un-
precedented in his experience; 
Whereas on June 1, 2011, Holly Paz, Director of Rulings 
and Agreements within the Exempt Organizations Divi-
sion, requested the tax-exempt application filed by Cross-
roads Grassroots Policy Strategies for review by Lois G. 
Lerner’s senior technical advisor; 
Whereas in June 2011, Lois G. Lerner ordered the Tea 
Party cases to be renamed because she viewed the term 
‘‘Tea Party’’ to be ‘‘pejorative’’; 
Whereas on March 22, 2012, IRS Commissioner Douglas 
Shulman was specifically asked about the targeting of 
Tea Party groups applying for tax-exempt status during 
a hearing before the House Committee on Ways and 
Means, to which he replied, ‘‘I can give you assurances 
* * * [t]here is absolutely no targeting.’’; 
Whereas on April 26, 2012, IRS Exempt Organizations Di-
rector Lois G. Lerner informed the House Committee on 
Oversight and Government Reform that information re-
quests were done in ‘‘the ordinary course of the applica-
tion process’’; 
Whereas on May 4, 2012, IRS Exempt Organizations Direc-
tor Lois G. Lerner provided to the House Committee on 
Oversight and Government Reform specific justification 
for the IRS’s information requests;
•HRES 565 EH 
Whereas prior to the November 2012 election, the IRS pro-
vided 31 applications for tax-exempt status to the inves-
tigative website ProPublica, all of which were from con-
servative groups and nine of which had not yet been ap-
proved by the IRS, and Federal law prohibits public dis-
closure of application materials until after the application 
has been approved; 
Whereas the initial ‘‘test’’ cases developed by the IRS were 
applications filed by conservative-oriented Tea Party or-
ganizations; 
Whereas the IRS determined, by way of informal, internal re-
view, that 75 percent of the affected applications for 
501(c)(4) status were filed by conservative-oriented orga-
nizations; 
Whereas on January 24, 2013, Lois G. Lerner e-mailed col-
leagues about Organizing for Action, a tax-exempt orga-
nization formed as an offshoot of President Barack 
Obama’s election campaign, writing: ‘‘Maybe I can get 
the DC office job!’’; 
Whereas on May 8, 2013, Richard Pilger, Director of the 
Election Crimes Branch of the Department of Justice’s 
Public Integrity Section, spoke to Lois G. Lerner about 
potential prosecution for false statements about political 
campaign intervention made by tax-exempt applicants; 
Whereas on May 10, 2013, IRS Exempt Organizations Direc-
tor Lois G. Lerner apologized for the IRS’s targeting of 
conservative tax-exempt applicants during a speech at an 
event organized by the American Bar Association; 
Whereas the Ways and Means Committee determined that, of 
the 298 applications delayed and set aside for extra scru-
•HRES 565 EH 
tiny by the IRS, 83 percent were from right-leaning orga-
nizations; 
Whereas the Ways and Means Committee also determined 
that, as of Lois G. Lerner’s May 10, 2013 apology, only 
45 percent of the right-leaning groups set aside for extra 
scrutiny had been approved, while 70 percent of left-lean-
ing groups and 100 percent of the groups with ‘‘progres-
sive’’ names had been approved; 
Whereas the Ways and Means Committee has also deter-
mined that, of the groups that were inappropriately sub-
ject to demands to divulge confidential donors, 89 per-
cent were right-leaning; 
Whereas on May 15, 2013, Attorney General Holder testified 
before the Judiciary Committee that the Department of 
Justice would conduct a ‘‘dispassionate’’ investigation 
into the IRS matter, and ‘‘[t]his will not be about 
parties * * * this will not be about ideological persua-
sions * * * anybody who has broken the law will be held 
accountable’’; 
Whereas on May 15, 2013, President Barack Obama called 
the IRS’s targeting ‘‘inexcusable’’ and promised that he 
would ‘‘not tolerate this kind of behavior in any agency, 
but especially in the IRS, given the power that it has and 
the reach that it has into all of our lives’’; 
Whereas the Attorney General has stated that the Depart-
ment of Justice’s investigation involves components from 
the Civil Rights Division and the Public Integrity Sec-
tion; 
Whereas the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Jus-
tice has a history of politicization, as evident in the re-
port by the Department of Justice Office of Inspector
•HRES 565 EH 
General entitled, ‘‘A Review of the Operations of the Vot-
ing Rights Section of the Civil Rights Division’’; 
Whereas Barbara Bosserman, a trial attorney in the Civil 
Rights Division who in the past several years has contrib-
uted nearly $7,000 to the Democratic National Com-
mittee and President Barack Obama’s political cam-
paigns, is playing a leading role in the Department of 
Justice’s investigation; 
Whereas the Public Integrity Section communicated with the 
IRS about the potential prosecution of tax-exempt appli-
cants; 
Whereas on December 5, 2013, President Barack Obama de-
clared in a national television interview that the IRS’s 
targeting of conservative tax-exempt applicants was 
caused by a ‘‘bureaucratic’’ ‘‘list’’ by employees in ‘‘an 
office in Cincinnati’’; 
Whereas on April 9, 2014, the House Committee on Ways 
and Means referred Lois G. Lerner to the Department of 
Justice for criminal prosecution; 
Whereas the House Committee on Ways and Means found 
that Lois G. Lerner used her position to improperly influ-
ence agency action against conservative tax-exempt orga-
nizations, denying these groups due process and equal 
protection rights as guaranteed by the United States 
Constitution, in apparent violation of section 242 of title 
18, United States Code; 
Whereas the House Committee on Ways and Means found 
that Lois G. Lerner targeted Crossroads Grassroots Pol-
icy Strategies while ignoring similar liberal-leaning tax- 
exempt applicants;
•HRES 565 EH 
Whereas the House Committee on Ways and Means found 
that Lois G. Lerner impeded official investigations by 
knowingly providing misleading statements to the Treas-
ury Inspector General for Tax Administration, in appar-
ent violation of section 1001 of title 18, United States 
Code; 
Whereas the House Committee on Ways and Means found 
that Lois G. Lerner may have disclosed confidential tax-
payer information, in apparent violation of section 6103 
of the Internal Revenue Code; 
Whereas former Department of Justice officials have testified 
before a subcommittee of the House Committee on Over-
sight and Government Reform that the circumstances of 
the Administration’s investigation of the IRS’s targeting 
of conservative tax-exempt applicants warrant the ap-
pointment of a special counsel; 
Whereas Department of Justice regulations counsel attorneys 
to avoid the ‘‘appearance of a conflict of interest likely 
to affect the public perception of the integrity of the in-
vestigation or prosecution’’; 
Whereas since May 15, 2013, the Department of Justice and 
the Federal Bureau of Investigation have refused to co-
operate with congressional oversight of the Administra-
tion’s investigation of the IRS’s targeting of conservative 
tax-exempt applicants; 
Whereas on January 13, 2014, unnamed officials at the De-
partment of Justice leaked to the media that no criminal 
charges would be appropriate for IRS officials who en-
gaged in the targeting activity, which undermined the in-
tegrity of the Department of Justice’s investigation;