Link to article here. (Click on the link at this site to view the video of Miller gettin’ cozy with a lobbyist)

Despite defeat, Miller executes more damage to property rights
By Terri Hall
June 1, 2016

After an onslaught of threats that remain unresolved, residents of the Texas Hill Country just got a little retribution. From issues with land development and water to toll roads and property rights, Texas House District 73 yearned for new leadership. After an ugly, heated run-off election last week, it got it. Incumbent State Representative Doug Miller, an establishment Republican and staunch supporter of liberal Republican Speaker Joe Straus, was ousted by newcomer conservative businessman Kyle Biedermann of Fredericksburg. With Miller set to appear as an ‘expert witness’ on behalf of the developer of the controversial Johnson Ranch housing development, a very public showdown between neighboring landowners and this lame duck representative is taking shape.

The vast majority of the problems facing Hill Country residents over the last decade stem from out of control development. Between commercial development and massive new residential housing developments popping up across the scenic and once pristine Hill Country, issues like traffic, water shortages and rate hikes, sewage dumping, and even flooding have plagued residents, and they’re not getting much help from their elected representatives. Indeed, many see Miller as part of the problem.

The latest in the dispute over a wastewater permit involving the Johnson Ranch has emerged through the Johnson Ranch Municipal Utility District (MUD), which is a quasi-governmental entity controlled by the developer of Johnson Ranch. MUDs, which are controlled by private developers, allow private corporations to gain access to the governmental power of eminent domain. Naturally, landowners who have their private property stolen in the name of a public use for what amounts to private gain fight back. Such is the case with Terrell and Pat Graham who have been forced to spend a small fortune in legal fees defending Pat’s family homestead that’s been a continuous working cattle ranch for over one hundred years — the Lux family ranch.

Miller is set to serve as an expert witness for the Johnson Ranch MUD, testifying against the Lux-Graham family, which puts Miller at odds with the private property rights that Texans hold sacred. While it comes as no surprise to the Grahams, who have received no help from Miller for three years, it’s sent a shockwave through Bulverde residents who see Miller’s provocative move as a thumb in the eye and proves his coziness with well-connected special interests who funded his re-election campaign has wholly clouded his objectivity when it comes to his role as a public servant. What makes this move by Miller more breathtaking is the fact that he Chairs the Special Purpose District Committee that oversees the creation and governance of MUDs.

The Grahams’ property adjacent to Johnson Ranch is under threat of eminent domain by the Johnson Ranch MUD. The developer, David Hill Johnson Brothers (DHJB), wants to dump up to 350,000 gallons a day of treated sewage onto the Graham’s ranch, causing problems for cattle grazing and robbing them of the use and enjoyment of their property. An administrative law judge agreed with the Grahams and recommended that the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) deny the wastewater permit, but TCEQ granted it anyway. The Grahams are appealing that decision.

But in the meantime, the developer tried to do an end run around the Graham’s lawsuit by reviving a dormant MUD where it could use eminent domain to take their land instead of wait for a final ruling that may go against the developer. Miller is now a party to the MUD’s abusive actions. Rather than defend the public interest as an elected official, he’s siding with special interests who have rewarded Miller financially. Miller is wholly owned by those special interests, so much so that he’s willing to throw his own constituents under the bus in order to allow an entity controlled by a developer to steal private property from one Texan using forcible eminent domain for the developer’s own private gain. Yet, Miller claimed he was strong in defending property rights.

This is why Miller was defeated. His constituents realized, whether it was during the campaign or in their own dealings with him, that he no longer represented them but special interests. The best course of action when an elected official is this bought and paid for is to boot them from office. It’s refreshing when voters do just that. Sadly, it may not be in time to help the Graham-Lux family hang onto their property.

However, residents of House District 73 can look forward to having an advocate in their newly elected representative, Mr. Biedermann. As a landowner himself, Biedermann understands first-hand the tie Texans have with their land and the threats that come from both government itself and from private entities that team up with big government to take it. Most importantly, Biedermann knows his constituents will hold him accountable if he ever wavers, as they did with Doug Miller.

Link to article

Straus, Wolff attempt to rewrite history on toll roads at election time
By Terri Hall
Examiner.com
February 16, 2016

It’s always interesting to watch politicians try to re-write history when election time rolls around. A case in point is State Representative Joe Straus, Speaker of the Texas House, and Bexar County Commissioner Kevin Wolff. Both have supported tolls in the past and they’ve put up persistent roadblocks to removing tolls from San Antonio road projects, but now they’re taking credit for expanding US 281 without tolls. Of course, this was after a total rebellion from the grassroots and residents in the corridor for over a decade. We heard repeatedly why we had to ‘accept’ tolls, why it was a ‘done deal,’ and why these powerful men ‘could do nothing about it.’

It wasn’t until Governor Greg Abbott campaigned against toll roads and advanced the largest infusion of new road funding in Texas history during his inaugural first year in office that either Straus or Wolff actually made a major effort to expand area highways without tolls — and that was largely due to the fact that grassroots anti-toll groups like Texans for Toll-free Highways advocated and won protections for taxpayers in the legislation prohibiting the new funding from being used on toll projects. That’s when the dominos started to fall.

Well, voters, it’s time to say ‘baloney’ at the ballot box and call their bluff. Early voting starts today in the Texas primary and runs through Friday, February 26. Election day is March 1. Both Straus and Wolff have strong anti-toll challengers. In House District 121 to unseat Straus, grassroots candidates Sheila Bean and Jeff Judson are making a strong run at the Speaker. Both are opponents of toll roads, and tolls will be an issue in that race. Incumbent Kevin Wolff, also has a strong anti-toll challenger with Ret. Lt. Navy Commander Michael Koerner seeking to unseat one of the members of a political family dynasty in Bexar County — the Wolffs. Tolls will also be an issue in the race. All three challengers face an uphill battle, but at a time when voter outrage with the political landscape — local, state and national — is at an all-time high, a perfect storm just may be brewing — enough to unseat these two entrenched incumbents of the political class.

Straus is arguably one of the most powerful men in Texas politics as Speaker. All House bills are controlled by his committee chair appointees. No legislation passes without his approval. Even if you get your bill out committee, it can again be stymied by the House Calendars Committee, stacked with Straus lieutenants, where bills go to die by not being placed on the House calendar for an actual floor vote. Straus has been the regular target of conservative challenges both during the election of a Speaker by House colleagues and on the ballot box for the State Representative seat. Straus has repeatedly blocked key conservative legislation like Abbott’s ethics reform, banning sanctuary cities, and even delayed the passage of Abbott’s road funding bill until the very last minute, watering it down and placing a sunset date on the vehicle sales tax fund transfer where it expires just one year after it kicks in.

Straus’ committee chairs over House Transportation have repeatedly blocked anti-toll reform bills, like making the tolls come off the road when it’s paid for to prevent perpetual taxation, removing loopholes that allow free lanes to be converted into toll lanes, and blocking the use of gas tax and other public funds from propping up toll projects that aren’t financially feasible.

Wolff sits on the Alamo Area Metropolitan Planning Organization, or AAMPO, charged with deciding what area road projects are funded with tolls. He’s repeatedly voted to toll 281, Loop 1604, I-10, I-35 — literally dozens of toll projects across the Alamo city. He twice allowed funds to be stolen from 281 to fund Loop 1604 as a freeway, forcing tolls to stay on 281. Over one billion in uncommitted funds have come through the AAMPO since the citizens have challenged area toll roads, yet Wolff and Straus never fought to insist the previously allocated non-toll funding for 281 be restored or that those funds be prioritized to remove tolls from AAMPO plans.  Wolff even told voters they could ‘fry me for it later’ when he voted to keep tolls on 281, despite new funding making non-toll possible. He allowed the 281 funds to be taken for Loop 1604 to appease his liberal Democrat colleagues on Commissioners Court.

Both Straus and Wolff support the latest version of the 281 debacle, too. Rather than return 281 to a complete non-toll expressway, they simply removed the toll element and kept the controversial conversion of two existing main lanes into HOV-bus lanes, that few cars will be able to access. So they’re shrinking highway main lane capacity from six lanes down to four.

They extol the virtues of the project and repeat the toll authority’s lie that they’re ‘doubling’ capacity on 281. Yet, all they’re actually ‘adding’ are frontage roads, not highway main lanes, and in fact, they’re taking away lanes by converting two lanes into the HOV-bus lanes. AAMPO officials, Via, and TxDOT admit the purpose of this road diet is to force Stone Oak, Fair Oaks, and Boerne commuters out of their cars and onto a bus.

While I-10 will also include an HOV-bus lane, that corridor will see a net increase of actual highway main lanes from four to eight, with two of those new lanes being the HOV-bus lanes. But no such luck for 281 users. Their misery will be made permanent, thanks to Kevin Wolff.

Wolff supports his father, County Judge Nelson Wolff’s, liberal attempts at behavior modification by forcibly imposing the HOV-bus lane conversion on 281 and the addition of an HOV-bus lane on I-10 because he won’t stand up to his dad and his love affair with unpopular Via projects. Nelson Wolff’s big government policies will hijack one of the remaining bastions of freedom Texans have enjoyed since the dawn of the highway program — freedom of mobility. Now a government bureaucrat will control when and how you can access highway lanes built with your tax money.

Straus and his staff defend the HOV-bus lane conversion on 281 to try and fool constituents into thinking they’re getting new highway capacity, when, in fact, they’re having two main lanes open to all cars today taken away and turned into restricted lanes controlled by Via. So even with the addition of overpasses, there will still be congestion in the 281 corridor for our lifetimes. Straus has also failed to deliver road funding to the Alamo city. Cities our size, like Ft. Worth, get triple the road funds of San Antonio, year after year, on Joe Straus’ watch. He promised to end the diversions from the state gasoline tax for several sessions but never got it done until Abbott made it a priority.

San Antonio deserves and must insist on more responsive, fiscally responsible leadership. Thankfully, voters have the opportunity to send these entrenched establishment politicians packing on March 1.

For a complete list of Texans for Toll-free Highways endorsements, go here: http://tollfreehighways.com.

Link to article.

Bexar County Commissioner Kevin Wolff makes erroneous statements in this News 4 story. The Alamo Area MPO’s own consultant said HOV lanes have done nothing to increase carpooling or alleviate congestion. Ginger Goodin of the Texas Transportation Institute testified before the MPO last month that HOV-bus lanes are designed to change behavior and get people to switch modes of transportation.

Then there’s Wolff’s claim that the 281 project will add 6 new lanes. The only new lanes they’re building are FRONTAGE ROADS, not general purpose highway lanes. There are NO NEW highway main lanes whatsoever in this project, and, in fact, the HOV lanes will convert two of the six existing general purpose lanes (open to all cars) into an HOV-bus restricted lane, actually shrinking existing capacity and leaving only 4 non-HOV lanes when today there are six.

The public has a right to know how congested this corridor will continue to be when they’re promising one thing and delivering another.

Millions set aside for highway improvements
By Emily Baucum
New 4 WOAI-TV
February 9, 2016

SAN ANTONIO – Bexar County leaders set aside millions of dollars Tuesday to help revamp two major highways: Loop 1604 out west, and Highway 281 on the far north side.

It’s all part of a nearly billion-dollar plan to improve roads in growing parts of town.

The plan no longer includes toll roads but it does include something else we’ve never seen in this area: carpool lanes.

Drivers on the far west side already know progress on Loop 1604 takes patience.

“It was just stop-and-go traffic,” driver Shanara Guishard said.

Work is underway to expand the highway and add overpasses.

“You’re always stuck waiting in traffic,” driver Jeremy Duran said.

Bexar County is one of several agencies putting money into the pot.

Commissioners set aside $52 million to revamp Loop 1604 from Highway 90 to Culebra, and they paved the way for improvements stretching all the way to Bandera.

“So you’ll have a full divided highway from Highway 90 to I-35,” Commissioner Kevin Wolff said.

Commissioners also set aside $48 million to revamp Highway 281 from Loop 1604 north to the county line. Construction will hopefully start in early 2017.

“Loop 1604 to Stone Oak Parkway, you will see a total of six new lanes,” Commissioner Wolff said. “Two of those will be HOV lanes.”

They’ll be the first carpool lanes in our area, and he says research shows they should relieve congestion.

“All the data says the HOVs should work,” Commissioner Wolff said. “But we also have the ‘get out of jail free’ card: if it doesn’t, we’ll just turn it into a general purpose free lane.”

Both projects will take a couple of years to complete. Commissioner Wolff says if they cost more than expected, TxDOT would be the agency on the hook.

Link to article here.

Funds yanked: Congress puts the brakes on civil asset forfeiture
By Terri Hall
February 1, 2016
Examiner.com

Many conservatives are upset with the omnibus spending bill Congress passed at the end of the year, but one provision they should praise is congress rescinding funding for the Justice Department’s civil asset forfeiture program. Most Americans have no idea what civil asset forfeiture is until law enforcement seizes your vehicle and everything in it during a routine traffic stop even though you have committed no crime.

The program was initially launched to help local law enforcement agencies fight drug trafficking and other organized crime by seizing assets they suspect may be involved in those crimes. But now it’s morphed into a system where you don’t even have to be charged with a crime to have your property seized by police, and few innocent parties ever get their money or property back.

The modern use of civil asset forfeiture is rife with abuse and fraught with violations of citizens’ fourth amendment constitutional rights. Local law enforcement agencies now seek out high value assets to seize and use the proceeds from the sale of those assets to fund new vehicles for police departments or to fund other day-to-day operations of local law enforcement rather than seek to prosecute actual criminals and take down organized crime rings.

Many times it’s a driver who may be stopped and is found to have lots of cash on hand, so law enforcement jumps to the conclusion that the driver is involved in some sort of a drug-related crime and police immediately seize the cash, the vehicle, and all the property in the vehicle (and sometimes even the person’s home and other property) even though there’s no evidence of any crime nor do they charge the person for a crime.

It’s a very cumbersome, expensive, and lengthy process for an innocent party to get their seized property back, causing many to cut their losses and abandon their property altogether. Law enforcement is also known to threaten to charge innocent people with crimes if they seek to get their assets back, again causing many innocent parties to relinquish their property rather than fight an uphill, seemingly unwinnable battle.

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that an ‘innocent owner’ defense is not constitutionally required. In states where such a defense is permissible, the innocent party is usually responsible for proving their innocence. The presumption of innocence seems nowhere to be found when it comes to civil asset forfeiture, leaving innocent parties the difficult task of fighting for their own constitutional rights against well-funded, well-organized government agencies.

The Newspaper.com cites a Tennessee motorist that got stopped and the deputy found him in possession of $18,480 in cash. No drugs were found and the motorist said the cash was for a music deal, yet a sheriff’s deputy still confiscated the cash despite there being no evidence of any crime. The motorist was never charged with any crime. It took him almost two years in federal court to finally get his money back.

The federal government’s involvement stems from the ‘equitable sharing’ program through the Justice Department that allows local law enforcement to do an end run around state laws curbing civil asset forfeiture by invoking the federal forfeiture statute. The feds then split the proceeds with the locals skimming 20% for themselves, leaving local law enforcement with 80% of the booty to spend however they wish.

In response to the growing concern over how civil asset forfeiture collides with property rights, the Institute for Policy Research is hosting a summit on civil asset forfeiture on February 9 in Irving, Texas. The summit will feature grassroots and tea party favorites like State Senator Konni Burton, State Senator Don Huffines, and State Representative Matt Schaefer along with speakers from the both the left and the right – the ACLU and Freedom Works.

Other conservative think tanks, like Heritage Foundation, are also stepping up their efforts to educate the public to the abuses of civil asset forfeiture and demand lawmakers fight to protect Americans’ fundamental rights from wrongful forfeiture. The recent congressional action to defund the federal program only lasts through 2016, so expect both sides to be ready for battle in 2017.

Link to article here.

Public outrage rises as cost of Austin toll road triples
By Terri Hall
January 17, 2016
Examiner.com

Toll roads in Texas face growing opposition and a shocking revelation by the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority (CTRMA) just threw gasoline on the fire. The CTRMA tripled its initial cost estimates for its plan to add toll lanes to US 183 from MoPac to RM 620 in Austin from $225.7 million to a whopping $650 million. The 8-mile project will now cost $81.25 million per mile. By anyone’s estimation, that’s a staggering jump.

The CTRMA is seeking the approval of its $424.3 million amendment with the revised cost estimate by the Capitol Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) at its next board meeting. CAMPO board member and Travis County Commissioner Brigid Shea expressed dismay at the scant, sketchy information initially provided to the board. But rather than join her in scrutinizing the hike, fellow board members were frustrated by her questions and wanted to press to approve. However, action was delayed until the February 8 board meeting.

The toll authority has since provided more detail on the reason behind the explosion in cost. The majority of it involves two sets of flyovers or direct connect interchange ramps with the highways that intersect US 183 to the north (RM 620) and south (MoPac). The other additions involve bridges from the southern interchange with MoPac’s toll lanes into the toll lanes to be built in the median of US 183. Combined, this adds over $364 million to the tab. Another $90.2 million would add an additional free, general purpose free lane for about 4 miles. Lastly, $69.4 million got tacked on to inflate all the costs for the year it would start construction in 2019.

One of the objections from toll opponents is the exorbitant costs involved in turning freeways into a two-tiered highway system, cordoning off toll lanes from free lanes and having to construct expensive flyovers, bridges, or ramps to give special access to the inside toll lanes. It’s far cheaper to add free, general purpose lanes open to all cars without all the complicated flyovers and bridges. Plus, general purpose lanes are far more efficient since an unrestricted lane carries far more traffic than a restricted toll lane.

Another concern involves the CTRMA’s use of state funds to subsidize its overpriced toll project. The toll authority admits it doesn’t even have preliminary data on how much of the new project cost can be repaid with strictly the toll revenues collected, but they’ve made clear they expect all Texas taxpayers to pick up part of the tab for their bloated toll road.

Melissa Cubria, Director of Texas Public Interest Research Group, believes this cost explosion casts doubt on the CTRMA’s ability to properly manage Austin’s toll system.

“The news that the US 183 boondoggle will triple in cost is the latest in a series of stories that undermine CTRMA’s credibility and indicate that CTRMA board members do not have the expertise to manage billions in taxpayer funds. At this point, they are spending taxpayer dollars like reckless Wall Street bankers,” Cubria observes.

The Texas Transportation Commission may not pony-up the bucks for the US 183 toll project for two reasons. First, the Commission is currently evaluating its role in toll projects and may cut-off or greatly reduce its subsidies to toll projects that cannot pay for themselves. The Commission has diverted over $7 billion in funds to toll projects, double taxing Texans to take toll roads. Governor Greg Abbott campaigned against toll roads and the Commission he appoints may end or at least greatly reduce, the amount of subsidies that toll authorities received during the pro-toll Rick Perry years. Second, all of the Texas Department of Transportation’s new funding, Prop 1 and Prop 7, is strictly prohibited from going to toll projects. The sheer amount of funding available to subsidize toll projects has all but dried up.

Gasoline tax is the only remaining source of funds without restrictions, and since it has not been increased in more than 20 years, it, too, is a shrinking source of revenue. However, Texas State Senator Don Huffines introduced a bill last year during the 84th legislature to block even gasoline taxes from funding toll projects. Though it failed to pass, State Representative Ron Simmons successfully added an amendment to a bill, HB 122, to prohibit Texas Mobility Funds from going to toll projects, and House Transportation Committee Chairman Joe Pickett recently announced he’s on a war path to end managed toll lanes (inside existing freeways like is planned for US 183) in Texas calling the underutilized lanes ‘unacceptable in a growing state.’

So the state’s involvement in toll projects is in limbo, with toll opponents stacking up new allies in the legislature in the fight to prevent double taxation. With more than 40 challengers to many establishment, pro-toll incumbents, the anti-toll ranks could swell dramatically in time for the 85th legislature to convene in 2017. Whether the Commission acts to block further support of toll projects or the taxpayers stage a coup through its elected leaders in the legislature, toll projects that aren’t financially feasible like US 183 could well be on the ropes.

Link to article here.

IRS gains power to revoke passports for failure to pay taxes
By Terri Hall
Selous Foundation for Public Policy Research
January 4, 2016

Many Americans are shocked to find out that the recently passed federal highway bill, Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act, or the FAST Act, includes a provision that can take away or block them from having a U.S. passport. At a time when political scandals plague the IRS, which has been used to target conservatives, tea party and pro-Israel-affiliated groups, this is an especially shameful revelation brought to you by the House and Senate Republicans.

The GOP has put itself in a box. The Federal Highway Trust Fund has not been collecting enough revenue through the federal gasoline tax to pay for the level of spending thought necessary by the special interests. The GOP has also failed to fight to ensure every penny of the gas tax is, in fact, going to highways, not transit, rail, and bike lanes that automobile users do not use.

The federal gasoline tax, currently at 18.4 cents a gallon, has not been raised since 1993. Republicans do not want to raise taxes, including the gas tax. So, by taking a gas tax increase off the table and lacking the will to cut spending to offset the shortfall, Republicans have locked themselves into other schemes to raise the revenue needed to fund the federal highway program – schemes they’ve deemed more politically acceptable.

So, the GOP turned to tax compliance as their ‘solution.’ By giving the IRS the power to block and even revoke U.S. passports, hence one’s ability to travel internationally, for failure to allegedly pay federal taxes, Congress believes it can make up the difference by collecting more in taxes to help pay for the highway trust fund.

Is it any wonder voters don’t trust the Republican leadership in both the House and Senate?

The FAST Act actually creates a new section of the U.S. tax code, 7345, entitled, “Revocation or Denial of Passport in Case of Certain Tax Delinquencies.” While the focus is on those who owe $50,000 or more, because it includes interest and fees, many will fall into the category as fines and interest add up quickly. Indeed, the harsh new rules aren’t even designed to catch those who the government believes are fleeing the country to avoid paying taxes. It applies universally to those behind on paying their federal taxes, regardless of whether its criminal or civil in nature. The language is also very vague and much of the enforcement and application of this new law will be left up to the IRS to implement through the adoption of administrative rules. So, it’s ultimate reach is truly unknown.

Many view criminalization for failure to pay a debt as an illegal and unconstitutional revival of debtors’ prisons. Congress outlawed debtors’ prisons in 1833 and the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled them unconstitutional multiple times, most notably it ruled in its 1983 case Bearden v. Georgia that it’s a violation of the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.

Robert Woods, in his Forbes Magazine article on November 25, questions whether or not this new law will pass constitutional muster, “The right to travel is established, both between states and internationally. And although some restrictions have been upheld, it is not clear that this measure would pass the constitutional test.”

The passport provisions also represent a risk even for domestic travelers from four states. Louisiana, Minnesota, New Hampshire, and New York refused to comply with the REAL ID Act that forced states to issue drivers licenses according to new federal standards. Taking effect in 2016, residents of those states may now be required by the TSA to show a passport instead of a driver’s license in order to board a plane for domestic travel.

None of this tax policy would have made it into this totally unrelated, bloated, 1,300-page transportation bill without the blessing of the tax writing committees and GOP leadership,  Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI-01) prior to becoming Speaker. While the language likely originated in the Senate, the House, which preferred to pay for the bill through tax reform, eventually conceded to include the IRS provisions into its bill, arguing tax reform won’t happen with Obama in the White House.

As part of this tax compliance scheme, the IRS has also gained the ability to utilize private debt collectors to accomplish this goal in Section 32102 of the tax code titled, “Reform of rules relating to qualified tax collection contracts.” You may be thinking, why is that a bad thing? Because private debt collectors use brutal tactics to collect money, and they can even charge the delinquent taxpayer for any costs related to the private company’s debt collection services, piling onto the tab owed    .

The IRS already had the ability to use private debt collectors, but now it’s mandated for inactive tax receivables for any tax debt that has been:
– removed from the active inventory for lack of resources or inability to locate the the taxpayer;
– more than 1/3 of the applicable limitations period that has lapsed and no IRS employee has been assigned to collect the receivable; or
– a receivable assigned to collections, but more than 365 days have passed without interaction with the taxpayer or a third party for purposes of furthering the collection.

The private debt collectors do not have to disclose that they’re a private contractor either. Only the Secretary of Treasury decides when companies can disclose the truth to taxpayers.

History has already shown that using private debt collectors hasn’t worked. It was first tried in 1996 and only lasted a year due to complaints of harassment and unfair tactics. Under George W. Bush, they tried it again with the same result – unfair tactics, even harassing the elderly parents of a taxpayer with 150 phone calls after the collections firm knew the taxpayer was no longer at that address. It also resulted in taxpayers paying out penalties to those whose rights the private debt collectors violated.

Both attempts resulted in a net loss to the government, meaning you and I the taxpayer. The first, a net loss of $17 million, and the second a net loss of $4.5 million, this after Congress was told it would reap a net gain of $1 billion. The actual cost to administer the program in the 2000s was $86 million. When you factor in the commissions paid out, add another $16 million cost to the total tab. A 2013 study by the National Taxpayer Advocate (NTA) showed that IRS agents were more effective in collecting debt than private contractors, yet here we are.

Private debt collectors are notorious for not giving accurate information about taxpayers’ rights and options. They have no incentive to help you resolve your claim, only to collect what’s owed. If the taxpayer believes there are inaccurate claims to the amount owed, the debt collector won’t look into it as an IRS agent would. There are also concerns about fraud and protecting the data privacy like your address, bank accounts, social security number, employer, medical bills, etc.

As we all know, there are plenty of scammers out there waiting to pounce on such an opportunity to pose as the IRS (or its contractors). At least 736,000 contacts have been made by scammers over the phone in the past two years alone demanding pre-paid debit cards be sent to them to resolve one’s tax debt, costing 4,550 innocent taxpayers over $23 million in fraudulent tax settlements. The government then issued warnings about such scammers informing taxpayers the IRS doesn’t usually make the initial contact by phone, but private debt collectors routinely initiate contact through phone calls. How’s someone supposed to know the difference?

No matter how you look at these two IRS power grabs, it spells trouble for the taxpayer. Whether you’ll become a prisoner in your own country by being denied a passport, or harassed by unethical and ruthless private debt collectors to settle an alleged IRS tax debt, the Republican leadership in Congress delivered this anti-liberty, big government reality to your doorstep after voters gave them the keys to the Capitol to do the opposite.
______________________________________________________________________________
Terri Hall is the founder of Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom (TURF), which defends against eminent domain abuse and promotes non-toll transportation solutions. She’s a home school mother of ten turned citizen activist. Ms. Hall is also a contributor to SFPPR News & Analysis.

Link to article…

ELECTION 2016
Smith record causing opponent to raise Cain
By Terri Hall
Examiner.com
October 29, 2015

It’s shaping up to be a tough re-election season for incumbents. One of them may be Baytown’s ethically challenged Wayne Smith. His voting record on transportation reflects a disconnect with many Texans in District 128 who oppose toll roads, especially the privatization of public roads. It’s a record that got challenger Briscoe Cain to take notice, and he’s running to replace Smith as a more conservative voice in the Texas House.

Elected to seven terms in the Texas House, Smith chairs the Committee on Licensing and Administrative Procedures. As a former member of the Transportation Committee and as Chair of the Licensing Committee, Smith has potential conflicts of interest as a licensed Professional Engineer who owned Wayne Smith and Associates Consulting Engineers up until his election to the House. He also served as Legislative & Government Affairs Chairman for the Texas Society of Professional Engineers as well as serving as its President prior to taking office. Smith’s committee has oversight over the Texas Society of Professional Engineers.

Despite Texas law prohibiting politicians from using campaign funds for personal use, Smith violated Section 253.035 of the Election Code on 32 separate occasions between July 2002 and June of 2007 to pay dues to the National Society of Professional Engineers, among other professional associations.

His wife, Brenda, picked up where he left off, serving as an attorney for Lockwood, Andrews & Newnam, who, you guessed it, builds roads, including toll roads. So Smith is in the unique position of personally profiting from his connections to lawmakers and his influence over transportation and licensing policy.

Though Smith authored a bill, HB 1892, in 2007 to place a moratorium on private, corporate toll roads known as Comprehensive Development Agreements (CDAs) or public private partnerships, former Governor Rick Perry vetoed the bill and advanced a severely compromised bill, SB 792, in its place. Smith immediately caved to the governor, became his henchman on the bill, and even lied to his colleagues about the nature of market value tolling, claiming it only applied to the Grand Parkway project not every toll project across the state. Of course, once the bill passed, it was made very clear by legal experts and attorneys representing toll agencies that market value tolling did, in fact, apply to all toll projects in Texas.

So what is market valuation? It essentially allows a public toll entity to view the toll project as an ATM machine, similar to a private toll contract, and determine an upfront payment to be used on other projects based on its determined worth. This is just like Cintra offering Dallas officials $2.8 billion up front for Hwy 121 in exchange for the right to collect tolls for 50 years. It results in charging the highest possible tolls to use public highways since the toll is no longer based on the costs of constructing the road and paying off its debt. It would instead be based on how much officials think they could milk commuters for during congested hours. Market valuation is runaway taxation in the hands of un-elected toll boards.

William Lutz with Lone Star Report wrote in May 2007 of the ramifications of SB 792:
“A further flaw is it allows continuation of current policy, whereby the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) may require up-front ‘concession fees’ in exchange for building some new toll projects. The tolls that pay these concession fees are taxes, not user fees, because concession fees result in tolls over and above the amount required to build and maintain the road. Since the fees are paid back over time from toll revenue, it increases the burden of debt on our children and grandchildren. In short, concession fees, which are continued by the ‘market valuation’ language in SB 792, allow the government to raise taxes and do off-budget spending in a manner concealed to the public and without proper legislative oversight and authorization.”

The San Antonio Express-News on June 3, 2007, describes the Robin Hood scheme, “The provision would require market valuations to gauge how much money a toll road could bring in, including what motorists are willing to pay, and earmarking the profits to other area projects. ‘I’m uncomfortable with it,’ Bill Thornton (Chairman of the Alamo Regional Mobility Authority) said of the mandate. ‘Government is not here to make a profit, government is here to provide a service.’”

Governor’s puppet
The word given to House members in the back rooms prior to the vote on the House floor was ‘follow Wayne Smith.’ The leadership said if he votes for something, follow. If he votes against, follow. That’s what the governor wants.

A report in the Austin American Statesman, May 17, 2007, echoed the same sentiment when Smith said, “We could end up with another bill on the governor’s desk that he’ll veto” if members push too far with changes.

That statement summarizes Smith’s approach to governing. Go along to get along. If you push too hard, you might make waves or get leadership mad at you. Never mind if leadership is asking you to go against your own constituents’ best interests or your own values and principles.

Smith also authored bills to give money to rail boondoggles (HB 2434, 81st session) and to grant eminent domain powers to what amounts to private developers who control Municipal Utility Districts (HB 4201, 84th session). He voted to allow toll entities to ‘own’ their toll projects in perpetuity (HB 1112, 82nd session), virtually clinching their ability to continue to charge tolls indefinitely, which make tolls a permanent new tax.

In addition, he’s a big fan of Transportation Reinvestment Zones (TRZ), patterned after Tax Increment Reinvestment Zones (TIRZ), and voted to allow TRZ property taxes to be used to subsidize toll roads, a double tax. Smith’s wife served on a TIRZ board in Harris County, posing another potential conflict for a sitting legislator. How can he see clearly on legislation pertaining to TIRZ when his wife was part of one? Many grassroots groups and even the Houston Chronicle and Houston Press view TIRZs as placing taxing authority in the hands of un-elected boards, opening the door to corruption and mismanagement.

With friends like this, who needs enemies. Smith has become a career politician, serving for 12 years. It’s clear he represents special interests instead of his constituents’. Taxpayers deserve better and now they have a choice in the race for Texas House District 128. For more information on Cain, go to: http://briscoecain.com/.