Justice Department: Acorn Can Be Paid…..Update: Darrell Issa Responds

Scroll for updates

The decision only applies to contracts that were signed prior to Congress’ vote to ban government funding for the group.  Its author focuses on the phrase “provided to” as his basis for the decision.

Mr. Barron said he had based his conclusion on the statute’s phrase “provided to.” This phrase, he said, has no clearly defined meaning in the realm of government spending — unlike such words as “obligate” and “expend.” 

Citing dictionary and thesaurus entries, he said “provided to” could be interpreted as meaning only instances in which an official was making “discretionary choices” about whether to give the group money, rather than instances in which the transfer of funds to Acorn was required to satisfy existing contractual obligations.

Since there are two possible ways to construe the term “provided to,” Mr. Barron wrote, it makes sense to pick the interpretation that allows the government to avoid breaching contracts.

Naturally.  Who knows how many existing contracts are in place or when they expire, but until they do ACORN will continue to receive taxpayer funds for nefarious activities such as providing guidance in obtaining loans for child sex rings and money laundering.

Update:  Darrell Issa blasts Justice Department’s decision

But Representative Darrell Issa, the top Republican on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, said “the bipartisan intent of Congress was clear — no more federal dollars should flow to ACORN.”

“It is telling that this administration continues to look for every excuse possible to circumvent the intent of Congress,” Issa said in a statement. “Taxpayers should not have to continue subsidizing a criminal enterprise that helped Barack Obama get elected president. The politicization of the Justice Department to payback one of the president’s political allies is shameful and amounts to nothing more than old-fashioned cronyism.”

Republicans to Democrats: If You Think August Was Bad, Just Wait For September

This is encouraging.  It’s been a long time since we have a had a motivated, unified message and  it’s refreshing to see that Republicans are done playing nice and are willing to go to the mattresses to stop ObamaCare.

As lawmakers prepare to return for their return to Washington next week, House Republicans have a message for their town-mauled Democratic colleagues: August is over only on the calendar.

The end of the summer recess may mean an end to the beatings back home, but Republicans are vowing to keep the pressure up on health care reform straight into September.

If Democrats — particularly the moderate Blue Dogs — thought August was a bad dream, Rep. Jack Kingston (R-Ga.) said the GOP is “going to keep the nightmare going through the fall.”

For congressional Republicans, July was all about hoping the summer recess would come before the Democrats could pass a health care bill. August, says Kingston, was about having “as many town hall meetings as possible in order to educate the public, to keep this momentum up.”

Now it’s September, and the focus will shift back to Washington, where House Democrats are awaiting action from the Senate

while trying to reconcile three competing bills of their own.

Republicans will return to the Capitol, too, of course, but Kingston said they will still be back home in their districts “mentally, culturally and spiritually.”

And that, says Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), means that Republicans will be bringing back the heat from home. Arguing that a calm political environment favors the party in power, Issa vowed to create the opposite in September.

“If [the Democrats] give us lemons, we want to make very loud lemonade,” he said.

I think reading the bill in its entirety on the House floor would be a good start.