Correspondence

0 Comments | Insight on the News, May 21, 2001

Rossotti Watcher Is on the Lookout Ethical Conflicts

I read John Berlau's thorough article about IRS Commissioner Charles Rossotti ["A Taxing Dilemma," April 23]. I can't speak for the IRS Oversight Board, but I will speak for myself.

Commissioner Rossotti is obliged to meet every ethical duty fully and beyond reasonable doubt. The ethical duties directly applicable to the commissioner include and are affected by the agreement between the commissioner and the Senate Finance Committee. He is meeting his ethical obligations if he complies with the general ethics laws as modified in his case. The Finance Committee and federal ethics officials are fully capable of deciding his compliance. I don't want to intrude on their jurisdiction.

Nevertheless, I'm independently obliged to watch for conflicts of interest and other inappropriate conduct by IRS personnel. But my perspective is legally and practically limited. To the extent my view permits, I've seen nothing to suggest the commissioner has acted unethically. Rather, in direct contacts with him I've witnessed nothing but exemplary conduct. He has never mentioned American Management Systems except to refer to his management experience there.

I agree with former senator William Roth as you quoted him: "We're extraordinarily fortunate to have a man of [Rossotti's] caliber." From my perspective, Commissioner Rossotti is the most critical player during the most critical time in the history of the IRS. He has significantly begun the reorganization process in full compliance with congressional intent. As a result of his attention to and initial success in achieving the aims of Congress, he enjoys the confidence of Congress and the confidence of a deep, wide constituency within the IRS.

However, the country's need for the commissioner's service does not dilute his ethical responsibilities, give him any leeway in meeting those responsibilities or relax my duty to watch for ethical conflicts.

Bush administration lawyers and the Senate Finance Committee carefully reviewed this issue before the commissioner was confirmed, and full disclosure occurred then. Appropriate disclosure should continue and receive wider, balanced dissemination and explanation to the public.

Vigilance is high. Everyone is watching, including Insight (properly so). I've seen no actual conflicts and, based on my experience with the commissioner, I would expect none. Still, it's my job to watch, and I will.

Steve Nickles IRS Oversight Board

Disposal of Nuclear Waste Still Raises Many Questions

I just finished reading Woody West's article on nuclear energy [The Last Word, April 30]. I hardly can be considered politically correct, but all I can say about fissionable power supplies is, "Just say no!"

When someone has come up with a reasonable way to dispose of nuclear waste, I will be happy to change my mind. But until then, I will support drilling/mining (in a reasonable manner) in national-monument areas, wilderness areas, offshore, etc. I also support alternative-energy production and research in areas such as fusion. Again, I say no to fission power plants and their horribly destructive byproducts.

Vernon Kuhns San Francisco

Does Military `Expert' Need Another History Lesson?

Responding to the question, "Would a modernized Chinese military threaten the United States?" [Symposium, April 30], retired Navy Rear Adm. Eugene Carroll Jr. answered "no."

In his response he wrote, "Very much like the Battle of Britain when German buzz bombs and aircraft hammered England ..." That battle was in 1940, and the V-1 (buzz bomb) didn't come until several years later. So much for Carroll's knowledge of military subjects.

Thomas P. Breen Jr. McHenry, Ill.

Write: Insight, Correspondence Editor, 3600 New York Ave. N.E., Washington, DC 20002. E-mail: Insight@wt.infi.net. Fax: (202) 529-2484. Please include an address and daytime phone number Letters may be edited for space.