Time: Sat Sep 13 08:25:29 1997 by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id IAA25664 for [address in tool bar]; Sat, 13 Sep 1997 08:18:41 -0700 (MST) Delivered-To: liberty-and-justice-outgoing@majordomo.pobox.com Date: Sat, 13 Sep 1997 08:14:17 -0700 To: (Recipient list suppressed) From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] Subject: L&J: IRS: Shut Them Down NOW!!!! Okay, America, it's time to wake up, and smell the roses. The IRS is coming apart at the seams. It's time for a total boycott, nationwide. Start sharpening those wooden stakes. They work much better than silver bullets!! /s/ Paul Mitchell http://supremelaw.com >Date: Sat, 13 Sep 1997 08:01:18 -0700 >From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] >Subject: SLS: THE ULTIMATE TAX REFORM: JANUARY 1, 2000 >Bcc: <wkalivas@rust.net>,sls > >Down the tubes in a bit bucket. > >They are strangling themselves >in their own "codes" (COBOL, Fortran, >C, Assembly, PL/I, etc.) > >Halleluia!! > >/s/ Paul Mitchell >former systems programmer > > >>I know this is long, but it's worht a look. Any of you programmers out >>there care to comment?? >> >>From: jmcnally@bigdog.fred.net >>Date sent: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 10:42:20 -0400 (EDT) >>Subject: REMNANT REVIEW of September 5, 1997 >> >>Gary North's >> REMNANT REVIEW >>emailbonus: Matt. 6:33-34 >>year2000@garynorth.com >> >> Preparing the Remnant for the far side of the crisis >> >>Vol. 24, No. 9 590 September 5, 1997 >> >> I am hereby lifting the copyright of this issue of >> Remnant Review. This one I want you to send to your >> friends, neighbors, boss, Congressman, and anyone >> else who might want advance information on the end, >> at long last, of the 16th Amendment: vetoed by Year >> 2000 noncompliant computers. Photocopy it, print it, >> whatever. Then visit my Web site for full documen- >> tation (under "Government"): >> >>THE ULTIMATE TAX REFORM: JANUARY 1, 2000 >> >> What I am about to report will verify what I have been saying all >>year. If this doesn't constitute proof, I don't know what can persuade >>you. From this point on, anyone who tells you that the Millennium Bug >>is not a big deal, or who says, "We'll just have to wait and see about y2k, >>there's no need to hurry," simply doesn't know what he's talking about. >>Ignore him. >> >> On August 21, I stumbled into the most amazing government >>document I have ever seen. I had read a brief news story about a >>company that had applied for a contract to work as a subcontractor for >>the IRS in a restructuring of its computer systems. The IRS admitted to >>Congress last January that its $4 billion, 11-year attempt to modernize >>its computer systems had failed. Here was a follow-up story. So, I went >>to the company's Web site to find more information. This led me on a >>merry chase across the Web. >> >> Finally I landed on the IRS's page -- specifically, its page relating to >>its PRIME project. There were pages of blue links to documents, each >>one with a strange name or the name of a state. It was not clear to me at >>first what I had discovered. So, I started clicking links. I found nothing >>that I could understand, link after link: government bureaucratese. >>Then I hit pay dirt: the mother lode, my friends -- what we have been >>waiting for since 1913. Deliverance. Free at last, free at last! THE >>IRS'S MAINFRAME COMPUTERS -- 63 OF THEM, PLUS >>MICROCOMPUTERS -- ARE ON THE BRINK OF TOTAL >>COLLAPSE. Yee-hah! >> >> This amazing admission appears in an innocuously titled document, >>"Request for Comments (RFC) for Modernization Prime Systems >>Integration Services Contractor" (May 15, 1997). The author is Arthur >>Gross, Associate Commissioner of the IRS and Chief Information >>Officer, i.e., the senior IRS computer honcho. It was Mr. Gross who >>went before Congress in January to admit defeat. >> >> Mr. Gross now says that the IRS is no longer capable of operating its >>own computer systems. The IRS has over 7,500 people involved in just >>computer maintenance, with a budget a $1 billion a year (Appendix B. >>p. 2), yet they can no longer handle the load. And so, says Mr. Gross, >>some of them are going to get fired. You can imagine the continuing >>morale problem that this announcement will cause! The IS (information >>systems) division will be, as they say, DOWNSIZED. From now on, the >>IRS must achieve the following: >> >> . . . shifting the focus of IS management to a >> business orientation: servicing customers with >> exponentially increasing technology needs, >> implementing massive new technology applications >> on schedule within budget while managing the >> downsizing of the IS organization >> (Appendix B. p. 2). >> >> Do you think that people slaving away in their cubicles, trying to fix >>the Millennium Bug, will respond favorably to this notice? "Fix it, and >>then you're out!" Mr. Gross knows better. So, with this amazing >>document, he calls on private industry to come in and TAKE OVER >>THE ENTIRE IRS COMPUTER DIVISION. This is what Mr. Gross >>calls "a strategic partnership" (p. 1). The new partners will have to fix >>the Millennium Bug. The IRS will give them exactly eight months, start >>to finish: October 1, 1998 to the end of June, 1999. >> >> The IRS's Digital Augean Stables >> >> Perhaps you have had trouble on occasion getting information from >>the IRS about your account. After reading this document, I now know >>why. The information is held in what the IRS calls "Master Files" (p. >>4). These files are held in the Martinsburg, West Virginia, computer. >>This computer receives data sent in by 10 regional centers that use a >>total of 60 separate mainframes. These mainframes do not talk to each >>other. Or, as Mr. Gross puts it, they are part of "an extraordinarily >>complex array of legacy and stand-alone modernized systems with >>respect both to connectivity and inoperability between the mainframe >>platforms and the plethora of distributed systems" (p. 4). This is >>bureaucratese, but I do understand the word, INOPERABILITY. >> >> The tax data build up in the local mainframes for five business days. >>Then they are uploaded to West Virginia. This may take up to 10 actual >>days. Then the Martinsburg computer sends it all back to the regional >>computers in the Service Centers. Then the information is made >>available to the "Customer Service Representatives" (p. 5), i.e., local tax >>collectors. The elapsed time may take two weeks. >> >> But . . . it turns out that the actual source payment documents are not >>sent to the Master Files. Neither is "specific payment or tax >>information." This information stays in what the IRS calls >>STOVEPIPED SYSTEMS, meaning stand-alone data bases "which, for >>the most part, are not integrated with either the Master Files or the >>corporate on-line system, IDRS" (p. 5). Separate tax assessments for the >>same person can appear in six separate systems, and these do not >>communicate with each other (p. 5). "Further, each system generates >>management reporting information which is not homogeneous, one with >>the other . . ." (p. 7). To help us visualize this mess, and much larger >>messes, the document includes charts. These charts are so complex that >>my printer was unable to print out the 116-page document -- probably >>not enough RAM. I had to get two other people involved to get one >>readable copy. >> >> I have included one of these charts on the back page, just for fun. Go >>ahead. Take a quick look. No need to get out your magnifying glass >>just yet. Then comes the key admission: "These infrastructures are >>largely not century date compliant . . ." (p. 11). The phrase "century >>date compliant" is the government's phrase for Year 2000-compliant. In >>other words, THE IRS'S COMPUTERS ARE GOING TO CRASH. >>Now hear this: >> >> In addition to three computing centers, (Memphis, >> Detroit and Martinsburg) the latter of which is a >> fully operational tax processing center, the IRS >> deploys a total of sixty mainframes in its ten >> regional service centers. >> >> None of the mainframes are compliant, thereby >> necessitating immediate actions ranging from >> systems software upgrades to replacement (p. 9). >> >>It gets worse: >> >> A still greater and far reaching wave of work >> in the form of the Century Date Project is >> cascading over the diminishing workforce that >> is already insufficient to keep pace with the >> historical levels of workload. For the Internal >> Revenue Service, the Century Date Project is >> uniquely challenging, given the aged and non- >> century compliant date legacy applications and >> infrastructure as well as thousands of undocumented >> applications systems developed by business personnel >> in the IRS field operations which are resident on >> distributed infrastructures but not as yet >> inventoried (p. 13). >> >> Notice especially two key words: "undocumented" and "inventoried." >>"Undocumented" means there is no code writer's manual. They either >>lost it or they never had it. "Inventoried" means they know where all of >>the code is installed. But it says: "not as yet inventoried." How much >>code? Lots. >> >> The IS organization has inventoried and scheduled >> for analysis and conversion, as required, the >> approximately 62 million lines of computer code >> comprising the IRS core business systems. With >> respect to the business supported field >> applications and infrastructures, however, we do >> not know what we do not know. Until central field >> systems and infrastructures are completed, the IRS >> will be unable to analyze, plan, and schedule the >> field system conversion (p. 13). >> >> I love this phrase: WE DO NOT KNOW WHAT WE DO NOT >>KNOW. This is surely not bureaucratese. Now, let's put all of this into >>a clearer perspective. The Social Security Administration discovered its >>y2k problem in 1989. In 1991, programmers began to work on >>correcting the agency's 30 million lines of code. By mid-1996, they had >>completed repairs on 6 million lines (CIO Magazine, Sept. 15, 1996.) >>Got that? It took five years for them to fix 6 million lines. But the IRS >>has 62 million lines THAT THEY KNOW ABOUT, but they don't know >>about the rest. It's out there, but there is no inventory of it. >> >> Consider the fact that they have not completed their inventory. The >>1996 "California White Paper," which is the y2k guide issued by the IS >>division of the California state government's y2k repair project, says that >>inventory constitutes 1% of the overall code repair project. Awareness >>is 1%. So, after you get finished with inventory, YOU HAVE 98% OF >>YOUR PROJECT AHEAD OF YOU. Meanwhile, the IRS has not yet >>completed its inventory. >> >> The IRS has led the American welfare state into a trap. The Federal >>government, like the U.S. economy, will be restructured in the year >>2000. Most Americans will be in bankruptcy by 2001, but they will be >>free. >> >> Meanwhile, the news media are all a-dither about the Clinton- >>Congress accord on taxes, which will balance the budget in 2002. As >>George Gobel used to say, "Suuuuuure it will." Who is going to collect >>revenues in 2000? >> >> Please Help Get Us Out of This Mess! >> >> The next section of Mr. Gross's report I find truly unique. When was >>the last time you read something like this in an agency's report on its >>own capacity? (The next time will be the first.) >> >> THE CHALLENGE: THE INFORMATION SYSTEMS (IS) >> ORGANIZATION LACKS SUFFICIENT TECHNICAL >> MANAGEMENT CAPACITY TO SIMULTANEOUSLY >> SUPPORT TODAY'S ENVIRONMENT, EFFECTUATE THE >> CENTURY DATE CONVERSION AND MANAGE >> MODERNIZATION (p. 13). >> >> This states the IRS's problem clearly: its computer systems are just >>barely making it now, and the Year 2000 Problem will torpedo them. >> >> Mr. Gross then announces the IRS's solution: quit. The IRS has >>now admitted that "tax administration is its core business" and it will >>now "shift responsibility for systems development and integration >>services to the private sector . . ." (p. 54). But first, it must find some >>well-heeled partners. >> >> "The IRS has acknowledged that its expertise now and in the future >>is tax administration." This means that "the IS organization must be >>rebuilt to preserve the existing environment and partner with the private >>sector to Modernize the IRS" (p. 13). I love it when someone capitalizes >>"Modernize." Especially when it really means "officially bury." >> >> Then the coup de grace: "Any reasonable strategy to move forward, >>therefore, would focus on managing the immediate crisis -- 'stay in >>business' while building capacity to prepare for future Modernization" >>(p. 14). Then comes part 2 of the report: >> >> The Next Eighteen Months: >> Staying in Business and >> Preparing for Modernization >> >> Mr. Gross knows that there is a deadline, and it isn't 2000. It's >>months earlier. He has selected June, 1999. Most organizations have >>selected December, 1998. This allows a year for testing. Mr. Gross is >>more realistic. He knows late 1998 is too early. The IRS can't do it. (I >>would say that late 2008 is too early. The IRS has tried to revamp its >>computer system before.) >> >> . . . the IRS must undertake and complete major infrastructure >>initiatives no later than June 1999, to minimally ensure century date >>compliance for each of its existing mainframes and/or their successor >>platforms. At the same time, the IRS must complete the inventory of its >>field infrastructures as well as develop and exercise a century date >>compliance plan for the conversion replacement and/or elimination of >>those infrastructures. (p. 19). >> >> Then comes an astounding sentence. This sentence is astounding >>because it begins with the word, IF. (Note: RFC stands for Request for >>Comment.) >> >> IF THE INFRASTRUCTURE ANALYSIS BECOMES >>AVAILABLE, UPDATES WILL BE PROVIDED TO POTENTIAL >>OFFERERS TO ASSIST IN DEVELOPING RESPONSES TO THE >>RFC. >> >> If...? IF...? He is warning all those private firms that he is inviting >>in >>to clean up the mess that they may not be given the code analysis. But >>code analysis constitutes the crucial 15% of any Year 2000 repair job, >>according to the California White Paper. Then, and only then, can code >>revision begin. >> >> Meanwhile, the IRS system's code is collapsing even without y2k. >>The programmers are not able to test all of the new code. Mr. Gross >>calls this "Product Assurance." This division, he says, has "sunk to >>staffing levels less than 30 percent of the minimum industry standard . . >>. ." This makes it "one of the highest priorities within the IS >>organization, given that, today, major tax systems are not subjected to >>comprehensive testing prior to being migrated to production" (p. 15). In >>short, Congress passes new tax code legislation, and the IRS >>programmers implement these changes WITHOUT TESTING THE >>NEW CODE. Now comes y2k. As he says, "the Century Date >>Conversion will place an extraordinary additional burden on the Product >>Assurance Program." I don't want to bore you, but when I find the most >>amazing government document I've ever seen, I just can't stop. Neither >>could Mr. Gross: >> >> Regrettably, the challenge is far more overarching: to modernize >>functioning but aged legacy systems which have been nearly irreparably >>overlaid by and interfaced with a tangle of stovepiped distributed >>applications systems and networked infrastructures (p. 55). >> >> I'll summarize. The IRS has got bad code on 63 aging mainframe >>systems, plus micros. It has lost some of the code manuals. It does not >>know how much code it has. It must now move ("migrate") the data >>from these y2k noncompliant computers -- data stored in legacy >>programs that are not y2k compliant -- to new computers with new >>programs. These computers must interact with each other, unlike >>today's system. Bear in mind that some of this code -- I have seen >>estimates as high as 30% -- is written in Assembler language, which is >>not understood by most programmers today: perhaps 50,000 of them, >>worldwide (Cory Hamasaki's estimate). Then everything must be tested, >>side by side, old system vs. new system, on mainframe computers, before >>anyone can trust anything. (This assumes that extra mainframes are >>available, but they aren't.) Warning: >> >> Beyond the magnitude of the applications system migration, the >>complexity and enormity of the date conversion that would be required >>necessitates careful planning and risk mitigation strategies (e.g., parallel >>processing). While the risks inherent in Phase III may be nearly >>incalculable given the age of the systems, the absence of critical >>documentation, dependency on Assembler Language Code (ALC) and >>the inevitable turnover of IRS workforce supporting these systems, it is >>essential to plan and execute the conversion of the Master Files and its >>related suite of applications (p. 30). >> >> I'll say it's essential! The key question is: Is it possible? No. >> >> Can you believe this sentence? "The risks inherent in Phase III may >>be nearly incalculable . . ." What does he mean, "may be"? They ARE. >> >> Meanwhile, Congress keeps changing the Internal Revenue Code. >>This creates a programming nightmare: coding the new laws. So, how >>big is this project? Here is how Mr. Gross describes it: "Modernization >>is the single largest systems integration undertaking in world eclipsing >>in breadth and depth any previous efforts of either the public or private >>sector. Given the fluid nature of the Nation's Tax Laws, Modernization >>is likely to be the most dynamic, creating even greater complexity and, >>in turn, compounding the risks" (p. 54). Many, many risks. >> >> Two questions arise: (1) Who is going to fix it? (2) At what price? >>The answer? He has no answer. All he knows is that this project is so >>huge that NORMAL COMPETITIVE BIDDING WILL NOT WORK. >>For this project, the IRS is not saying what its "partners" will be paid. >>It's open for negotiation. >> >> You may be thinking: "Boondoggle." I'm thinking: "Legal liability >>in 2000 larger than any company's board of directors would rationally >>want to risk, unless they think Congress will pass a no-liability law in >>2000." Here is Mr. Gross's description of the special arrangement. Pay >>close attention to the words "competitive process." He bold faces them; I >>do, too. >> >> Our challenge, therefore, is to FORGE A BUSINESS PLAN AND >> PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP in accordance with federal >> governmental procurement laws and regulations ABSENT THE >> TRADITIONAL LEVEL OF DETAILED REQUIREMENTS >> TYPICALLY ESTABLISHED AS THE BASIS OF THE >> COMPETITIVE PROCESS (p. 60). >> >> He calls on businesses to create a "DETAILED SYSTEMS >>DEVELOPMENT PLAN" (p. 60). He goes on: "In general, the IRS >>seeks to create a business plan which: Shares risk with the private >>sector; Incents [incents???!!!] the private sector to either share or >>assume the 'front end' capital investment . . ." (p. 60). Read it again. >>Yes, it really says that. THE IRS WANTS THE PRIVATE SECTOR >>TO PUT UP MOST OR ALL OF THE MONEY TO FIX ITS ENTIRE >>SYSTEM. >> >> This is why the minimum requirement for a company to make a bid >>is $200 million in working capital. It has to have experience in >>computers. It must be able to repair 5 million lines of code (p. 70). >> >> How complex is this job? The complexity is mind-boggling: a seven- >>volume "Modernization Blueprint." To buy it on paper costs $465, or >>you can get a copy on a free CD-ROM. Needless to say, I got the CD- >>ROM. >> >> So, you think, at least the IRS is getting on top of this problem. >>Suuuuure, it is. The contract award date is [let's hear a drum roll, >>please]: October 1, 1998 (p. 73). How realistic is this? You may >>remember Mr. Gross's deadline: June 1999. So, he expects these firms >>to be able to fix 62 million lines of noncompliant code, if they can find >>the missing code in the field offices, even though the IRS has lost the >>documentation for some of this code, in an eight-month window of >>productivity. Social Security isn't compliant after seven years of work >>on less than half the IRS's number of lines of code. >> >> The IRS is facing a complete breakdown. Its staff can't fix the code. >>The IRS wants private firms to pay for the upgrade and manage the >>computer systems from now on. It does not know how much code it has. >>It does not have manuals for all of the old code. It does not even know >>how to pay the firms that get the contracts: either by "contractually >>agreed upon fees" or "pursuant to measurable outcomes of the >>implemented systems" (p. 61). It has called for very large and >>experienced firms to submit comments by October 1, 1997. >> >> In short, the IRS does not know what it is doing, let alone what it has >>to do. It only knows that it has to find a few suckers in private industry >>to bear the costs of implementing a new, improved IRS computer system >>and then assume responsibility for getting it Year 2000-compliant >>between October 1, 1998 and the end of June 1999. ("There's one born >>every minute.") Here are 12 companies that have expressed interest: >>Anderson Consulting, Computer Sciences Corporation, EDS >>Government Services (EDS is not itself y2k compliant), GTE >>Government Systems, Hughes Information Technology Systems, IBM, >>Litton PRC, Lockheed Martin Corporation, Northrup Grumman >>Corporation, Ratheon E-Systems, Tracor Information Systems >>Company, and TRW. The list is posted at: >> >>http://www.ustreas.gov/treasury/bureaus/irs/prime/interest.htm >> >> Conclusion >> >> It's all over but the shouting. The IRS is going bye-bye. >>Accompanying it will be the political career of Mr. Gingrich and the >>historical reputation of Mr. Clinton. Bill Clinton will be remembered as >>the President on whose watch the Federal government shut down and >>stayed shut down. First Mate Newt will try to avoid going down with >>the ship of state, but he won't make it. And as for Al Gore . . . . Well, >>maybe he can get a job herding cattle on the Texas ranch of his ex- >>roommate at Harvard, Tommy Lee Jones. Think of it: not "Gore in >>2000," but GORED IN 2000. Mr. Information Highway will hit a dead >>end. >> >> On June 30, 1999, the IRS will know that its computers are still >>noncompliant. On the next day, July 1, fiscal year 2000 rolls over on >>the Federal government's computers and on every state government's >>computer that has not rolled over (and shut down) on a bi-annual basis >>on July 1, 1998. Almost every state: about half a dozen will roll over on >>October 1, 1999. >> >> In 1999, chaos will hit the financial markets, all over the world -- >>assuming that this does not happen earlier, which I do not assume. The >>public will know the truth in 1999: THE DEFAULT ON U.S. >>GOVERNMENT DEBT IS AT HAND. The tax man won't be able to >>collect in 2000. The tax man will be blind. Consider how many banks >>and money market funds are filled with T-bills and T-bonds. Consider >>how the government will operate with the IRS completely shut down. >>Congress hasn't thought much about this. Neither has Bill Clinton. >> >> >> >>********************************************** >>To subscribe or unsubscribe, email: >> majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com >>with the message: >> subscribe ignition-point email@address >>or >> unsubscribe ignition-point email@address >>********************************************** >>http://www.telepath.com/believer >>********************************************** >> >> ======================================================================== Paul Andrew Mitchell : Counselor at Law, federal witness B.A., Political Science, UCLA; M.S., Public Administration, U.C. Irvine tel: (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night email: [address in tool bar] : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU website: http://www.supremelaw.com : visit the Supreme Law Library now ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its best Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal zone Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o this As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice. We shall not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal. ======================================================================== [This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.] =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Unsub info - send e-mail to majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com, with "unsubscribe liberty-and-justice" in the body (not the subject) Liberty-and-Justice list-owner is Mike Goldman <whig@pobox.com>
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail