FREE REPUBLIC NETWORK and Radio FRN Present: Live from CPAC MARK LEVIN Landmark Legal Foundation

THE SHREW: Howdy Freepers. We’re here live at CPAC and we’re interviewing Mark Levin from Landmark Legal Foundation. Mark posts on Free Republic occasionally as holdonnow, and is a renowned pundit who is on virtually all the networks and uses that phrase to stop liberal pronouncements and diatribes. Mark, nice to see you.

THE SHREW: Thank you! We’re excited to be here. This is our second time at CPAC and it’s a pleasure to see all the conservative leaders and conservative activists.

MARK LEVIN: You know I always try to get here. Sometimes I don’t for various reasons, but this year is really blockbuster. I’ve never seen so many people here.

THE SHREW: This is the largest attendance that I have witnessed. This is my third CPAC.

THE SHREW: Thank you. We’re excited about being here. There, I’ve seen about 30-35 Freepers so far this morning. Mark, tell us what Landmark Legal is up to right now.

MARK LEVIN: Well, we have two major areas of focus right now. The first one is the National Education Association. And we’ve spent the last few years exposing and detailing and cataloguing and filing complaints against their political activities, you know, their 501c3. Excuse me, 501c4. Now while they’re allowed to be involved in certain types of political activity, you have to report that on your tax return, and you have to pay corporate income taxes on it. Well, the NEA, since 1994 on its tax returns, has reported zero political activity. So they can do it, they just have to report it, and pay some taxes on it.

MARK LEVIN: Yeah, last time I checked that’s a problem. So, we have filed two very substantial complaints against them with the IRS. And then last year we also found that documents that are now under permanent seal by a court, but that doesn’t affect us because we’re not a party to that case, showing that the NEA and the DNC, the AFLCIO and other groups have coordinated their political activity so as to best use their resources and not duplicate costs. It’s a rather extensive and elaborate operation and we’ve exposed that and we filed that with the IRS. We’ve also filed complaints against them with the FEC, and in March we have another blockbuster complaint which I can’t talk about. We don’t want to give them a heads up until we do it. The other area we’re focused on is the use of taxpayers money to subsidize the left. So we’re in the midst of very significant litigation against the EPA, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Forest Service, and Bureau of Land Management, which give away in total billions of dollars of taxpayers funds to these non-profit 5014 organizations. We don’t think the government should be subsidizing their advocacy.

THE SHREW: Especially since, as taxpayer subsidized advocacy, they oppose what other taxpayers would be in favor of.

MARK LEVIN: There’s no question that 99% of this stuff goes to the left and goes to a big government agenda. They’re not funding capitalism. They’re not funding property rights. They’re not funding free speech. They’re funding people who go to the government and demand more government intervention.

THE SHREW: Is there any effort that you’re aware of within the administration or within the various government agencies to curtail or limit this activity?

MARK LEVIN: I’ve not seen it. Now, in all fairness, they’ve only been there a year.

MARK LEVIN: But let me give you an example. The EPA. The EPA’s budget for funding non-profit organizations in 2001, since Governor Whitman has been there, is substantially more than it was the prior year. Now, she’s stuck with the budget she got. She inherited that. But there’s been no effort to curtail the amount of money going to these groups or the fact that there’s very limited competition and reporting of these grant proposals out there so other people can compete for them. It’s pretty much an inside ballgame, and when you consider that since 1993, the EPA has given over 2 billion dollars in these grants to several thousands of non-profit groups, and I’m talking about universities too, but they’re not competed and they’re not these internal panel review systems and they’re very rarely audited. So the fact is that a lot of money’s going out and very little is known about what it’s going for.

THE SHREW: So there’s little or no accountability to the taxpayers. Is Congress overlooking this or are they just standing by and using it to subsidize the pork in their own district?

MARK LEVIN: Well, what Congress does is they like to call in the Enron people, talk about what they’re supposed to be doing. That’s fine, but Congress has responsibilities too. They are in effect the Board of Directors of the EPA.

MARK LEVIN: No, they haven’t done anything to curtail this, and I can assure you that if there’s any attempt to curtail the spending, you will hear the howls and shrill screams of the left because you’re effecting their treasury. But the bottom line is this is worse, as far as I’m concerned, than Enron because they are taking taxpayer money. We’re not giving it to them voluntarily. They’re spending it on these boondoggles. There is no accountability and next year they’re going to spend more.

MARK LEVIN: Any attempt to curtail that, you’re, we’re gonna be, people are going to be accused of opposing the environment. Since when is funding the EPA in these enormous sums of money and all of these leftwing groups, since when does that have to do with the environment?

MARK LEVIN: Also, apart from the EPA, the Forest Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Bureau of Land Management, our friends in the West, in the Midwest, I’m sure are very familiar with these organizations. People in the northeastern corridor are not that familiar with them so they don’t seem to care that much…

MARK LEVIN: That’s exactly right. But they are brutal organizations, and they are doing similar things and our litigation with them is proceeding as well.

THE SHREW: One of the activities that’s occurred in the last year that has generated a huge amount of interest on Free Republic that directly speaks to what you’re talking about is the Klamath Falls situation in Oregon.

THE SHREW: And, there was an article posted on Free Republic a couple of days ago about a decision that was being made and an appointment that was to return the property rights to the farmers who own the water and then make the down-river or other users of that water pay the property owners for that product. Have you tracked that at all or are you familiar with that case?

MARK LEVIN: I’m familiar enough to know this. There’s no reason why Secretary Norton, who I know when I worked as Deputy Solicitor of the Interior under Don Hodel, she worked under me as did other associate solicitors, there is no reason why she doesn’t put an end to this and allow these farmers and these ranchers to have their water. Let these liberal environmental groups sue and go into court. If they want a judge to make an ultimate decision, that’s fine too. But all these farmers and ranchers having, they’re the ones that are having to sue in effect. I put people before these creatures unless you can tell me that, with some certainty, that there’s some absolute unbelievable benefit that mankind will receive from one of these endangered species. In other words, this isn’t a pet shop.

MARK LEVIN: Where you go in and there’s that particular parrot that they got, you know, from the Amazon. These are peoples’ backyards. This is their livelihood.

THE SHREW: And it’s the property that they’ve had since the government sold them the land 140 years ago.

MARK LEVIN: And it’s the property that’s protected under the United States Constitution.

THE SHREW: There’s so many legal issues that this town seems to be predominated by those in your profession. How do you…

MARK LEVIN: Can I comment on that? That’s an excellent point. de Touqueville for instance, he warned about that. If you become a society in essence, and what he loved about our society was that we weren’t bogged down by, not so much lawyers, but rules and regulations, and people were fairly free to live their lives as they wanted. Well that America is much different than the America that we know now. We’re still the freest country and the greatest country. Don’t get me wrong. But it’s no thanks to these people who want to interfere with our individual liberties, who don’t believe in the rule of law, and who don’t believe in property rights and capitalism. It’s no thanks to them.

THE SHREW: No sir. Not at all. There is, will there be any drive on tort reform before the next election or is that going to wait until 2003 or be even presented at that time?

MARK LEVIN: Well, you know, I hope there’s a drive on tort reform, but considering that one of the two major political parties lives off the largesse of the trial lawyers, I’m afraid that’s going to be a lot of whistling in the wind there. But, I just don’t see Tom Daschle, who wants to both be President and retain his Majority Leadership, I just don’t see…

MARK LEVIN: But the problem is I don’t see them doing what is right and to the public interest in that respect, that is taking on their own special interest. No, I see them trying to raise more money from them.

THE SHREW: Undoubtedly. Money seems to be the focal point, uh I didn’t know lawyers, I thought lawyers were interested in the law and it turns out that they’re interested in the dollars.

MARK LEVIN: All these tobacco guys, and the ones that are now bringing up McDonald’s…

MARK LEVIN: …those lawyers, I don’t know. When you take a billion dollars out of a four billion-dollar award to a state, does that sound like somebody cares about the little people?

MARK LEVIN: When you break the back of the asbestos companies and you buy the Baltimore Orioles, does that sound like somebody that’s out to protect the little guy?

THE SHREW: There’s a lot of discussion about, based on the nine eleven terrorism scenario about a National ID card. Conservatives…

MARK LEVIN: Well, let me tell you something. What in the world is that going to do in terms of national security? I have social security card.

MARK LEVIN: That’s already abused in terms of who gets to know my social security number. It was never supposed to be that way. In fact, it’s illegal to use it for other purposes.

MARK LEVIN: You see the problem, the problem with the big government types, and I’m not talking about national security types, which I’m one of, …

MARK LEVIN: …but the big government types that look at every opportunity to expand the size of the government rather than to actually resolve a problem, they’re interested in empowering the central government. Now, a National ID card I assume could be copied as easily as a Social Security card.

THE SHREW: They’re talking about using smartchip technology. Would that just put more power in the hands of the authorities?

MARK LEVIN: Well, let me ask you a question. If they can’t find nearly a million illegal immigrants in this country, what does it matter if they have smartchip technology or not?

THE SHREW: Well, I’m saying that’s the technology that they’re putting forth and saying this will solve that problem.

MARK LEVIN: I don’t want the INS or the ATM, I mean, uh, the Treasury Department, the IRS, Tom Daschle, John Conyers, I don’t want them tracking me.

THE SHREW: Is, that’s a very fair point. Is there, do you have concerns about the Patriot Act that was recently passed?

THE SHREW: I know it’s a fine line. We’re in a state of war. We need to be supportive of the administration in regard…

MARK LEVIN: Now, I’ll tell you why. A good part of that statute is already law with respect to mobsters.

MARK LEVIN: I’m not in favor of the RI, I have a serious problem with the way the government uses RICO and asset forfeiture and all of that.

MARK LEVIN: So I’m not talking about private litigation right now, I’m talking about the federal government.

MARK LEVIN: But what I’m talking about is, for instance, the roving wiretaps so you can track cell phones.

MARK LEVIN: …who are deemed as part of the mob, for instance as you were talking about. I don’t see any reason why they shouldn’t be able to do it with respect to people who are deemed as terrorists as long as they get, as long as there’s judicial review. And that’s what is required and that’s what should be required. A judge has to look at it.

MARK LEVIN: A federal judge. There’s no independent cowboy, some GS12 over there in the Marshal Service …

THE SHREW: Are statistics kept to record the rate of acceptance of those warrant requests?

MARK LEVIN: You know I used to be Chief of Staff to the Attorney General. And it’s not so easy to get a wiretap.

MARK LEVIN: There’s a, in fact some of the really top secret cases I can tell you that there’s a little courtroom in the basement of the Justice Department that’s a vault in essence. And in emergency situations, I remember in our case, we actually had to get, send a helicopter to go get a federal judge and bring him down. Uh, I can’t get into any more detail than that.

THE SHREW: You gotta have somebody there and they, we, you have that in place and we respond to it.

MARK LEVIN: Right. And that’s how we normally should go about, uh, if we’re going to infringe on people’s liberties, you know, we need to have a third person in essence.

THE SHREW: So you have the Judicial Branch overseeing the Executive Branch’s execution of the law.

MARK LEVIN: So I want us to arm up against it as best as we can. But you see there are phony things thrown out there, like this National ID card as if that’s going to stop some jerk from coming into an airport and lighting his sneakers up. Or, uh, well, these screeners now that they’re going to federalize as if somehow that’s going to stop or improve screening, when in fact those screeners, I don’t care if they’re paid minimum wage or five million dollars an hour, those, the hijackings that occurred on the eleventh had nothing to do with the screeners.

MARK LEVIN: It’s a whole phony answer to a serious problem that makes Congress look like it’s actually doing something.

THE SHREW: Alright tell me. I’m not a lawyer. Tell me about racial profiling and the legal implications and how this has occurred. Is it just another feel-good exercise, or is racial profiling by Justice Department employees a justifiable act?

MARK LEVIN: You know, this word profiling, see what the left does is it takes very normal words and then disparages them. So the word profiling now is viewed as a very evil word you’re not allowed to say. I call it reality. The reality is that we know that there are terrorist cells with, that are funded and supported and protected in certain countries. We know it’s not (inaudible)…

MARK LEVIN: That’s right. Now, we know they’re not from Sweden. We know they’re not from Japan.

MARK LEVIN: We know they’re not your 89-year old grandmother. So, are we to sit back and pretend that, uh, that we should just pick randomly every fifth person out of line? Even though she’s a four nine, four feet nine inch tall gray-haired 89 year old woman who speaks Swed, who speaks Japanese? That’s just idiotic, so why waste our time with that? On the other hand, you know, there ought to be something more than the color of somebody’s skin.

MARK LEVIN: So, if you’re looking at somebody and they look, they’re acting suspicious, meaning they’re acting nervous, or they’re playing with their shoe…

MARK LEVIN: …or there’s a bulge in a shirt pocket, hell yes those people should be stopped. And hell ye, and you know, I’ll tell you what makes me real eff is John Dingle.

MARK LEVIN: Metal hip. He didn’t tell them he was a congressman. And so the metal hip sets the thing off and he’s offended. They made him drop his pants.

THE SHREW: He told them about it before he went through the metal detector. I have a metal hip and it’s going to activate your device.

MARK LEVIN: Right. Well, I’ve got three stints, and now and then it does the same thing. But, they don’t know that he actually has a metal hip. He didn’t show them his medical card. Oh ho, everyone out there like me, who has stints or metal hips, you get a card. He didn’t show them his card. He didn’t do anything. So they move him out there. They make him drop his pants. I feel sorry for the screener who had to actually look at the guy in his boxer shorts.

MARK LEVIN: But having said that, excuse me congressman, the same laws that apply to us, and the same procedures that apply to us, why are you so offended by them? So he, it didn’t bother me at all that he was required to drop his pants.

THE SHREW: I was searched on the flight here to D.C. I had to have, it was a very efficient process, but it was certainly…

MARK LEVIN: You know what’s funny. You can see me. I’m a little, I have darker skin, olive skin, dark hair what’s left of it. I had about a five-year growth, ha five-year, five-day growth on my face. My wife has very light skin, fairly petite, Southern accent. We’re going to Florida. We go through the gate. They let me go and they stop her.

MARK LEVIN: Now I thought that was hilarious. I expected to be stopped, but they stopped her.

THE SHREW: That is funny. My wife was searched twice on the most recent flight and she looks about as much like a MiddleEastern terrorist as my daughter. It’s just…

THE SHREW: Absolutely. And the expense, and then federalization of the employees. Is that to create yet another federal power base…

MARK LEVIN: Yes because you can go on the web and look up Merit Systems Protection Board and you can look up how difficult it is to fire employees.

MARK LEVIN: They issued a report in the late nineties, the Merit Systems Protection Board, and said that it’s virtually impossible to fire a federal employee.

MARK LEVIN: So why are we making it more difficult to get the right people in the right positions? Giving them a ten-dollar an hour raise doesn’t do it. Giving them a unicard doesn’t do it. This was an unbelievable power grab.

THE SHREW: When, one of the things that was discussed in Barbara Olson’s book was the huge number of Clinton appointees that transitioned to civil service. Are those people also unfireable?

MARK LEVIN: Well I’m happy to tell you something. In, it’s about four years ago, Landmark Legal Foundation urged Congress to pass a bill repealing what’s called the Ramspeck Act. It’s that Act that was passed in the forties that allowed political types from Capitol Hill preferential appointments into the civil service and all the years they worked in politics would translate into years as a civil servant.

MARK LEVIN: And they were peppering hundreds and hundreds of these people throughout the federal bureaucracy at the highest levels. So we pushed to get this repealed and by God, it’s been repealed. So it’s stopped as of two or three years ago, so now if one of these political types on Capitol Hill wants to work in the civil service, they have to compete like everybody else.

THE SHREW: Wonderful news. Mark, Free Republic Network is proud to have you as a guest. What is your interaction with Free Republic? How often do you post there? Is it a good source of information for you?

MARK LEVIN: Free Republic is one of the, I obviously have it bookmarked. People can see me pop on there now and then. I’m not on there as much as I’d like to be, but if I have a moment, I like to get on there and see what’s going on, what our friends are talking about, what some of the quacks are talking about. Sometimes I like to get into it with them a little bit. Uh, and I think people don’t understand who are critical of that website that that’s America.

MARK LEVIN: Anyone can get on there who wants to. So if somebody wants to get on there and be a moron, they get on there and they’re a moron.

MARK LEVIN: Ah, but, except in this case, everyone’s letter to the editor gets published as opposed to some ivory tower editor saying “no, I’ll take this one and I won’t publish that one.” So, I love it. I go on that site, I go on the Drudge site, I go on Rush Limbaugh’s site, and I go on other sites too, but clearly Free Republic’s among my top favorite.

THE SHREW: Well I know you’re introducing someone this afternoon and you’re in great demand throughout the day. We really appreciate you being here and speaking to us. Look forward to seeing you on the website and thanks for your support of Free Republic.

MARK LEVIN: Look, it’s my honor. I love you guys and I appreciate everything you do.

This is my favorite part of the interview:

THE SHREW: Wonderful news. Mark, Free Republic Network is proud to have you as a guest. What is your interaction with Free Republic? How often do you post there? Is it a good source of information for you?
MARK LEVIN: Free Republic is one of the, I obviously have it bookmarked. People can see me pop on there now and then. I’m not on there as much as I’d like to be, but if I have a moment, I like to get on there and see what’s going on, what our friends are talking about, what some of the quacks are talking about. Sometimes I like to get into it with them a little bit. Uh, and I think people don’t understand who are critical of that website that that’s America.
THE SHREW: Absolutely.
MARK LEVIN: Anyone can get on there who wants to. So if somebody wants to get on there and be a moron, they get on there and they’re a moron.
THE SHREW: Right.
MARK LEVIN: That doesn’t reflect anything about Free Republic.
THE SHREW: It reflects on the individual poster.
MARK LEVIN: Of course, like any jerk that writes a letter to the editor.
THE SHREW: Absolutely.
MARK LEVIN: Ah, but, except in this case, everyone’s letter to the editor gets published as opposed to some ivory tower editor saying “no, I’ll take this one and I won’t publish that one.” So, I love it. I go on that site, I go on the Drudge site, I go on Rush Limbaugh’s site, and I go on other sites too, but clearly Free Republic’s among my top favorite.

Right! ;-)

Thanks for the interview Mark!

Regards,

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.