[CTRL] Ashcroft opponents targeted on taxes!

[William Shannon]

http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?ItemID=10793


Ashcroft opponents targeted on taxes
Bill Berkowitz -


WORKINGFORCHANGE

02.20.01 - Mark R. Levin, head of the Landmark Legal Foundation, is mad as
hell and he's not shy about it. Who is this middle aged balding guy with an
attitude angry at? Just about anyone to the left of Attila the Hun. Now, he's
going after some of the 200 or so organizations that lined-up to deny Sen.
John Ashcrof this "righteous" spot heading up the Justice Department. Some
Democrats claim that the 58-42 Senate vote that confirmed Sen. Ashcroft was
meant to be read as a warning to President Bush. Something like, "If you come
around here with an ultraconservative judicial appointment, you're gonna be
in trouble." Seriously though, how much more of an ultra can Bush find -
perhaps a member of the Council of Conservative Citizens? It's obvious to
many observers that if the Dems couldn't summon the backbone to defeat, or at
least filibuster, the Ashcroft nomination, what kind of response can be
expected of them regarding Bush's tax proposal and cuts in domestic programs,
not to mention future nominations. During the first week in February, it
became apparent that Mark Levin's Landmark Legal Foundation wasn't going to
just settle for winning the Ashcroft battle. They had bigger fish to fry.
First, Landmark announced the formation of its "501-C Project" which intends
to "ensure that liberal nonprofit organizations that lobby against
presidential appointments comply with U.S. tax and lobbying laws." The
Unification Church-owned Washington Times reported that Landmark has asked
the Internal Revenue Service "to investigate accusations that several civil
rights groups and other nonprofit organizations violated their federal
tax-exempt status by participating in lobbying efforts against the nomination
of John Ashcroft as attorney general." According to Levin: "Published reports
reveal that scores of liberal, 501(c)tax-exempt groups spent the last month,
and hundreds of thousands of dollars, in a well-coordinated and highly
organized lobbying campaign against the Ashcroft nomination. They have also
announced that they will lobby against future nominees who they consider too
conservative. The IRS must look at these activities very carefully to ensure
that these organizations are not skirting the law or failing to pay their
taxes." Levin pointed to a January 9 meeting of organizations opposed to
Ashcroft's nomination, held at the headquarters of the American Association
of University Women. Called by the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights,
among the groups Levin identified as in attendance were the National
Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), the Sierra Club,
Planned Parenthood, the National Organization for Women's Legal Defense and
Education Fund, the National Education Association and the National Black
Women's Health Project. This was just one of several complaints with federal
agencies that Landmark has filed in the past few months. They also filed a
complaint with the IRS and the Federal Election Commission (FEC) against one
of the right's perennial targets, the National Education Association. Over
the years, Landmark has butted heads with the NEA especially around the issue
of school vouchers in Wisconsin, where Landmark provided legal support for
pro-voucher organizations. Levin says the teachers union is using millions of
dollars in unreported tax-exempt funds to influence the outcome of political
races. According to Landmark's website (http://www.landmarklegal.org), the
complaint, part of the its Quality Schools 2001 initiative, claims that "the
last several NEA Form 990 federal tax returns, submitted to the IRS under
penalty of perjury, disclose no political expenditures whatsoever. The NEA
and several of its affiliates have also failed to disclose the full extent of
their political activities to the Federal Election Commission (FEC)."
Landmark is asking these government agencies to "initiate comprehensive
investigations of the NEA's political activities and expenditures to
determine whether it has violated federal tax and campaign laws. Landmark is
also asking the IRS to consider whether the NEA's tax-exempt status should be
revoked, and whether the IRS and the FEC should impose fines and penalties on
the NEA." Landmark was founded in 1976, as the Great Plains Legal Foundation
with an office in Kansas City, Mo. (it also has an office in Herndon, Va.)
Its mission is to provide litigation and legal aid to conservatives and
conservative causes. In 1995, taking advantage of the Republican takeover of
the House, Landmark stitched together a plan called "Beyond the First 100
Days: A Legal Reform Plan for the 104th Congress," which put forward strict
conservative ideas in several areas including antitrust, civil justice,
criminal justice, and private property rights. For the past eight years,
beginning with the so-called Travelgate scandal, Mark R. Levin has been
especially pissed off at everything related to Bill and Hillary Clinton. He
called for the impeachment of Attorney General Janet Reno. He branded Salon,
the online magazine, "a political tool of liberal fat cats," after they
published several stories detailing the efforts of the right-wing impeachment
crew. During the 1996 presidential campaign, Bob Dole asked, "where's the
outrage?" Levin, who became a fixture on television talking-head programs
during the Clinton impeachment imbroglio, embodied the outrage. He seethed on
CNBC's Geraldo program and was livid on Fox's Hannity & Colmes. He dishes
with the best of them in his commentaries on the op-ed pages of the
Washington Times. And, via snail mail, his correspondence is always acidly
acrimonious. So what's eating at the guy? I'm not a psychologist, but
occasionally I play one in these columns, so I'm guessing his anger has been
festering for quite some time. He served as chief of staff for Attorney
General Richard Thornburgh and later for Attorney General Edwin Meese III.
His disgust for all things liberal must have received a booster shot when he
represented Meese in litigation resulting from Iran-Contra Independent
Counsel Lawrence Walsh's final report. Levin certainly couldn't be angry
about his organization's current financial situation. The Right Guide,
published by the Ann Arbor, MI-based Economics America, Inc., points out that
Levin's Landmark Legal Foundation received more than $1.2 million, or 95% of
its revenue, from contributions and grants awarded by foundations,
businesses, and individuals in 1997. That year, sizable grants included
$375,000 from the Sarah Scaife Foundation, $150,000 from the Scaife Family
Foundation, and $25,000 from the John M. Olin Foundation. In 1998 $57,500
came from the William H. Donner Foundation. The Landmark Legal Foundation is,
along with Larry Klayman's Judicial Watch, one of the most persistent
conservative litigation outfits in the nation's capital. By virtue of its
recent activities, Landmark has become one of the key players in the
long-term conservative project aimed at taking government funding away from
liberal groups. With more ultraconservative appointments waiting in the
wings, liberal organizations are sure to raise their voices in opposition.
When they do, they are sure to be confronted by an ever-vigilant,
always-outraged Mark Levin.