James Lankford

They just want their own government to be responsive.

When a 'Dear Colleague' letter comes out, I follow it--and his exact words were--as if it is regulation.

That has been longstanding policy that individuals can both have a faith and live their faith, especially for a student on a campus.

I would say there are a lot of districts that disagree with that, and we can agree to disagree.

There are a tremendous number of people that are begging for that because it is incredibly difficult to both understand and implement in a lot of businesses because of the number of exceptions.

So, basically you are giving donors to non-for-profits 25 weeks to donate more so that they can stay open.

How many have you met with at this point, because there are hundreds of thousands.

In fact, 85 Senators supported that, overwhelming supported in the House, affirmed by the President.

I think it would be safe to say that many school officials did not find the interpretation to be inherent in Title 9.

It is a very serious problem.

So we are back to my original question. If a university chooses to use clear and convincing standards versus preponderance of evidence, what does the Department of Education do with that school?

Only on interpretive.

I can assure you, Americans are not excited about fighting their own government.

We are still a nation of the people, by the people, for the people.

And if there is the perception they have gone, it is the courts? Who do they respond back to----

These have very serious consequences both to businesses, individuals, taxpayers--lots of litigation both for the Federal Government and us.

It seems to be a pretty straightforward, plain reading that all of us supported, allowing more local control in some of the decisions.

I could introduce you to a lot of university presidents that do not agree with that statement and a tremendous number of law professors across the country that do not agree with that statement.

The IRS really does not document their analysis of their economic impact.

Because there are guidance documents that are going out that are not coming through OIRA, do you have a concern that there may be some guidances being promulgated and put out there that are economically significant that might bypass the…

It gets noisy in a hurry when industry, individuals, employers, employees suddenly realize, I have two or three bosses here all telling me to do different things.

But then who is sorting out the conflicting guidances that may come out or the conflicting deadlines that may come out from multiple entities because they do not know someone else is doing this unless you flag them to it.

This is not a level playing field where an individual can just, as it has been argued: Well, it is not legally binding.

How many non-for-profits are there out there in America?

No, but it is an interesting challenge just to be able to look at five courts ruled the other direction; one court ruled that way.