This site deals only with the corporate corruption of science, and makes no inference about the motives or activities of individuals involved.
There are many reasons why individuals become embroiled in corporate corruption activities - from political zealotry to over-enthusiastic activism; from gullibility to greed.
Please read the OVERVIEW carefully, and make up your own mind.
Paul L Menchik
— A minor cash-for-comments economist from Michigan State who worked for the tobacco industry. —
The idea of running a team of cash-for-comments academic economists was developed by Ogilvy & Mather Public Relations for the Tobacco Institute in 1983 and 1984. At that time the operation was run by one of O&M's contracted consultants, James Savarese, who had both economics and labor/union contacts, and it focussed on a small core-group of academic economists who were found speaking engagements at various society meetings.
Both the Tobacco Institute and Jim Savarese knew Professor Robert Tollison, of the Economics Department of George Mason University who also ran the neo-con/supply-side Public Choice Society. Tollison and his associate Richard Wagner had long worked for the international tobacco lobby organisation ICOSI (later INFOTAB) and they had excellent contacts with a large number of Randian/Hayekian [uber-libertarian] economists at other universities, due mainly to Tollison's directorship of the Center for the Study of Public Choice, which was located at GMU, but run as a private think-tank.
Tobacco industry money generously supported the Center, and before long Tollison and Savarese were using it as a recruitment and money-laundry service to develop the cash-for-comments network among appropriate academic economists. The idea was to have at least one "Professor of Economics" at a prominent local university, in each of the States, who was willing to support and promote industry propaganda. They were paid on a piece-work basis, averaging $1,000 to $3,000 each for articles planted in local newspapers, or for appearances as 'independent expert witnesses' at legislative or ordinance hearings on smoking bans, or on the raising of excise taxes on cigarettes.
The first project began in June 1984 with Tollison and Savarese getting 13 economists on their network to write op-ed articles in support of the tobacco industry position on excise taxes. They were sent first to the Tobacco Institute for 'improvement' and legal clearance, then returned to the economist who was instructed to plant them on a specific local newspaper, then send copies to their Congressman. This became the pattern of operations.
Jim Savarese and Bob Tollison (supported by Anne Tollison and staff from the Center) took over the operations from O&M, and they branched out into a diverse range of cash-for-comments academic networks: professors in law, business, marketing, and advertising, and with indoor-air-quality testing experts, risk-assessment specialists, biomedical researchers, etc.
These academics all had in common the desire to make money from the tobacco industry without revealing their connection to the 'Merchants of Death'. Savarese and Tollison provided them with the shield from 'legal discovery' so they were able to claim that these were "independent expert opinion articles" (op-eds). Some of the better newspapers may also have paid them separately for their journalistic contributions.
Some of the more enthusiastic of these tobacco lackeys were also designated to attend local ordinance hearings on public smoking, and in some cases to attended and gave expert evidence to Congressional inquiries and the like. Their credibility rested on the fact that they were esteemed academics from a university — so, in effect, they mined the credibility of their employer-institution for personal gain.
By 1989 Tollison and Savarese seem to have had about 65 Professors of Economics on their books, and about the same number (combined) in the other academic disciplines. The numbers changed over the years, but overall about 100 professors of economics at various state universities were involved.
Decline The Savarese-Tollison partnership appears to have broken up around 1990, but Savarese continued to run the operation for most of the decade — often using Tollison just as one source (but he was better paid than the others).
Over time — and sometimes abruptly — some of these economists dropped out of the operation. Some obviously did not like their articles being modified by the Tobacco Institute, and [who knows] ... maybe some even developed a conscience?
A few new recruits were added regularly to the networks in the 1990 - 1994 period, but the tobacco companies themselves tended to take control of the biomedical research specialist network [probably because of the legal necessity of dealing with them through lawyers to avoid the risk of legal 'discovery'].
Of the many academic cash-for-comments networks, the economists' lasted the longest and was the most productive, from the industry viewpoint.
There is also a Mark David Menchik writing on taxation issues.
Some key documents
• Economist Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.
• His CV is at
1974–76: Lecturer at Rutgers College
1976: PhD University of Pennsylvania
1979–86: Assistant/Associate Professor Michigan State University
1982–83: Visiting Associate Professor, University of Pennsylvania
1984 Jul: The Tobacco Institute's Cigarette Excise Tax Plan.
The plan augments our basic lobbying efforts by relying on groups outside the industry — some not regularly associated with the industry — to argue against excise taxes for us.
It is an ambitious program, based on the notion that many of the most effective protests against tobacco taxes will come from groups philosophically distant from The Institute. Many such groups agree with us on the excise issue, even though they disagree with us on other matters.
At the federal level, supporting Congressional members from the tobacco states is essential to our lobbyists. The tobacco members consistently vote as a unified group — something that is rarely seen in Congress today. They are our lobbyists' most important resource.
The program recommends that economic and other consultants assist us in developing, "packaging," and presenting our anti-excise arguments in legislative testimony or meetings with coalition members.
Economic consultants with different areas of expertise will conduct research and act as spokespersons for The Institute and organizations supported by The Institute. Specific activities with economists are discussed throughout the tactics.
- Stimulate reputable public finance economists at key state universities to determine the validity of state revenue forecasts, perhaps on behalf of state business organizations and present arguments against excise taxes in various forums; e.g., meetings with potential coalition members or budget officials.
- Encourage economists to make the case against regressive taxation in meetings with potential coalition members and legislators.
- Retain public finance economists affiliated with non-profit organizations to research the subject and use their findings in forums such as:
- Private meetings with state legislators or staff ;
- formal testimony before government bodies ;
- targeted media appearances;
- speeches before business, civic, labor, and other groups ;
- tax symposia in key states where the proceedings could be published for use in other states ; and
- articles which raise the visibility of key arguments in the business, academic, and popular press.
- Presenting specific members of the House Ways and Means and Senate Finance Committees with arguments prepared by economists with whom they share some common interest; e.g college affiliation, service on the same commission.
- Gaining the support of Citizens for Tax Justice (CTJ), the most influential labor/liberal tax reform group in the country, in opposition to excise taxes.
- Relying on the AFL-CIO — via The Bakery, Confectionery, and Tobacco Workers Union — to ensure that the labor/liberal tax package that emerges in the next session of Congress does not include tobacco.
Appendix: A list of economists in key states who may be willing to act as industry and third-party spokespersons on the tax issue.
Following is a list of economists in key states who might assist us as experts receiving honoraria. We have begun contacting them to ensure their willingness and expertise. We are asking each about past experience; work with similar issues; previous work with the industry; published articles or research; and availability.
Our intent is to have a group of individuals whom we can call upon as needed to testify, conduct special research and discuss their research projects and/or views on excise taxes with budget officials, potential coalition members, legislators and the media.
1985 Jan 31: Hurst Marshall has distributed this Tobacco Institute list of economists from the cash-for-comments network. It has been organise by State, and includes the names of Congressmen they wish to influence.
Attached for your information are the names of economists who have been identified by PR to assist TI on the federal cigarette excise tax issue. This economist will be detailed to make the contact with Congressmen [by sending him/them the published op-ed]:
These people are also available to testify at the state level.
If you feel that this type of witness can be of assistance to you on state cigarette tax issues, please contact Fred Panzer for details and arrangements.
Please notify your lobbyists as to the availability of these people. At the same time, you may wish to ask them for their ideas or suggestions for other economists within their states.
MICHIGAN (Rep. VanderJagt)
• Professor Paul Menchik,
Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan
1985 Feb 7: Judy Wiedemeier of the Tobacco Institute is writing to the regional lobbyists.
Attached for your information, are the names of economists who have been identified by our Public Relation department to assist T.I. on the federal cigarette excise tax issue. These people are also available to testify at the state level.
The attached list includes the contact details of this economist and also the Congressmen that are their targets.
If you feel this type of witness can be of assistance to you, please contact me for details and arrangements. If you have any ideas or suggestions for other economists within your state, please let me know, as we are always expanding our resources.
Professor Paul Menchik
Michigan State University East Lansing, Michigan
1985 Feb 21: Roger Mozingo of the Tobacco Institute is sending his state directors a list of resources available to fight against excise taxes in their states. Paul Menchik heads their state list of available economic witnesses for Michigan.
1985 Mar: Tobacco Institute document "Federal Markets" on the likely allies the industry has acquired to oppose the earmarking of cigarette excises for healthcare. It also includes a record of their successful activities in each state
Positive Actions by Local Allies:
Academics: Professor Paul Menchik wrote an op-ed article on tax reform that appeared in the Muskegon Chronicle on April 15 (newspaper in home district of Ways & Means member Vander Jagt). Copies were sent to Vander Jagt.
Minorities: Contacts have been made with the Michigan State Chapter of American GI Forum and Michigan State Chapter of LULAC. [Latin-American pro-tobacco group]
See page 4
See Success List
1985 Mar 1: James Savarese writes to Fred Panzer at the Tobacco Institute.
This letter is in response to your request for information about the Michigan economists identified by your lobbyists to work on the excise tax issue. He is dismissive of one economist, Harvey Brazer, who has exhibited strong anti-smoking/pro excise-tax sentiments.
As you know, we identified an economist, Paul Menchik, at Michigan State University who has agreed to work in support of the tobacco industry. He sent us a good letter opposing excise taxes for our OP-ED campaign.
As we have discussed many times,. I take full responsibility for the reliability of the economists on our states list. My experiences with the Harvey Brazers of the world have not been good.
1985 April 15: Menchik, along with dozens of other academic economists, has written an op-ed piece "Unfair excise Taxes should be eliminated." published in the Muskegon Chronicle. Like most of the Tobacco Institute funded op-eds published at this time, this article attacks excise taxes in general while dealing only superficially or obliquely with tobacco.
It says that the article "is taken from his pamphlet "Federal Tax Reform: Some Unfinished Business." Of course it doesn't mention that the article has been funded by the tobacco industry, and it cries crocodile tears over the way in which cigarette excises will impact on the disposable income of poor families. See Page 11
|Content vs. Purpose?|
|The question is not what was said in these articles, but rather the reasons why they were said.
If your vision of economics is merely that it is a form of commercial bookkeeping (a view that prevailed until the global financial crisis), then clearly the early deaths of other people — those who have passed their social usefulness and are a burden on the tax system — is of benefit to the survivors. Smokers who are taxed during their smoking lives and then die young are therefore a net benefit to their communities.
Of course the same can apply to euthenasia of the disabled and the elderly, and perhaps the hanging of all academic economists who propound this sort of simplistic nonsense. Clearly Menchik and his associates were unencumbered by feelings of guilt about supporting an industry which has shortened the lives of a 100 million people.
1985 May 29: Fred Panzer writes to other issues-executives at the Tobacco Institute praising the success of the Op-ed Article Project on Excise Taxes.
So far, sixteen op-ed pieces of twenty-three submitted have either appeared or have been accepted for publication.That's a..700 batting average!
The authors of these clippings are Thomas Pogue; A James Heins; Paul Menchik; Domenick Armentano; Todd Sadler; Joseph Jadlow; Henry Butler; Fred McChesney; Ryan Amacher; Robert Ekelund Jr; who all parade their university credentials, and who all forget to mention that the Tobacco Institute paid them to write these columns.
We're looking for about 35 of our economists to participate. They're the ones in states represented on the two tax writing committees of Congress.
Attached are clippings of ten of the articles:
Des Moines Register, Chicago Sun-Times, Muskegon Chronicle, Hartford Courant, Caspar Star-Tribune, Tulsa Tribune, Austin American-Statesman, Atlanta Journal, Greenville (S.C.) News, and Huntsville (Ala.) Times. You may agree that it would be a natural follow-on to arrange for sending the article to the approriate member of the state legislative tax writing committee. This would help create the impression that we have more support "out there" than expected. If nothing else, the exercise would give our lobbyists more credible and positive material to leave behind with state legislators.
[This a variation in what became known as a 'Big Chill' tactic of letting legislators know that you had the money and power to challenge them in campaigns and Congress if they didn't fall into line.]
1985 June 30 to Sep 6: The Tobacco Institute have arranged the weekly syndication of a series of Opinion pieces, comparing statements of four economists (varied weekly) on various subjects. These have been picked up and run by newspapers; presumably in the belief that they are worthy articles of economic opinion. The economists quoted are:
[It's great to see newspapers publishing such a diversity of economic opinion!]
- K Celese Gaspari (Uni of Vermont) — a cash-for-comment economist
- David N Laband (Uni of Maryland) — a cash-for-comment economist
- Fred McChesney (Emory Uni) — a cash-for-comment economist
- Dean Tipps — nominally a union official — actually Citizens for Tax Justice lobbyist
- Allen M Parkman (Uni of New Mexico) — a cash-for-comment economist
- Richard Vedder (Ohio Uni) — a cash-for-comment economist
- Roger Faith (Arkansas State Uni) — a cash-for-comment economist
- Lee Alston (Williams college) — a cash-for-comment economist
- William Hunter (Marquette Uni) — a cash-for-comment economist
- Dennis Logue (Dartmouth College) — a cash-for-comment economist
- William Shughart (George Mason Uni) — a cash-for-comment economist
- Harold Hochman (City Uni of New York) — a cash-for-comment economist
- David Wilhelm (Citizens for Tax Justice) — think-tank lobbyist
- Joseph Jadlow (Oklahoma State Uni) — a cash-for-comment economist
- Robert Ekelund (Auburn Uni) — a cash-for-comment economist
- Thomas Borcherding (Claremont Grad. School) — a cash-for-comment economist
There's also published articles on tax reform by Todd Sandler (Uni of Wyoming); Michael Crew (Rutgers Uni); Robert Ekelund (Ashburn Uni); Joseph Jadlow (Oklahoma State Uni); Ann Harper-Fender (Gettysburg College); Thomas Pogue (Uni of Iowa); Lee Alston (Williams College), Paul Menchik (Michigan State Uni); Henry Butler (Texas A&M Uni); Burton Abrams (Uni of Delaware)
1985 June 21: James Savarese submits his bill to the Tobacco Institute for the academics who have written articles or made speeches for the Tobacco Institute.
- Op Ed Project — $1000 each in 'professional fees'
for Abrams, Alston, Armentano, Harper-Fender, T Anderson, Denzau, Bohanon, Jadlow, Wagner and Menchik.
- Southwest Social Science Meeting — Houston
- Keith Watson ($1,000),
- RB Ekelund Jr ($2,003)
- Joseph Jadlow ($2,605),
- Richard Wagner ($2,716)
- Robert D Tollison ($5,000)
- Henry N Butler ($2,070)
- Eastern Economic Assoc, Meeting — Pittsburgh
- George E Hoffer ($1,431)
- Gary M Anderson ($2,450)
- Robert D Tollison ($6,375)
- Bill Shurghart III ($2,529)
- Michael D Pratt ($1,288)
- John H Bowman ($1,000)
1985 Sep 6: 'Acey' at the Tobacco Institute has sent a bundle of newspaper clippings along to their printer/copier.
Enclosed are 15 original newspaper clippings (don't lose them!) some in better shape than others.
We'd like these articles on seperate sheets so the lobbiests (sp) can make up their own individual packets. They will also be including some publications too.
This brings us back to the infamous Tax Folder... To hold all these clippings, publicatiosn and information on tax articles.
Size should be a 9 x 12 folder to fit in a 9x 12 envelope. You know what I mean. Good looking folder, not too slick. Articles should be in black & white.
[Menchik's article is to be circulated.]
1985 Nov 6: Ken Arnold of Ogilvy & Mather PR writes to Fred Panzer at the Tobacco Institute.
Fred, here is a summary of the Economist Op-ed and Economic News Service projects.
This chart list all the important Congressmen they want their economists to influence, including:
With regard to the Economist Op-ed project, we have submitted a total of 34 op-ed articles, and 18 of them have been published. Recent articles appeared in the Huntsville Times on September 11, by Robert Ekelund and in the Providence Journal on October 25, by Arthur Mead (see attachments).
Enclosed is a revised op-ed chart, indicating House Ways & Means and Senate Finance Committee Members impacted to date and the circulation of each newspaper publishing the articles. In most cases, the papers are the largest in the targeted district.
Congressman Guy Vander Jagt
Muskegon Chronicle (c- 47,600) April 15
Professor Paul Menchik
Michigan State University
Economic News Service:
Ogilvy & Mather appear to have organised a separate syndication system for economic articles which did not carry the names of the cash-for-comments academics, but which were simply distributed to these newspapers as if they were news. However, the titles show that they were carefully crafted to suit the local prejudices and interests — so they were probably written anonymously by the same academics..
1985 Dec 12: Annual Report of the Tobacco Institute's Public Relations division lists him as having:
We believe that the active and creative use of experts — our scientists in particular — gives us an edge. But without question, public smoking is our toughest challenge.
A close second is taxation. In 1985, most of our resources in this area were focused on the federal situation.
That being the case, we concentrated almost exclusively on the home districts and offices of the 56 members of the House Ways and Means and Senate Finance Committees.
We identified and utilized economists from universities in 48 of those districts. Some testified at the four federal tax hearings in which had interest. Others participated in academic symposia attended by Congressional staffers. Others communicated directly with their Congressmen.
And 34 of them wrote op-ed articles on the need to consider excises as part of tax reform. Many of these articles appeared in the principal newspaper in the targeted districts which have, by our estimation, a total circulation of nearly 4 million.
The economists were of great help. [SNIP]
Professor Paul Menchik wrote an op-ed article on tax reform that appeared in the Muskegon Chronicle on April 15 (newspaper in home district of Ways & Means member Vander Jagt) Copies were sent to Vander Jagt.
1986: Made a full Professor Michigan State Uni
1986 Jan: The Tobacco Institute's Public Relations Resource Catalogue for their Regional Directors, lists documents, booklets, article, posters and people who can help them fight local public smoking ordinances and threats to raise the excise taxes on cigarettes.
It provides a long list of economists who are willing to speak at hearings, write letters to the editor, or create op-eds for the newspapers to counter any threat to public smoking or possible increase in excise taxes.
The Tobacco Institute offered their Regional Directors the C/Vs of all of these economists, and said
"Requests for economists should be made ASAP. Allow at least one week. PR approval needed." He is listed [along with 50 other economists] as a contact in:
He is available on two weeks notice as a witness for hire.
- Professor Paul Menchik
Economics Department, Michigan State University , East Lansing, MI
Public Smoking/Witness: Local economists are available on two-weeks notice to provide economic testimony on the public smoking issue. Those economists who have testified or prepared op-ed pieces on the economic effects of public smoking are marked accordingly. The others may be briefed on the potential cost to government of implementing smoking restrictions.
Tax witness: [He will] "explain why excise taxes are regressive and unfair to consumers and unsuitable and unreliable as a means to increase the federal revenue."
Those economists who have testified or prepared op-ed pieces on the economic effects of public smoking are marked accordingly. The others may be briefed on the potential cost to government of implementing smoking restrictions.
1986 May: A bundle of 72 pages of information is being circulated by the Tobacco Institute to its Regional Directors. The data is predominantly on the tobacco-industry beat-up known as Sick Building Syndrome and on the general problems of Indoor Air Quality [all down-playing the effects of smoking in confined spaces]
Section 1 is headed
List of sources. Local and national experts you can call for quotes or background information. It promotes the services of three specialist lobbyists
They have also provided a list of the 52 Professors of Economics from various State Universities who can be called on to provide services for roughly $1000 a time: This economists name and address are included under "Tobacco & Taxation (listed by state, alphabetically)".
- Lewis Solmon - an academic who discounts problems of workplace smoking
- Al Vogel - who claims to be an expert in public attitudes to smoking
- Mike Forscey, a labor lawyer/lobbyist who helped the tobacco industry keep the union movement on-side.
1986 May 30: Fred Panzer of the Tobacco Institute was contacting British-American Tobacco's PR executive, Tom Humber [also Burson-Marsteller and National Smoking Alliance] sending him some of the examples of the network economists.
Enclosed are: (1) The first wave of 27 op-ed reprints, (2) A second wave of 32 op-ed articles (21 published and 11 unpublished), sent out on Packwood's first tax reform proposal.
He also lists 21 of the economist (including this one) and provides copies of many of their recent articles.
I've also included one on the Chase [Economtrics] study. There are a few others being rounded up, as well as a syndicated excise tax feature series we developed. Out of all this should come something useful for your people.
1986 Oct 3: A Tobacco Institute report on the economists network, lists the Congressmen they are expected to influence,and the economist's various academic specialities.
This early list is probably the most detailed of all. A later section of this 43 page document also runs through the 28 main states giving the names and details of witnesses willing to speak to legislators on Taxes (almost exclusively economists), and those available as witnesses for the tobacco industry on Public Smoking issues (economists and a range of others)
A major effort had also been made recently to enlist fire officers and brigades to counter demands for a 'fire-safe' cigarette which had low ignition propensity.
MICHIGAN, (Rep. VanderJagt)
[Economist:] Professor Paul Menchik, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, 517-355-7756
[Speciality:] Fiscal policy; public finance, economic and social statistics; savings, social security, inheritance and s.s. reserves.
| Tax Witnesses: ||Materials available|
|Paul Menchik|| Mich. data card|
"Excise Taxes: The Fairness Issue"
"More Taxes on Tobacco...."
Earmarking topic sheet
Letter writing brochure.
| Public Smoking:||Materials available|
|Applicable to both state and socal legislation|
|Al Vogel (productivity)|
Steve Schlossberg (labor implications)
Lew Solmon (economics)
Bob Klotz (enforcement)
Response Analysis summaries
Public Smoking topic sheet
"Some Considerations" workplace kits
"In Defense of Smokers" reprint
"The Other Side of the Smoking Controversy" reprint
Letter writing brochure
| Fire: |
|Fire Safety Education Grant to||Detroit Fire Marshall, Capt Joseph P Boland|
State Fire Marshal, Karen Gulliver
Wayne County Dept/Pub.Safety, Wayne Bennett
Benton Harbor FD, Lt Thomas Fogarty
| Sampling materials: ||Materials available|
|Helping Youth Decide|
Letters of Commendation/Praise
| Media Relations: |
|Contacts are in place in Grand Rapids and Traverse City. Contact Bill Toohey for assistance.|
1986 Oct 3: The State Directors for the Tobacco Institute have been reviewing all economics network witnesses in their territories, and culling those who are not actively participating. The Washington DC office is now circulating to its State Directors a list of the economists available who...
"...have been identified in several states by J. Savarese as available and hopefully capable to testify in our behalf, or aid in our defense against proposed state of local legislation, from an economic aspect. This list differs from others in providing a list of the economic specialities of each network economist, along with the Congresmen they were designated to influence. He is listed as specializing in:
MICHIGAN (Rep. VanderJagt)
Professor Paul Menchik
Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, 517-355-7756
[Specializing in]Fiscal policy; public finance, economic and social statistics; savings, social security, inheritance and s.s. reserves.
1986 Dec 8: Sam Chilcote is summing up the Tobacco Institute's activities in fighting the Packwood Tax Plan which attempted to impose special excise taxes on tobacco, alcohol and fuel (in the oil crisis years) to reduce use. Packwood also wanted to make these taxes and tarffs non-deducatable for federal income tax purposes.
The document bundle (219 pages) includes:
- Pages 2 to 34: A major study done for the TI by Policy Economics Group
- Pages 35 to 50: Another major study commissioned from DeSeve Economics for the Coalition Against Regressive Taxation (CART) [funded by tobacco to act as a front]
- Pages 51 to 57: A couple of papers done for Covington & Burling
- Pages 58 to 100: A long document which has deliberately NOT included the name of the organisation which produced it within the document itself. (But done by deSeve Economics Associates Inc).
- Pages 101 to 129 : A paper on the "Burden of Tobacco Taxes on Selected Demographic Groups"
- Pages 130 to 144: Some booklet trying to rabble-rouse the Hispanic and Black communities and make them believe Packwood is attacking them racially.
- Page 145 to 177: A Citizens for Tax Justice 'poll' on attitudes. and Coalition Against Regressive Taxation document
- From Page 178 on: many of the op-eds they have had published in newspapers by the cash-for-comment academic economists, (including one from this source.)
See Menchik's Muskegon Chronicle article on page 199 of the document bundle.
1986 Dec 11: James Savarese sends Fred Panzer at the Tobacco Institute a summary of the activities of his network of economists. This is effectively the beginning of the main cash-for-comments economists network.
There are now 62 names on the list (Some states have 4 or 5) not counting himself and Bob Tollison. The details given for each consist of State, Regional Division [of the TI], Name, Address and Telephone number. Added to this is a list of the 'Projects' they have completed (in later lists, also the names of Congressmen they have contacted.)
I have attached a list of all the economists we have used along with the projects they have worked on in behalf of the Tobacco Institute.
Virtually all of these cash-for-comment academics have been generating op-ed articles for newspapers, or have, in some unspecified way, opposed the Packwood Excise Tax plan — or perhaps helped fake up one of the 'Chase' [Econometrics studies]. A few participants have attended Congressional or government inquiries ['Treasury I') or local ordinance hearings as 'independent witnesses' while secretly acting for the tobacco industry. Two of the 64 members (Ann Harper-Fender and Gary Anderson) were acting termporarily as advisors to Ronald Reagan's Advisory Council on Intergovernmental Relations— which sought to bring pressure on the FDA, EPA and OSHA and stop them being pro-active with smoking bans.
Other participants have been promoting the industry line at various academic conferences and fora [mainly as keynote speakers at economic society meetings] , and a few of the core-team were involved in brianstorming sessions with members of the tobacco industry looking for new angles for their PR, and for possible research project which might generate some economic propaganda for the industry.
Many of them have joined in with the industry's orchestrated letter-writing campaigns opposing workplace smoking bans.
- GSA = Government Services Administration.
- 'Ways & Means' = Congressional committee on finances
- ALEC = American Legislative Exchange Council (a formalised way for big business to directly influence Congressional and State politicians)
- Chase Econometrics = A company that did economic impact studies for the tobacco industry in various locations to 'prove' that smoking bans would destroy local economies.
The references for this network member were:
Michigan [ Region III ]
Professor Paul Menchik
Economics Department, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48823, 517-355-4553
- original excise tax op-ed
Menchik appears not to have worked for the network after 1988, although some of his articles were quoted in the 1990s.