WARNING: 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.

OPINION ONLY

Professor Thomas Borcherding was one of the original cabal of economists who became the nation-wide network working for the Tobacco Institute. It was put together by tobacco lobbyist James Savarese and Professor Robert Tollison of George Mason University who collaborated in the 1980s to provide the tobacco industry with academics willing to write propaganda material ... always provided their names were not linked to the industry or to any of the cigarette companies.

The idea was simply that the academic 'sleepers' would be available on a cash-for-services basis when needed to counter attempts to increase excise taxes, or to ban public smoking, or just to appear as independent experts at Congressional hearings and promote the industry causes.

Economist were by far the most useful academics to the tobacco industry because the distinction between economics and politics was never clear: so support of the cigarette companies could always be claimed as support for free-market economics ... the rights of individuals to make public choices ... small government ... or even the first Amendment to the Constitution.

The economist always claimed to be 'independent', 'professionals' and they wre recognised 'academics' from some credible university. They never revealed the source of their funding in their op-eds or letters-to-the-editor.

If ever put under cross-examination, they must be able to claim with weasel-word precision, that they had never received a penny from the tobacco industry. Therefore all payments were laundered, either through tobacco industry lawyers (usually Covington & Burling), the principle organisers, James Savarese & Associates, or through Bob Tollison's Center for the Study of Public Choice at George Mason University.

The aim was to have, in each State, at least one academic economist, one academic lawyer, and one academic from a business management, business law, marketing or advertising discipline willing to jump into action and write op-ed articles for their local newspaper, or to appear at local ordinance or legislative hearings. Copies of these articles were always to be sent to a local Congressman who sat on some important (to the tobacco industry) committee.

The academics were always expected to wave their own and their university's credentials vigorously, and loudly proclaim their "independence' from any crass-commercial motives. And those who could boast of being 'non-smokers' were especially prized — since without this addiction, their non-dependent-on-tobacco status was thought to be proved beyond any doubt!

The foundation document for the network still in the tobacco industry archives is the Draft plan (below) dated 30 April 1984

This 109 page DRAFT Tobacco Institute "Cigarette Excise Tax Plan" was aimed at countering the Reagan Administration's "Packwood Tax Plan" and the list of economist involved includes Thomas Borcherding.

Some key documents

• Economist , Economics Department Claremont Graduate School, Claremont, CA and Director of The Claremont Center for Economic Policy Studies.

• His CV makes no mention of his life as tobacco lobbyist.
    See also SourceWatch

1939 Feb 18: Born Cincinnati OH

1961: BA University of Cincinnati

1965–66: at the Thomas Jefferson Center for the Study of Political Economy, University of Virginia.

1966: PhD in Economics, Duke University.

1966–71: Assistant Professor, University of Washington

1971–73: Associate PRofessor, Virginai Polytechnic

1973–77: Associate Professor at Simon Fraser University (a hotbed of tobacco industry funding)

1974–75: At the Hoover Institute. (another hotbed of tobacco funding)

1980–97: Editorial positions with Economic Inquiry.

1983: Professor of Economics, Claremont Graduate School

1984 Apr 30: The Tobacco Institute's Cigarette Exercise Tax Plan (DRAFT) shows that they are disillusioned with President Reagan because, after the deregulatory fiascos of his first term, he was now leaning more towards the use of excise taxes to offset some of the income tax reductions given to the wealthy — resulting in a fast-growing deficit which had now reatched $200 billion.

Outlook for 1985

Once the elections are over, it is almost certain that the new Congress will consider a significant tax increase. Since an enormous amount of revenue is needed to balance the federal budget, it will be very difficult to keep federal cigarette excises out of a final tax package.

Economic Consultants
One public finance economist for 10 days @ $1,000 including meetings with coalition members and/or the Governor's staff; research and preparation; and testimony. TOTAL $10,000

One economist for a union workshop on the tax issue, including 3 or 4 training sessions over the course of a convention. TOTAL $5,000

Six economists @ $5,000 and one senior economist @ $20,000 for a tax symposium, including publishing of the proceedings at $3,000. The senior economist would play an oversight/organizational role and would be responsible for editing the proceedings. Such a symposium would be staged for regional or national impact. TOTAL $53,000

One economist provided to a public employee union to do original research on the need for adequate services to be funded by broad-based taxes; this would include the final report and testimony. TOTAL $25,000

Potential Economic Consultants
    Following is a list of economists in key states who might assist us as consultants. 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 speaking availability.

    As discussed in the body of this program, our intent is to have a group of individuals who we can call upon regularly to testify, conduct special research projects, and discuss their research and/or views on excise taxes with the media.

• California, Thomas Borsherding, Claremont College
• Connecticut, William McEachern, University of Washington
• Florida, Richard Wagner, Florida State University
• Georgia, Fred McChesney, Emory University Law School
• Illinois, James Heins, University of Illinois
• Massachusetts, Harlan Platt, Northeastern University
• Minnesota, Thomas Stimson, University of Minnesota (St. Paul Campus)
• New York, Harold Hochman, City University of New York
• Ohio, David Klingaman, Ohio University
• Pennsylvania, Mark Pauly, University of Pennsylvania
• Texas, Charles Maurice, Texas A&M University
• Washington, Yoram Barazel, University of Washington
• Washington, D.C. Robert D. Tollison, George Mason University
• Wisconsin, Burton Weisbrod, University of Wisconsin

    Tollison is the most influential and prestigious on this list; he would be hired to consult on federal tax situations and to oversee efforts of the others throughout the country.

See last page
Yoram Barazel is the only name on this list who appears to have resisted the Institute's overtures.

1984 Apr 30: This 109 page DRAFT Tobacco Institute "Cigarette Excise Tax Plan" which was aimed at the Reagan Administration They had an immediate requirement of

• One public finance economist for 10 days @ $1,000, [Total $ 10,000 ] including meetings with coalition members and/or the Governor's staff; research and preparation; and testimony.
• One economist for a union workshop on the tax issue, [Total $5,000] including 3 or 4 training sessions over the course of a convention.
• Six economists @ $5,000 and one senior economist 53,000 @ $20,000 for a tax symposium, including publishing of the proceedings at $3,000. [Total $53,000] The senior economist would play an oversight/organizational role and would be responsible for editing the proceedings. Such a symposium would be staged for regional or national impact.
• One economist provided to a public employee union to do original research on the need for adequate services to be funded by broad-based taxes; this would include the final report and testimony. [Total $ 25,000]

Potential Economic Consultants
    Following is a list of economists in key states who might assist us as consultants. 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 indusry; published articles or research; and speaking availability.

    As discussed in the body of this program, our intent is to have a group of individuals who we can call upon regularly to testify, conduct special research projects, and discuss their research and/or views on excise taxes with the media.

• California, Thomas Borsherding, Claremont College
• Connecticut, William McEachern, University of Washington
• Florida, Richard Wagner, Florida State University
• Georgia, Fred McChesney, Emory University Law School
• Illinois, James Heins, University of Illinois
• Massachusetts, Harlan Platt, Northeastern University
• Minnesota, Thomas Stimson, University of Minnesota (St. Paul Campus)
• New York, Harold Hochman, City University of New York
• Ohio, David Klingaman, Ohio University
• Pennsylvania, Mark Pauly, University of Pennsylvania
• Texas, Charles Maurice, Texas A&M University
• Washington, Yoram Barazel, University of Washington
• Washington, D.C. Robert D. Tollison, George Mason University
• Wisconsin, Burton Weisbrod, University of Wisconsin

Tollison is the most influential and prestigious on this list; he would be hired to consult on federal tax situations and to oversee efforts of the others throughout the country.

See last page
Yoram Barazel is the only name on this list who appears to have resisted the Institute's overtures.

1984 May 2: Ogilvy & Mather's monthly report to Peter Sparber at the Tobacco Institute says:

TAX PROJECT We identified an economist, Tom Borscheding, to testify against California Senate Bill 1961, which calls for excise tax increases. The agency prepared his testimony, which he will give May 2.

    The agency continued to work closely with you to revise and update the tax plan. Some of our activities included:

• adding California and Minnesota sections;
• providing background on economic consultants;
• preparing budget estimates;
• obtaining information on WIFE and LULAC;
• obtaining names and COPE ratings of state legislators and analyzing their COPE and tobacco ratings;
• preparing a list of policy questions for use with the executive committee;
• notifying you about Heinz's speech to the National Council on Aging and obtaining a copy for you.

1984 June: /E In 1984 Robert D. Tollison [of George Mason University] joined forces with four other economists: Harold M. Hochman [CUNY], Thomas E. Borcherding [Claremont College LA], Fred McChesney [Emory Uni] and Dolores T. Martin [Uni of Nebraska], to start the Committee on Taxation and Economic Growth. This very quickly became

"an informal committee of economists from 42 states who have collectively and individually participated in activities on behalf of the tobacco industry in the areas of excise taxation and public smoking."

(SourceWatch)

"The Committee on Taxation and Economic Growth" [which] opposes excise taxes and believes government should seek other ways to raise revenue.

    The following excerpts, taken from public testimony before the U.S. Treasury Department, present some of the strongest arguments against excises. [Five are quoted, with Borcherding saying:]

"`.. excise taxes, wherever levied, misallocate resources; they cost the economy production and jobs.

    ... everyone knows that placing an excise tax on a good raises its price, but in spite of the widespread belief that the tax is `passed on' to the con-.sumer, it is more generally the ease that part of the tax is paid by the producer.

    Regardless of how the tax burden is shared (by the producer and the consumer), the price of the taxed good rises and its sales decline. The welfare of both consumers and producers is reduced, and part of this welfare loss is transferred to the government in the form of tax revenues.

1984 June: /E Tobacco Institute appendixes to some report. Page 5 is a list of "Potential Economic Consultants."

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 projects, and discuss their research and/or views on excise taxes with budget officials, potential coalition members, legislators, and the media.

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.

Resources:
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.

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.

Strategies:

• 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.

Cash-for-Comment Economists
State	Economist
California	Thomas Borsherding, Claremont College
Connecticut	William McEachern, University of Washington
Florida	Richard Wagner, Florida State University
Georgia	Fred McChesney, Emory University Law School
Illinois	James Heins, University of Illinois
Mass.	Harlan Platt , Northeastern University
Minnesota	Thomas Stimson, University of Minnesota (St.P)
New York	Harold Hockman, City University of New York
Ohio	David Klingaman, Ohio University
Penn.	Mark Pauly, University of Pennsylvania
Texas	Charles Maurice, Texas A&M University
Wash.DC.	Robert D Tollison, George Mason University.
Wisconsin	Burton Weisbord, University of Wisconsin
[This was the core group which established the cash-for-contents network. Over the years the numbers reached over 100.]

    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.

1984 July 2: O&M PR reports to Peter Sparber about the Treasury Department Hearings in New York, Washington and Springfield:

• New York: Harold Hochman, Economics Professor at Baruch College of the City University of New York, testified Monday, July 25 at the U.S. Treasury hearing in New York.
  
      We arranged an interview with Meredith Hollas of WNBC-AM. It lasted 10 minutes and Hochman concentrated on the excise issue.
  
      During his testimony, Hochman was photographed by the Berton County Record (Hackensack, NJ Daily) and Cable News Network. We supplied reporters from these outlets with copies of his testimony as well as several other reporters in attendance. Hochman was very relaxed and animated in his testimony, but was slightly nervous during his interview.
• Washington: Robert Tollison, Professor of Economics at George Mason University, testified Tuesday, July 26 at the Washington tax reform hearing
  
      Tollison's testimony concentrated solely on cigarette excises.
  
      Several reporters attended the hearing and we distributed testimony to each. Fortune and Nation's Business did not attend the event but were interested in receiving Tollison's testimony.
  
      We also taped a Q&A with Tollison regarding excise taxes, an interview with a "man-in-the-street" on the issue, and Tollison's testimony for use in a wrap-up news story on the hearings to be released via satellite.
• Springfield: Roger Kormendi, Professor of Economics at the University of Chicago, testified at the final tax reform hearing on Thursday, July 28 in Springfield, IL.
  
      Kormendi was a very effective speaker and impressed the Treasury Department officials. Both officials asked him numerous questions concerning his testimony and [Dep.Ass.Sec.]Pearlman wanted to get in touch with him over the telephone to further discuss Kormendi's views.
  
      Kormendi was very articulate and relaxed with the press. We arranged an interview with WNNS-AM of Springfield that took place at the hearing. The interview lasted 10 minutes and Kormendi concentrated on the unfairness of "hidden taxes."
  
      He was also interviewed by:
  • The Chicago Tribune — Kormendi is a friend of the reporter who covered the hearing.
  • TV 31, Peoria, IL — Five minute interview covering his views on excises and consumption taxes.
  • Bureau of National Affairs —Reporter talked to him briefly about the main points of his testimony. She took his phone number for further information.
  • USA Today — Reporter had received information from O&M and wanted to know if TI had funded Kormendi's speech. Kormendi adamantly told him that although TI funded him, his views.were his own.
• Attached is a tape of Tom Borcherding's interview on the Michael
      Jackson Show (Los Angeles).

1984 July 16: A summary report of the Tobacco Institute notes that they had managed to plant economist witnesses at six of the eight Treasury Department regional hearings.

• Thomas Borsherding at Los Angelos on June 12
• Delores Martin at Minneapolist on June 19
• Fred McChesney at Atlanta on June 20
• Harold Hochman at New York on July 25 (sic...June?)
• Robert Tollison at Washington on June 26
• Roger Kormendi at Springfield June 28

1984 Nov 9: The economists have suggested to Savarese that the Tobacco Institute should attempt to use economic forums to spread their propaganda in 1985. The TI should pay the network economists to attend and give papers at these forums. They have suggested:

• Public Choice Society, New Orleans, LA, February 21-23
• Eastern Economic Association, Pittsburgh, PA, March 21-23
• Southwestern Social Science Association, Houston, TX, March 20-23
• Western Economic Association, Anaheim, CA, June 25-29
• Southern Economic Association, Dallas, TX, November

It is important to bear in mind that these papers must be a cut above the testimony we produced for the Treasury hearings, but they do not have to be of professional journal quality.

    This is not to say that we wouldn't want to get several of these published independently in academic journals, but rather that this is not necessary in the majority of cases.

    Again, unlike the Treasury hearings, the authors would have to do a good deal of the research themselves. We would work with them to insure that the main points are made, but we do need them to commit some of their time to the production side. [Note how this is being spelled out. Clearly most of the research data in previous papers had been handed to the economists, with their papers or testimonials already written.]

    In order to get on the program of these meetings , we will need to rely heavily on Bob Tollison, who has just been elected President of the Southern Economic Association for 1985.

    With the help of Tollison, Tom Borcherding, and Hal Hochman; we can probably appear before each of these groups.

    If The Institute is interested in pursuing their idea, I am available to work with Tollison to draw up a brief one page outline for programs for each of these forums. I will check.with the economists we have used to ascertain their availability ahd interest — and any ideas they might have concerning specific papers.

1984 Nov 20: O&M is organising the first economists forum at the Public Choice Society meeting in New Orleans, Feb 21-23.

The topic would be "Public Choices About Tax Reform."

W.F. Shugart II, an economist from Clemson University, would chair the panel. Those who would present papers would be:

• Thomas Borcherding, from Claremont Graduate School. Subject: "Tax Reform and Simplification: A Public Choice Perspective."
• Harold Hochman, from City University of New York. Subject: "The Value-Added Tax: Do We Need Another Excise Tax?"
• Fred McChesney, Emory University Law School. Subject: "Tax Reform in a Rent-Seeking Perspective: The Role of Interests."
• Gary Anderson, an economist from George Mason University, would be the discussant.

Bob Tollison would be responsible for getting us on the program. He and Jim Savarese would work with each of the people to ensure that each paper contained a clear anti-excise tax message.

    Shughart and Anderson would also mention excises in their presentations. We will be obtaining CV s from Anderson and Shugart, who Jim and Bob Tollison know well. The other economists have all worked with us before.

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.

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.

CALIFORNIA (Rep. Matsui, Rep. Stark, Rep. Thomas)
  •   Professor Thomas Borcherding
      Claremont Graduate School Claremont, California

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. Thomas Borcherding heads their state list of available economic witnesses for California.

1985 March: /E A State Activites (Tobacco Institute) report lists him as active in California on their behalf:

Professor Tom Borcherding (Claremont College) testified against California Senate Bills 1163 and 1408 to increase excise taxes on cigarettes. He also prepared remarks on the California Tax Reform Advisory Commission Report for use by tobacco industry lobbyists.

1985 Mar 21: Hurst Marsahll to Jack Kelly [Tobacco Institute internal memo], re Californian Tax Reform Advisory Commission. He suggests that they use " "the Californian economist, Thomas Borcherding" " to prepare a "sound economic paper on the subjects of excise taxes."

• 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

1985 June 6: James Savarase & Associates has submitted its bill to Peter Sparber at the Tobacco Institute. The billing shows that some economists were paid via Robert Tollison, and that an Emory University Symposium had been held with Congressman [Wyche] Fowler.

• Robert D. Tollison (includes services of four economists and expenses) Completion of 40 States' Economist List.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . $6.055
• Emory University Symposium with Congressman Fowler (Robert Tollison and Fred McChesney + $1,500 to Emory Law School).  .  .  .  .  .  . $10,006
• Public Choice Society Session.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . Total $17,326
  • Robert Tollison ($6863),
  • William Shughart ($2908),
  • Fred McChesney ($2748),
  • Thomas Borcherding ($3033)
  • Dwight Lee (DRL Inc) ($1773)
• Op-ed Project Professional Fees and Expenses.  .  .  .  . Total $23,346
  • Robert Tollison (also laundering payment to four economists) — $15,346
  • A James Heins, Richard Vedder, Todd Sandler, Ryan Amacher, Joseph Jadlow, Henry Butler, RN Ekelund, Fred McChesney — (each $1000)

                        TOTAL A/C was for $56.733.81

1985 June 12: The formal "Committee on Taxation and Economic Growth" put together by the tobacco industry to support its propaganda, now has its own letterhead to write to Congressional politicians and aides. It claims to be a

"bi-partisan organization of public policy experts and public finance economists founded in 1984 to examine ways of creating a federal tax system which will provide adequate revenue in an efficient, equitable manner.

• Robert Tollison of George Mason Institute is Chairman,

• Thomas Borcherding, Claremont Graduate School
• Harold Hochman, Baruch College, CUNY
• Cotton M Lindsay, Clemson university
• Fred McChesney, Emory university,
• Dwight Lee, University of Georgia
• Richard Wagner, Florida State Uni.

[Note Delores Martin's name is not on the letterhead, even though she was involved initially, and later with the network.]

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 Tom Borcherding (Claremont College) testified against California Senate Bills 1163 and 1408 to increase excise taxes on cigarettes. He also prepared remarks on the California Tax Reform Advisory Commission Report for use by tobacco industry lobbyists.

1986 Jan: Public Relations Resources Commitee of the Tobacco Institute lists him as "available to provide economic testimony on the public smoking issue" He is an op-ed writer and/or witness who is available at two weeks notice.

See Page 9

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.

    It lists him as a contact in:

• Professor Thomas Borcherding
  Claremont College Graduate School, California

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 Mar 13: Savarese writes to Fred Panzer at the Tobacco Institute about the "Chase Study/Op-eds".
[These are promoting faux-economic impact studies on the effects of smoking bans, done in specific cities for the Tobacco Institute by Chase Econometrics]

• The St Louis article has been approved and submitted to the St Louis Despatch.
• The Baltimore article has been approved, but not yet submitted.
• John Militello's Philadelphia article is awaiting approval
• Richard Wagner's Miami article is being discussed.
• Four new articles are enclosed
  • Chicago (by Henry Butler)
  • (Another by Butler) for either Dallas or Houston
  • New York (by Michael Crew)
  • Atlanta (by Dwight Lee)
• In writing stages are articles for
  • Los Angeles (by Thomas Borsherding)
  • Cleveland (by Richard Vedder)

1986 Apr 3: James Savarese writes to his stable of economists on the subject of "New Research Opportunities." [A sure-fire come-on with academics]

I would like to thank you for all of your cooperation and diligence in handling the projects we have worked on together. I am taking this opportunity to alert you to some new research opportunities that may be available in the upcoming weeks.

    The Tobacco Institute is interested in considering research proposals which would establish a much more realistic examination of the social cost issue as it relates to the smoking issue.

... rebuttals developed by Bob Tollison and Richard Wagner to the OTA report.

    The Institute would like to examine proposals for research that test, in a quantitative way, a number of propositions on the relevant cost considerations that apply to the smoking issue.

    If some aspect of this interests you, please provide me with a brief (1-2 page) description of any project you have in mind by April 30. Please include a cost approximation.

1986 Apr 3: This appears to be the approved copy of the letter on "New Research Proposals" that Jim Savarese sent to his long list of network economists. This letter leaves no doubt that these academic economist knew that they were being paid to protect the interests of the tobacco industry.

    The economist were also being given outline "rebuttals" developed by Tollison and Wagner to help them in writing their counter-attacks to an an Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) anti-smoking report.

I would like to thank you for all of your cooperation and diligence in handling the projects we have worked on together. I am taking this opportunity to alert you to some new research opportunities that may be available in the upcoming weeks.

As you know, the tobacco industry is exposed continuously to a barrage of attacks on economic issues. Many of these attacks involve a serious perversion of the concept of social cost. The Tobacco Institute is interested in considering research proposals which would establish a much more realistic examination of the social cost issue as it relates to the smoking issue.

I have attached a report prepared by the staff of the Office of Technology Assessment which is representative of the kind of "research" being put forth by anti-tobacco activists. I have also included the rebuttals developed by Bob Tollison and Richard Wagner to the OTA report.

The Institute would like to examine proposals for research that test, in a quantitative way, a number of propositions on the relevant cost considerations that apply to the smoking issue.

1986 Apr 8: The Tobacco Institute's administration wants some accounting and address details on Dennis Chinn, Greg Niehaus, James A Papke , Thomas Borcherding and many others

1986 May: A bundle of information predominantly on Sick Building Syndrome and Indoor Air Quality is being circulated by the Tobacco Institute to its Regional Directors. However, Section 1 is headed

List of sources. Local and national experts you can call for quotes or background information.

1986 July 3: Ellen Quinn in TI accounting still has not received the required payment data for network economists Thomas Borcherding, Dennis Logue and Greg Niehaus [Although she manages to spell his name correctly]

When requesting a payment for services, an honorarium, or a political contribution, please include the social security or federal ID number and the address of the recipient.

1986 July 17: Susan Stuntz (Issues Manager) at the Tobacco Institute writes to PR head William Kloepfer giving him some useful quotes elicited from "Economic, Labor Submissions to GSA" (General Services Administration). These were usable quotes from cash-for-comments letters opposing the proposed federal building smoking ban. The economists all claimed the cost projections of producing and installing "No Smoking" signs was a major reason for their gratuitous involvement.

¡Since I believe the GSA's monetary estimate is in error, the agency is likely in non-compliance with E.C. 12291. The new smoking regulations should not be put into effect until a competent RIP has been completed and its contents scrutinized." Thomas Borcherding, Claremont Graduate School.

1986 Jul 21: Chilcote of the Tobacco Institute writes to the members of the Executive Committee detailing their successes in generating objections to the proposed GSA anti-smoking bans. They have persauded the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) to have the rules amended, and have turned out their friends and associated companies to generate letters of objection.

Included among the comments received by GSA thus far are thousands generated as a result of contact with TAN [Tobacco Action Network] activists, other tobacco family organizations, key coalitions, organized labor and economists.

    The State Activities Division's alert of key contacts in the field, as well as TAN activists, has generated at least 3,100 letters of opposition. These are letters for which copies have been sent to division headquarters; there are no doubt many others.

    Among member companies, all have asked their employees to write letters of opposition. In addition, RJ Reynolds reports its phone bank efforts to reach Washington, DC, residents, may have resulted in up to 3,700 opposition letters. Reynolds also sought letters from respondents to an earlier mailing on the federal excise tax issue. Philip Morris initiated a program designed to generate up to 10,000 mailgrams to GSA by the comment deadline.

• 8th July — Arthur T Denzau, Washington University, St Louis, Mo
• 3rd July — Barry W Poulson, University of Colorado, Boulder
• 10th July — Thomas E Borcherding, Claremont College/Graduate School, California
• 7th July — William F Shughart II, Center for the Study of Popular Choice, George Mason University, Washington DC
• Undated — (joint) Cecil E Bohanon, James E McClure, Stephan F Gohmann, Clarence R Deitsch, Lee C Spector — all PhDs in economics at Ball State University, Muscie, Ind.
• 7th July — John F Militello, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania,
• 7th July — Jean J Boddewyn, Baruch College, The City University of New York
• 5th July — Morgan Reynolds, Texas A&M University
• 8th July — Cliff P Dobitz, North Dakota State University
• 8th July — William C Mitchell, University of Oregon
• 11th July — Arthur C Mead, Economist, Newport RI
• 10th July — D Allen Dalton, Boise State University, Idaho
• 10th July — Henry N Butler, George Mason Univeristy
• 10th July — (joint) S Charles Maurice, Leonardo Auernheimer, Niccie L McKay, John R Hanson II, Lynn Gillette, Gregory Delemeester at Texas A&M University
• 9th July — (joint) Robert B Ekelund, Richard Ault, David Saurman, John Jackson, RG Hebert, JK Watson, Mark Thonton, at Auburn University, Alabama
• 9th July — (joint) Richard K Vedder, Lowell E Gallaway, Jan Palmer, David Klingaman at Ohio University

1986 July 31: The Tobacco Institute accounts are difficult to decypher but they show half-million dollar payments for the "P/R Excise Tax Program" for the first half of this year:

• $187,658 to Fleishman-Hillard (who ran the media tours and general PR)
• $102,814 to Ogilvy & Mather (PR and political lobbying)
• $160,611 to Savarese & Associates (incl. payments to some economists on the network)
• $ 5,200 to academic economist Thomas Borcherding (network member)
• $ 21,592 to DeSeve Economics Associates (for a loaded economic study)
• $ 10,250 to Fingerhut-Grandos (opinion research consultants)
• $ 20,500 to the Labor Management Committee (Savarese, passed this on to union lobbyists)
• $ 44,872 to Doremus & Co publicise the Chase Econometrics study
• $ 7,752 to Lewis Gilman & Kynett (PR Philadelphia)

1986 Aug: The Regional Vice Presidents (RVPs) and Regional Directors (RDs) of the Tobacco Institute in charge of various areas have supplied comments on their Economic Witnesses. This polling showed:

    Six of the Regional VPs thought it important that the economist was a resident of the State, "Ideally associated with the State University", while three did not, provided they were "presented to the legislators by a 'credible... organization' (e.g. Chambers of Commerce, labour union)."

[In was OK not to be academic, provided they hid their tobacco industry backing behind a front organization.]

The consolidated and encapsulated comments included:

Region IX
Thomas Borcherding. (Claremont Graduate School)
Althouqh considered certainly knowledgeable," Borcherding came across as "too professorial," with a tendency to lecture the legislators. His presentation did not focus sufficiently on the state of California. The lawmakers wanted to hear his specific opinions on the legislation being addressed.

    According to the RVP, Borcherding could be "very good before the right audience" (e.g., editorial meeting, public debate), which is not necessarily a legislative body.

1986 Sep: /E A Tobacco Institute report on "State Activities" credits Professor Hanna as providing help in California, under the heading "Positive Actions by Local Allies."

Professor Tom Borcherding (Claremont College) testified against California Senate Bills 1163 and 1408 to increase excise taxes on cigarettes.
He also prepared remarks on the California Tax Reform Advisory Commission Report for use by tobacco industry lobbyists.

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.

CALIFORNIA, (Rep. Matsui, Rep. Stark,, Rep. Thomas)

[Economist:] Professor Thomas Borcherding, Claremont Graduate School], Claremont, California,
[Speciality:] General theory; domestic fiscall policy and public finance; public choice approach, regulatory agencies and processes.

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.

CALIFORNIA

    (Rep. Matsui, Rep. Stark, Rep. Thomas)

    Professor Thomas Borcherding, Claremont Graduate School, Claremont, California
714-621-8000 ext. 3355

    [Specialising in] General theory; domestic fiscal policy and public finance; public
    choice approach, regulatory agencies and processes.

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,

See pages 210 to 219 of the bundle which have multiple Letters-to-editor/commentary from 17 cash-for-comments economists — William Hunter, Dennis Logue, William Shugart, Harold Hochman. David Wilhelm, Joseph Jadlow, Robert Ekelund, Thomas Borcherding, K Celeste Gaspari, David Laband, Fred McChesney, Dean Tipps, Allen Parkman, Richard Vedder, Roger Faith, Lee Alson, and William Hunter,
      They had obviously managed to plant these multiple-author pieces on a number of newspapers.

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.

Dear Fred,
    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.

• 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.

California [Region IX]

Professor Thomas Borcherding

Economics Department, Claremont Graduate College, Claremont, California 91711,

Services rendered:
• original excise tax op-ed
• Chase
• testimony: taxes - California (3 times)
• academic forum (2)
• GSA letter writing campaign
• regional hearings, Treasury I - Los Angeles

1987 Jan 6: and 12 Jim Savarese advises the Tobacco Institute that some economists were no longer working for his network. However Borcherding is still being listed as their main Californian economist-for-hire.

In order to keep this project straight with respect to the economists, we were specifically assigned to go back to all 42 names on the original list to check to see if the economists were still interested in working for us, still in the same state, and available to meet with representatives from state activities.

    We have 34 who fit this criteria and have been contacted. The list is attached. The states that we once had that are currently missing are Arizona, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nebraska, New Jersey, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

    The attached invoice covers the project of re-contacting the original 42 economists and coming up with the present 34 people.

The primary purpose of this contact is to determine if a given economist is capable of testifying effectively before a legislative body.

    They have been informed that someone from TI will be in contact with them.

    We request that an initial contact be made by telephone immediately. Please let me know when this initial contact has been made. Personal meetings should be arranged and completed no later than May 1, 1987.

1987 Jan 6: Savarese is charging the Tobacco Institute $3,200 to update the cash-for-comments economists list (with Borcherding still active)

1987 Feb 6: James Savarese has finalised his list of compliant economists, and sends them to Susan Stuntz at the Tobacco Institute. It lists all the familiar cash-for-comment economists:

Old faithfuls:
Lee Anderson, Terry Anderson, Dom Armentano, Cecil Bohanon, Thomas Borcherding, Henry Butler, JR Clark, John David, Allan Dalton, Arthur Denzau, Clifford Dobitz, Robert Ekelund, David Gay, Anne Harper-Fender, Dennis Hein, John Howe, Wm Hunter, Joe Jadlow, Michael Kurth, Suuner LaCroix, Dwight Lee, C Matt Lindsay, Dennis Logue, Chuck Mason [Masen], Charles Maurice, Fred McChesney, Robert McMahon, Arthur Mead, Wm Mitchell, Allen Parkman, Wm Peterson, Thomas Pogue, Barry Poulson, Raymond Raab, Simon Rottenberg, Mark Schmitz, Richard Vedder, Richard Wagner

Greg Niehaus, Mario Rizzo, Roger Riefler, and Boon Yoon.]

1987 June 22: The Tobacco Institute has been sent by Savarese a "Schedule of Payments — Excise Tax Op-Ed Project" It details the name of the cash-for-comment economist, the State, the targetted newspaper, and both past and current payments — with a separate column labled "Total Earned to Date".

In CALIFORNIA
Anderson for LA Times —Owed $1200, — Total to date $1200

Borcherding for Sacramento Bee — Owed $1500 — Total to date $1500

1988 July 3: Thomas Borcherding has written a paper for the Western Economics Association [One of those listed in his and Tollison's advice to the Tobacco Institute] on "Tax Earmarking and User Charges."

1988 Nov 28: Debbie Schoonmaker at the Tobacco Institute writes to Savarese about Social Cost Research Papers.

Enclosed are drafts of the Wagner and Ekelund social cost papers.
Each has been reviewed and will not need further clearance provided the recommended changes are incorporated into the final versions of the papers.

    The legal comments are fairly straight-forward. If you or the authors need an explanation or wish to discuss further, please call.

    You'll also see that I've enclosed a copy of the California Health Department's "social cost" study. We can discuss this example in our "SWAT team" meeting.

• Atlantic Economic Assn., Philadelphia, Oct 6-9 , meeting on User Charges: has
  • Dwight LeeChairman + paper, "Some Bureacratic Implications
  • Richard Wagner"User Charges: Principles and Practice"
  • Bruce Yandle, "User Charges: Evaluation and Critique.
  • Discussant: Robert Staaf.
• Western Economic Association, Los Angeles, June 30 — July 3 meeting on Tax Earmarking and User Charges.
  • Dwight R. Lee, "The Political Economy of Tax Earmarking"
  • Richard Wagner, "The Fiscal Politics of Tax Earmarking"
  • Paul Wilson,"User Charges and the Problem of Externalities"
  • Discussants: Thomas Borcherding and Benjamin Zycher, Rand Corporation [unknown relationship]
• Southern Economic Association, San Antonio, Nov 20-22 on Excise Taxation
  • Robert Ekelund, Chairman:
  • Dwight R. Lee, "Political Economy of Corrective Taxation"
  • Randall Holcombe, Auburn University. "Excise Taxes in Theory and Practice"
  • Richard E. Wagner, "The Fiscal Politics of Excise Taxation"
  • Discussants: Joseph Jadlow, and Henry Butler,

1989 Jan 11: Carol Hrycaj at the Tobacco Institute writes to Debby Schoonmaker on the "Promotion of Economic Conference Papers."

Of the six papers presented during those sessions, only two that were discussed at the Western meeting may be suitable for public consumption: Lee's paper, "The Economics and Politics of Tax Earmarking;'1 and Wagner's paper, "Fiscal Norms, Fiscal Practice and Tax Earmarking."

    Paul W. Wilson, Thomas E. Brocherding and Bruce Yandle also submitted papers; their relationship with our consultants is unclear. Regardless, the Wilson, Brocherding and Yandle papers are technical treatments of the subject matter and would be difficult to repackage for the general public.

1995: On the Advisory Board of the Independent Institute.

1996: The Independent Institute - David J Theroux is the Founder and President
    Borcherding is on the Board of Advisors, It says that he is Prof of Economics at the University of Maryland.

2000: Borsherding is yet another economist from the cash-for-comments network who has gravitated to the tobacco-funded Independent Institute.
    He and an associate have written "Conflicts of Interest in the Hollywood Film Industry" [Their next study will be "Conflicts of Interest among academic economists."]

CONTRIBUTORS:LR13 JJHS lrt3