  | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ABOUT CONTACT CONTRIBUTION OVERVIEW TUTORIALS LEGAL/COPYRIGHT A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | Dates | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CREATED 3/30/2013 US-CanadaWARNING:
This site deals only with the corporate corruption of science, and makes no inference about the motives or activities of individuals involved.
|
OPINION ONLY
Clifford P ('Cliff') Dobitz [Prof ]— One of the more prolific cash-for-comment economists who worked for the tobacco industry. He is from North Dakota State University. He was a booster of claims that the EPA used "junk science" in determining the dangers of passive smoking. —Tobacco lobbyist James Savarese and Professor Robert Tollison of George Mason University collaborated in the 1980s to provide the tobacco industry, through the Tobacco Institute, with networks of academics in various disciplines who would be willing to write and sprout propaganda material ... always provided the payments for these services were not directly tracealble back to the Institute or to any of the cigarette companies.
The idea was simply that these 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 of the acolyte academics because the distinction between economics and politics was never clear: so support of the cigarette companies could always be portrayed as support for free-market economics including the rights of individuals to make public choices ... small government ... or even the first Amendment to the Constitution.
The economist working for Savarese, always claim to be 'independent' 'professionals' and ' academics', and they exploited the fact that they came 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 imprecision) 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
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! Unfortunately, it worked. Cliff Doblitz, a personal friend of Bob Tollisson, was first approached in 1987 and he he did some work for the economist's network by providing op-eds to newspapers in North Dakota He was approached again ten years later in March 1997 when they need to fill a gap in left by the firing of John David in West Virginia. The correspondence doen't explain how a state-based North Dakota economist would operate in West Virginia, since he seems to have retained his position at North Dakota State University.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Tax Witnesses: | Materials available |
|---|---|
| Cliff Dobitz | N.D. data card "Excise Taxes: The Fairness Issue" "More Taxes on Tobacco...." Earmarking topic sheet Letter writing brochure. |
| Public Smoking Witnesses: | Materials available |
| Al Vogel (productivity) Steve Schlossberg (labor implications) Lew Solmon (economics) Bob Klotz (enforcement) | Voter survey Economic survey Labor assistance 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 Advertising. |
| Fire: | |
| Fire Safety Education grant to State of North Dakota, John D Jansen Jr New Tools for Volunteer Fire Fighters.. | |
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:
NORTH DAKOTA (Rep Gorgan)
Professor Cliff Dobitz
North Dakota State, Fargo, North Dakota
[No specialization listed]
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,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:
North Dakota [ Region IV ]
Professor Cliff DobitzDepartment of Economics , North Dakota State, Fargo, North Dakota 58102, 701-237-8683
Services rendered:
- original excise tax op-ed
- GSA letter writing campaign
1987 Jan 6: and 12 Jim Savarese advises the Tobacco Institute that some economists were no longer working for his network. However Dobitz is still being listed as their main North Dakota 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.[The invoice is missing, and he gives no details of the current project.]
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.
An internal memo within the Tobacco Institute explains to Regional Directors why they had needed Savarese to check on availability:
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 Dobitz 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:plus a few new ones.[
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 Mar 24: Jim Savarese writes to Jeff Ross at the Tobacco Institute about the "Tobacco Excise Tax Op-ed Project".
Attached please find two more excise tax op-eds and a copy of the clipping from the Hartford Courant.Attached were 7 new articles (in draft form) from Professors Chuck Mason, Dennis Logue, Charles Maurice, Dominick Armentano, William Mitchell, Robert McMahon, and Clifford Dobitz.
As of today, 18 articles have been written and 2 articles have been published. As I mentioned earlier, the Des Moines Register has accepted an article and we have a good chance at the Houston Post.
1987 May 1: The Tobacco Institute has written to all its State and Regional Directors requesting that they personally check our and evaluate the academic economists who have signalled that they are willing (for a healthy commission) to provide personal witness statements at ordinance of legislative hearings.
George Minshew of the State Activities division has sent out this memo to prod them into action:
It has been several months since the original request was given to you. Some of the witnesses have testified and been in your territories during this time, therefore evaluation of those will be a simple matter of getting it done. As to the others, may I suggest that you talk with you lobbyist, pick up your telephone and talk with the economist, go to see the economist, talk with someone who has dealt with him....whatever it takes to get it done now.
This notice is not meant as a request or to ask what you thoughts are in this matter. It is direct instructions to get this project completed without any more delay. We will all pay one hell of a price should we end up without this resource and find that it was a plus factor that would win a battle or two in the future.
Clifford Dobitz's curriculum vitae is attached together with his evaluation.
1987 May 5: Cotton Mather ('Matt') Lindsay of Clemson University has written an article "Excise Taxes: Facist Finance" which is being circulated at the Tobacco Institute. He has discovered through his extensive research that:
it is difficult to achieve vertleal equity [equal burden on everyone] through excise taxes because the amount of the tax paid depends on purchases rather than income.This simplistic analysis is accompanied by a list of the cash-for-comments economist from the network [to whom it will presumably be sent as an example (See note "at last....")] together with handwritten notes as to the skills and value of each as witnesses at legislatures or local ordinance hearings.
Breweries and tobacco companies write checks to the government for the excise taxes on beer and cigarettes, but here economists agree; these companies pass these taxes on to consumers. One's share of the burden of the revenues raised by these taxes depends on how much beer one drinks and how much one smokes.
The unfairness of these excises is manifest; it is not merely another economists' debating point. The tobacco excise tax, for example, is the most regressive tax in the federal system. It is paid only by smokers who are today predominantly lower-middle income earners, lower income working women and blue collar workers.
Some have argued that these taxes are appropriate because the funds can be earmarked for expenditures like Medicare, environmental protection and even public employee pensions. Why beer drinkers and cigarette smokers ought to pay more for such things is far from clear, however. To the extent that these activities shorten life, they relieve the burdens of Medicare and pension funds by removing potential claimants from the eligibility roles.
Viewed from another perspective, smokers and beer drinkers not only bear a disproportionate share of taxes because they pay excises on these commodities, but they get less for their money, too. Because they live a shorter life span, they collect less in retirement benefits and receive fewer Medicare benefits.
This may be fine for Mussolini, but it is antithetical to tax principles in a free and open society.
Professor Cliff Dobitz:
"No contact: State not lend itself to Economic witness xxx??"
1987 May 22: Michael Brozek the Regional Vice President for Region IV wrote to George Minshew at the Tobacco Institute presenting his Economic Witness Evaluation He writes:
Please convey to those in charge of the economic witness program; it is one thing to evaluate an economic witness over lunch, by telephone or over cocktails. But, it is quite another thing to evaluate these potential witnesses in the acrimonious, politically charged, circus-like disarray of a committee hearing. In essence, some of these guys (as in the case of Minnesota) fold under any unfriendly inquisition.He then deals with each of them on a case-by-case basis:
The ivory tower is different from the political trenches.
My recommendation, if we are to continue this economic witness program, a political orientation would be advisable in order to better equip these witnesses for potentially politicized circumstances.
NORTH DAKOTA: Professor Cliff Dobitz
We have talked by telephone with Professor Dobitz and were unable to set up a politically presentable program for testimony. North Dakota's internal economic situation, due to oil revenues, did not lend itself properly to our economic arguments.
1987 May 27: In this document, Michel Brozek, the Regional Director of the Tobacco Institute, has been in contact with Professor Clifford Dobitz, who must already be enlisted as an available witness, to evaluate his ongoing value to the tobacco industry. He writes:
[I]t is one thing to evaluate an economic witness over lunch, by telephone or over cocktails. But, it is quite another thing to evaluate these potential witnesses in the acrimonious, politically charged, circus-like disarray of a committee hearing. In essence, some of these guys (as in the case of Minnesota) fold under any unfriendly inquisition. The ivory tower is different from the political trenches.A tacked-on CV shows that one of Dobitz's personal references comes from Robert Tollison, of the Center for the Study of Public Choice at George Mason University. [See Dobitz's C/V.]
My recommendation, if we are to continue this economic witness program, [is that] a political orientation would be advisable in order to better equip these witnesses for potentially politicized circumstances. [ie he only wants libertarian or neo-con partisan warriors.]
We have talked by telephone with Professor Dobitz and were unable to set up a politically presentable program for testimony. North Dakota's internal economic situation, due to oil revenues, did not lend itself properly to our economic arguments
1987 June 9: The Tobacco Institute's Phase II - Excise Tax Op-Ed project involved an article-writing campaign by cash-for-comment economists was run by James Savarese & Associates. It was secretly directed by Robert Tollison from George Mason University with Savarese as the organiser and front.
In the mid 1987 period, the project was controlled by Jeff Rose [under Peter Sparber] at the Tobacco Institute and it focussed on defeating cigarette excise tax increases — and especially the threat of such taxes being 'earmarked' to bolster health care budgets.
Saverese and Tollison appear to have been in some form of loose partnership, because Anna Tollison, the wife of Bob Tollison, was employed by James Savarese & Associates to keep a record of the articles generated by their large contingent of academic economists and to organise payment.
She reported that
"In sum, 41 economists were solicited to write editorials. We have publications in 20 states, 14 articles have been written and submitted, and 7 articles are still outstanding." [Others were in the offing]She included a long list of the economists who wrote the articles, the newspapers in which they were published, together with their circulation figures [eg. the potential number of readers they may have influenced] and the publication date. This economist is featured on her list.
NORTH DAKOTA, Dobitz, The Forum, [circ.] 56,900, [pub date] 4/17/87
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 NORTH DAKOTAAlso there were payments to George Mason production staff ( Bob Tollison, Bill Shughart and Gary Anderson) for rewrites ($27,500) and a $5,800 payment for replacement of five economists (presumably because they were unproductive or unsatisfactoy). Carol Roberts was also paid for the final production. ($5,000)
Dobitz for Forum —Owed $1100 — Total to date $2000
Total here with expenses was $33,810 on top of the $40,525 paid to the network economists.
1987 June 23: Savarese writes to Jeff Ross at the Tobacco Institute sending along a list of Democrat members of the House Ways and Means Committee...
... along with the economists we use in those areas. Nine of these are good, solid hits which we should be able to count on to do the job and get a publication. I have *ed these on the attached list. The remaining 6 are all people we have used in the past, but who have not been consistently successful.[This proves, beyond doubt, that under their arrangement with the network economists, they were only paid if their op-eds were published in local newspapers, and if they actually sent letters to their Congressmen.]
Since I'm under a new financial arrangement with the Tobacco Institute and I need to get these costs cleared in advance, I'll make my best effort here to budget this proposed project.
If all 15 would get published, which is highly unlikely, the cost of Phase II Excise Tax Op-ed Project would run $45,000.
More than likely we'll get 8-10 placements and 3 to 4 others who won't get placed, but will still send letters to their members on the Ways and Means Committee. In that case, the cost will be $37,000.
The attached list showed who was considered reliable or unreliable:
| DEMOCRAT WAYS & MEANS COMMITTEE PROJECT | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| STATE | Democrat Congressmen | Economist | Reliability |
| Illinois | Dan Rosenkowski Marty Russo | Fred McChesney | Unreliable |
| Florida | Sam Gibbons | Richard Wagner | Unreliable |
| Texas | J. J. Pickle Michael A. Andrews | Charles Maurice | RELIABLE |
| California | Fortney H. (Pete) Stark Robert T. Matsui | Gary Anderson | RELIABLE |
| Indiana | Andrew Jacobs | Cecil Bohanon | RELIABLE |
| Tennessee | Harold E. Ford | Brian Goff (in Kentuxky) | RELIABLE |
| Georgia | Ed Jenkins | Dwight Lee | RELIABLE |
| Missouri | Richard A. Gephardt | Tom Wyrick | Unreliable |
| New Jersey | Frank J. Guarini | JR Clark | RELIABLE |
| Arkansas | Beryl Anthony, Jr | David ER Gay | Unreliable |
| Alabama | Ronnie Flippo | Robert Ekelund | RELIABLE |
| North Dakota | Byron Dorgan | Cliff Dobitz | RELIABLE |
| Connecticut | Barbara Kennelly | Dominick Amento | Unreliable |
| Pennsylvania | William J. Coyne | Ann Harper-Fender | Unreliable |
| Wisconsin | Jim Moody | William Hunter | RELIABLE |
1987 July: a selected group of the economists have been commissioned to write op-eds about cutting the deficit — and to de-emphasise the value of excise taxes. Generally they follow the line of listing four possibilities approaches
- a general consumption tax (efficient but regressive)
- increased excise taxes (inefficient and regressive)
- a national lottery (regressive and competitive with State lotteries)
- increased income taxes (unpopular)
|
|
[This was one of their most successful projects. Professor Dominick Armentano writes to Anna Tollison [wife of Robert] that "... the article went national"]
1987 Aug 16: A list of 26 quotes excerpted from major newspaper editorials and op-eds from the TI's cash-for-comments economists about the Packwood tax plan.
The Bismarck 'Tribune, August 16, 1987
"if a tax system is put in place for raising revenue and far. changing human behavior, it is coercive and it imposes a negative impact upon human welfare."Cliff Dobitz, professor of economics, North Dakota State University
1987 Aug 21: Jeff Ross at the Tobacco Institute has prepared a consolidated summary of "Field Staff Evaluation of Economists" for his superiors, William Kloepfer and Peter Sparber. They have been asked to look at 34 of these academics. This includes an outline of their recent achievements.
NORTH DAKOTA
Professor Cliff Dobitz North Dakota State University Fargo, ND
Excise Tax Op Eds: The Forum — 04/17/87
Economic Witness/Testimony:
Field Staff Contact: Telephone contact.
Field Staff Evaluation: None.
1987 Aug 31: Peter Sparber [Issues Manager] to Bill Kloepfer [PR head] at the Tobacco Institute:
Jeff [Rose] has done a good job of summarizing the economic consultant situation and I am attaching my copy of his report with some marginal notes. I think he should consider sending a collection of all of the published op-ed pieces to each of the consultants for the sake of inspiration.[This memo leaves no room for doubt that these economists knew precisely who they were working for, and why they were being paid (about $1000 per article) by the tobacco industry.]
In the case of those who have not had an article accepted for publication I would like to know whether they submitted one.
The economists were visited by State [regional] tobacco staff, and subject to an evaluation of their work and their prospects. Not all measured up. Jeff Ross reported:
Two general comments from field staff warrant some consideration. Michael Brozak recommended a political orientation to prepare witnesses for potentially politicized hearings.
We agree and recommend that State Activities consider advising field staff to conduct such briefings as appropriate. Richard Scanlan suggested that an economist from the state capital city is much more valuable. We have asked Savarese and Tollison to see if they can identify a candidate.
1988 Mar 31: The Tobacco Institute's list of available economists, with details of their target for a review of Robert Tollison and Richard Wagner's "Smoking and the State" book (secretly funded and published by the tobacco industry). Jim Savarese writes to Jeff Ross who looks after the cash-for-comments network:
I have listed below potential areas where we could place book reviews for the Tollison/Wagner monograph.
North DakotaTargeted paper: The Forum
Economist: Cliff Dobitz, North Dakota State.
1988 May 26: Savarese advises the Tobacco Institute that
We have initiated the book review project. A copy of the book and a short summary were sent out today to 17 economists across the country with instructions for writing a brief review suitable for newspaper publication.Doblitz's name was on the list.
I have attached a list of the economists. I'll keep you up to date as soon as the reviews start rolling in.
1988 July 14: A number of the economists' pseudo-reviews of the Tollison/Wagner book Smoking and the State have been sent to the lawyers for legal clearance. 
Once again, I am forwarding several reviews of Smoking and the State for your comment. You will find that we marked certain sections of these reviews that appear to be controversial. Would you suggest alternative language for those passages?
Included in this package are critiques prepared by Brian L Goff, Cliff P Dobitz, Samson M Kimenyi and Allen M Parkman. In addition, enclosed is an executive summary of the Tollison and Wagner book. The copy reflects our comments.
Due to a deadline for publication, Professor Kimenyi has requested we expedite the review of his article and obtain.clearance as soon as possible.
She also sends the same articles to Shook Hardy & Bacon with the same request. It is not clear why two of the largest and most experienced tobacco law firms would be both asked to vet such documents.
1988 Oct: A Savarese memo notes that his review was acccepted and published by the
1. The Forum
2. Grand Forks Herald
1988 Nov 20: Tollison and Wagner have written another book: "Smoking and the State" which is being favourably reviewed by their network of tobacco-friendly economists. Cliff Dobitz, a professor of economics at the North Dakota State University has written "Where there's smoke there's economic analysis" in the Grand Forks Herald.
"use of solid economics to explain the claimed direct and indirect costs of smoking in non-technical, easy to understand language. It is chock-full of insight, frequently supported by data, about the alleged economic consequences of smoking."
1989 Jan 4: Savarese sends his December Status Report to Susan Stuntz at the Tobacco Institute. It lists dozens of projects that he is supervising — and meetings he is organizing to help the tobacco industry create coalitions with other industries and unions.
Entries most relevant to the cash-for-comments economists are:
- participated in strategy sessions on the National Economic Commission (NEC). [Later a general economists op-ed project]
- Agricultural Research project — began development of research proposals on the effect of excise taxes on farmers. [Later became an Ekelund and Long 'study'.]
- Airline Cabin Air Quality — continued op-ed project on Northwest Airlines. [They had been first to ban smoking on domestic flights] As of January 3, three op-ed projects have been published
- Shreveport Journal [by] Michael Kurth, McNeese State Uni
- Commercial Appeal [by] JR Clark, University of Tennessee at Martin
- The Greenville News [by] Ryan Amacher, Clemson University
- Began Ad Ban op-ed project. As of January 3 one op-ed has been published
- Chicaco Tribune [by] Lloyd Cohen, California Western School of Law.
- Social Cost Book Review Program [smoking and the State] - As of January 3, seven book review have been published.
Three are forthcoming:
- The State [by[ Ryan Amacher, Clemson University
- Tulsa Tribune [by] Joseph Jadlow, Oklahoma State Uni
- Grand Forks Herald [by] Cliff Dobitz North Dakota State University
- Fort Dodge Messenger [by] Todd Sandler Iowa State University
- Montgomery Advertiser [by] Robert B. Ekelund Auburn University
- Bryan-College Station [by] Charles Maurice Texas A&M University
- Columbus Enquirer by Dwight R. Lee Washington University
- Regulation Magazine [by] Dwight R. Lee Washington University
- Jackson Clarion Ledger [by] Samson Kimenyi University, Mississippi
- Arkansas Democrat [by] David E. R. Gay University of Arkansas
1989 Jan 11: The Tobacco Institute's Scientific Consultancy Activity 1988-89
This is an 80 page mixed bag of files dumped together [Well worth perusing]. The first document is from 1990 [ordered in reverse]
- Pages 3 to 23 begin with Witness Appearances in 1988 and 1989 involving both "Indoor Air Quality experts" who work for the Tobacco Institute, and three economists [Bob Tollison, Richard Wagner and Dwight Lee]
- Pages 24 to 31 Labor IAQ Presentations in 1988 and 1989 which involves key figures in the labor movement and a few "IAQ experts."
- Pages 32 to 39 IAQ/ETS conferences attended by tobacco industry disinformation experts in 1988 and 1989
- Pages 40 to 41 Academic and Unaffiliated Scientfic Witnesses
- Pages 43 to 53 Smokers Rights Legislation in various states.
- See page 54: Tobacco Institute "Confidential" memo on "Tax Hearing Readiness" which is their battle plan to counter earmaking of cigarette excise taxes to fund health programs. It lists a large number of organizations and a few congressmen who can be relied on to help. It also has both primary and secondary lists of economists from Tollison's "cash-for-comments" network willing to give testimony.
Economists: [Primary]
The Tobacco Institute's list of cash-for-comments professors and senior academics who were available to write op-eds and give evidence at Congressional hearings, etc. had grown extensively.- Bill Orzechowski, Tobacco Institute
- Robert Tollison, George Mason University
- Richard Wagner, George Mason University
- Dwight Lee, University of Georgia, Athens
- Michael Davis, Southern Methodist University
- Gary Anderson, California State at Northridge
- William Prendergast (resource: Prendergast/Solmon papers)
- Other Network economists [see Secondary attached list below]
"Due by mid-year is a book examining earmarking and "user fees" from a public choice perspective. The treatise will contain 8-10 chapters written by respected economists, including, Henri LePage and Nobel laureate James Buchanan."
NORTH DAKOTA
Professor Cliff Dobitz, North Dakota State University
[TI budget papers show that each op-ed now earned the economists $3,000. Presentations to conferences earned them $5,000. Savarese was paid $70 to $100,000 pa for this project, and Ogilvy & Mather $250,000.]
.See page 5
1989 April 18: Susan Stuntz (Issues Manager) at the Tobacco Institute memoes her boss Sam Chilcote. She is sending him material previously used for a two-day "Gerry Long" presentation. He wants to use it in a shorter one-day (unspecified) briefing session.
[Gerald H Long was the CEO of RJ Reynolds who in 1988 had just taken over as Chairman of the Tobacco Institute's Executive Committee and wanted to make changes.]
The outline for the Powerpoint slides is here in full, together with the names of the politicians they were required to influence. It boasts that the..
Economists' Network 64 Strong [is] Targeted to Congressional Tax Writing Committees [and utilizing the] Production of Op-Eds on Federal Tax Policy.
[List of economists]
1989 Dec 14: Jim Savarese is listing the economists taking part in their new Excise Tax Op-Ed project.
I have also listed the newspapers we plan to target and a package of the materials we are sending to the economists.This economist is on the list for NORTH DAKOTA, Bismark Tribune.
We should start getting drafts of the op-eds around the first of the year.
1990 Mar 20: Clipping of an op-ed by Dobitz for the Tobacco Institute which appeared in Grand Forks Herald.
1990 April: The monthly Tobacco Institute report for March from Carol Hrycaj who is in charge of the issues surrounding Excise Taxes, says
The consulting economist's excise tax/"user fee" op-ed program continues to generate results. We reviewed several draft articles and returned them to the authors for placement.
Published articles in March include: Dwight Lee, Macon Telegraph and News; Michael Babcock, The Topeka Capital-Journal: and Clifford Dobitz, the Grand Forks Herald.
1990 May: This is a list of the newspapers designated to certain economists on the network. They are to attempt to plant an op-ed article on "Excise Taxes" on this local newspapers.
NORTH DAKOTAhas been given the Bismarck Tribune as his propaganda target.
Cliff Dobitz, North Dakota State University
1990 May 7: The Tobacco Institute's "1991 Tax and Social Cost Plans" have sections on
- "Social Costs" Hearings Readiness (preparation for fielding witnesses at Congressional hearings.) They list here the arguments that the Institute and its allies must be prepared to present.
- "Tax" Hearing Readiness (as above, but for excise tax increases, State and Federal)
- List of cash-for-comment network economists in each State.
NORTH DAKOTA
Professor Cliff Dobitz
Department of Economics, North Dakota State University
Fargo, North Dakota 58102 701-237-8683
1990 Aug: This long document has media tour records [being conducted by Fleishman-Hillard] for the cash-for-comments
- economists network
- ventilation network members (mainly HBI)
- biological scientists network,
- academic lawyers nework
- labor network and
- advertising academics network
Also there is attached a list of Savarese's network economist triumphs which has the intriquing heading "Consulting Economists — Not on Philip Morris List" which suggests that PM was running a parallel operation to that of the Tobacco Institute.
This list holds the recent successes in planting op-eds on local newspapers, and a few appearances of economists at State hearings, conferences, etc.
Clifford Dobitz
Professor of Economics, North Dakota State University
3/90 Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in Grand Forks Herald
1990 August: The Monthly Report of Carol Hrycaj includes the news that:
Consulting economists' anti-excise tax op-eds continue to appear in print. Clifford Dobitz's article was published in the Bismarck Tribune; Michael Babcock's op-ed appeared in the Manhattan Mercury. The Indianapolis Star published an op-ed coauthored by Cecil Bohanan and John Horowitz
1990 Aug 3: Sam Chilcote at the Tobacco Institute has advised the Members of the Executive Committee of plans to develop a celebrity speakers program using academics and other expert consultants. There are offer the speakers both money and personal promotion:
[W]hile it is clear that there are a number of individuals who can and are speaking out on our issues independent of The Institute, there also is much more that could be done. There are, for example, opportunities to develop higher profiles for those individuals with whom we enjoy an existing relationship, and to increase within the media an awareness of their availability.He then lists:
There also are a number of individuals who have been identified who do not currently have a relationship with the industry, but whose views appear to be compatible with our own. Should the Executive Committee decide that it wants to proceed with an expansion of our speakers' program, these individuals would be contacted to determine their interest in our issues.
The addition of new speakers to our program will be expensive. Most of these individuals command substantial consulting fees; media and other activity will require a new commitment of funds, although an exact amount cannot be determined until candidates have been approached.
- Authors, newscasters and newspaper columnists
- Well-known politicians, political aides, White House staffers, State authorities, agency administrators, etc
- Heads of various coalition groups (American Advertising Federation. etc)
- Cash-for-comments legal and business academics from Savarese's network list.
- Cash-for-comments 'risk assessment' academics and promoter.
- Cash-for-comment experts in indoor air pollution and ventilation systems.
- Cash-for-comment academic economists + some likely allies:
- BRUCE L. BENSON, professor of economics, Florida State University and board member, James Madison Institute, a Tallahassee think tank.
- DWIGHT R. LEE, professor of economics, holder of the Ramsey Chair of Private Enterprise, University of Georgia
- JAMES C. MILLER, Citizens for a Sound Economy Foundation, Washington; former director of OMB
- WALTER E. WILLIAMS, professor of economics, George Mason
University, Fairfax, Va. - BOB TOLLISON, George Mason University, Center for the Study of Public Choice
- Some more minor network academics, together with their recent achievements.
Clifford Dobitz
Professor of Economics
North Dakota State University
3/90 Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in Grand Forks Herald
1990 Aug 6: Clipping of an op-ed byDobitz for the Tobacco Institute which appeared in The Bismark Tribune "We're not as stupid as our leaders think." (attacking President George Bush I and Congress)
[Of course, it is not stupidity but greed that is the problem here.]
1990 Oct: /E Tobacco Institute document. It lists the services that academics and secret consultants have provided to the tobacco industry during 1989 and 1990 — both as witnesses and as authors of articles and letters.
- Pages 2 - 9 Advertising: lawyers and advertising administrators
- Pages 10 - 30 Science and Public Policy on ETS/IAQ
- Pages 31 - 39 Taxation
This gives the dates of each of the services, and any 'Current Projects' they may be working on:
Clifford Dobitz
Professor of Economics, North Dakota State IIniversity
- 3/90 Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in Grand Forks Herald
See page 32-5
[TI budget papers show that each op-ed still earned the economists $3,000. Presentations to conferences earned them $5,000. Savarese was paid $70,000 to $100,000 pa for this project, and Ogilvy & Mather $250,000.]
See page 5
1990 Oct: /E Tobacco institute document. It lists services that academics and secret consultants have rendered to the tobacco industry during 1989 and 1990.
This gives the dates of each of the services, and any 'Current Projects' they may be working on:
Clifford Dobitz, Professor of Economics, North Dakota State University
3/90 — Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in Grand Forks Herald
See page 34
| 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 people 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 bookkeeping benefit to their communities. In cost-benefit terms, their demise reduces the social deficit. Of course the same argument 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. |
1991 Jan: /E Tobacco Institute draft plan for 1991 with emphasis on "Taxes." These are the economist-related paragraphs:
Objective
To discourage reliance on consumer excise taxes on cigarettes to meet social and economic objectives by demonstrating that excise taxes are regressive and inconsistent with fair taxation.
Goals and Tactics:
- Commission two op-ed articles in 1991 from consulting economists. As articles are published, provide to other Institute decisions for promotion and submission to appropriate policy makers.
- Conduct at least 10 presentations by consulting economists on the excise tax issue before national, regional and state tax policy conferences.
- Continue to utilize consulting economists for testimony and briefings. Expand appearances to include presentations to business clubs and the business press. Conduct media refresher courses for public speaking appearance and delivery of testimony.
- Utilize the consulting economists for an op-ed program that addresses the national earmarking issue and state specific earmarking issues. As articles are published, provide to other Institute divisions and promote to appropriate public policymakers. Use field staff network to support distribution efforts.
1991 Jan 8: Savarese has sent the current list of network economists to Carol Hyrcaj at the Tobacco Institute. It contains three new names, but otherwise is essentially the same as the old lists.
ALABAMA, Robert B. Ekelund, Jr., Auburn University
ARIZONA, William J. Boyes, Arizona State University
ARKANSAS, David E. R. Gay, University of Arkansas
CALIFORNIA, Gary Anderson, California State at Northridge
Roger Arnold, California State Univ. - San Marcos
COLORADO, Barry Poulson, University of Colorado
CONNECTICUT, Dominick Armentano, University of Hartford
DELAWARE, Burton Abrams, University of Delaware
FLORIDA, Bruce Benson, Florida State University
GEORGIA, Dwight R. Lee, University of Georgia
IDAHO, Allan Dalton, Boise State University
ILLINOIS, James Heins, University of Illinois
INDIANA, Cecil Bohanon, Ball state University
IOWA, Todd Sandler, Iowa State University
KANSAS, Michael Babcock, Kansas State University
KENTUCKY, Brian Goff, Western Kentucky University
LOUISIANA, Michael Kurth, McNeese State University
MAINE, Robert McMahon, University of Southern Maine
MASSACHUSETTS, David Tuerck, Suffolk University
MISSISSIPPI, Bill Shughart, University of Mississippi
MISSOURI, Joe A Bell, Southwest Missouri State University
Thomas I. Wyrick, Southwest Missouri State University
MONTANA, Terry L. Anderson, Montana State University
NEBRASKA, Dee Martin, University of Nebraska
NEVADA, John Dobra, University of Nevada Reno
NEW HAMPSHIRE, Dennis Logue, Dartmouth College
NEW MEXICO, Allen Parkman, University of New Mexico
NORTH DAKOTA, Cliff Dobitz, North Dakota State University
OHIO, Richard Vedder, Ohio University
OKLAHOMA, Joseph Jadlow, Oklahoma State University
OREGON, William Mitchell, University of Oregon
PENNSYLVANIA, Ann Harper-Fender, Gettysburg College
RHODE ISLAHD, Arthur Mead, Universityof Rhode Island
SOUTH CAROLINA, Ryan Aiaacher, Clemson University
SOUTH BikEOTA, Dennis lain, Augustana College
TENNESSEE, JR Clark, The University of Tennessee at Martin
TEXAS, S Charles Maurice, Texas ASM University
Michael Davis, Southern Methodist University
VIRGINIA, Richard B Wagner, George Mason University
WASHINGTON, Richard D. Zerbe, Jr., University of Washington
1995 Dec 21: Savarese & Associate's Status report to Carol Hyrcaj at the Tobacco Institute on the FDA op-editorial program [Dec 8th].
As reflected in the status report, we have replaced Iowa, Wisconsin, and the Houston congressional district with three new states (California, Massachusetts and West Virginia). As you know, we have already received Robert Sexton's (California) article, as well as confirmation that the economist in Massachusetts is able to participate.Clearly some of their draft articles were not entirely satisfactory and required rewrites by Savarese's staff. The notes include some additional revealing items such as:
At this time, we are asking those economists that have published, to forward a copy of their article to their congressman/congresswoman.
[These last two were obviously a fill in for a Texas and a Wisconsin economist who had dropped out or the network.]
- Professor Cecil Bohanon — "Revised op-ed returned to economist 11/10"
- "Professor Pogue has been contacted. We are waiting to hear whether he will be able to particpate."
- Professor Kurth — "Will have op-ed to us by next week" [for checking]
- Professor Ridgway — "Will have op-ed to us in a week"
- Professor Gallaway — "Returned revised op-ed to economist 11/2"
- Professor Davis — "Returned revised op-ed 11/3"
- Clifford Fry, Resources Inc, Bryan Texas — "Had to identify new economist. Sent materials 11/14"
- Prof Charles Breeden, Marquette University, — "Had to identify new economist. Sent materials 11/14"
1996 Jan 5: This Status Report on FDA Op-ed Program is revealing about the master-servant relationship between the tobacco industry and their network economists. It lists 20 attempted newpaper plants of their anti-FDA propaganda and details about the 20 economists who wrote these articles on commission:
SOUTH DAKOTAAttached in front of this document is a model letter to be used by the professors when sending a copy of their article to a local Congressman. Of course the cover letter to the Congressman makes no mention of the fact that the Tobacco Institute paid $3,000 to have the op-ed written.
Professor Cliff Dobitz, Department of Economics, P.O. Box 5075, North Dakota State University, Fargo, North Dakota
[Omitted from this list for some reason — but appears on the next with a published article attacking the FDA]
.
See also the earlier version of this report which notes which op-eds have been sent for revision before being submitted to the newspaper.
1996 Mar 8: Kelleigh Varnum, of Savarese & Associations advises Carol Hrycaj at the Tobacco Institute that:
We have located an economist to replace John David (WV). His name is Cliff Dobitz (ND). The status report reflects this addition.
Also attached is Ed Price's (OK) letter to Congressman Largent.
Doblitz was an old network contributor from North Dakota. But presumably he had not then been contracted or contracted to attack the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) which was the then-current project for both op-ed writing and contacting Congressmen.
Dobitz's assignment on the FDA Op-ed Project was not included. However he was sent the necessary materials (draft articles by Tollison and Wagner, etc) on 6th March.
1996 Apr 16: Kelleigh Varnum advises the Tobacco Institute on the progress of the FDA Op-ed Program.
To date, 14 of 20 articles have published.The general list also records this economist other successes.
- David Kurth (LA) informed us that his op-ed published on February 21, in Lagniappe. Apparently, there was a breakdown in communication with the editor and he did not realize that the article had published. Enclosed is a copy of the article. Unfortunately, it is of very poor quality. We will forward the original to you when we receive it.
- Although the Atlanta Constitution has promised for quite some time to publish Dwight Lee's op-editorial, there still have not been any developments. As a result, we have directed Dwight to pursue other outlets for submission.
- Cecil Bohanon (IN) is contacting the editor of the Journal Gazette. He will pursue other outlets for submission if they decide not to publish his article.
- Publication of Barry Poulson's (CO) and Cliff Dobitz's (ND) op-editorials is forthcoming.
- Both Mike Davis (TX) and Terry Ridgway (NV) are checking with their editors on the status of their articles.
1996 May 16: Doblitz, like many of the more productive of the network economists, was back working for Jim Savarese and the tobacco industry; this time they are attacking the Federal Drug Administration (FDA).
In this Status Report listing he is shown to have sent an op-ed to
The Forum, which published it on April 28 1996.A copy of the published article is attached. He uses the old tobacco industry tactic of claiming some special authority in the tobacco argument because:
As a non-smoking economist I see the FDA's proposal as a 100 percent "bureaucratic fix." No one wants young people to smoke.
But, I submit the loss in personal freedom (further eroding a private enterprise market) as well as the monetary cost of enforcement far outweighs the veiled attempt of "protecting children."
[It would be more apposite if he were able to claim to be a non-mercenary ethical economist, rather than a non-smoker hireling.]
1996 June 24: Status Report on FDA Op-Ed Program. It lists the various network economists and the articles they have planted with their newspapers. It also records publication dates and those newspapers which declined to use the propaganda, together with the Congressmen who have been contacted.
About this network economist it says:
SOUTH DAKOTA
Professor Cliff Dobitz, Department of Economics, P.O. Box 5075, North Dakota State University, Fargo, North Dakota 58105
Submitted to: The Forum - Published April 28,1996
[No information on Congressmen contacted]
1997:
Following the release of numerous tobacco industry documents 'discovered' by plaintiff lawyers in the Cippolone Trial, and the later "Mr Butts" leakage of suit-cases full of documents to Professor Stan Glantz at the University of California, San Francisco, the industry took serious measures to remove incriminating details from any potentially leaked documents.
This resulted in the names of the cash-for-comments network economists being removed from documents exchanged between Savarese and the Tobacco Institute. From this time on, the Professors are only referred to by the names of their institutions.
1998 June 8: Walter Woodson at the Tobacco Institute writes to Lance Morgan (at PR firm BRMG) asking him to pass these to Savarese
Here are two more from the Savarese group. I would like to return them to Savarese on Wednesday. Please call if you have comments or suggestionsThe memo carris a handnote wifh "Louisiana - Kurth" and attached is an article "Proposed Tobacco Bill is Enormous Smoke Screen" by Cliff Dobitz at North Dakota State University. [So much for the industry smoke-screen of not including the professors names in their correspondence!] Dobitz maintains that the National Tobacco Policy is not about restricting youth smoking, but about increasing taxes. It will...
raise excise taxes by more than half a trillion dollars. Most of the money will be used to support what politicians love to do, redistribute income. The tax revenue will be used for new federal programs and, in turn, expand the federal bureaucracy.[Again, he forgets to tell his readers that this article was commissioned by the Tobacco Institute — and this article was written after the legally-binding Master Settlement Agreement (prohibiting such lobbying) between the industry and the Clinton Administration]
1998 Aug 15: The Florida "Press Journal" carried an article "Government assaults success" by cash-for-comments economist DT Armentano which attacks the McCain tobacco bill and the FDA.
The list of activities of the other economists shows that the network continued to be operated by the Tobacco Institute itself (under Walter Woodson, and Lance Morgan - both Public Affairs division). [However Savarese is still in the picture.] The op-eds are now being rejected by many newspapers, who are no longer willing to publish tobacco industry propaganda.
And, since legally discovered tobacco documents had already begun to appear on-line, the Tobacco Institute has carefully deleted the names of the Professor of Economics who wrote each op-ed piece.
Dobitz is listed under the heading
NORTH DAKOTA, North Dakota State University
Published: The Forum
1998 Oct 18: Dobitz is columnist in "The Forum Commentary"
Junk science contains the objective of achieving some preconceived ideal state. It is based upon value judgments and therefore its conclusions are subjective and prescriptive rather than objective and descriptive.
EPA's investigation related to environmental tobacco smoke did not move from hypothesis and data to conclusion. It moved from a preconceived then mandated conclusion back to selected data in order to reach the mandated conclusion.
We now have our definition of junk science. It is science that uses selected data to reach a preconceived conclusion. A conclusion that by the very nature of the data necessarily misrepresents reality.
In "The Vision of the Anointed," Thomas Sowell, the distinguished economist profoundly notes: "People are never more sincere then when they assume their own moral superiority."
Hence, taxpayers get EPAs junk science. This federal agency has used the practice of assessing ETS relationship to lung cancer based upon moral intention instead of its verifiable effect. This recent court decision reminds us that health hazard "crisis" regulations need greater justification than merely EPA's compassionate motive.
1998 Oct 18: Fargo's newspaper guest columnist Cliff Dobitz has written "Junk science taints EPA's smoke claim" in "The Forum's Sunday Commentary." The article was based on Judge William Osteen's ruling [later ridiculed by the Master Settlement Agreement and other court cases].
Dobitz attacks the EPA for "numerous errors as well as unwarranted conclusions" [and for] using the media for publicly proclaiming its "results." [His quotes].
We are told that it is all "'junk-science'" [a term invented by the tobacco industry], and the article gives us the benefit of his philosophical insights:
Junk science contains the objective of achieving some preconceived ideal state. It is based upon value judgments and therefore its conclusions are subjective and prescriptive rather than objective and descriptive.[One could suggest that this was the pot calling the kettle "black"]
EPA's investigation related to environmental tobacco smoke did not move from hypothesis and data to conclusion. It moved from a preconceived then mandated conclusion back to selected data in order to reach the mandated conclusion.
We now have our definition of junk science. It is science that uses selected data to reach a preconceived conclusion. A conclusion that by the very nature of the data necessarily misrepresents reality
Thomas Sowell, the distinguished economist profoundly notes: 'People are never more sincere then when they assume their own moral superiority." Hence, taxpayers get EPA's junk science.
This federal agency has used the practice of assessing ETS relationship to lung cancer based upon moral intention instead of its verifiable effect. This recent court decision reminds us that health hazard "crisis" regulations need greater justification than merely EPA's compassionate motive.
[After lecturing his readers on the importance of "moral superiority" he includes nothing in the article to reveal that he has been a paid Tobacco Institute witness, or that this article was written under contract for the Tobacco Institute — or that they had vetted and 'corrected' his prose.]
CONTRIBUTORS:dhf2 sjc2 JJHS
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic License