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

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.




TOBACCO INDUSTRY EXPLANATORY

ABBREVIATIONS
JARGON
SPIN-MEISTERS
INITIALS
FIRST & NICKNAMES
Misc.RESEARCH HELP
Smoking-Gun docs.

RELEVANT LINKS

NETWORK OPERATIONS
Cash-for-comment economists' network
General TI networks
James E Long
George Berman
James Savarese
Ctr.Study Pub.Choice
James Buchanan
Robert Tollison
Anna Tollison
Richard Wagner
James C Miller III
Carol M Robert
Elizabeth A Masaitis
Committee on Tax & Economic Growth
Harold Hochman
Fred McChesney
Thomas Borcherding
Delores T Martin
Dennis Dyer
George Minshew
Fred Panzer
Susan Stuntz
Peter Sparber
Carol Hrycaj
Debra Schoonmaker
Jeff Ross
Cal George
William Prendergast
Bill Orzechowski
CASH-FOR-COMMENT
NETWORK MEMBERS

Dominick Armentano
Burton A Abrams
Lee Alston
Ryan C Amacher
Gary Anderson
Lee Anderson
William Anderson
Terry Anderson
Scott E Atkinson
Roger Arnold
Richard W Ault
Michael Babcock
Joe A Bell
Bruce L Benson
Jean J Boddewyn
Peter Boettke
Thomas Borcherding
William J Boyes
Charles Breeden
Lawrence Brunner
Henry N Butler
Bill Bryan
Cecil Bohanon
John H Bowman
Dennis L Chinn
Morris Coates
Roger Congleton
Jeffrey R Clark
Michael Crew
Allan Dalton
John David
Michael Davis
Arthur T Denzau
Clifford Dobitz
John Dobra
Robert Ebel
Randall Eberts
Robert B Ekelund
Roger L Faith
David Fand
Susan Feigenbaum
Clifford Fry
Lowell Gallaway
Celeste Gaspari
David ER Gay
Kenneth V Greene
Kevin B Grier
Brian Goff
James D Gwartney
Sherman Hanna
Anne Harper-Fender
Kathy Hayes
Dennis Hein
James Heins
Robert Higgs
Richard Higgins
F Steb Hipple
Harold M Hochman
George E Hoffer
John Howe
Randall G Holcombe
William Hunter
Stephen Huxley
John D Jackson
Joseph M Jadlow
Cecil Johnson
Samson Kimenyi
David Klingaman
Roger Kormendi
Michael Kurth
David Laband
Suuner Lacroix
Dwight R Lee
Dennis Logue
James E Long
C. Matt Lindsay
Donald P Lyden
Craig MacPhee
Mike Maloney
Delores Martin
Chuck Mason
Charles Maurice
Fred McChesney
James E McClure
William McEachern
Richard McKenzie
Robert McMahon
Arthur Mead
Paul L Menchik
John F Militello
William C Mitchell
Greg Neihaus
James A Papke
Allen Parkman
Mark Pauly
William Peterson
Harlan Platt
Michael D Pratt
Thomas Pogue
Barry W Poulson
Edward Price
Robert Pulsinelli
Raymond Raab
Roger Riefler
Terry Ridgeway
Mario Rizzo
Morgan Reynolds
Simon Rottenberg
Randy Rucker
Richard Saba
Todd Sandler
David Saurman
Mark Schmitz
Robert Sexton
Gordon O Shuford
William Shughart
Robert J Staaf
Thomas Stimson
Wendell Sweetser
Mark Thornton
Mark Toma
David G Tuerck
Richard Vedder
Bruce Vermeullen
Richard Wagner
J Keith Watson
Burton Weisbrod
Walter E Williams
Paul W Wilson
Thomas L Wyrick
Bruce Yandle
Boon Yoon
Richard O Zerbe

 

 

OPINION ONLY

William J ('Bill') Hunter     [Prof ]    

— A cash-for-comment economist from Marquette University who worked for right-wing causes and the tobacco industry. —  

Bill Hunter was one of the regular team around Robert Tollison who operated the cash-for-comments network in support of the tobacco industry. He was moderately active and a keen member of the Public Choice Society.


William J Hunter was an Associate Professor of Economics at the Marquette Uni, Milwaukee. He was also associated with the Center for Study of Public Choice, George's Hall, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia which is Robert Tollison's front organisation.

He became part of a network 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 [through the Tobacco Institute] with a number of academics who would be 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!

DISAMBIGUATION

There was also
  • Dr William J Hunter was the health and safety director of the European Commission [Director, DGV/F Health and Safety Directorate] in Luxembourg
  • William Jay Hunter, Jr. Middleton & Reutlinger who was a B&W Kentucky lawyer involved in the Master Settlement Agreement.
  • William H. Hunter, works for the Winston-Salem Convention & Visitors Bureau.
  • William M Hunter II was associated with the American Heart Association
  • William A Hunter, editor of Black River Tribune VT
  • William D Hunter, Florida Community Developers Assn.
  • William Hunter, representative the American Ass'n for Counseling and Developtnent
       

Some key documents

• Associate Professor of Economics, Marquette Uni, Milwaukee.

• See his C/V sent to the Tobacco Institute May 1987


1946 July 12: Born


1974: BS Business and Economics Marquette University


1975–76: Marquette University Teaching Assistant


1976: MS. Economics Marquette University


1976–77: Virginia Polytechnic Instituteand State University Research Assistant


1977–79: Center for Study of Public Choice, Graduate Fellow


1979: PhD. Economics Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University


1979–82: Central Michigan University Assistant Professor


1982: Charles Breeden is listed as a co-writer and academic associate of William J Hunter Both are economists at Marquette University in Wisconsin and both were later active members of the economists' network.

    Hunter and Breeden were also membera of the Public Choice Society (Hayek/neo-con economists) who's president is Bob Tollison. Tollison was also the Director of the Center for the Study of Public Choice, at George Mason University and the main tobacco industry recruiter of academic economists [See Hunter's C/V.]
[Breeden and Hunter also joined force with professor Gene Smiley and businessman Franklin Buchta to establish the Wisconsin chapter of the HeartLand Institute. The Heartland Institute was heavily tobacco funded, and Philip Morris kept special files on its activities.]


1982: Marquette University, Assistant Professor


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.
This economist will be detailed to make the contact with Congressmen [by sending him/them the published op-ed]:
WISCONSIN, [No Congressman identified with Hunter]
  •   William Hunter
      Maquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin



1985 Feb 7: Judy Wiedemeier of the Tobacco Institute is writing to the regional lobbyists.

Attached for your information, are the names of economists who have been identified by our Public Relation department to assist T.I. on the federal cigarette excise tax issue. These people are also available to testify at the state level.

    If you feel this type of witness can be of assistance to you, please contact me for details and arrangements. If you have any ideas or suggestions for other economists within your state, please let me know, as we are always expanding our resources.
The attached list includes the contact details of this economist and also the Congressmen that are their targets.
WISCONSIN

Professor William Hunter
Marquette University Milwaukee, Wisconsin



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. William Hunter heads their state list of available economic witnesses for Wisconsin.


1985 June 30 to Sep 6: The Tobacco Institute have arranged the weekly syndication of a series of Opinion pieces, comparing statements of four economists (varied weekly) on various subjects. These have been picked up and run by newspapers; presumably in the belief that they are worthy articles of economic opinion. The economists quoted are:
  • 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
[It's great to see newspapers publishing such a diversity of economic opinion!]


1986: This is the Tollison/Saverese network list for 1986. It has 64 names, but it still doesn't cover all 50 States. Some States have two or three network members, so newspapers [and sometimes Congressmen] need to be specified for each member to ensure there is no accidental duplication.

    Telephone numbers (office and home) are often included in case an urgent op-ed or ordinance hearing is needed. These are grouped by State:

WISCONSIN
Professor William Hunter
    Department of Economics, Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53233, 414-224-7377(Also) Center for Study of Public Choice George's Hall, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia 22030


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, or write letters to the editor, or op-eds for the newspapers to counter the public smoking or excise tax threat. It lists him as a contact in:

  • Professor William Hunter, Department of Economics,
    Marquette University, Milwaukee WI
He is available on two weeks notice as a witness for hire.
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.

[Note his close associate from a later period, Charles Breeden from the same university, is not on the list at this time.]



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.
He includes an OTA paper on the dangers of smoking and also...
... 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.
The scent of possible research money on top of the op-ed writing must have generated substantial academic enthusiasm. William Hunter is listed as one of the recipients for this letter on the "Brainstorming - Research Ideas" project.
[This is one of two documents that refers to him as "Bill Hunter"]

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.
This went out to the long list of cash-for-comments economist on the network.


1986 May: /E A Tobacco Institute list of "Schedule of Payments - Excise Tax Op-Ed project." (April-May 1986) This lists those academic economists who have already planted their article on a local newspaper, and the amount they are to be paid.

    They appear to have been paid $900 for each article, and $1025 if they had also made contact with their local Congressman. However a number of the cash-for-comments network members still have not completed their commission.

    The George Mason (Uni) production staff of Bob Tollison, Bill Shughart, and Gary Anderson were paid for "rewrites, editing and research, 18 articles", and Carol Robert for the "production of final product " a total of $18,000 + $1067 expenses [or $1000 per article to make them saleable propaganda for their newspapers]

Hunter of Wisconsin has been given the target of planting his article on the Wisconsin St. Journal and was due for payment of $900.
A later Schedule of Payments increases this amount by another "$125 + $975.00 — Paid in Full"

    The GMU production staff were also being paid another $9,500 for rewrites, editing and research on 9 additional articles, while Savarese seems to have been charging $5,800 + $235 in expenses for recruiting replacement economists in California, Montana, New York, Ohio and Tennessee.


1986 May: A bundle of 72 pages of information is being circulated by the Tobacco Institute to its Regional Directors. The data is predominantly on the tobacco-industry beat-up known as Sick Building Syndrome and on the general problems of Indoor Air Quality [all down-playing the effects of smoking in confined spaces]

    Section 1 is headed

List of sources. Local and national experts you can call for quotes or background information. It promotes the services of three specialist lobbyists
  • Lewis Solmon - an academic who discounts problems of workplace smoking
  • Al Vogel - who claims to be an expert in public attitudes to smoking
  • Mike Forscey, a labor lawyer/lobbyist who helped the tobacco industry keep the union movement on-side.
They have also provided a list of the 52 Professors of Economics from various State Universities who can be called on to provide services for roughly $1000 a time: This economists name and address are included under "Tobacco & Taxation (listed by state, alphabetically)".


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:
Fiscal policy; public finance; collective choice; state and local government



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:
WISCONSIN
Professor William Hunter
    Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
    [Specializing in] Fiscal policy; public finance; collective choice; state and local government



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.
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.)

    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 = General (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:
Wisconsin [ Region IV ]

Professor William Hunter

    Department of Economics, Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53233, 414-224-7377

    Services rendered:
    • original excise tax op-ed
    • GSA letter writing campaign



1987 /E: Charles Breeden and his associate William J Hunter (both Masquette Uni, Economics Department) are on the Advisory Board of the Heartland Institute, then run by John Ashcroft. They are jointly associated here with Joseph Bast, the Executive Director of Heartland, who is also a Midwest Economic Summit Advisor as listed by the Tobacco Institute.

    Breeden and Hunter are both also on the Business and Economic Development committee of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) organisation which can only mean they have decided to become actively involved in political lobbying.

See
Heartland ALEC
Midwest advisors:


1987 Jan 6: and 12 Jim Savarese advises the Tobacco Institute that some economists were no longer working for his network. However Hunter is still being listed as their main Wisconsin 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 invoice is missing, and he gives no details of the current project.]

    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 William Hunter 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 plus a few new ones.[Greg Niehaus, Mario Rizzo, Roger Riefler, and Boon Yoon.]

Old faithfuls: Lee Anderson, Terry Anderson, Dom Armento, 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



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.


    Bill Hunter's CV and evaluation are included in this file.

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.

    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.
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.

Professor William Hunter:
"Yes: Will be good witness"



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.

    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.
He then deals with each of them on a case-by-case basis:
WISCONSIN: Professor William Hunter
I have spoken with Professor Hunter by telephone. Due to the budgetary process in Wisconsin, ie. eaucus system, only written correspondence with regard to economic information may be feasible.

    However, TI legislative counsel Paul Sicula, Professor Hunter and myself will meet on Wednesday, 5/27/87 to review economic models of Wisconsin and Minnesota.


    The original handnotes (some of which didn't get into the formal report) show that the Regional Director for the Northern Sector had noted about this academic:
Yes: will be a good witness



1987 May 27: In this document, Michel Brozek, the Regional Director of the Tobacco Institute, has been in contact with Professor William Hunter, who is enlisted as an available economist, 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.

    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.]

    I have spoken with Professor Hunter by telephone. Due to the budgetary process in Wisconsin, ie. caucus system, only written correspondence with regard to economic information may be feasible. However, TI legislative counsel Paul Sicula, Professor Hunter and myself will meet on Wednesday, 5/27/87 to review economic models of Wisconsin and Minnesota.

    A tacked-on CV shows that Hunter is a member of the Public Choice Society (Hayek/neo-con economists) who's president is Robert Tollison and who are associated with the Center for the Study of Public Choice, at George Mason University. [See Hunter's C/V.]

    Another economic network op-ed writer, Prof. Charles Breeden is listed as a co-writer and academic associate of Hunter. Both are economists at Marquette University in Wisconsin.



1987 June 9: The Tobacco Institute's Phase II - Excise Tax Op-Ed Project involving an article-writing campaign by cash-for-comment economists. was run by James Savarese & Associates. Robert Tollison at George Mason University secretly recruited and controlled this network with James Savarese & Associates as the front.

    At the Tobacco Institute in the mid-1987 period, the project was directed by Jeff Rose [under Vice President for Issues Management, Peter Sparber] and it focussed on defeating cigarette excise tax increases — especially the threat of such taxes being 'earmarked' to bolster health care budgets.

Anna Tollison, the wife of Bob Tollison, was employed by James Savarese to keep a record of the articles generated by the large contingent of academic economists, and to organise their payment. She reported this month 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.] Hunter has written an op-ed for them which was published.
WISCONSIN:
Hunter — Wisconsin State Journal 4/27/87 (Circulation 140,000)



1987 June 22: The Tobacco Institute has been sent by Savarese a "Schedule of Payments — Excise Tax Op-Ed Project." This is a detailed accounting for all the current active members of the network.

    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 WISCONSIN
Hunter for Wisconsin State Journal —Owed $975 — Total to date $2000
Also were payments to George Mason Production staff (Bob Tollison, Bill Shughart and Gary Anderson for rewrites ($27,500) and replacement of five economists (presumably because they were unproductive or unsatisfactoy) ($5,800). Carol Roberts was also paid for the final production. ($5,000) Total here with expenses was $33,810.

He also reports on

  • Professor Thomas Pogue (IOWA)
    Including a C/V
  • Professor Raymond Raab (MINNESOTA)
    Including a C/V
  • Professor Roger Riefler (NEBRASKA)
  • Professor Cliff Dobitz (NORTH DAKOTA)
    Including a C/V
  • Professor Dennis Hein (SOUTH DAKOTA)
    Including a C/V
He also includes a C/V for Henry Butler (TEXAS)


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.

    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.
[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.]

    The attached list showed who was considered reliable or unreliable:

DEMOCRAT WAYS & MEANS COMMITTEE PROJECT
STATEDemocrat CongressmenEconomist Reliability
IllinoisDan Rosenkowski
Marty Russo
Fred McChesney Unreliable
FloridaSam 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
IndianaAndrew 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)
In this bundle are very similar articles planted on their local newspaper in the March-April period by
  • Dwight Lee (2 of),
  • Dominick Armentano (3 of),
  • John Howe,
  • Joseph Jadlow,
  • S Charles Maurice (2 of),
  • Thomas Pogue,
  • Cecil Bohanon (2 of),
  • Chuck Mason,
  • JR Clark (2 of),
  • Allen Parkman.
  • Robert Ekelund Jr. (2 of),
  • William Mitchell,
  • Cliff Dobitz (2 of),
  • Barry Poulson,
  • William Hunter,
  • Michael Kurth,
  • John David,
  • David Gay,
  • Lee Anderson,
  • Robert McMahon,
  • Craig McPhee,
  • Brian Goff (2 of),
  • Dennis Logue,
  • Thomas Wyrick,
  • Arthur Mead,
  • Richard Wagner.

[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 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.

WISCONSIN
Professor William Hunter
Marquette University Milwaukee, WI

Excise Tax Op Eds: Wisconsin State Journal — 04/27/87
Economic Witness/Testimony:
Field Staff Contact: Scheduled meeting 05/27/87.
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.

    In the case of those who have not had an article accepted for publication I would like to know whether they submitted one.
[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.]

    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 Feb 8: The Tobacco Institute to its Regional VPs and Directors.

Attached is an updated list of The Institute's cadre of excise tax economists. These economists are available for testimony, one-on-one meetings with legislators, writing letters and op-ed pieces in the states in which they teach, as well as in any state you deem appropriate.
This economist is listed.


1988 April 25: NorthWest Airlines had just implemented the first ban on short domestic flights (formalised by the FAA on April 23rd), and the Tobacco Institute was turning out its lobbyists to convince the other airlines that smoking bans of any kind were a bad idea. The economists were central to this propaganda project.

  • Michael Babcock (Kansas Uni) wrote "Good service, not gimmicks win fliers" for the Topeka Capital-Journal which suggested that Northwest was a dangerous and unreliable airline, and that it should concentrate on maintenance and safety rather than persecuting smokers.
  • Michael Kurth (McNeese State) wrote "Market forces are the best way to guarantee freedom" for the Shreveport Journal. He saw it in personal freedom terms:
    The political remedy to social conflict is to ban "offensive" behavior. In a democracy, that usually means the behavior of a minority. That is what the Federal Aviation Administration did when it banned smoking on all airline flights lasting more than two hours. Some air travelers were offended by the smoking of other passengers, even though the smokers were isolated in the back of the plane.

        But by what criteria were their preferences elevated and satisfied over the preferences of smokers?
  • Ryan Amacher (Clemson University) had "Eliminating choice failed marketplace test" He claims that the Northwest Airlines experience had been a disaster (in fact it was highly successful). He also suggests Northwest was a dangerous airline to fly.
  • JR Clark (Uni of Tennessee) had "Focus on service would help airlines most" in the Memphis Commercial Appeal.
  • Michael Davis (Southern Methodist University) had "Smoking ban gets good test" in the Times Herald
  • William Hunter (Marquette Uni) had "Airline smoking ban example of free-market conflice resolution" in the Capital Times.. He damns the Northwest policy for "failing the market test" and praises those airlines which were competing without smoking bans.



1988 Dec: At the beginning of 1988, Northwest Airlineshad successfully banned smoking on all US domestic flights. Then in April 1988 a two-year trial smoking ban on all domestic flights of less than two hours duration had been introduced by the FAA.

    The tobacco industry had flown into a panic since their own polling showed that a majority of airline passengers (smokers and non-smokers) were reasonably happy with such bans. They therefore instructed the cash-for-comments network economists to write articles attacking the financial stability of Northwest, attack its safety record, and preaching the need for smoking 'tolerance'.

    The resulting articles generally took the line that Northwest Airlines was suffering financially... when in fact, the ban had been generally successful. This was, in fact, a clear attempt at influencing the stock-market to put pressure on airline management.

    Involved in this disinformation exercise were

  • Michael Babcock, Kansas State Uni (Topeka Capital-Journal) "Good service, not gimmicks win fliers"
  • Michael Kurth McNeese State Uni, letters to the editor. (Shreveport Journal)
  • Ryan Amacher, Clemson University (unknown) "Eliminating choice failed market test
  • JR Clark, Uni of Tennessee, Martin (Memphis Commercial Appeal) "Focus on service would help airlines most.
  • Michael Davis, Southern Methodist Uni (LA Times Syndicate/Times Herald) "Smoking ban gets good test."
  • William Hunter, Marquette Uni (The Capital Times) "Airlines smoking ban example of free-market conflict resolution."
[Many of the writer knew so little about the smoking ban that they confused the Northwest Airline ban with the later FAA trial.]


1989 Jan 11: This is an 80 page mixed bag of files dumped together. [First is from 1990]

  • Pages 3 to 23 It begins 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]
    • 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."
    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.
    Wisconsin now has him listed at two institutions:
    • Professor William Hunter, Department of Economics, Marquette University
      Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53233, 414-224-7377
    • Center for Study of Public Choice
      George's Hall, George Hason University, Fairfax, Virginia 22030

[TI budget papers show that:

  • Each op-ed earned the economists $3,000.
  • Presentations to conferences earned them $5,000.
  • Savarese was paid $70 to $100,000 pa for this project,
  • Ogilvy & Mather charged $250,000.
See page 5


1989 Feb: The Tobacco Institute's report on its Communications Activities [with a a focus on blocking smoking bans on airlines] says:

    The 2/9/89 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association published a report on smoking aboard aircraft.

        The Institute responded and issued a press release (copy enclosed). Aggressively promoting the position that the study does not support a total airline smoking ban, TI speakers pressed our position in a number of interviews with print and broadcast media. Press reports and transcripts are enclosed.

        Three reviews (copies enclosed), giving Northwest Airline's smoking ban a failing grade, were published [by network members]:
  • Michael Davis, visiting assistant professor of Economics at Southern Methodist University, in the Dallas Times Herald;
  • William Hunter, association professor of economics at Marquette University, in the Capital Times (Madison, WI);
  • Michael Babcock, professor of Economics at Kansas State University, in the Topeka Capital-Journal.

Clippings of the Hunter, Davis and Babcock articles


1989 Mar 17-19: The Annual Meeting of the Public Choice Society together with the Economic Science Association. These are Hayek-oriented neo-con economists of the kind which gave us the Global Financial Crisis of 2008-9. The speakers list contains many active members of the economists network: — some of whom spoke many times. (William Hunter in particular.) It is clear that this society was a profitable recruiting ground for Tollison and Savarese.

    The large group of speakers connected with Tollison's Center for the Study of Public Choice at George Mason University completely dominated the conference session on Public Health.

  • Robert Tollison
  • Richard Wagner
  • David ER Gay
  • Dwight Lee
  • William C Mitchell
  • Burton Abrams
  • Cecil E Bohanon
  • Charles Breeden
  • William J Hunter
  • Bruce Benson
  • Burton Weisbrod
  • Bruce Yandle
  • Roger L Faith
  • Roger Congleton
  • James Buchanan
  • Gary Anderson
  • Peter J Boettke
  • Jeffrey R Clark
  • Robert J Staaf

    This document also contains a list of the Public Choice Society's participants, many of whom were also members of the economist's network.


1989 Mar 13: SportsInc, the Sports-buisness Weekly published an article on "The Impact of Economics" (sports sponsorship). It includes a discussion on the use of multipliers and quotes

George Mason University professor William J. Hunter, is the author of a Heartland Institute study entitled Economic Impact Studies: Inaccurate, Misleading and Unnecccssary



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.]

This document has the speaker's powerpoints, including a list of network economists divided on a State-by-State basis.       Note the document is 117 pages

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 includes William Hunter]



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.

    We should start getting drafts of the op-eds around the first of the year.
This economist is on the list for WISCONSIN, Milwaukee Journal


1990 Jan 18: Jim Savarese has sent a draft of a new William Hunter op-ed to Carol Hyrcaj at the Tobacco Institute.

Carol;
Attached is an op-ed from William J Hunter - it looks fine.

    Jim
A note on the bottom says "Comments expected from (tobacco lawyers) Covington & Burling on January 24th".

    His argument is that all excise taxes are "regressive" and in this article he very cleverly uses a very slippery economic argument that,
people with incomes less than $20,000 pay 37% of the tax while individuals with incomes over $50,000, and almost twice as much total income, pay only 13% of the tax.
[Could it be that there were many more smokers in the under-$20k wage bracket ?]

    He concludes:
Shifting "the tax burden onto the lowest incone groups through higher excise taxes, while perhaps politically expedient, can only be considered cowardly in any other context.
[This draft has minor references to 'tobacco' and none admitting that the Tobacco Institute were funding the writing and placement of this piece. Who is being 'cowardly'?]

    Both Covington & Burling and Shook Hardy and Bacon were being required to clear these op-eds legally. See



1990 Feb 25: Clipping of an op-ed by Hunter for the Tobacco Institute which appeared in The Milwaukee Journal "Anti-tax fervor forces politicians to regressive excise taxes." (attacking Congress and new excise proposals)


1990 Mar: The Tobacco Institute report on their activities on Excise Taxes, says:

The 1990 op-ed program involving consulting economists' articles on the excise tax and "user fee" question moved forward last month. We reviewed additional draft articles and returned them to the authors to seek placement.

    Meanwhile, the previously cleared op-eds continue to appear in print. Recently published articles include those by J.R. Clark (with placements in five different Tennessee newspapers); Ryan Amacher (the Anderson Independent-Mail); William Hunter (the Milwaukee Journal); and John David (the Charleston Gazette).

    Consulting economists sent letters to administration officials reported to be looking for ways to justify a cigarette excise tax/"user fee" connection. Many of the economists received a direct response from a Treasury Department official who appears to have backed-off from the "user fee" notion.



1990 April 30: Hunter's article has been published in The Milwaukee Journal, and so he sends a copy and a letter on Marquette University letterhead to Senator Herb Kohl, one of his designated Congressional targets He claims to be primarily concerned with getting a fair-deal for Wisconsin:

As you probably know Wisconsin falls short in its fiscal return on its federal taxes. Increased excise taxation in general and the Rostenkowski proposal in particular will only exacerbate the net outflow of tax dollars from Wisconsin.

    Federal tax and expenditure policies have made Wisconsin residents a net exporter of tax revenues and therefore have put the State at a competitive disadvantage for a very long period of time.


    Kohl's standard letter in reply is duplicated and passed around the Tobacco Institute.

    Twenty of the network academics have managed to plant similar articles on their local papers.


1990 May: This is a list of successes Savarese and Tollison claim from having their tame economists on the network plant op-ed articles on their local newspapers.

WISCONSIN
William Hunter, Marquette Univ. — Madison Capital Times



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
    What TI and Its Allies Must Cover
    1. "Social cost" arguments used to justify excise tax increases, smoking restrictions and ad bans are not valid.
    2. Independent economists state that "social cost" calculations used by anti-smokers do not withstand credible economic scrutiny.
    3. There is no convincing economic evidence that smokers impose costs on society. Any supposed costs are "private costs" and are borne by the smoker.
    4. Other industries are vulnerable to social cost attacks. A "slippery slope" may exist as anti-smokers, using "social costs" arguments, seek legislation restricting smoking or increasing taxes. These efforts may signal lawmakers to regulate other products as well.
  • "Tax" Hearing Readiness (as above, but for excise tax increases, State and Federal)
    What TI and Its Allies Must Cover
    1. Excise taxes are regressive and take away tax reform for low- and middle-income Americans. As a percentage of income, low income families pay as much as 27 times more in federal excises than high-income families.
    2. Cigarette excise taxes are discriminatory. They fall disproportionately on Blacks, Hispanics and other minorities.
    3. Excise taxes are unfair. Tobacco consumers are forced to pay more than others for government services benefitting everyone. Why should smokers pay more for national defense than nonsmokers?
  • List of cash-for-comment network economists in each State.
This is an updated list with the current locations of each, with phone numbers and addresses.
WISCONSIN
Professor William Hunter
Department of Economics, Marquette University
Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53233 414-224-7377

    He was currently on sabbatical at:
Center for Study of Public Choice
George's Hall, George Mason University
Fairfax, Virginia 22030
http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/vej19a00/pdf

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
The economist's media tours are to promote the Wagner and Tollison book on the Social Cost of smoking which had been written for the Tobacco Institute. and reviewsd by many of the cash-for-comment economist network members.

    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.

William Hunter
Associate Professor of Economics, Marquette University

2/90 Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in The Milwaukee Journal.



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.

    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.
He then lists:
  • 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.
This economist, along with dozens of others, is thought to be a potential speaker and is credited with recent achievements:
William Hunter
Associate Professor of Economics
Marquette University

2/90 Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in The Milwaukee Journal



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:
William Hunter
Associate Professor of Economics, Marquette University
  • 2/90 Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in The Milwaukee Journal

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
[The date of his article is probably a mis-type. It is more likely to be May]


1991: A list of useful consultants and witnesses held in the B&W files, carried many entries which show lists of past activities for the Tobacco Institute, which were effectively credentials showing that they could be trusted.

William Hunter
Associate Professor of Economics Marquette University
  •   2/90 Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in The Milwaukee Journal



1991 Feb: He had written an op-ed for the Tobacco Insittute, and they advised Regional Directors that he was now available for consultation

5/90 Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in Milwaukee Journal




There appears to be a gap in the files from mid 1991 until mid 1993. However later records show that Hunter was still working for the Tobacco Institute during this time.



1993 Mar 23: Jim Savarese is proposing to Cal George at the Tobacco Institute a new Op-ed program.

Outlined below is our proposed op-ed program in opposition to the use of excise taxes to finance health care.
  1. Op-ed article by Robert Tollison to be submitted to Wall Street Journal $ 4,000.00

  2. Rebuttal article by Bob Ekelund, Auburn University, to be submitted to the Birmingham News $ 3,000.00

  3. "Monster" tax op-ed project using twenty economists (list attached) to submit articles in opposition to using excise taxes on cigarettes to finance health care reform - to be submitted to twenty newspapers in twenty different states $60,000.00

    TOTAL $67,000.00
This economist is listed as one of the proposed lucky recipients of $3,000 in largess from the Tobacco Institute for slashing out a quick op-ed. He was to submit the article to Milwaukee Journal.


1993 May: William Hunter has used "the dog ate my homework" excuse about his article for the "Monster Tax Op-Ed Project." Savarese's report to the Tobacco Institute says

WISCONSIN
Prof. William Hunter
Department of Economics , Marquette University,
Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53233
      Op-ed lost in mail - just received - will send week of 5-24-93



1993 Aug 2: William Hunter's "In My Opinion" column, is published in The Milwaukee Journal. It carries the heading "Clinton's 'modest' tax plans to take heavy toll in Wisconsin"guaranteeed to appeal to the local jingoists and Republicans.

Taxes that have been considered by the Clinton administration include not just higher levies on the very wealthy, but also excise taxes on alcohol, tobacco, gasoline and a tax on energy (BTU). The intent of income tax increases is to restore "fairness" to the tax system by placing greater burdens on the rich.

    No such claim can be made for excise taxes, which place the greatest burden on the poor and middle class, and therefore would fall heavily on the residents of Wisconsin.
He wants special concessions for Wisconsin residents who heat their homes by gas, as against the 'wealthy residents' of the East Coast who heat with oil. He makes no specific mention of tobacco other than to use cigarettes as an example of the "regressive" inequality.

    There is no mention that the Tobacco Institute has paid him $1,500 to write the column. However he concludes with their message:
If Clinton is sincere in his desire to raise taxes fairly, then he needs to abandon excise taxes, despite their potential political benefits.

[This is how public relations works most effectively. If it is obvious who is planting the propaganda, then it is generally ignored.]

1993 Aug 3: This is a series of lists of activities conducted by Savarese & Associates in running the economist's nework, dating from Mar 23 1993 until August. Savarese's staff have sent these to the Tobacco Institute as progressive reports on problems, and their successes in having op-ed pieces published.

    Note that the articles are often being revised by Jim Savarese, then checked by Calvin George at the Tobacco Institute, then cleared by the tobacco lawyers, before being returned to the economist for onward transmission to the newspaper. These are not 'independent' opinion articles, but tobacco-industry shaped and highly manipulated propaganda.

  • Mar 23 Successfully planted article with Milwaukee Journal
  • Apr 9 Nothing recorded
  • May 12 (Monster Tax article) — nothing recorded
  • May 18 "Op-ed lost in mail, just received — will send week of 5/24/93"
  • June 2 "Received 6/1/93. Sent to Cal 6/1/93"
  • June 14 "Submitted to Milwukee Journal. Returned/Cal 6/4/93"
  • Aug 3 (Monster Tax op-ed) "Forthcoming. Milwakee Journal called 7/27 will be published shortly"


Hunter disappears from the economists' network lists shortly after this and appears to have been replaced by his associate Charles Breeden.



1994 March 16: A group of academic economists including almost all the members of the Tobacco Institute's cash-for-comments network sent an "An Open Letter to President Clinton on Healthcare Reform." This had been organised by David J Theroux, the founder and operator of the Independent Institute apparently with the assistance of an academic network member, Simon Rottenberg. [The institute was well-funded by the tobacco industry]. They say:

In The Open Letter to President Clinton, 565 economists and 76 other scholars from all 50 states and the District of Columbia state their firm opposition to any form of direct and indirect price controls in any healthcare program.

    Rationing Health Care: The New Threat of Price Controls, by Simon Rottenberg and David J. Theroux

    They use the old straw-man scare techniques of the sky-falling.
In countries that have imposed these types of regulations, patients face delays of months and years for surgery, government bureaucrats decide treatment options instead of doctors or patients, and innovations in medical techniques and pharmaceuticals are dramatically reduced.
Which, as anyone who has lived in England, Canada, Australia, etc. knows, is pure rubbish.

    Along with Hunter and his associates, also on this list of signatories were a number of think-tank lobbyists [including most of the Hoover Institute] and others who worked for the tobacco industry, and the Research Director of the Independent Institute, Robert Higgs, who was also a fill-in network economist.

1995: Report of the Heartland Institute says:

A Wisconsin chapter of The Heartland Institute was launched in February by businessman Franklin Buchta and Marquette University professors Charles Breeden, Gene Smiley , and William Hunter.

    Heartland Wisconsin hosted its first meeting in May at the Wisconsin Club in Milwaukee and, that same month, hosted a successful briefing for state legislators in Madison. In November, Mark Greenfield signed on as executive director of Heartland Wisconsin.
Later, when outlining their successes, the Institute boasts:
Meanwhile, Heartland was publishing Perspectives (20 of them this year), hosting events, and participating in public debates in other ways. James Johnston helped deflate a movement to municipalize Chicago's electric utility, William Hunter challenged Wisconsin's prevailing wage laws, and Herbert Walberg demonstrated how small school districts outperform large ones.

Joseph Bast was named one of the "88 People to Watch in 1988" by the Chicago Tribune. [His wife Diane was the Publications Director of the Institute]


1995 Nov: /E William Hunter's old Marquette University associate Charles Breeden appears to have come back into the network to work on the FDA project.

An extensive economist op-ed program was implemented to focus media attention on the FDA's agenda. The program attacks the FDA proposal from an anti-big government, anti-regulatory perspective. Targeting key Congressional districts.

    Economists prepared and submitted op-eds for publication to major newspapers in select states:
      Dr Charles Breeden, Marquette University
[There is no mention of William Hunter in December 1995 ]



The records of this period are fairly thin, but it is likely that this was the end of Bill Hunter's secondary profession as a tobacco lobbyist.



2002 Aug 28: Hunter is listed as a Policy Advisor to the Heartland Institute while still at Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI


2010 Sept 24: Hunter is now Director, National Institute on Consumer Credit Management (NICCM), Marquette University, College of Busines Administration.


2013: NICCM will move to Atlanta for 2013

Marquette's long-time director Dr Bill Hunter retires On June 4, 2012, 67 financial managers, representing 18 corporations in the consumer finance industry, arrived at Marquette University for the final installment of the National Institute on Consumer Credit Management. Established in 1950, NICCM has trained some of the industry's most prominent leaders.

    Dr William Hunter, professor of finance and director of NICCM, has more than 30 years' experience in the finance industry and has shared his expertise with the institute for the past 20 years. We would like to thank Dr Hunter for his years of service, as well as the professional instructors and board members who have contributed to NICCM's success at Marquette.

WORTH READING
















CONTRIBUTORS:samf ajw2 in22


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic License