  | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 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 5/20/2013 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
Dwight R Lee [ Prof]— An economist at the University of Georgia and Washington University, St Louis, who worked for many decades in support of the tobacco industry. He provided cash-for-comment services on-tap. —Among academic economists, probably only Robert Tollison did more to promote the interests of the tobacco industry than Dwight Lee. From his first sniff of tobacco industry lucre he was a dedicated and enthusiastic collaborator.
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 a number of networks 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.
Dwight Lee was one of Tollison's closest associates, and one of the tobacco industry's most productive recruits. His work for the tobacco industry was "above and beyond the call of duty" and must have earned him a small fortune over the years.
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 ' academics' from some credible university, and 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 were always 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! Dwight Lee was a 'core' member of one of the Tollison/Savarese economists network. who had been trained by the Tobacco Institute to make their "Social Cost' arguments. His name appears in both the 1989 Five-man core group of 'Consulting Economists Team' and in the 1990 Six-man core group. He was clearly an enthusiastic servant of the tobacco industry for many years.
Dwight Lee's C/V shows an extraorinary number of grants from the Earhart Foundation, and one in the Summer of 1988 from the Olin Foundation. He even got one from the Dr Scholl Foundation in 1982 — probably to study the economics of pedicures !
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Packwood's Dilemma |
|---|
The Reagan Administration had gone on a spending spree while promising to rein in the bureaucracy and cut taxes. Under Reagan the national debt was skyrocketing, so Oregon Republican Bob Packwood was given the job of designing a new tax plan. However President Reagan insisted that it must:
So while actively supporting the Reagan Administration's anti-agency (FDA, EPA, OSHA) activities and the Republican attempts to limit product-liability, class actions, etc. the tobacco companies (who also owned beer, wine and spirit businesses) took a prominent stand against Packwood — but kept themselves in the background through hiring academic economists to promote their propaganda. |
1986: See Center for the Study of Public Choice 43 page self-congratulatory booklet.
During 1985, we welcomed three new research associates to our staff. William F. Shughart II joined the Center Staff from Clemson University. Professor Shughart's research specialities are industrial organization, public choice, and antitrust. Jennifer Roback joined our ranks from Yale University.
Also during 1985, the Center suffered a large loss — Dwight Lee moved on to the University of Georgia, where he was given a chair. Life goes on, but it is not nearly so much fun without Dwight around.
1986 Jan: The Tobacco Institute's Public Relations Resource Catalogue for their Regional Directors, lists documents, booklets, article, posters and people who can help them fight local public smoking ordinances and threats to raise the excise taxes on cigarettes.
It provides a long list of economists who are willing to speak at hearings, write letters to the editor, or create op-eds for the newspapers to counter any threat to public smoking or possible increase in excise taxes.
The Tobacco Institute offered their Regional Directors the C/Vs of all of these economists, and said
"Requests for economists should be made ASAP. Allow at least one week. PR approval needed."He is listed [along with 50 other economists] as a contact in:
He is available on two weeks notice as a witness for hire.
- Professor Dwight Lee
Department of Economics, University of Georgia, Athens, GA,
Lee testified against proposed public smoking, legislation in Harrisburg and Philadelphia, PA, in, [mid-1985.]
Public Smoking/Witness: Local economists are available on two-weeks notice to provide economic testimony on the public smoking issue. Those economists who have testified or prepared op-ed pieces on the economic effects of public smoking are marked accordingly. The others may be briefed on the potential cost to government of implementing smoking restrictions.
Tax witness: [He will] "explain why excise taxes are regressive and unfair to consumers and unsuitable and unreliable as a means to increase the federal revenue."
Those economists who have testified or prepared op-ed pieces on the economic effects of public smoking are marked accordingly. The others may be briefed on the potential cost to government of implementing smoking restrictions.
1986 Jan 26: Katherine Becker in her Weekly Activitiy Report at the Tobacco Institute, lists
Reviewed and commented on smoking restriction/economic impact studies by Greg Niehaus and Dwight Lee for 1/27 meeting with PR.
[Niehaus was a graduate student who had been working with Tollison. He later became a cash-for-comments economist on the network.]
1986 Feb 24: Craig Barnes (TI Media Relations department) memo to William Kloepfer at the Tobacco Institute about the use of various Chase Econometrics studies [See below] which have been done in a number of states to produce data which is guaranteed to support the industry lobbying.
The Media Relations department had been enlisted to support the Issues Management division which normally ran the economists network. They were to make direct contact and conduct briefings with journalists and editors of most of the major newspaper and broadcasting outlets and feed them information derived from the relevant Chase study done in their area.
These 'Chase' economic studies were customised to suit the tobacco industry's requirements and were conducted in the various states when legislation or local ordinances threatened. Sometimes one of the network economists would be included in the Chase team (certainly the following press briefing) to give it more credibility. Barnes advised Kloepfer that:
In an approved revision of the plan it was decided that including a state economist in the briefings created too large a briefing team and that we would counter subsequent anti's criticism more effectively by using the economists for op-ed pieces. The approved revision has been followed.
[They prefer to leave the economists underground so they can pretend to be 'independent commentators' and not raise suspicions that they are employed by the tobacco industry.]
[Inclued] A list of the economic consultants who have completed and submitted Chase op-ed articles.
ACTION: Such op-ed pieces have been completed and pitched in each market we've entered so far.The following drafts have been recieved and, with minor revisions, are ready to go.
- St. Louis — Richard McKenzie, Washington University
- Baltimore — David Laband, University of Maryland
- Chicago — Henry Butler, University of Chicago
- Houston — same
- New York — Michael Crew, Rutgers University
- Atlanta — Dwight Lee, University of Georgia
- Philadelphia — Jack Militello, Wharton
[Note that they were running the 'Chase Econometrics' project in parallel with the Packwood Excise Tax/Op-ed Project.]
| Chase Econometrics Studies |
|---|
1986 May 19: Scott Stapf at the Tobacco Institute sent to Peter Sparber a "Final report on the Chase Econometrics project." It detailed the successes of the 'Chase Campaign'
|
1986 Mar 11: Bill Kloepfer (Head of PR) reports to Sam Chilcote the president of the Tobacco Institute on a meeting he has had with "Consulting Economists" over "Tax Issue Advice"
As you suggested, I met March 5 in a hotel room with five economists to discuss approaches by the industry to tax issues. Pete Sparber participated. Attending were:[Truncated notes also on]Consensus among the consultants emerged on four points:
- James Savarese, Ogilvy & Mather
- Dennis Logue, Dartmouth
- Dolores Martin, University of Nebraska
- Dwight Lee, University of Georgia
- Henry Butler, University of Chicago
For background, I provided three documents to the consultants a week before the meeting: The executive summary of the Chase [Econometrics] study; the state activities division Feb. 10 memorandum on "Tax Revenue Earmarking Trends and Comments"; and the DeSeve [Economics Associates, Inc.] regressivity study.
- Some types of earmarking of cigarette excises may be beneficial.
- Plotting of a long-run demand curve for cigarettes is necessary.
- Academic research on the "social costs" issue is needed.
- Institute support of alternatives to excises as revenue sources is undesirable.
The discussion lasted for about five hours. It was quite worthwhile. We should take appropriate steps internally now to consider the major points which emerged.
- Earmarking: The advice we received was to consider carefully any earmarking proposals, perhaps accepting those which present a coalition probability and protesting those which do not.
- Demand Curve: The effect of price, including excises, on cigarette demand apparently is usually measured on an immediate basis. Most economists evidently find the demand for cigarettes to be relatively inelastic. [because they are addictive]
- Social Cost: While the so-called social costs issue affects public policy in many ways, it was recognized as one of the incentives for increased cigarette taxes. The group recognized the 1985 Office of Technologic Assessment memorandum as a landmark and its members indicated they would welcome an opportunity to study it as a basis for proposing research projects which could mitigate its unwarrented effects.
They understand that The Institute does not have an economic research budget per se, but that we would welcome any suggestions which we might consider on their merits.
1986 Mar 13: Savarese writes to Fred Panzer at the Tobacco Institute about the "Chase Study/Op-eds".
[These are promoting faux-economic impact studies on the effects of smoking bans, done in specific cities for the Tobacco Institute by Chase Econometrics]
- The St Louis article has been approved and submitted to the St Louis Despatch.
- The Baltimore article has been approved, but not yet submitted.
- John Militello's Philadelphia article is awaiting approval
- Richard Wagner's Miami article is being discussed.
- Four new articles are enclosed
- Chicago (by Henry Butler)
- (Another by Butler) for either Dallas or Houston
- New York (by Michael Crew)
- Atlanta (by Dwight Lee)
- In writing stages are articles for
- Los Angeles (by Thomas Borsherding)
- Cleveland (by Richard Vedder)
[Note how flexible they are between Dallas and Houston — the articles can quickly be modified to suit the city]
1986 Apr: /E James Savarese has circulated these instructions to his stable of cash-for-comment economists. He is asking them to write to the House Ways and Means Committee members in their states, and include a copy of their op-ed articles.
He provides stamped and addressed envelopes, and strict instructions for what the letter should say:
Contents of your letter to the memberDwight Lee was one on the list of "Economists asked to write letters to Congressmen."
- Opposition to consumption taxes, especially federal excise taxes, and in particular alcohol and cigarettes (you may list others if you wish).
- Opposition to any tax increase as part of the budget reconciliation process; i.e., the need to comply with Gramm-Rudman target of $145 billion deficit limit. This deficit target should be reached with spending reductions.
- However, if the tax reform package that ultimately emerges generates some windfall tax revenues during the first year, FY 1987, these should take the place of any other tax increase that might be considered. (For your information, most analysts believe that the Packwood version of the tax bill is revenue neutral over a five year period, but that it raises between $15-$20 billion during the first year.
- One tax bill per year is more than enough. Whatever tax bill (if any) passed will create enormous uncertainty among the taxpaying public. The last thing that taxpayers — as investors, consumers, etc. — need is another tax bill one month after the major reform bill is passed.
[This is lobbying in any sense of the word. The economists were exploiting their university credentials for personal and tobacco industry financial gain.]
1986 Apr: A Tobacco Institute evaluation of the usefulness of the networks by the Regional Directors and Vice Presidents says about this economist:
Dwight Lee (University of Georqia): A last-minute substitute to present legislative testimony,
Professor Lee was rated as having little, if any, effectiveness at the hearing on smoking restrictions. He was not familiar and/or comfortable with the obviously canned testimony he presented. Lee, apparently viewed as a "stranger" by some midwestern legislators, may be more effectively utilized in the southern states.
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.He includes an OTA paper on the dangers of smoking and also...
The Tobacco Institute is interested in considering research proposals which would establish a much more realistic examination of the social cost issue as it relates to the smoking issue.
... rebuttals developed by Bob Tollison and Richard Wagner to the OTA report.The scent of possible research money on top of the op-ed writing must have generated substantial academic enthusiasm. He is listed as one of the recipients of this letter on the "Brainstorming - Research Ideas" project.
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.
His name has been ticked, indicating that he has replied with a proposal.
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.This went out to the long list of cash-for-comments economist on the network.
As you know, the tobacco industry is exposed continuously to a barrage of attacks on economic issues. Many of these attacks involve a serious perversion of the concept of social cost. The Tobacco Institute is interested in considering research proposals which would establish a much more realistic examination of the social cost issue as it relates to the smoking issue.
I have attached a report prepared by the staff of the Office of Technology Assessment which is representative of the kind of "research" being put forth by anti-tobacco activists. I have also included the rebuttals developed by Bob Tollison and Richard Wagner to the OTA report.
The Institute would like to examine proposals for research that test, in a quantitative way, a number of propositions on the relevant cost considerations that apply to the smoking issue.
1986 Apr 3: This is an 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.This went out to the long list of cash-for-comments economist on the network.
As you know, the tobacco industry is exposed continuously to a barrage of attacks on economic issues. Many of these attacks involve a serious perversion of the concept of social cost. The Tobacco Institute is interested in considering research proposals which would establish a much more realistic examination of the social cost issue as it relates to the smoking issue.
I have attached a report prepared by the staff of the Office of Technology Assessment which is representative of the kind of "research" being put forth by anti-tobacco activists. I have also included the rebuttals developed by Bob Tollison and Richard Wagner to the OTA report.
The Institute would like to examine proposals for research that test, in a quantitative way, a number of propositions on the relevant cost considerations that apply to the smoking issue.
1986 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 into saleable propaganda for their local newspapers]
Lee in Georgia has been given the target of planting his article on the Atlanta Constitution and was due for payment of $1025.00.
A later Schedule of Payments increases this amount by another "$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.
1986 May 16: Jim Savarese and Bob Tollison have reviewed the "Social Cost' (OTA) research proposals received and they suggest to the Tobacco Institute those that "Merit Consideration for Funding:"
Although these can be improved in some regards to ensure they are most useful to the industry, three proposals seem to have a good deal of merit.They also want some revised and re-submitted:
- "Is Absenteeism Related to Smoking? An Empirical Study" by Robert Ekelund, Richard Ault, and John Jackson. This is a solid, well thought out proposal. I think they could show that smokers are not more absent from work, other things equal.
- "The Relevance of Consumption Benefits from Smoking: An Empirical Assessment" by Dwight R. Lee and Phillip A. Cartwright. This is a good proposal to estimate the benefits of smoking, which, strangely enough, has never been done. This research will be quite useful.
- "Employment Effects of Smoking Bans in Public Accommodations" by CM. Lindsay and M. T. Maloney. This is an interesting proposal about smoking bans and the impact on restaurants.
They propose rejecting the Kurth-Coats proposal; the Lindsay-Maloney proposal; and one from Henry Butler.
- "Improving the Accuracy of the Assessment of Social Cost Associated with Smoking" by Barry W. Poulson.
[There is also a scathing criticism of the Kurth-Coats project and heavy criticism of one from economist Cotton Lindsay. They have gone back to Henry Butler to give him a chance to revise his proposals. Dennis Logue, Barry Poulson and the Cartwright & Lee proposal also aren't up to the standard required.
On the whole, the economist's network scored fairly low by their standards.]
1986 May 22: James Savarese has written to his cash-for-comments economists requesting that they now...
... produce a follow up letter to the members of the House Ways and Means Committee in your state. You will note that we are asking that you send this correspondence by Tuesday, May 27, to the home district offices of these members.He also enclosed the target list of the Members of the House Ways and Means Committee, and (to the Tobacco Institute) the list of economists.
You should refer to your correspondence with the state's Senators and attach copies of your OP-EDs that were placed. In the event that your OP-ED has not yet been placed, please attach it and mention one newspaper to which it has been sent.
Contents of your letter to the member:
- Opposition to consumption taxes,
- Opposition to any tax increase as part of the budget reconciliation process;
- One tax bill per year is more than enough.
1986 May 30: Fred Panzer of the Tobacco Institute was contacting British-American Tobacco's PR executive, Tom Humber [also Burson-Marsteller and National Smoking Alliance] sending him some of the examples of the network economists.
Enclosed are: (1) The first wave of 27 op-ed reprints, (2) A second wave of 32 op-ed articles (21 published and 11 unpublished), sent out on Packwood's first tax reform proposal.He also lists 21 of the economist (including this one) and provides copies of many of their recent articles.
I've also included one on the Chase [Economtrics] study. There are a few others being rounded up, as well as a syndicated excise tax feature series we developed. Out of all this should come something useful for your people.
1986 June 5: Susan Stuntz writes that she is interested in the absenteeism proposal by Ekelund, Ault and Jackson, and the food-service industry/smoking ban study by Lindsay-Maloney. She thinks the Cartwright-Lee and Poulson projects are worth reviewing.
Savarese's attached note says about this proposal:
"The Relevance of Consumption Benefits from Smoking: An Empirical Assessment" by Dwight R. Lee and Phillip A. Cartwright. This is a good proposal to estimate the benefits of smoking, which, strangely enough, has never been done. This research will be quite useful.Ed Battison then adds his own evaluationL
Cartwright & Lee (U. of Georgia)
The background on consumption benefits of smoking is valid, but it is very strongly worded: e.g. "The objective of the sponsors of the OTA report is clearly to distort both facts and theory in order to provide a Justification for imposing punitive..." This statement cannot be proved or used.
The proposal objective 1 is valid, "...for looking at benefits derived from smoking',' but it may point toward alleged addiction. [Tobacco lobbyists always precede the word 'addiction' by 'alleged' because of tobacco industry sensitivities. He is saying that the only benefit gained from smoking is that of satisfying the nicotine addiction.]
Objective 2 has been done 25 times inside the Tobacco Institute and outside, published in the literature. Too little effort is proposed to get difficult and relevant data to represent the Z vector of variables that are importantly linked with cigarette consumption. These were discussed earlier.
The suggestion of calculating the consumer surplus overlaps a lot with the proposal by Kurth and Coats. In fact, these two proposals are too similar, and this idea is subject to the same problems discussed under Kurth & Coats.
Smoking adversaries and legislators may be unwilling to accept the abstract concept of consumer surplus loss associated with different taxes. This measure is not extremely accurate, nor are the results large, unless very high tax rates are analyzed.
Using the common formula for c.s. the abstract loss of utility is not large compared to either cigarette revenue or federal cigarette tax revenue, and it is not an out-of-pocket loss.
The memo of July 10, 1985 by me estimated a consumer utility loss burden of $577 million for a 40http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/joa48b00/pdf
1986 June 11: Peter Sparber at the Tobacco Institute memoes Fred Panzer, his boss enclosing a number of Congressional statements.[Only days after they were given]
Enclosed are statements prepared for various Congressional hearings on the tax issue that specifically comment on earmarking to some degree.
These statements are by:I've asked Jim Savarese, who provided these papers, to begin working on copy that could serve as the text for multipurpose anti-earmarking publications.
- Henry Butler of Texas A&M,
- William Shughart and Dwight Lee of George Mason; submitted to Ways & Means, June 20, 1985;
- Bob Tollison of George Mason for the Chafee subcommittee on September 10, 1985;
- Randy Rucker of North Carolina State on the Rose bill on July 18, 1985;
- CM [Cotton Mather] Lindsay of Clemson for hearings on the Stark bill which never were held.
1986 July 23: [See page 5 of 33] File note from Katherine Becker at the Tobacco Institute " Resource Evaluation — Trisler Interview"
At Bill Trisler's (BT) request, Public Relations provided an economic impact study on pending smoking restriction legislation in Michigan.[There is much more here on other similar expert 'resources']
Marketing Resources [the local lobbying company] and Gary Neuhaus [sic Greg Niehaus] used the study "to educate the public and legislators" about the potential costs of restrictions through newspaper articles and legislative briefings.
In BT's view, if Tobacco Institute sponsorship is identified, "red flags go up." Reaction is good if Institute sponsorship is not identified or if our representative has a "good relationship" with a legislator.
Legislative reaction to presentation of the TI study by an industry ally will elicit a different response than if presented by TI, depending on who the ally is and who are the legislator's constituent groups.
Economist Witness
- Dwight Lee (University of Georgia): A last-minute substitute to present legislative testimony, Professor Lee was rated by BT as having little, if any, effectiveness at the hearing on smoking restrictions. He was not familiar and/or comfortable with the obviously canned testimony he presented. Lee, apparently viewed as a "stranger" by some midwestern legislators, may be more effectively utilized in the southern states,
- James A. Papke (Purdue University): This economist testified on a tax bill before the Ohio House Ways and Means Committee. Described by BT as an "outstanding" witness with a good grasp of how this issue (tax hike) would affect the economy, he is rated as someone who could likely be used very effectively in any situation,
- Greg Neuhaus (University of Michigan): Having participated in editorial briefings and testified on a Michigan smoking restriction bill, Neuhaus was considered by BT as an intelligent witness with a quiet, very effective delivery. Neuhaus was viewed as "excellent" in responding to legislators' questions. He knew his material and did not have to search for the answers in the study.
In Bill's view, it is very important for the economist witness to be a resident of the state in which he or she will testify. Industry opponents condemn The Institute for "big spending" when "outsiders" are brought into a state for a hearing.
1986 Aug: The Regional Vice Presidents (RVPs) and Regional Directors (RDs) of the Tobacco Institute in charge of various areas have supplied comments on their Economic Witnesses. Six of the RVPs thought it important that the economist was a resident of the State, "Ideally associated with the State University", while three did not, provided they were "presented to the legislators by a 'credible... organization' (e.g. chambers of commerce, labour union)." [Provided they hid their tobacco industry backing behind a front organization.] The consolidated and encapsulated comments included:
Region III
Dwight Lee (University of Georgia):
A last-minute substitute to present legislative testimony, Professor Lee was rated as having little, if any, effectiveness at the hearing on smoking restrictions. He was not familiar and/or comfortable with the obviously canned testimony he presented. Lee, apparently viewed as a "stranger" by some midwestern legislators, may be more effectively utilized in the southern states.
James A. Papke (Purdue University):
This economist testified on a tax bill before the Ohio House Ways and Means Committee. Described as an "outstanding" witness with a good grasp of how this issue (tax hike) would affect the economy, he is rated as someone who could likely be used very effectively in any situation.
Greg Neuhaus [sic Neihaus] (University of Michigan):
Having participated in editorial briefings and testified on a Michigan smoking restriction bill, Neuhaus was considered an intelligent witness with a quiet, very effective delivery. Neuhaus was viewed as "excellent" in responding to legislators' questions. He knew his material and did not have to search for the answers in the study.
Dwight Lee took up a tenured position at the University of Georgia, but remained welded to the CSPC and tobacco money.
1986 Nov 12: Richard Scanlan to William Buckley (Tobacco Institute) Report summarising the efforts made to counter proposed public smoking bans and limitations in Nassau County.
The August 14th hearing resulted in some 25 witnesses; 21 of these witnesses appeared in opposition to Draft #4 of this regulation.Their efforts failed.
Included in opposition witnesses were scientific witnesses provided by the Institute, Philip Witorsch, M.D. and Mark J. Reasor, Ph.D. In addition Joseph Carlino submitted a legal memorandum provided by Covington and Burling.
An economic impact study was presented by Mr. Dwight Lee for Savarese Associates. In addition, Mr. Gray Robertson [ACVA and HBI] provided an analysis of the ventilation requirements and their impacts.As you are aware, the Nassau County Board of Health met on November 6th and adopted amended Draft #6 by a 4-to-1 vote. This regulation would restrict smoking in workplaces, restaurants, retail stores and other public places.
In implementation the Department of Health is to "give preferential consideration to non-smokers." All restaurants will be required to set aside at least 50% of seating as non-smoking, unless they install "approved" ventilation systems, in which case only 25% of seating need be non-smoking.
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:Georgia [ Region VI ]
Professor Dwight R. LeeDepartment of Economics, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30608 404-542-1311
Services rendered:
- original excise tax op-ed
- testimony:
- taxes - Indiana
- smoking restrictions - Philadelphia Nassau County
- ALEC excise tax panel - Denver
- brainstorming meeting with Kloepfer [PR for the Tobacco Institute]
- academic forums
- Ways and Means letter writing campaign
- GSA letter writing campaign
- economic impact study: Nassau County.
1987 Jan 6: and 12 Jim Savarese advises the Tobacco Institute that some economists were no longer working for his network. However Lee is still being listed as their main Georgia 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 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 WagnerGreg Niehaus, Mario Rizzo, Roger Riefler, and Boon Yoon.]
1987 Feb 6: This is the Tollison/Saverese network list of economists recruited until the end of 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:GEORGIA
Professor Dwight R. Lee
Department of Economics, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, 30603, 404-542-1311
(Visiting) Center for Study of American Business, Washington University, Box 1208, St. Louis, Missouri
1987 Mar 12: Dwight Lee has a column "Will Congress keep its tax promise? Not if past record is any example" in The Atlanta Constitution.
"It is hard to imagine a tax that does more to violate the spirit of tax reform than the cigarette excise tax.
The cigarette excise tax is an extremely regressive tax. meaning that it imposes a greater burden on the poor, as a percentage of income, than on the non-poor. Even before the I983 doubling of the federal excise on cigarettes, those who made less that $7,000 per year paid from three to six times more in tobacco taxes, as a percentage of income, than did those with yearly incomes above $35,000.
This tax discrimintion against the poor was increased in 1983 with the "temporary" increase in the cigarette tax. How committed to tax equity can Congress be if it once again victimizes many of the poor with another increase in the federal excise tax on cigarettes?.
[It is really heartwarming to see how these disciples of Ayn Rand are really concerned with economic imposts on the down-trodden underclass. However they don't seem to notice that cigarette company profits and medical and welfare costs associated with smoking and health are also regressive.]
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.GEORGIA, Lee, Atlanta Consitution, [circ.] 209,500, [pub date] 3/12/87
"Only a brazen hypocrite could support an increase in excise taxes and at the same time claim to favor fairness in taxing." Professor Dwight R Lee, The Atlantic Constitution, July 24 1987
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
In this bundle are very similar articles planted on their local newspaper in the March-April period by
- 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)
- 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 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 GEORGIA
[Dwight] Lee for Atlanta Constitution —Owed $9750, — Total to date $2000
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 RussoFred McChesney Unreliable Florida Sam Gibbons Richard Wagner Unreliable Texas J. J. Pickle
Michael A. AndrewsCharles Maurice RELIABLE California Fortney H. (Pete) Stark
Robert T. MatsuiGary 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 Jul 24: 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 Atlanta Constitution, July 24, 1987
"Only a brazen hypocrite could support an increase in excise taxes and at the same time claim to favor fairness in taxing."Dwight R. Lee, professor of economics,. University of Georgia
[Only someone as stupid as Dwight Lee could brazenly blacken his own kettle calling others 'brazen hypocrites']
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.
GEORGIA
Professor Dwight R. Lee University of Georgia Athens, GA
Excise Tax Op Eds: Atlanta Constitution — 03/12/87 Atlanta Constitution — 07/24/87
Economic Witness/Testimony: (nil)
Field Staff Contact: Telephone; reviewed written material.
Field Staff Evaluation: None.
1988 Jan: The plans and budgets for various sections of the Tobacco Institute include a section on the "Social Cost Issue" to be handled by Jeffrey D Rose and Carol Hrycaj.
This is an attempt to counter the argument that the society has a right to institute cigarette excise taxes and introduce public smoking bans because smokers impose a substantial additional burden on non-smokers through additional medical costs, cleaning, general pollution, etc.Overview:
Implementation of our 1988 "social cost" plan is well underway. A network of "social cost" economists has been identified and held an organizational meeting in Washington, D.C. Also, several projects are underway to demonstrate the significant historical and economic contribution of tobacco to our nation's heritage.
Highlights: We have identified an initial group of economists to work on the "social cost" issue. They include:We held an organizational meeting to review "social cost" issues and to brief the economists on our issue plan.
- Bob Tollison, George Mason University;
- Richard Wagner, Florida State University;
- Dwight Lee, University of Georgia;
- Robert B. Ekelund, Jr., Auburn University;
- Gary Anderson, California State at Northridge;
- Richard Higgins, Howrey & Simon; and
- James Savarese, Savarese & Associates.
Research needs presented to the economists included:. We will receive research proposals in the next few weeks and will select projects to begin immediately. Robert Ekelund already has submitted a proposal concerning absenteeism.
- review and critique of existing "social cost" literature;
- productivity and absenteeism;
- insurance costs;
- social security/Medicare cost; and,
- application of "social cost" economics to other industries
Bob Tollison is preparing a proposal for an academic symposium on the "social cost" issue to be held once initial research is complete. The economists also are indentifying opportunities to deliver presentations on the issue before regional and national economic conferences.
The Tollison and Wagner "social cost" book is scheduled to be published in March. We met with Tollison and public affairs counsel to discuss a media tour and other promotional ideas.
We are negotiating with Chase Econometrics and other economic consulting firms on updating the Chase study on the economic impact of the tobacco industry. We will coordinate the project with State Activities Division's new economist once he comes on board.
Public Choice & Hayek Libertarianism Most of these network economists held extreme free-market/ Hayekian/ Randian positions. But that is not the problem... many intellectually-honest and highly moral economists hold similar views.
The objection is that these academics:This is not a question of academic freedom, but of trusted academics engaged surrepticiously in commerical lobbying.
- allowed the Tobacco Institute to stipulate the subject matter for 'learned articles', and nominate both the media outlet and the Congressmen to influence, then
- agreed to the Tobacco Institute staff and lawyers editing, modifying and 'improving' articles published under their name (with university affiliations) while proclaiming "these views are my own."
- (Some) took commissions to produce and publish 'customised' or manipulated research, designed to mislead.
- They also collaborated and conspired with others on the network to promote what was clearly tobacco industry propaganda, and
- hid these commerical relationships from their universities, students and the general public — the people who paid their salaries and provided them with positions of trust.
1988 Jan 15: Jim Savarese and Associates, joint subcontracts with Ogilvy & Mather, is outlining the arragements for handling the economists and the labor unions to the Tobacco Institute..
Nineteen eighty-seven was a banner year for the Tobacco Institute in its fight against excise tax increases at the federal level.He then outlines a couple of problem areas before dealing with the "Economists Program." [No full list for these 42 network economists appears to exist]
Through careful coalition building and effective message dissemination, the Institute was able to fight the battle on its own terms and secure a substantial victory.
In reviewing your 1988 plans, we found many areas where Ogilvy & Mather and Savarese and Associates can continue to provide services. There are also new areas where we have expertise which have not been fully explored.Our work with the network of forty-two economists should continue into 1988. In 1987, the network was effective in producing op-eds and submitting and presenting testimony. These activities should continue in 1988. In addition, the economists network can be used for editorial board briefings, presentations at conferences and the placement of articles on this issue with major media outlets.
In order to make the most of the new opportunities for the economist network, several factors must be taken into consideration:The opportunity exists to place economists on key economic programs, panels, and at national and regional tax policy conferences. As an addendum to this effort, it is possible to have their comments reprinted and distributed.
- only 7 or 8 of the economists within the network have the potential to make presentations to editorial boards and conferences.
- those economists selected to make presentations to editorial boards and conferences need a training program. This program may include media training through Michael Sheehan and briefings by Jim Savarese and Bob Tollison.
- the editorial board program is a limited strategy with applicability mainly at the federal level with some use at the state level.
- when implementing the editorial board program, Ogilvy & Mather can assist with pitch materials, press kits, and a placement program.
They also want to commission studies. They suggest:They also propose to work with a number of right-wing tax groups, some left-wing labor groups, minority groups, senior citizens, agricultural groups, and advertising companies. They propose to sponsor conferences, and make a video on excise taxes.
- Effects of an excise tax increase on the federal budget (and its fairness)
- on bootlegging "and come up with some strong conclusions" [predetermined!]
- In addition, Savarese and Associates can locate a conservative economist to make the argument that there is an acceleration of government spending when taxes are increased. The program will include placement in an economic journal.
A national Excise Tax Op-ed Program will target various important members of the Congress and big businessmen (e.g. Lee Iaococca) on the National Economic Commission (NEC). The network economists will be required to target specific newspapers, and a few key political figures. The target for this member of the network is:Atlanta
Targeted paper: The Atlanta Constitution
Economist: Dwight Lee, University of Georgia
[Why selected:] The Atlanta Constitution is a key southern regional newspaper.
1988 Feb 2: James Savarese reports to the Tobacco Institute on a meeting with a "core group of economists"...
To exchange thoughts and ideas on the social cost issue with the goal of determining projects and making assignments for 1988.The core group consists of
[In order to attack] Anti-smoking activists [who] have distorted the issue of social cost. Even though economists ridicule their statistics, politicians and the press believe them.with the support of PR/lobbyists from
- Gary Anderson
- Bob Ekelund
- Richard Higgins
- Dwight Lee
- Jim Savarese
- Bob Tollison
- Richard Wagner
Conclusions: This is lobbying pure and simple: The conclusions of their report expose numerous outright admissions as to the scientific and academic subterfuge these people are knowlingly engaged in.
- Leslie Dawson, Karen Hochberger, Richard Marcus.- from Ogilvy & Mather and James Savarese & Associates
- Mike Forscey - lawyer from Wunder and Diefenderfer, working for the Labor Management Committee of TI
- Jeff Ross, Carol Hyrcaj and Paula Duhaime from the Tobacco Institute
Primary assumptions that need to be countered.
- The higher rate of illness of smokers is a 'private cost' not a social cost [and therefore should be ignored.]
- It is not politically useful for us to argue the primary health statistics.
- Up to this time, ETS has not been translated effectively by the opposition into cost numbers. Rather, it is a regulatory issue. We cannot afford to lose the argument among people who think they are being harmed by ETS. If ETS causes harm, it becomes a classic case of real social cost.
- We must make sure that primary costs of smoking be kept out of any social cost calculation. We must separate primary smoking statistics from ETS statistics.
- More research is needed on ETS in order to deny health consequences
They then allocated Research projects to the economists and disussed additional research ideas which might prove useful to the industry. Both the Southern and Eastern Economic Association presented forums at which the economists could present papers and...Goals:
- Insurance and Health Costs: Health problems exist for smokers. The cost for health care due to excess illness or death of smokers equals smokers' cost to society.
- Insurance premium — Discounts for non-smoker (not justified?)
- Pension Plans — Increased mortality rates saves money
- Productivity and Absenteeism: Smokers are absent more frequently than non-smokers.The time spent by a employee smoking on the job is time spent not working. These factors make the smoker a less productive member of society than a non-smoker.
- The worker bears the cost of absenteeism via fewer raises, less advancement, or termination. Society bears no burden.
- Social Security and Medicare: [Death benefits argument]
- Based on lifetime calculations, smokers should be getting a rebate. We should propose a rebate program, rather than a tax program.
- If non-smokers live longer, when the baby boomers reach retirement age, very high tax rates will be necessary to finance Medicare and Social Security. If smoking is banned, it would cause some serious problems in future years.
- Fires: It is not a social cost for a smoker to burn his house down, just a private cost. Social cost only exists if a neighbor's house burns down (a much smaller number).
- ETS: Blanket smoking.restrictions raise costs to private employers. If restrictions are cost effective, individual companies will adopt them.
As a result of this meeting, we should devise a specific plan and timetable- of implementation with assignments for specific projects.
We need to review and critique existing materials and develop our own core of research.Tollison is looking for one or two others. Major session of a university to bring together all relevant research on social cost will be planned after research projects are completed. Proceedings will be published in a monograph.
1988 Mar 31: Jim Savarese is writing to Jeff Ross at the Tobacco Institute re the National Economic Commission (NEC) and their Excise Tax Op-Ed Project using selected members of the cash-for-comments economists network.
I have listed below areas that we should target that would be beneficial in reaching members of the NEC. Also attached are the materials that we will send out to the authors.
The Atlanta Constitution is a key southern regional newspaper.
Targeted paper: The Atlanta Constitution
Economist: Dwight Lee, University of Georgia
1988 Apr 15: Bill Orzechowski, the staff economist at the Tobacco Institute is sending a list of their consultants to Randy Thompson, who is an Issues Manager at RJ Reynolds.
This is for International Smuggllng and Cross Border Issues:
Potential Witness List (Alphaberical listing)
.Economics - Public PolicyInternational Smuggling and Crime Issues
- Mike Davis, PhD, Economic professor at the University of Texas, Dallas.
Mike has testified on behalf of the Tobacco Institute on cross border sales and cigarette smuggling from Mexico in the context of a Texas cigarette tax increase on two or three occasions. He appeared before the Texas legislature in 1997 on behalf of TI to defeat a proposed 20¢ T'exas cigarette tax hike. He is a good witness and gets up to speed rather quickly.
Contact: Bill Orzechowski, Rob Walker
Relationship: Testified for TI on a few occasions and was media trained by TI.- Dwight Lee, PhD - Professor of economics at University of Georgia.
Ramsey Professor of Economics and Private Enterprise at the University of Georgia, a position he has held since 1985. He is also the current president of the Southern Economics Association. He has had full-time tenured faculty appointments at the University of Colorado, Virginia Tech University, George Mason University, and the University of Georgia. He is a well respected economist. He has co-authored seven books, written numerous articles and lectured extensively.
Contact: Bill Orzechowski, Rob Walker
Relationship: Has testified on numerous occasions for the industry on state and federal cigarette tax issues.- Robert Tollison, PhD - professor of economics at George Mason University.
He is past president of the Southern Economics Association. He is the author of numerous articles and books. He has had considerable experience in all phases of tobacco economics - a pioneer of sorts. He has testified on tobacco tax issues at federal and state levels. The "dean" of tobacco economics.
Contact: Bill Orzechowski or Rob Walker
Relationship: Dr Tollison has testified for the industry on numerous occasions.- Richard Wagner, PhD - professor of economics in the Public Choice Center at George Mason University.
The author of many articles and books. He is a leader of the public choice area of economics and is the editor of the Constitutional Political Economy journal. He has great deal of experience on state cross border issues and tobacco taxes.
Contact: Bill Orzcchowski or Rob Walker
Relationship: Dr Wagner has testified for the industry on numerous occasions on state cross border issues.
[The four listed above are all members of Tollison/Savarese cash-for-comments network. The three listed immediately below are contractors via think-tanks.]- Steve Entin - President Institute for Research on The Economics of Taxation (IRET)
He has great deal of experience in the corporate tax arena. Has testified or appeared as guest speaker in front of "tough" audiences such as public health groups and done a very good job with our issues.
Contact: Bill Orzechowski, John Dunham
Relationship: Appeared at Tax Foundation seminars that PM has helped finance. Often calls TI for advice and materials on tobacco tax issues.- Pat Fleenor/JD Foster - two economists at the Tax Foundation.
Pat Fleenor is an economist with the Tax Foundation, and J.D Foster is the President and Chief Economist of the Tax Foundation, The Tax Foundation monitors tax and fiscal activities at all levels of government. The group supplies objective fiscal information and analysis to business, government and the general public. The group has done extensive research on cross border cigarette sales and smuggling.
Contact: John Dunham, Wayne Winegarden
Relationship: PM and Tl has given financial support to the Tax Foundation. The Tax Foundation did a study for TI on cigareite excise tax differences and cigarette tax evasion.- John R McGowan, PhD - Gustave Klausner Associate Professor of Accounting.
He has provided international tax consulting services to the Missouri Society of CPAs and is the author of many articles. McGowan is currently studying the issue of state excise taxes and their effect on interstate smuggling and crime.
Contact: John Dunham or Wayne Winegarde.
Relationship: Dr McGowan has participated in Tax Foundation seminars that PM has helped finance. His current paper is being funded by NAPO, which PM has financially supported.Social and Crlme Aspects of Smuggling
- Mario Possamai - Vice President, Forensic Investigators Associates
- Rod Stamler - Chairman, Forensic Investigators Associates (Toronto)
- Jacob Sullum/Ed Carson - Reason Foundation,
Tax Administrators
- Ron Martel - former Mayor of Cornwall, Canada
Other Names
- Robert Shepherd - Deputy Commissioner - Enforcement, New York State Department of Taxation
- Monte Williams - Administrator, Excise Taxes Division, California State Board of Equalization
- Bill Chamberland - Tax Specialist Washington Department of Revenue
- Roger Overholser - Florida wholesaler affliated with Florida Tax. Watch.
- Jeff Groh, Jerry Bowerman, John McGaw - BATF smuggling experts
- Andre Reiman - A Senior Vice President for a PM subsidiary in Europe
- Adam Andre-Brown - Spokesperson for RJR subsidiary in Geneva.
- Per Brix Knudsen - Director Anti-Fraud Unit - European Union.
1988 May: Jim Savarese has sent the newspaper clippings of the National Economic Commission (NEC) Excise Tax Op-ed Program along to the Tobacco Institute. Following the second term of the Reagan Administration, the budget deficit had blown out to such an extent that it was obvious that the next President would need to find new revenue streams — and cigarettes were the obvious target. NEC was charged with making recommendations for deficit reduction.
The Tobacco Institute instructed their tame network economists to write op-eds for their designated local newspapers attacking the idea of increased excise taxes. These are newspaper clippings:
- Dom Armentano, Uni of Hartford (New Haven Register) "Reagan's successor must resist temptation to raise taxes."
- Burton Abrams, Uni of Delaware (Sunday News Journal) "Equitable and efficient ways to raise taxes."
- Dwight Lee, Uni of Georgia (The Atlanta Journal) "Tax increase won't cut budget deficit."
- Allen Dalton, Uni of Idaho (Idaho Press-Tribune) "Federal tax hike destined in 1989."
- Todd Sandler, Iowa State Uni (Cedar Rapids Gazette) "The Shape of Taxes to Come"
- John Howe, Uni of Kansas (The Capital-Journal) "Less spending, not more taxes, is the only real budget solution."
- David Tuerck, Suffolk University (The Boston Globe) "A sinful proposal".
- Thomas Wyrick, Southwest Missouri State (The News-Leader) "Higher taxes can't solve budget crisis."
- JR Clark, Fairleigh Dickinson Uni (Daily Record NJ) "Excise tax: Bitter medicine for economy."
- William Mitchell, Uni of Oregon (Register-Guard) "Tax increases not solution to reducing deficit."
- Michael Davis, Southern Methodist Uni (Dallas Times Herald) "Excise taxes are far from painless remedy."
- Charles Maurice, Texas A&M Uni (Houston Post) "Economic panel lets officials dodge the deficit bullet."
- John David, West Virginia Tech (Charleston Gazette) "Taxes will target the poor."
1988 May: Savarese has sent the Tobacco Institute a bundle of clippings of the articles planted by this and other economists in their newpapers. This is proof of service, required for payment.
Dwight Lee has managed to plant an article: "Tax Increases won't cut budget deficit" on the Atlanta Journal and Constitution (Apr 24)
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.Lee'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.
In October, a Savarese memo notes that his review was listed forPOSSIBLE publication in Atlanta Constitution[Any pro-tobacco article would automatically be accepted at this time by Regulation] http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/vsg93b00/pdf
FORTHCOMING Regulation Magazine
1988 June 16: The TI's Susan Stuntz speech on "Indoor Air Quality Programs" and Jeff Ross on the issue of "Social Cost."
A few months ago we initiated a comprehensive new program to address the social cost issue.
I'm sure you all know the often quoted remark from Fletcher Knebel "It is now proved beyond doubt that smoking is one of the leading causes of statistics" Nowhere are those statistics more prevalent or more ludicrous than in Social Cost Economics.
The overall objective of our program is to show there are no Social Costs of smoking.
And as a corallary objective, to reveal the absurdity of Social Costs Economics and its implications on individual choices.
We're off to a good start in implementing this new program and we'd like to go well beyond what we originally planned. Let me summarize these new activities.
- First, we've established a core group of Social Costs Economists from respected academic institutions across the country.
They will take the lead in arguing against social cost economics.....testifying..... dealing with the media.... conducting briefings.... and producing research.- A new wave of research will be ready by the end of August.
- To promote Japan. with its smokers as highly productive — and therefore evidence against these social cost arguments
- To compare tobacco with coffee, sugare and beef etc, and so generate support from other industries [Slippery slope argument]
- Study on absenteeism to absolve smoking illnesses and blame job boredom and income levels as causes.
- Tollison/Wagner Book and author media tours.
- Our team of Economists will be addressing their colleagues at the Atlantic, Southern and Western Economic Association meetings. we will promote the final reports from these meetings.
- Also, an academic symposium on the Social Cost Issue will be held this fall at George Mason University. The symposium will feature findings of research projects currently underway.
- Another facet of our program focuses on the business community. We're establishing a coalition of businesses concerned with the slippery slope implications of social cost economics. The US Chamber Foundation has agreed to take the lead in organizing the coalition.
1988 June 23: Debbie Schoonmaker at the Tobacco Institute receives a memo from contract organiser James Savarese with "an update status on the NEC Op-Ed Project: [NEC = National Economic Commission, the group they were trying to influence.]
As it now stands, 9 articles have been published, 4 articles (New Mexico, Missouri, Oregon, and Idaho) are forthcoming, 4 articles have been submitted for publication, and 2 articles are in the revision stage.It lists the network economists by the state in which they operate together with the academics's successes in planting articles on their principle state newspapers.
1988 June 30: Carol Hrycaj at the Tobacco Institute has sent Joseph Jadlow's critique of "Smoking & the State" (Tollison/Wagner) along to the lawyers Covington & Burling for legal clearance. Also
Dwight Lee has expanded his revi-w of the Tollison and Wagner book and is seeking publication in Regulation Magazine.
1988 July 27: Richard Wagner, writing on the letterhead of the Center for Study of Public Choice at George Mason University, writes to James Savarese [as surrogate for the Tobacco Institute] outlining a book editing project being mounted by himself and Robert Tollison.
The tobacco industry is fighting to block the 'ear-marking' of cigarette excise taxes for Federal health programs. .
Bob and I both think we have an excellent chance of getting [libertarian journalist Henri] Lepage, as well as having a strong chance of getting [Nobel Prize-winner James] Buchanan.All of those involved [apart from LePage] were cash-for-comment economists.
You may not know of Lepage. He is a prominent French journalist-economist, who several years ago had an international best seller that was translated into English as Tomorrow, Capitalism. Lepage is presently conducting a major research project into pricing in French utilities, and finds that the actual conduct of French utflities bears no relation to the normative economics of user-charging [actually a gross overstatement], but bears a strong relationship to the theory of public choice.
I think you will agree that we have the makings of a strong and interesting book on user-charges and tax earmarking, one that will challenge very strongly the halo that seems to surround these terms in ordinary discourse about tax policy.
Chapter 4 — "The Political Economy of User Charges: Some Bureaucratic Implications," by Dwight R. Lee, University of Georgia.
Through a discussion of the economic theory of bureaucracy, the author explains how user charges actually reduce efficiency. Using the model, the author shows that government managers are rewarded for departmental inefficiencies through faulty built-in incentives.
Chapter 7 — "The Political Economy of Tax Earmarking," by Lee and Wagner
Chapter 8 —"Rent Seeking and Tax Earmarking," by Dwight R. Lee
Chapter 9 —"Tax Earmarking and the Optimal Lobbying Strategy," by Lee, Tollison and Kimenyi.
The Tobacco Institute's Tax Hearing Readiness Plan in the following year had a note saying:
Several new excise tax-related studies are underway and will be completed by spring 1989. In addition, an update of the Chase economic impact study has been commissioned.
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.
Preliminary research has been conducted assessing public attitudes toward excise taxes.
Specialist PR firm Fleishman-Hilliard were then contracted to promote this book and its authors around the various states in the USA.
See
1988 Aug 11: Walter Woodson of the Tobacco Institute is circulating a number of the economists NEC Excise Tax op-ed clipping among his Regional Vice Presidents and Directors. One is: "Tax Increase won't cut budget deficit" by Dwight Lee.
1988 Sept 1: Jim Savarese is billing the Tobacco Institute for services rendered during August. He has been "working with economist on social cost research proposals"
| • Himself and Leslie Dawson | $20,000 |
| • Subcontractor A [almost certainly Tollison] | $3,500 |
| • Subcontractor B [Shughart or Lee] | $1,800 |
| • Subcontractor C [Minnesota Tax Consultant] | $1,500 |
| • Western Economic Association expenses [Held in Los Angeles] | |
| Dwight Lee | $846 |
| Richard Wagner | $830 |
| Paul W Wilson | $625 |
| Note: Two participants, Zycher & Borcherding, are from Los Angeles. | |
1988 Oct: 6-7 Dwight Lee sends the Tobacco Institute a formal report on Atlantic Economic Association meeting in Philadelphia which has a group of his tobacco industry economists associates as speakers:
- Dwight Lee, Uni of Georgia
- Richard Wagner, George Mason University
- Bruce Yandle, Clemson University
- Henry N Butler, George Mason Uni Law School
- Robert Staaf, Clemson University
1988 Nov 28: Debbie Schoonmaker at the Tobacco Institute writes to Savarese about Social Cost Research Papers.
Enclosed are drafts of the Wagner and Ekelund social cost papers.She also attaches three lists of cash-for-comments speakers who have been selected to talk at various meetings of local economic associations they wish to influence [See earlier list]:
Each has been reviewed and will not need further clearance provided the recommended changes are incorporated into the final versions of the papers.
The legal comments are fairly straight-forward. If you or the authors need an explanation or wish to discuss further, please call.
You'll also see that I've enclosed a copy of the California Health Department's "social cost" study. We can discuss this example in our "SWAT team" meeting.
- Atlantic Economic Assn., Philadelphia, Oct 6-9 , meeting on User Charges: has
- Dwight LeeChairman + paper, "Some Bureacratic Implications
- Richard Wagner"User Charges: Principles and Practice"
- Bruce Yandle, "User Charges: Evaluation and Critique.
- Discussant: Robert Staaf.
- Western Economic Association, Los Angeles, June 30 — July 3 meeting on Tax Earmarking and User Charges.
- Dwight R. Lee, "The Political Economy of Tax Earmarking"
- Richard Wagner, "The Fiscal Politics of Tax Earmarking"
- Paul Wilson,"User Charges and the Problem of Externalities"
- Discussants: Thomas Borcherding and Benjamin Zycher, Rand Corporation [unknown relationship]
- Southern Economic Association, San Antonio, Nov 20-22 on Excise Taxation
- Robert Ekelund, Chairman:
- Dwight R. Lee, "Political Economy of Corrective Taxation"
- Randall Holcombe, Auburn University. "Excise Taxes in Theory and Practice"
- Richard E. Wagner, "The Fiscal Politics of Excise Taxation"
- Discussants: Joseph Jadlow, and Henry Butler,
1988 Dec 1: James Savarese reports to Susan Stuntz at the Tobacco Institute on his unit's activites during November (for himself and his employee, Leslie Dawson). His consultancy is specialising in coopting labor and economists, and countering the next Surgeon General's report.
Also attached are the accounts ($114,589 for the Tobacco Industry Labor Management Committee disbursement.He also lists successes he has had with getting economists to plant op-eds on various local newspapers.
- met with officials of the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) to discuss tax strategy.
- continued discussion with Coalition of Labor Union Women (CLUW) re national convention
- continued work with National Energy Management Institute (NEMI) on development of training program and brochure.
- meetings with Citizens for Tax Justice, Leadership for the New Century, Citizens for Tax Justice, National Economic Commission.
- on the task force for Airline Cabin Air Quality (weekly meetings/ writing op-eds)
- Prof David Saurman - op-ed on Prop 99 with San Jose Mercury News
Also numerous reviews of the Tollison/Wagner book "Smoking and the State".- Prof Ryan Amacher (Clemson Uni) in The State.
- Joseph Jadlow (Oklahoma State Uni) in Tulsa Tribune.
- Todd Sandler (Iowa State Uni) in Fort Dodge Messenger.
- Robert B Ekelund (Auburn Uni) Montgomery Advertiser.
- Dwight R Lee (Washington Uni) Regulation Magazine.
- Samson Kimenyi (Uni of Mississippi) in Jackson Clarion ledger.
- David ER Gay (Uni of Arkansas) in Arkansas Democrat.
1989: Dwight Lee is on a number of Tobacco Industry Witness Lists which have been bundled together as a single unit in the filing cabinet.
- Basic Group of witnesses in 1988-89:
- Larry Holcomb (perpetual IAQ consultant)
- Simon Turner (IAQ consultant with ACVA/HBI)
- Jeff Seckler (IAQ consultant with ACVA/HBI — later whistleblower.
- Dick Wagner (cash-for-comment economist)
- Bill Orzechowski (Tobacco Institute's resident economist)
- David Weeks (perpetual IAQ consultant)
- Dwight Lee (cash-for-comments economist)
- Mike Davis (cash-for-comments economist)
- Gray Robertson (main IAQ consultant with ACVA/HBI)
- Morris Coats (cash-for-comments economist)
- Jolly Ann Davidson (NASBE childrens consultant)
- Alan Katzenstein (statistical consultant)
- John Fox (Lawyer and legal consultant)
- 1988 Witness List Those above plus:
- David Brenton (focus on airlines)
- 1989 Witness list those above plus
- Alan Kassman (industry science consultant),
- Jack Peterson (IAQ consultant),
- unnamed from "Bestype Consulting",
- Dennis Vaughn (lawyer and legal consultant),
- 1991 Witness List adds a number of new consultants.
- Brennan Dawson (TI spokesperson),
- Jim Goold (RJR lawyer),
- Joe Pedelty (IAQ consultant),
- Melinda Sidak (C&B lawyer),
- David Remes (C&B scientist/recruiter),
- Frank Powell (NEMI/IAQ consultant),
- Bernadette Davidson (lawyer-lobbyist),
- Tom Lauria (TI staff spokesperson)
- Rich Silberman (IAQ consultant),
- Walt Decker (consultant toxicologist)
- 1993 June 1 Tobacco Institute list of "Witness/Expert Appearances — Scientific/Legal/Spokespersons."] The list has lost a few, but also grown since 1988 to now include:
- Mike Buckley,
- Gio Gori (ex NCI now lobbyist),
- Bill Wordham,
- Walter Merryman (TI Public Relations),
- Melinda Sidak,
- Rudy Cole,
- Larry Halfen.
- 1990 Witness List (page 35) includes most of the main group. Note:
Bill Orzechowski, Mike Davis, Morris Coats,
1989: Social Cost Issue, Consulting Economist Team. This document is assumed to be the Tobacco Institute informing their litigation team about the facts of the cash-for-comments academics network — and its offshoot, the core team trained in Social Cost Issues.
The social cost economic team includes: Robert Tollison, Richard Wagner, Dwight Lee, Richard Higgins, Gary Anderson and Michael Davis,These six consulting economists are specifically trained in the social cost issue, and are "prepared for a variety of assignments, from presenting testimony to conducting research."
How we use themKinds of things they do
- Conduct research.
- Prepare op-eds and letters to the editor.
- Review and comment on (government and private sector] social cost studies and reports.
- Media tours to promote Smoking and the State.
- Conduct briefings on the issue/arguments with legislators, staff and lobbyists.
- Conduct and publish economic research (constituting the basis of the social cost program).
- Write and place op-eds on discrete topics.
- Prepare and submit letters to the editor.
- Available to present testimony.
- Media tours.
- Make presentations to academic/economic peers.
- Conduct briefings on the issue (during social cost economist network meeting with PAD, SAD, lobbyists and legal counsel).
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."
GEORGIA
Dwight Lee, Univ. of Georgia
Visiting the Center for the Study of American Business in Washington University, St Louis [a major recipient of tobacco industry funding]
[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 Jan 11: Carol Hrycaj at the Tobacco Institute writes to Debby Schoonmaker on the "Promotion of Economic Conference Papers."
Of the six papers presented during those sessions, only two that were discussed at the Western meeting may be suitable for public consumption: Lee's paper, "The Economics and Politics of Tax Earmarking;'1 and Wagner's paper, "Fiscal Norms, Fiscal Practice and Tax Earmarking."
Paul W. Wilson, Thomas E. Brocherding and Bruce Yandle also submitted papers; their relationship with our consultants is unclear. Regardless, the Wilson, Brocherding and Yandle papers are technical treatments of the subject matter and would be difficult to repackage for the general public.
1989 Jan 27: Dwight Lee and TI consultant David Weeks had been sent along to the AMA's Tobacco Conference to provide a report.
1989 Feb 14: Dwight Lee has been sent to a Senate hearing in Jefferson City MO as a witness who will support the tobacco industry.
1989 Mar 13: Dwight Lee has been a teleconference witness at a Legislative hearing in Juneau, AK.
1989 Mar 14: James Savarese & Associates is billing the Tobacco Institute for
Tobacco Advertising Ban Project:Dwight Lee has now been enlisted to help Savarese and Tollison with their second network of academics — cash-for-comments business law professors — willing to support the industry by attacking advertising bans.Final of three payments $19,000
The attached list shows what each member of the cash-for-comments lawyers network has achieved with his op-ed articles. For this member it says:
Lee
Received by Savarese 3-3
Sent to Fred Panzer 3-7
[It had not been returned by the Tobacco Institute]
The April 25 Status Report shows that Lee had sent his article along to the Atlantic Constitution, where it was listed as "forthcoming."
1989 Mar 17-19: The Annual Meeting of the Public Choice Society together with the Economic Science Assocition. These are Hayek-oriented neo-con economists of the kind which gave us the Global Financial Crisis of 2008-9. The speakers list mentions many active members of the economists network: — some of whom spoke more than once. (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.
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 30: Dwight Lee's report and papers from an "Issues and Taxation" session which was organised for the Southwestern Social Science Association meeting in Little Rock Arkansas. Lee reported that:
Three papers were presented, one each by Dwight R. Lee of Washington University, St. Louis; Richard McKenzie, Clemson University; and David Gay, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville.
Discussants were Edward Price, Oklahoma State University; Richard Wagner, George Mason University.
The session was attended by approximated 20 people, and enough time was left over for several questions and comments
1989 April: A Tobacco Institute report on its Communications efforts carries the statement that:
Freedom of speech and advertising ban proposals were the subject of two editorials (copies enclosed) this month:
- in the Atlanta Constitution, Professor Dwight Lee of the University of Georgia argued that "we should be no more tolerant of antismokers who would promote their view of virtue by denying the freedom of speech to others than we are of Ayatollah Khomeini, who would do the same."
- Professor Robert Ekelund of Auburn University wrote "For personal and individual freedom to exist in a society, government cannot regulate or suppress the free exchange of opinion between free people, be it news, literature, editorial commentary or cigarette advertising," in the Montgomery Advertiser and Alabama Journal.
1989 Apr 4: Dwight Lee has been a witness at a Senate hearing in Columbus OH, and the following day he was a teleconference witness again with Juneau AK legislature.
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 May 1: - 4 Dwight Lee has been sent to a Senate hearing in Springfield IL for four days.
1989 May 31: Debbie Shoonmaker recommends funding of Tollison & Wagner's "Earmarking Book Proposal"
1989 Aug 8: Leslie Dawson of Savarese & Associate gives a status report on the Social Cost Project
- Smoking & Absenteeism (Ekelund, Ault, Jackson, Saba, Saurman) — submitted to the Southern Economic Journal, then revised and resubmitted — no editorial decision yet.
- The Social Cost of Everyday Life (Gary Anderson) — submitted to Contemporary Policy Issues — no editorial decision yet.
- Smoking and the Problem of Social Cost (Tollison & Wagner — accepted by Journal of Public Choice (they controlled the journal)
- Smoking and the Wealth of Nations (Wagner) — submitted to Journal of Contemporary Business.
- Self-Interest, Public Interest, and Public Health (Tollison & Wagner) — submitted to to Journal of Public Interest and Public Choice
- Smokers' Subsidy of Nonsmokers' Retirement Benefits (Higgins and Gordon Sufford from Capital Economics) — submitted to Social Science and Medicine
- Social Cost and the Cigarette Excise Tax: A Misguided Rationale for an Inefficient and Unfair Policy (Dwight R. Lee) — Unpublished
- Some Economic Consequences of the Koop Doctrine: National and State Revenue Shortfall from Smoking Regulation (Ekelund) - still at TI for review.
1989 Sep: Carol Hrycaj & Debbie Schoonmaker's monthly report to the Tobacco Institute on their"Social Cost" projects.
A social cost article in the Journal of the Medical Association of Georgia prompted us to request a rebuttal from a consulting economist. Prof Dwight Lee is reviewing the material and preparing a response.
1989 Oct: Carol Hrycaj's monthly report to the Tobacco Institute on her project "Social Cost."
Smoking and the State media tours were back on schedule in October.
Economist Dwight Lee was activated to testify in Florida and to write a response to an article that appeared in the September issue of the Journal of the Medical Association of Georgia.
Highlights:
Last month, economist Richard Wagner traveled to San Diego, CA, Little Rock, AR, and Memphis, TN, to discuss Smoking and the State. Meanwhile, Robert Tollison appeared before tha media in Los Angeles, CA, to address the social cost issue. We provided background information on legislative activity in each of the markets.
At State Activities' request, economist Dwight Lee testified in Florida in opposition to a proposed tax increase that would earmark revenue to fund indigent health care. The subject of "social costs" was raised in the hearing.
We also asked Lee to draft a response to an article on the alleged "social costs of smoking" in the State of Georgia. His reply, which is expected early next month, will be submitted to the Journal of the Medical Association of Georgia.
1989 Nov 30: James Savarese has left Ogilvy & Mather and set up his own business running a stable of cash-for-comments economists for the Tobacco Institute in partnership with Bob Tollison from George Mason University).
He is also involved in many other disinformation activities, and is still organizing economics seminars through the same front organisations, and using the same tobacco-funded economists. He reports on one operation:
"The Political Economy of Tax Earmarking" [ie the use of cigarette excises to prop up Medicare/Medicade]
Chairman: Robert Ekelund.
Papers by: Richard Wagner, Dwight Lee and Robert Tollison,
with J Keith Watson and Mark Thornton as discussants.
1989 Dec 11: Carol Hrycaj and Martin Gleason who are jointly running the Tobacco Institute side of the economists network at this time, memo Susan Stuntz about a Re: Treasury Department Task Force.
Rumors have circulated that a "Treasury-led task force" is considering recommending an increase in federal tobacco taxes.[This matches the March 21 list below with Lee speaking on his tobacco-cleared subject: "Tax Earmarking in a Rent-Seeking Environment".]
In response, we plan to work with consulting economists and allies to maintain an anti-excise tax environment, stressing that cigarette excise taxes are not "user fees," and increasing these taxes would violate President Bush's "no tax" pledge.
Following is a description of four specific anti-tax projects: • Op-ed Program: We have directed consultants to begin work on an anti-tax editorial program in key Congressional districts. [snip] Once the articles are published, they will be forwarded to the appropriate administration officials. • Communication with Treasury Department Officials. We have identified a potential opportunity to communicate with Treasury Department officials concerning the recent statements on tobacco excises.
If we pursue this option, key Republican economists would send letters to Treasury officials debunking the connection between excise taxes and user fees. This effort would be similar to the exchange of letters between Robert Tollison and Office of Management and Budget Director James Miller in 1987. • Earmarking Session. Consulting economists will participate in a session on earmarking during the Southwestern Social Science Association Conference in March 1990.
Robert Ekelund will chair the session, "The Political Economy of Tax Earmarking. Robert Tollison, Richard Wagner and Dwight Lee will present papers (draft chapters of the upcoming book on user fees/tax earmarking). A preliminary agenda is attached.
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 GEORGIA, Atlanta Consistution.
We should start getting drafts of the op-eds around the first of the year.
1990 /E: American Tobacco's advice to its senior staff about the operations of the 'Consulting Economists Team' suggests that their focus was on the 'core team of six' [However many on the main list are not included]
BackgroundWho they are
- A core of six consulting economists is specifically trained in the social cost issue.
- These economists are prepared for a variety of assignments, from presenting testimony to conducting research.
Length of relationship
- The social cost economic team includes: Robert Tollison, Richard Wagner, Dwight Lee, Richard Higgins, Gary Anderson and Michael Davis.
What they have done lately
- The team of social cost economists was established in early 1988. However, most of the economists have consulted with the industry on other issues for several years.
- Completed eight social research papers (review of the literature, absenteeism, international comparison, retirement benefits, tax earmarking, social cost of every day life, etc.).
- Present social cost research during the Southern Economic Association annual meeting in Orlando (Ekelund) [Nov 29 1989] and in Lake Tahoe last June during the Western Economic Association annual meeting (Anderson).
- Prepared and placed critiques of Smoking and the State.
- October media tours to Little Rock, AR; Memphis, TN; and Reno/Las Vegas NV.
- November media tours to Atlanta, GA; and Knoxville and Nashville, TN.
- Testified at SAD's request in Florida regarding ten-cent cigarette excise tax hike earmarked for indigent health care insurance.
1990 /E: This list is of scientists and academics who are willing to have their nams used to byline reports and articles produced by Philip Morris staff. This has Dwight Lee's name and some hint of his anti-EPA zealotry.
Dwight Lee — University of Georgia economist. Says giving the EPA authority over indoor air "would be like giving a machine gun to a child" .Lee also works with climate deniers S Fred Singer and Candice Crandall (both of SEPP) who are listed here also.
1990 Jan: This report for the Tobacco Institute — together with a list of scientists and academic consultants — detailing what these 'consultants' have achieved over the past year. Brennan Dawson, PR/spokesperson at the Tobacco Institute, is reporting here on their Public Relations and Issues Management activities to the TI's Communications Committee.
She mainly details the unit's successes in planting ghosted academic-op-ed pieces on newspapers. Some of the economists have managed to plant TI-written/doctored articles on a number of different newspapers.
Dawson has marked these names under a section heading: " "Consulting Economists, not on Philip Morris' List" " [which suggests that another substantial list of tobacco-serving economists existed elsewhere.] Here, they are just listing name, academic affiliation, and activites.
- Robert Tollison, Duncan Black Professor of Economics, George Mason University.
Letters to administration officials debunking excise tax/"user fee" connection Jan 1990
[He is probable the author of the main op-ed featured below]- Richard Wagner, Chair and Harris Professor, Department of Economics, George Mason University.
Letters to administration officials debunking excise tax/"user fee" connection. Jan 1990
[He is a GMU partner and colleague of Tollison]- Dwight Lee, Ramsey Professor of Economics, University of Georgia
[He also once worked at GMU and was close to both Tollison and Wagner] Op-ed on excise taxes and user fees published in Macon Telegragh News Jan 1990, Lee has also published articles in the Journal of the Medical Assoc of Georgia; presented to the Southwest Social Science Association, written other op-eds, and testified before the Delaware legislature on behalf of the tobacco industry.
On the Tobacco Institute list the following names are marked " "Consulting Economists, not on Philip Morris' List""
Clearly dozens of recruited academic economists have planted similar stories as op-eds in their local newspapers. without revealing that they were paid by the Tobacco Institute to write these articles, and were, in fact, acting as tobacco industry lobbyists.
- David Gay, Professor of Economics, University of Arkansas —
Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in Arkansas Democrat April 1990
- Barry Poulson, Professor of Economics, University of Colorado
Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in Alamosa Valley Courier May 1990
- Dominick Armentano, Professor of Economics, University of Hartford —
Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in New Haven Register Jan 1990
- Michael Babcock, Professor of Economics, Kansas State University —
Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in The Topeka Capital-Journal March 1990
- Thomas Wyrick, Professor of Economics, Southwest Missouri State University —
Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in News-Leader May 1990
- Clifford Dobita, Professor of Economics, North Dakota State IIniversity —
Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in Grand Forks Herald Mar 1990
- Richard Vedder, Professor of Economics, Ohio University
Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in Plain Dealer Jan 1990
- Joseph Jadlow, Professor of Economics, Oklahoma State University —
Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in The Tulsa Tribune Apr 1990
- Ryan Amacher, Dean of the College of Commerce and Industry, Clemson University —
Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in The Anderson Independent-Mail 18 Feb 1990
- J R Clark, Hendrix Professor of Economics, University of Tennessee —
Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in The Paris Post-Intelligencer, The Weekly County Press, Kinusoort Times-News, The Commercial Appeal, the Jackson Sun. May 1990
- John David, Professor, West Virginia Tech —
Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in The Charleston Gagette Feb 1990
- William Hunter, Associate Professor of Economics, Marquette University —
Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in The Milwaukee Journal Feb 1990
- Todd Sandler, Professor of Economics, Iowa State University —
Anti-excise tax/"no taxes" op-ed published in Fort Dodge Messenger Jun 1990
- William Mitchell, Professor of Political Science, University of Oregon —
Anti-excise tax/"no taxes" op-ed published in The Register Guard 12 Jun 1990
See their file of newspaper clippings.
Robert Tollison of George Mason university was both an organiser of economists, and a diligent consultant to the tobacco industry himself. His associates, Robert Ekelund, Richard Wagner, Dwight Lee, William Shurgart, and Gary Anderson, most likely assisted him in the organisation of these op-eds. They contributed also. [This is only a small section of the overall list. Many economists are recorded as having provided other similar services.
See document.]
1990 Jan 23: Robert Tollison sends Martin Gleason the
"Preface and first five chapters of the book + the 'third of the four billings for this project" = $36,250(Total must have been $145,000) This bundle consists of the contributions from Richard E Wagner, Gary M Anderson, Bruce Yandle. Dwight R Lee, Henri LePage, Mwangi S Kimenyi and James M Buchanan.
It also contains comments from Michael T Buckley at Covington & Burling
1990 Feb 1: Savarese's report to Susan Stuntz at the Tobacco Institute lists a number of projects involving the cash-for-comment economists:
- "Smoking and the Problem of Social Cost: A Survey" by Tollison and Wagner, published in Journal of Public Finance and Public Choice - reprints have been distributed.
- "Smoking and Absenteeism: An Empirical Study" by Ault, Ekelund, Jackson, Saba, and Saurman - submitted to Applied Economics.
- "Smokers Subsidy of Nonsmokers' Retirement Benefits" by Higgins and Shuford - submitted to Social Science and Medicine.
- "The Social Costs of Everyday Life" by [Gary] Anderson submitted to Contemporary Policy Studies.
- "Social Cost and the Cigarette Excise Tax: A Misguided Rationale for an Inefficient and Unfair Policy" by [Dwight] Lee - submitted to Contemporary Policy Studies.
- "Self Interest, Public Interest, and Public Health" by Tollison and Wagner - accepted for publication in Public Choice.
- "Some Economic Consequences of the Koop Doctrine: National and State Revenue Shortfall from Smoking Regulation" by Ekelund - returned to Ekelund for submission.
- "Smoking and the Wealth of Nations" by Wagner - submitted to Journal of Contemporary Business.
Began Phase III of the social cost research. Proposals have been submitted to TI.
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.
Lees article (March 8) "The politicians' user-fee/excise tax smoke screen"
1990 April: Social Cost overview by the section headed by TBD [possibly "To Be Determined?"] and Carol Hrycaj at the Tobacco Institute says:
[A] TI-commissioned social cost research paper on smoking and absenteeism, completed in 1989, has been accepted for publication by an academic journal.
"Smoking and Absenteeism," by consulting economists Robert Ekelund, Richard Ault, John Jackson, Richard Saba and David Saurman, has been accepted for publication by the academic journal, Applied Economics. The authors examine previous absenteeism and productivity studies and find that the "association of smoking and increased absenteeism is spurious."
Consulting economists will receive TI support for a presentation of academic papers during the Western Economic Association's conference to be held in San Diego in June. The session, "Smoking and Public Policy," will involve Dwight Lee and Gary Anderson in a discussion of smoking and social cost issues.
See page 30
[Note the date the study was 'completed and accepted' — a date which is two years after it was being referenced by Tollison and Wagner for the tobacco industry.]
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.
GEORGIAhas been given the Atlanta Constitution as his propaganda target.
Dwight Lee, Univ. of Georgia
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.
GEORGIA
Professor Dwight R. Lee
Department of Economics, University of Georgia
Athens, Georgia 30603 404-542-1311
(VisitinG) Center for Study of American Business
Washington University,
Box 1208 St. Louis, Missouri 63130 314-889-5691
1990 May 22: Attached to a 1990 Tobacco Institute Strategies document is a slightly later report from Martin Gleason (Public Affairs) at the Institute which reports on some early successes. Re: the economists network he reports.
They also planned to extend the "social cost" arguments to other industries using these economist, in order to enrol these industries and their lobbyists in a wider coalition.Texas economic program
- Developed regressivity and bootlegging studies (PW) [ Price Waterhouse]
- Economist ( Mike Davis) editorial board briefings
Economic witnesses
- Dwight Lee provided for Wilmington, N.C.— city council session on economic consequences of excise tax increase
- Morris Coates — testified in Baton Rouge on proposed LA excise tax increase.
1990 June: Carol Hryjak reports to the Tobacco Institute on her progress with the "Social Cost" program.
Consulting economists presented papers on the social cost issue during the Western Economic Association's annual meeting in San Diego, California. Dwight Lee chaired the session entitled, "Smoking and Public Policy." Papers were offered by Lee ("Smoking and Public Policy"), Gary Anderson ("Politics, Redistribution and Smoking") and Benjamin Zycher ("Insurance and Smoking: Market vs. Government"). A full report on the conference is expected next month.
We have agreed to support consulting economists' presentations during sessions of two other major academic conferences later this year: the Atlantic Economic Society and the Southern Economic Association. Both will focus on aspects of "user fees" and budgetary politics.
Consulting economists Bob Tollison and Richard Wagner began work on the manuscriptt for the revised edition of Smoking and the State.
We received a proposal from consulting economist Dwight Lee to write an article on the social cost issue for placement in an economic periodical, The Margin. The publication is required reading for students of economics at universities around the country.
We continued to work on the social cost plan for 1991, with a final draft submitted for Public Affairs review.
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.
Dwight Lee
Ramsey Professor of Economics
University of Georgia
• 1/90 Letters to administration officials debunking excise tax/"user fee" connection
• Op-ed on excise taxes and user fees published in Macon Telegraph News
• 3/90 Published "An Economic Analysis of the Economic Burden of Cigarette Smoking in Georgia," in the Journal of the Medical Association of Georgia
• Presentation on tax earmarking and regressivity at the Southwest Social Science Association conference in Fort Worth, TX
• 5/90 Op-ed on "social costs" published in the Chicago Tribune
• 6/90 Presentation on taxes and "social cost" at the Western Economic Association annual meeting in San Diego, CA
• Testified in opposition to excise increase measure before the Delaware legislature
[He has been a busy little Dwight !]
1990 Sep 26: Kurt Malmgren's Tobacco Institute telex re: Sacramento County, California Ordinance
On September 25, the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors on first reading voted 3-2 to adopt a strict ordinance banning smoking in the workplace and phasing out smoking in restaurants by 1993.The file then includes a long list of "Scientific/Other Witnesses Appearances & Media Tours - 1990" Along with all the other commercial IAQ shills ( Robertson, Seckler, Turner, etc) willing to testify for cash are a couple of volunteers from the academic economists network:
Terry Eagan — along with expert consultants Gray Robertson (IAQ), David Weeks, MD, (ETS), John Fox (labor/management attorney) and Melinda Sidak (C&B) were the subject of print and broadcast interviews.
Please contact me if you have questions, as we prepare for the referendum phase of this project.
- March 16 — Topeka, KS — Legislative Hearing — Dwight Lee
- March 30 — Park Ridge, IL — Local Hearing — Dwight Lee
- March 21 — "Social Cost" media tour, New York City — Bob Tollison
- April 12 — Honolulu, HI — Legislative hearing — Dick Wagner
- April 30 — New Hanover, NC — Local Hearing — Dwight Lee
- April (Editorial tour) — "Social cost" Texas Newspapers — Mike Davis
- May 9 — Baton Rouge, LA — Legislative hearing — Morris Coats.
1990 Oct 19: Richard Wagner, as section-chairman of the Atlantic Economic Society [subtitled "Patriots of the Future", Williamsburg] reports to James Savarese on a session he has run on "User Fees and Budgetary Politics." [The document is clearly designed as proof of payable services to the TI]
He outlines his introductory remarks, then writes:
The participants did the rest. Dwight Lee, Fred McChesney, and Robert Tollison each presented their papers dealing with aspects of the session's theme, and Kevin Grier and Bruce Yandle offered some interesting observations in discussing the papers.[All speakers and pre-selected discussants were members of the cash-for-comments network]
Indeed, one of Bruce Yandle's comments was to the effect that the three papers together provided a quite coherent, alternative body of analysis to the conventional literature on user fees.
1990 Oct 31: Ekelund has sent Savarese his "Proposed Program for SouthWestern Social Sciences Association Meeting" for approval. He will chair the session to be called "The Political Economy of Dedicated Taxes"
It will have papers by Dwight Lee, Robert Tollison and Richard Ault. Also Mark Thornton, John Keith Watson and John Jackson will be discussants.
[All cash-for-comments academics. Watson is now at the University of SouthWestern Louisiana]
1990 Nov: Executive Alert of the National Center for Policy Analysis has the headline story "Babies vs. the FAA" which claims
Under the banner of saving children's lives, a movement is afoot that would nullify many benefits of airline deregulation by effectively ending free air travel for infants and toddlers.A Briefing Paper by Richard McKenzie and Dwight Lee for the Cato Institute "Ending the Free Airplane Rides of Infants: A Myopic View of Saving Lives" claims that new rules requiring airlines to provide restraint seats, would drive "families to take to the highways rather than the airways," and says that car travel is more costly and dangerous than flying.
To save the life of one infant, an FAA rule may cost 60 lives and $72 million.
On top of these ridiculous assumptions they add a layer of dubious calculations using largely fictious data... then they multiply their miscalculations by 12 to give a 12 year estimate of $72 million and 60 lives.
[If ever a piece of academic junk based on dubious assumption illustrates why economics is known as the "dismal science" — it is this.]
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: Public Smoking report of the Tobacco Institute lists 39 pages of their activities. It includes many major and minor activities to counter the "Social Costs" claims, including:
- We continue developing resources to rebut social cost claims: Dwight Lee's social cost research paper has been published and consulting economists submitted the social cost treatise manuscript to a publishing house. A critique of the Health and Human Services social cost report is underway.
- Consulting economist Dwight Lee's social cost paper, "Social Cost and the Cigarette Excise Tax: A Misguided Rationale for an Ineffective Policy," was published in the Journal of Private Enterprise. Lee examines the economic efficiency of raising the tobacco tax based on social cost claims. He asserts that increasing the tax based on these arguments "rests on extremely weak grounds, both theoretically and empirically." We plan to prepare the article in reprint form for further distribution.
- Another Lee article appeared in print recently. "Economics and the War on Smoking, published in the December issue of The Margin, challenges claims that smokers should be taxed more than nonsmokers and that smokers are less productive than nonsmokers.
- We completed the review process for the new draft social cost treatise, The Economics of Smoking. This involved intensive working sessions with the team of reviewers and subsequent meetings with the authors. The manuscript has been returned to the authors to be forwarded to the publisher.
- We approved funding for a proposal to critique the Health and Human Services (HHS) report, National Status Report in Smoking and Health. Consulting economists Richard Ault and Robert Ekelund will examine the underlying methodology HHS used to derive its social cost estimates. We plan to aggressively promote the findings of the evaluation.
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
1991 April: The Political Economy Research Center (PERC) and the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) have a joint task force which reports on "Progressive Environmentalism: A Pro-Human, Pro-Science, Pro-Free Enterprise Agenda for Change," [Implying that their opponents were anti-human, anti-science and anti-free enterprise. This was the think-tank equivalent of that Mafia family gatherings to celebrate the wedding in "The Godfather"]
Cash-for-comments economist Richard L Stroup was the chairman, assisted by NCPA's President & CEO, John C Goodman, a professional lobbyist who worked for the Tobacco Institute. There were 76 Environmental Task Force members (far too many for them to have useful discussions) so this was obviously some "for the record" meeting of cloned minds.
This is some sort of coordination meeting of ultra-libertarian think-tanks from around the world — almost all belonging to the Atlas Group and working for the tobacco industry. Some of the most interesting are:
- Bruce Johnson, David Theroux of the Independent Institute
- The usual list of think-tankers from the Heritage, Heartland, Independent Institute, James Madison, Mackinac Center, Reason Foundation, Claremond Institute, ALEC, CSE, CIS, Cato, AEI, SEPP, IRET, PERC and NCPA staff/executives etc.
- Bruce Ames, (UC Berkely and TASSC)
- Cash-for-comment network economists: Dwight Lee, Terry Anderson, Tom DiLorenzo, Richard Stroup, Randy Simmons, D Allen Dalton,
- Eamonn Butler, Madsen Pirie, Adam Smith Institute, UK
- Martin Summers, Institute of Economic Affairs, UK
- Jo Kwong, Direct of Public Affairs, Atlas Economic Research Foundation
- Greg Lindsay of Center for Independent Studies in Australia
- Aaron Wildavsky - tobacco tout and philosopher
- Elizabeth Whelan, ACSH (created a faux-reputation as an anti-smoking activist)
- Stephen Gold, Ex Dir, Citizens for the Environment
- Manhattan Center, Wm Hammett, Lucy Clark
[Lee is Adjunct Professor, Center for the Study of American Business.]
1991 July 15: James Savarese is billing the Tobacco Institute for the services of his network economist at the Western Economic Association meeting in Seattle, Washington.
Dwight Lee; Henry Butler, Richard Wagner are charging a combined $18,500 for their professional services + $1,640; $912; $1,100 in expenses.
1991 June 29: The Tobacco Institute felt that their "Invited Session" at the 1990 Western Economic Meeting in San Diego was such a success that they promoted a similar one for the 1991 meeting in Seattle. It was also populated by their cash-for-comments lackeys.
This time the tobacco-required theme was to be "Earmarked Taxes: Economic and Political Dimensions," with papers by Dwight Lee, Henry Butler and Robert Hayes under the chairmanship of Benjamin Zycher. Steve Jackstadt was to be a discussant along with Zycher.
The Tobacco Institute ( Martin Gleason, Susan Stuntz and Carol Hryjak) gave them an enthusiastic go-ahead despite the fact (part concealed) that Jim Savarese would charge them $18,500 plus expenses.
1991 Jun 29: Dan Williamson of the California Polytechnic at San Luis has submitted his discussion paper to Savarese, and it has been sent to the Tobacco Institute for checking. It appears that they were not happy with his criticisms.
Three possible sources of externalities are considered: medical costs, lost productivity in the work place, and environmental tobacco smoke.He disputes Dwight Lee's claims about the incidental nature of costs associated with ETS.
Comments on the first two are valid and interesting although no mention is made of possible health insurance cost externalities created by smokers (Zycher discusses this). ETS externalities are not discussed at all.
The image the paper attempts to create of the powerful anti-smoking lobby pitted in the political arena against the individual smokers, strains for credibility.He also disputes Gary Anderson's interpretation of the theory of external cost.
Also, it appears that government has made significant use of its tax incentive powers rather than direct regulation in this "externality war." How does this reconcile with the political rent acquisition motive suggested of the anti-smoking lobby?
This is incorrect. What the sufferer of the external cost does not do is negotiate with the party (parties) causing the externality. He or she will nevertheless do something in the face of the externality, e.g., clean up the mess that without consent has been dumped upon him.And then he hs the nerve to criticise Ben Zycher
The main point here is that insurance companies, as residual claimants, have incentives to eliminate cross-subsidies from non-smokers to smokers. Do they? The reasons mentioned are to get a better mix of clients (more non-smokers).You'll be amazed to read that Dan Williamson was abruptly removed from the discussant role and replaced with the old reliable Thomas Borcherding.
But if all insurance companies do this they will each likely end up with the same mix of clients they started with (a prisoner's dilemma situation). Perhaps we have in fact a cooperative solution of this conflict in which none of the insurers follow this strategy and hence externalities do exist from smokers to non-smokers.
Clearly some empirical verification is called for.
class="note">[The expenses claims of Wagner, Lee and Butler are included here]
Note the "OK $18,500" agreement on the later agenda.
1991 Aug 5: A memo from Martha Rinker (Issues Manager) to her superior Marty Gleason at the Tobacco Institute.
We have one productivity work in progress, the Wagner and Grier "event study." The first draft of this project is expected in September. Its $42,500 price was taken into consideration during the budget process. RJR [RJ Reynolds] is very excited about this study and are anxious to see the final report.
Four proposed projects emerged from the meeting held a few weeks ago:
- a popular paper discussing the [Robert] Ekelund, et al results,
- a speaking tour,
- an op-ed program, and
- a possible health costs study.
The only task that has had a price tag attached to it is the "popular" article, $18,500. This should be less when the project is pared down to the size and audience discussed above. The speaking project would include the cost of preparation of the speech andtravel and expenses for the economists. The op-ed project costs would be the hourly fees for the economists preparing the op-eds. And, finally, the health care costs study would be the costs of recovering the information, research and writing of the study.[Projected total costs were $100,000]
- The preparation and publication of a popular article by [Richard] Wagner and [Robert] Tollison that would include a discussion of the Ekelund et al results, health care and insurance costs issues, and the social costs of everyday life.
The proposal is more than we want or need. A 20-25 page paper like this would have to published in a university business journal. What we had in mind, and I've discussed this with Savarese, is a shorter article to be placed in the personnel or human resource trades. The article would be good for reprints and possibly a TI brochure.
- The preparation and testing of a speaking project for [Dwight] Lee and Tollison. The tasks would include the preparation of a standard speech and the solicitation of speaking engagements with Chamber of Commerce type audiences.
- An op-ed campaign based on the paper prepared by Wagner and Tollison listed in the first task above. The op-eds would be written by economists in the targeted areas identified by TI.
- A possible health costs study looking at the actual costs of smokers and non-smoker
Work could begin in the first and last projects late in 1991 with delivery of the papers (and payment for the work) in 1992, The "popular" paper would mainstream the information we now have and need to circulate to counter the anti's. The other two tasks, preparation of a speech, solicitation of speaking engagements and writing op-eds could be started early in 1992.
1991 Nov 19: Carol Hrycaj sends a memo to Walter Woodson (TI Public Relations head):
Attached, as you requested, is a list of excise tax (and social cost) witnesses. The list of youth issue witnesses will be forwarded as soon as possible.She lists Robert Tollison, Richard Wagner and Dwight Lee
The following conservative economists are academics whose testimony is from a public choice perspective. Regional or local economists may be identified as appropriate.
1992 Mar 18: James Savarese writes to the Tobacco Institute attaching a reprint...
of Dwight Lee's paper, "Government v. Coase: The Case of Smoking." This paper is a product of the seminars and research projects which were commissioned over the past couple of years.The article has been published in the Cato Journal, alongside an article by cash-for-comments economists Gary M Anderson and Adam Gifford Jr, and another by Richard B McKenzie [Not on tobacco topics] and has references to Tollison, Wagner and Ault.
Attached to the Cato Journal is a draft academic paper by Richard Ault and Robert Ekelund specifically on tobacco and health measurements: "The Political Element in Science and Technology: SAMMEC II and the Anti-Smoking Movement." This article tries to argue that the standard statistical methods used for evaluating the health risk of smoking are wrong.
[SAMMEC = Smoking-Attributable Mortality, Morbidity and Economic Costs.]
1992 Oct 15: Jim Savarese's plan for the promotion of Wagner and Tollison's "The Economics of Smoking" book and "SAMMEC" paper.
SAMMEC Response Strategy There is a need for a responsive mechanism to handle media references to the SAMMEC study on "social costs." OA&R [Ogilvy Adams & Rinhart] will take a proactive approach to having SAMMEC discussed on the media tours and in op-eds.
Additionally, we will prepare a standard letter to the editor on the flaws of the SAMMEC study — providing room for localization in the first and last paragraphs. The letter will be distributed to, and eventually authored by, a Savarese and Associates economist in the particular state. The economist will generate the letter in response to an editorial or article in their local paper on "social costs" and SAMMEC.
If there is not an economist in that state, Dwight Lee will sign the letter. In this way, we will have the capacity to respond quickly to negative press based on the "social cost" theory.
1992 Nov 20: News article on Lee's report is headlined: "New Study Finds Workplace IAQ Standards Could Prove Greater Risk for Workers."
"A public policy research institute [the National Center for Policy Analysis] published a report which contends that potential overregulation of indoor air quality "would likely cost money, jobs and lives - while bringing about little improvement in the quality of our air." [snip][The National Center for Policy Analysis was heavily funded by the tobacco industry. It was another of those right-wing libertarian think-tanks closely associated with the Atlas Foundation that has premises alongside George Mason University.]
"The cost to the private sector could run as high as $100 billion, which would result in a widespread loss of low-income jobs, according to the report. The report concludes that every $1 billion in regulation costs is likely to cost 193 lives. This rationale parallels the risk risk analysis advocated last March by the Office of Management and Budget.
"The report was issued by the National Center for Policy Analysis, a nonprofit, nonpartisan group based in Dallas, Texas. The author of the report is Dwight R. Lee, the Bernard B and Eugenia A Ramsey Professor of Economics and Private Enterprise at the University of Georgia.
1993: Dwight Lee has authored The Next Environmental Battleground: Indoor Air which is supposedly an 'independent report' produced by the National Center for Policy Analysis in Dallas Texas. (The NCPA was generously funded by the tobacco industry) The clear aim of this booklet is to discount the role of second-hand smoke in disease causation, and play up the dangers posed by bacteria in airconditioning systems.
Lee worked diligently for Philip Morris and the Tobacco Institute over many years in producing monographs, op-ed pieces, booklets, etc. and this is almost certainly one of these. He lists a few random sources (non-tobacco) of toxic chemicals in the general environment then says:
Are we at great risk? Probably not. Human beings have always been exposed to carcinogenss that occur naturally in the air we breathe and the food we eat. If small quantities of carcinogens could kill us, the human race would have been extinct long ago.
However, there are problems. Poorly ventilated buildings have harbored Legionnaires' disease and tuberculosis.. Largely because of federal policy, some excessively insulated buildings have become "sick" — leading to increased absenteeism and lower productivity.
What should be done? The private sector is already responding, largely for economic reasons; to improve employee productivity and to avoid lawsuits. Most indoor air problems are caused by poor ventilation, and building owners are discovering that improving ventilation is, often profitable.
Spurred by the incentives of the marketplace, inventors are finding new and cheaper ways to clean the air. Boston ferns and other plants have proved to be remarkably capable of removing toxic chemicals from indoor air.
[Note how, in a couple of sentences, he dismisses carcinogens in the general environment — then suggests the problem is Legionairre's disease and TB caused by "federal policy." He then proposes solving the problem by sticking a couple of Boston ferns in office flower pots!... and you wondered why economists have a reputation for confused thinking and commercialized motivations!]
His attack on the federal policy, appears to be based on his economic calculation that:The outdoor air toxics regulations of the new Clean Air Act require that the private sector spend $6.5 billion for every life hypothetically saved.
In one case, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) imposed a rule that would require $5.7 trillion per life hypotheticaly saved — which implies that the EPA is willing to spend the entire GNP to save a single life.
[If you believe this, you'll believe anything. There's much more of this crap in this document if you are looking for amusement.]
1993 March: Tom Hockaday of APCO Associates (at this time the public relations company owned and controlled by Philip Morris) is ghostwriting and/or doctoring up articles for Dwight Lee and S Fred Singer. Hockaday writes to his contact Ellen Merlo and her associates at Philip Morris USA:
As you know we have been working with Dr Fred Singer and Dr Dwight Lee, who have authored articles on junk science and indoor air quality, (IAQ), respectively.
Attached you will find copies of the junk science and IAQ articles which have been approved by Drs Singer and Lee. [Note: not written by them...] You will also find attached copies of biographies for Drs Singer and Lee.
We discussed with Dr Singer, Ellen [Merlo]'s suggestion for the junk science article to have a more personal, introduction, however he is adamant that this would not be his style.
We are planning to send to you by close of husiness today, draft copies of three
additional articles that are being prcpared on the following, topics:
- the economic impact of excessive rcgulation and junk science — based on my
conversation with Tina [Walls] regarding the hearings in California.- effects of government regulation on business, and
- civil/personal liberties
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.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 Atlanta Constitution
- Op-ed article by Robert Tollison to be submitted to Wall Street Journal
- Rebuttal article by Bob Ekelund, Auburn University, to be submitted to the Birmingham News
- "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
1993 Apr 8: The economist's network is still functioning, but Savarese and Tollison have negotiated a different deal for the participants. Savarese now bills the Tobacco Institute for economist network op-ed commissions, half-down and half on delivery. They are being paid for preparing the articles rather than only when they succeeded in getting their articles published. This bill is for $37,000.
- Op-ed article by Robert Tollison to be submitted to Wall Street Journal — $4,000.00
- Rebuttal article by Bob Ekelund, Auburn Univeristy, to be submitted to the Birmingham News — $3,000.00
- "Monster" tax op-ed project using twenty economists 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. FIRST HALF = $30,000.00
[They now get $3,000 each per article — half on commission and half on delivery — while Tollison gets $4,000]
1993 Apr 13: Calvin George writes to his Tobacco Industry boss Susan Stuntz asking for permission to spend the $67,000 for the 22 op-eds listed by Savarese.
As previously discussed, the 20 economists proposed for the comprehensive op-ed program in opposition to excise taxes for health care reform have been selected with two primary criteria in mind:The cost of this project would be $67,000, which is consistent with previous experience for similar efforts. I am recommending approval of this proposal. Funds are available for this purpose in #1305-7301 under the line items for "Economists to deliver briefings, testimony, and write articles..." ($45,000) and "Op-eds on...health care costs" ($25,000).
- first, capacity to reach major media markets in states and Congressional Districts represented by key members of the Senate and House Leadership, as well as the Senate Finance and House Ways and Means Committees; and
- second, the previous track record of the economists in being able to place successfully op-eds in the major dailies identified.
The name of Dwight Lee is included in the list of these 20 network participants They also specify which newspapers ahould published their articles.
1993 June: A record of the Tobacco Institute activites of contracted spokespersons making leigslative appearances, etc. Professor Dwight Lee makes media tours and attends legislative appearances to give the USA the benefit of his expert opinion. This is a record of his witness activities during a little over a year.
- Oct 6 1988, he was at the New Orleans, LA hearings
- Dec 10 1988, he was at a tax hearing in Peoria, IL
- Jan 16 1989 he was a witness at a local hearing for Cook County, IL
- Jan 27 1989 he attended the AMA's Tobacco Conference.
- Feb 14 1989 he was a witness at a Jefferson City, MO Senate Hearing.
- Mar 13 1989 he made a legislative appearance, via teleconference for a Juneau, AK hearing.
- Apr 4 1989 he attended a Columbus, OK Senate Hearing
- Apr 5 1989 Another teleconference appearance at Juneau, AK
- May 1 - 4 1989 at the Springield, IL Senate hearing
- Mar 16 1990 at the Legislative hearing, Topeka, KS
- Mar 30 1990, at a local hearing Park Ridge, IL
- Apr 30 1990 At a local hearing in New Hanover, NC
- May 24 1990 at a legislative hearing, Dover, DE
1993 July 6: Susan Stuntz circulates more economist letters/op-eds for the file.
- Tollison has a letter that appeared in the New York Times in support of the Wagner/Greir view on cigarette tax excises against that of Professor Grossman (who both he an Wagner had challenged before)
- Dwight Lee had "Smokers already playing their fair share for health care" in the Altanta Journal.
- Cecil Bohanon and James McClure had planted "The prohibitive taxation of cigarettes" on the Indianpolis Star.
- Also included was a clipping of an old Ekelund/Thornton essay which had run on May 19 in the Altanta Journal and Constitution
1993 Aug 3: This is a series of lists dated from March to August 1993. Savarese's staff have sent these to the Tobacco Institute to progressively report successes and failures with the economists writing op-ed pieces and having them published.
Collectively they give us a good idea as to how the network worked and how litte they managed to plant on the major newspapers (the smaller local papers were obviously easy.) It's also interesting to observe the mechanical processes and the tight control the tobacco industry and its lawyers exerted over these academic lackies.
- The articles were either rejected, revised or passed by Jim Savarese and his staff
- They were then sent for checking and alteration by Calvin George [Cal] at the Tobacco Institute.
- The lawyer David Reemes who worked for the industry's main Washington lawfirm Covington & Burling then cleared them for publication.
- The economist then received the revised copies back for onward transmission to the selected newspapers.
- They would then send a copy to their local Congressmen without mentioning the tobacco industry's contractual arrangement.
Despite the protestations, these are not 'independent' opinion articles. They are industry-shaped, manipulated propaganda pieces designed as advocacy vehicles to promote tobacco interests in political, media and public circles — even when they don't directly mention or promote cigarettes or smoking.
These lists are all headed 'MONSTER' Tax Op-Ed Project:
GEORGIA
Professor Dwight E. Lee, Department of Economics, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia
- Mar 23 — [TI designated newspaper/s] Atlanta Constitution
- Apr 9 — Recieved 4/20/93 — Sent to Cal 4/20/93 — Received from Cal 4/22/93 — Waiting - legal — Returned 4/29/93 — Rev. Draft 4/30
- May 12 — Submitted to Atlanta Constitution
- May 18 — (as above)
- June 2 — Forthcoming: Atlanta Constitution ("They are publishing Bob Ekelund's piece — will publish Lee's later")
- June 14— Published in Atlanta Constitution 6/25/93
- Aug 3 — (as above)
1993 Nov 18: Dwight Lee, Professor of Economics at Georgia University, giving evidence at a Congressional hearing of the Committee of Ways and Means (Rep). He is there on behalf of the Tobacco Instititue and he relies heavily on the Tollison/Wagner books and other cash-for-comments publications.
He quotes his friend Ricahrd Ault as an authority on absenteeism.
Professor Richard Ault of Auburn University and several colleagues recently reviewed a series of studies suggesting that smokers miss more work that nonsmokers because they smoke.[This is a variant on the constitutional hypothesis. The argument goes like this:
Ault and his colleagues found that the studies merely compared absenteeism rates for smokers and non-smokers without considering whether the observed difference was due to smoking per se, or to other underlying determinants of absenteeism that are more prevelant among smokers than among nonsmokers.
According to Ault, the failure to consider such other determinants has resulted in "supurious conclusions about the relationship between smoking and absenteeism."
- Say a genetic predisposition to enjoy the taste of strawberries also increases the likelihood that you will smoke. Since many people are allergic to strawberries, it would be likely that these strawberry-loving smokers will take more days off work — purely because they have more allergic reactions than the non-smokers. Therefore, increased absenteeism among smokers can't be assumed to be caused by smoking. Other factors might be causal.]
1993 Dec: /E The Tobacco Institute's paper "1994 Projected Expert Witness Needs".
This year is expected to present unusually heavy federal, state and media activity, and the total cost of presenting appropriate witnesses Is likely to be considerably higher than in 1993. It is anticipated that the current TI budget for 1994, with only $220,000 allocated to witnesses and submissions, will not be sufficient to meet the major needs for expert assistance.They are excluding those staff who provide witness services, and their lawyers who are paid via retainers.
The consultants described here are those for whom the Institute incurs significant expense for appearances, usually a per diem charge ranging from a low of $1,500 up to $30,000, plus travel expenses as appropriate. The "Anticipated 1994 Costs" are the total costs projected, including travel expenses.The witness requirements are divided into four main "Issue Area" categories: Taxes; Smoking/ETS ('aka Public Smoking'); Youth/ADAMHA/FDA, and "Fire-Safe" Cigarette.
In addition, the Tobacco Industry Labor Management Committee will coordlnate assistance on tobacco tax and smoking Issues; the Committee bears any related expenses, and such requirements are not included here
Total Funding Required
The lowest amount that The Institute can hope to expend on federal, state and media witnesses In 1994 is $357,504. The high estimate for providing witnesses and support programs is $1,501,500. It is very likely that actual usage will be In the range of $750,000 to $1,000,003.
[ADAMHA = Alcohol, Drug Abuse & Mental Health Administration — a regulatory arm of Health and Human Services.]
TAXES:
Federal Legislative Requirements
Congress is expected to hold one-to-two hearings on the tobacco tax increases for health care reform; One witness would be required for each hearing.
Economic Witnesses: Robert Tollison, Richard Wagner, Dwight Lee
Anticipated 1994 Cost: Per hearing $12,000 — Total $12,000 - $24,000
State Legislative Requirements:
Interest in general tax Increases will be tempered by elections in many states in 1994.However, tobacco excise taxes are expected to be high on legislators' lists of "user fees" for increases
Economic Witnesses: Same as above
Total number of appearances projected: 8 hearings and briefings
Anticipated 1994 Cost: Per hearing $10,000 to $15,000 — Total $80,000 to $120,000
Media Support and Other Events (Taxes): The Media Division is often asked to provide an expert on economic and social cost issues for in-depth responses to media inquiries. Furthermore, it is anticipated that TI will present at least one press conference or similar event on the tax issue this year.
Witnesses: Same as above
Anticipated 1994 Cost: Per use $2,500 to $10,000 — Total $10,000
[So it was anticipated that in 1994 Tollison, Wagner and Lee would make between them $ 102,000 and $ 194,000 just from providing witness services alone. They were also running networks, writing and publishing books, doing pseudo-research, and producing letters-to-the-editor and op-eds on a wholesale scale.
The media annual income for someone with a Doctorate in 1994 was $61,921. For a high-school graduate it was $28,037, and for someone with less than a 9th grade education, it was $17,532]
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 Lee 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.
1994 Projected Expert Witness Needs.The Tobacco Institute is responsible for ensuring presentation of credible expert testimony on tobacco proposals in federal, state and media and other arenas. This testimony often comes from independent contractors or consultants who must be fairly compensated for their time and expenses.
Incomplete Document with notes: | ||||||
1994 May 2: John Rupp and Clauson Ely, two of tobacco's main conspiratorial lawyers at Covington & Burling have put together a list of "Proposed Consultants" that could be relied on to give testimony for the industry at a OSHA hearing. They divide the area of expertise into different categories:
- ETS [passive smoking's lack of] Health Effects:
- Lung-Cancer: Paul Switzer [H], Genevieve Matanowski [NC], Maurice LeVois [H], Peter Lee [?], Max Layard [H], Joe Fleiss [H], Gio Gori [H].
- Cardiovascular disease: Joseph Wu [H], Peter Lee [H], Meyer Friedman, Alan Armitage, Max Weetman.[sic Donald Max]
- Pulmonary effects: Phil Witorsch [H]
- Reproductive effects: Ray Witorsch [H]
- Irritation: Alan Hedge [H]
- ETS Exposure Analysis:
Mike Guerin/Roger Jenkins (ORNL) [H], Larry Holcomb [H]; Keith Phillips [NC].- ETS Risk Assessment:
Gary Flamm/John Todhunter [H], Sorrell Schwartz [?]- Ventilation Issues:
Milt Meckler [H], Gray Robertson [H?]- Economics and Other Impacts:
- Dwight Lee (productivity and other issues) [H]
- Lou Solomon (productivity and other issues) [sic actually Lew Solmon]
- Bob Tollison/Dick Wagner (productivity and other issues) [H]
- Phil Schaenman (assertions concerning accidental fires)
[The code 'H' means that they will need to be paid for the appearance. NC = No compensation (they are probably being already paid via some other channel. '?' means they don't know.
Keith Phillips of the UK Harrowgate and later Hazelton Laboratories (paid via contract).
Geneveve Matonoski had been heavily funded by tobacco through Johns Hopkins University grants — now doing a study attacking OSHA/EPA.
Gray Robertson was making the best part of a million dollars a year via his company HBI.
Peter Lee was paid by the British TAC.]
1994 Aug: See the full outline of his involvement in creating the fake Alexis de Tocqueville ETS/EPA report written by S Fred Singer and Kent Jeffreys, secretly for the Tobacco Institute.
1994 Aug 11: The Alexis de Tocqueville Institute has produced a report by S Fred Singer of SEPP via Philip Morris's own PR-firm APCO, for the tobacco industry and other industries in a small coalition.
This was a well-funded, and well-camoflagued attack on the activist concerns about Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS), which hid behind the potential problems raised by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over radon, pesticides and the SuperFund toxic chemicals in the environment. It says:
" Science, Economics, and Environmental Policy: A Critical Examination" is an evaluation of the data, statistical analyses, and underlying scientific theories that underlie the Envirorunental Protection Agency's (EPA) policy decisions on environmental tobacco smoke, radon, pesticides and hazardous clean-up under the Superfund law.[Of course, no one mentioned that John Graham and his Harvard Center for Risk Analysis were also tobacco industry-funded lobbyists.]
With the total costs of environmental regulations estimated to be $150 billion annually — or $1,500 per U.S. household — it is extremely important that environmental decisions be based on sound scientific analyses of potential risks to public health and the environment, and that the costs of environmental regulation be weighed against the benefits. [Note the lack of conculsions that it was even more important for American industry to clean up its act and stop polluting!]
But as Dr John Graham of the Harvard Center on Risk Analysis notes, "While it may seem obvious that EPA should use good science, students of the Agency have documented that the Agency's leadership, when preoccupied with public fears and legal pressures, has sometimes allowed good science to be neglected."
The aim of this report was to group together a number of different environmental threats (which most Republicans had been convinced were fallacious), create a giant scarecrow, then classify them jointly as examples of the EPA's strawman threats to health. This, they held, was evidence of the radical agenda of the EPA and other anti-smoking, anti-polluting zealots.
The Advisory Panel for this operation comprised Robert Tollison, Richard Wagner, Dwight Lee, Gary Anderson, Mark Thornton, Robert Ekelund, Jeffrey Clark, and Richard Vedder from the cash-for-comments economists network, as well as a few other tobacco industry consultants and well-known lobbyists.
This report market a turning-point in the tobacco industry's fight-back operations. Philip Morris had just successfully established The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition (TASSC). Steve Milloy at TASSC had the job of labelling any anti-tobacco study results as 'junk-science' and APCO who secretly ran TASSC, had extended the reach of this new 'junk-science' operation to embrace mutual-help relationships with the major poisoning and polluting industries which were becoming embroiled in the problems of climate change.
This was one of the tobacco industry's contributions to the 'anti-science' movement which was intended to counter both anti-smoking and climate change research.
1994 Aug 12: Dwight Lee at the University of Georgia makes an application to the Department of Labor "Comments on OSHA Proposed Rulemaking on Indoor Air Quality". He presents his comments,,,
on behalf of the Tobacco Institute, but the views expressed are my own and are consistent with my writing on air quality issues over almost the 20 years. I[This is known as the Faustian bargain claim. However, to be fair, it is one of the few occasions when he admitted that he was lobbying on behalf of the tobacco industry.]
1995 Jan 3: Tobacco Institute document "Expert Witnesses Used in 1994" lists under "Consultants"
Dwight Lee
- $ 0 — Maryland Senate 25-cent cigarette tax hearing 2/11/94 - DWIGHT SNOWED OUT
- $ 4,630 — Kansas 10-cent tax hearing 2/17/94
- $ 4,390 — Maryland House 25-cent cigarette tax hearing 3/1/94
- $ 4,484 — Ohio Tax Structure study commission hearing 5/25/94
- $17,788 — OSHA comments and comments on EPA's cost/benefit analysis of Waxman bill
1995 May 24: James Savarese and Robert Tollison have jointly submitted a major "Social Cost Program" to the Tobacco Institute. The alleged "$20 billion" in social costs attributed to smoking is currently being used as the basis of federal legislation and lawsuits initiated by the states to recover Medicare and Medicaid costs from tobacco companies. The purpose of this program is to provide information to the industry's anti-regulatory allies in Congress. primarily Republicans. to show that this cost figure is outrageously wrong.They also thoughtfully included a list of Congressmen to invite/influence, and the newspapers that would receive op-eds from the compliant cash-for-comment economics in the network. [All are well-established tobacco industry lobbyists except for Billy Kristol, who is just a far right-wing ideolog, fellow-traveller, and natural ally. He also works for Rupert Murdoch. This document has been returned to Brown & Williamson Tobacco by the tobacco lawyers Covington & Burling. They must have been asked to clear it. ] |
1995 Aug: Robert Higgs, Jean Boddewyn, Dwight Lee and other cash-for-comments economists are involved in two related battles in support of the tobacco industry:
- An attempt to discredit David Kessler and the FDA to block them controlling aspects of the cigarette industry.
- Attempts by the advertising industry to maintain tobacco advertising.
The industry has struck (or is in the process of striking) coalition deals with these think-tank allies over the FDA problem.
They have also co-opted sections of the Veterans organizations, unleashed the Freedom to Advertise Coalition and frightened senior citizens, and both organised labor and the agricultural sector.
- The Alexis De Tocqueville Institution
- The Small Business Survival Committee
- Frontiers of Freedom
- The Independent Institute
- The Business Leadership Council
- National Center for Policy Analysis
- Institute for Policy Innovation
- Capital Research
- CATO lnstitute
- Citizens for a Sound Economy
- Citizens Against Government Waste
- Heritage Foundation
1995 Oct: /E Philip Morris has been sent a list of the Tobacco Instutute's network economists who had been commissioned, and had...
... prepared and submitted op-eds [attacking the FDA] for publication to major newspapers in select states — targetting key Congressional districts:They had been told to "attack the FDA proposal from an anti-big government, anti-regulatory perspective" with a number of pre-determined themes
Economists prepared and submitted op-eds for publication to major newspapers in select states:
- Dr William Boyes, Arizona State University
- Dr Barry Poulson, University of Colorado
- Dr Dominick Armentano, University of Hartford
- Dr Dwight Lee, University of Georgia, Athens
- Iowa economist tbd [To Be Determined]
- Dr Cecil Bohanan, Ball State University
- Dr Robert Pulsinelli, Western Kentucky University
- Dr Michael Kurth, McNeese State University (Louisiana)
- Dr Bill Shughart, II, University of Mississippi
- Dr Joe Bell, Southwest Missouri State University
- Dr Terry Ridgway, University of Nevada, Las Vegas
- Dr Allen Parkman, University of New Mexico
- Dr Lowell Gallaway, Ohio University
- Dr Ed Price, Oklahoma State University
- Dr William Mitchell, University of Oregon
- Dr J.R. Clark, The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
- Dr Michael Davis, The University of Texas at Dallas
- Robert Higgs, Independent Institute, Edmonds, Washington
- Dr Charles Breeden, Marquette University
- While FDA claims their focus is on preventing youth smoking, the action is the first step to impose harsher regulations on tobacco;
- The FDA regs will have repercussions on not only the tobacco industry, but vending, confectionery and candy industries, distributors, advertisers and sponsors for sporting events; and
- The regs will have a devastating impact on jobs.
[This memo demonstrates just how compliant these academic tobacco lackeys had become — and how much they were willing to follow tobacco industry instructions in writing their op-ed pieces.]
1995 Dec: /E The Independent Institute operates a laundry service for tobacco industry payments being made to academics [ie $5,000 paid to Professor Thomas DiLorenzo for a 'Study of the Federal Anti-tobacco Campaign'.] This Institute has run a conference "De-Taxing America" at which a number of tobacco-economists were key speakers.
- Dwight Lee (Uni of Georgia) explained that "Uninformed voters are more favourably disposed to tax increases when revenues are " earmarked" for popular programs. Earmarking helps politicians circumvent taxpayer resistance by making more funds from general revenues available for discretionary spending.
- Thomas DiLorenzo (Loyola College) explained how excise taxes funding "politically correct" propaganda threaten free speech, including that of business people who risk regulatory retribution and IRS audits for criticizing unequal taxation.
- Adam Gifford (California State Uni, Northridge) showed how taxes on whiskey, margarine, and the press illustrate politicians' diverse aims, and how citizens have responded to predatory taxation by rebellion, flight, and evasion.
- Martin Thornton (Auburn University) said "Prohibition, the ultimate sin tax, evolved from new Enlgand Puritanism into today's secular neo-puritanism, often allying with empire-building bureaucrats and profit-seeking dealers of contraband. Prohibition produces undesirable side effects, especially violent crime.
- Bruce Benson (Florida State Uni) explained that "Quebec's 60% cigarette taxes of the early 1990s led to gang warefare over the lucrative trade in untaxed cigarettes.
- Gary Anderson (California State Uni, Northridge) explained that prohibition often results in more revenue for politicians and brueaucrats, more employees and more graft. Conventional wisdom further holds that selectively taxing some products will hardly reduce purchases, but Richard Vedder (Ohio University) showed that in the case of smoking, consumers cross state lines to buy cheaper cigarettes, hindering the tax collectors' goal.
- George Tullock (Uni of Arizona) suggested that too many scientific and economic questions remain to determine the social costs of smoking or whether taxes are preferable to moral suasion.
1995 Dec 8: The Savarese Status Report on the FDA Op-ed Program says that Lee's draft op-ed would be published by the Atlana Constitution newspaper.
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:
GEORGIAAttached 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 Dwight E. Lee, Department of Economics, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia
Atlanta Constitution - publication forthcoming. [In fact the Atlanta Constitution- declined as did the Augusta Chronicle, but he eventually planted the article on the Athens Banner-Herald]
[No information about congressmen contacted]
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 Jan 26: This Status report for the FDA Op-Ed Program shows that they were still planting articles and contacting Congressmen for the Tobacco Institute.
1996 Feb: /E The Tobacco Institute's Media Relations report on the Economists:
[Along with the core group of Tollison, Wagner, Ekelund, etc. these are mostly the 'stayers'.]Ongoing
- 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 William Boyes, Arizona State University
- Dr Barry Poulson, University of Colorado
- Dr Dominick Armentano, University of Hartford
- Dr Dwight Lee, University of Georgia, Athens
- Iowa economist tbd [To Be Determined]
- Dr Cecil Bohanan, Ball State University
- Dr Robert Pulsinelli, Western Kentucky University
- Dr Michael Kurth, McNeese State University (Louisiana)
- Dr Bill Shughart, II, University of Mississippi
- Dr Joe Bell, Southwest Missouri State University
- Dr Terry Ridgway, University of Nevada, Las Vegas
- Dr Allen Parkman, University of New Mexico
- Dr Lowell Gallaway, Ohio University
- Dr Ed Price, Oklahoma State University
- Dr William Mitchell, University of Oregon
- Dr J.R. Clark, The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
- Dr Michael Davis, The University of Texas at Dallas
- Robert Higgs, Independent Institute, Edmonds, Washington
- Dr Charles Breeden, Marquette University
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.
The Status Report for this FDA Op-ed Program records his involvement.
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 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:
GEORGIA
Professor Dwight E. Lee, Department of Economics, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30603
Submitted to: Atlanta Constitution - declined: Augusta Chronicle - declined: Athens Banner-Herald - Published June 6,1996
[No information about congressmen contacted]
| Excise Tax Forum |
|---|
| 1996 Aug 14: Philip Morris and RJ Reynolds were trying to put together a coalition of tobacco and alcohol companies and organizations to run a three-day "Comprehensive Inter-industry Forum on Excise Taxes", to be held early January 1997 in Palm Beach, the Bahamas, or Nassau.
It would bring together "15 Leading Academics, 10 Industry Representatives, 5 Decision Makers, and 5 Representatives from the Public Policy Community [eg. think-tank operatives]." It would be funded by the tobacco companies through the Coalition Against Regressive Taxation (CART) [a tobacco front], but officially run by the Tax Foundation [A subsidiary of Citizens for a Sound Economy which is now known as FreedomWorks.] Deliverables |
1996 Dec: /E Robert Sexton has now co-written "Regulate the FDA — Not Smoking" with Dwight R Lee, who by this time was virtually working full-time as a tobacco industry lobbyist. They'd obviously become keen environmentalist, since they recycled all the old claims and phrases they've delivered many times in the past.
However they do add touches of new and exotic information — which makes one wonder how they stumbled across such esoteric data. [for about half-a-second!]
The Food and Drug Administration, with President Clinton's approval, wants to impose more regulations on advertising and selling cigarettes to reduce teenage smoking. [It goes without saying that Sexton and Lee do not approve — either about the FDA, or President Clinton]We can only guess that regular perusal of the Norwegian Medical Journal was commonplace for economists at Peppidine University when they weren't discussing Whitewater over coffee with Ken Starr.
For example, after cigarette advertising was completely banned in Finland in 1978, teenage smoking increased, even though it had been decreasing before the ban.
A similar reversal in teenage smoking was also experienced in Sweden after its 1979 ban of cigarette advertising. Norway, which banned cigarette advertising in 1975, experienced little noticeable effect on smoking rates, according to a study in the Journal of the Norwegian Medical Association.
The FDA would do more to protect lives by reducing its regulations rather than trying to expand them. Originally, the FDA was charged with protecting us from unsafe drugs. Well and good. But in the 1960s, the FDA succeeded in expanding its authority (and budget) for the purpose of protecting us from what it considers unsubstantiated claims by drug companies.
[I]f we want to save lives, we should be doing more to regulate the FDA rather than giving the FDA more to regulate.
[And there's not a mention of Lee or Sexton receiving cash payments from the Tobacco Institute in the whole article.]
1996 Dec: /E Cato Institute Annual Report: Adjunct Scholar at the Cato Institute. include Cash-for-Comments /Public Choice economists Terry Anderson, Dominick Armentano, Thomas DiLorenzo, Robert Higgs, Dwight Lee, Richard Stroup, Walter Williams and also Jennifer Roback, the Outreach Coordinator for the Center for the Study of Public Choice and Henry Manne from the GMU Law School
1997: The Independent Institute publishes "Taxing Liberty and other 'Sins': Predatory Politics and Taxation" — a book edited by William F Shughart II of the cash-for-comment economists network. Many of the network members also get to write a chapter [in bold], while the other chapters are all written by their close academic associates at Clemson, Auburn, Florida, and Californian State Univerities.
| Independent Institute Book for the Tobacco Instititue | ||
|---|---|---|
| Chapter Authors | University | Subject |
| Intro: Wm Shughart II | editor | |
| 1. William F Shugart | Mississippi | The Economies of Excise Taxation |
| 2. Brenda Yelvington | Clemson Uni | Excise Taxes in Historical Perspective |
| 3. Adam G Gifford | Cal State, Northridge | Whisky, Parchment and Margarine |
| 4. Randall G Holcombe | Florida State | The Politics of Selective Excise Taxation |
| 5. Dwight R Lee | Uni of Georgia | Overcoming Taxpayer Resistance |
| 6. Thomas J DiLorenzo | Loyola College, | Excise Taxes to Fund PC Propaganda |
| 7. Gary M Anderson | Cal State, Northridge | Bureaucratic Incentives/Taxes to Prohibition |
| 8. Mark Thornton | Auburn Uni. | Prohibition: The Ultimate Tax |
| 9. B.Benson/D. Reamussen | Florida State | Predatory Public Finance |
| 10. Richard E Wagner | George Mason | Taxation on Alcohol/Control of Social Costs |
| 11. Robert Ekelund/P. Gant | Auburn Uni | Excise Taxes the Answer to Healtcare Crisis? |
| 12. Richard K Vedder | Ohio University | Bordering on Chaos |
| 16. Gordon Tullock | Arizona State | Excise Taxation/Rent-Seeking |
| Also three professors of law. | ||
[This 626 page document is the last corrected copy of the full manuscript ready for the printer. It has last-minute white-outs and hand-corrections and insertions by a single editor in order to maintain the 'excise tax' theme. It was in the Philip Morris file cabinet of inhouse lobbyist Josh Slavitt.]
1998 Feb: /E Roy Marden of Philip Morris has created a "Third Party Message Development Contacts List" which has a range of think-tank operators, journalists, and academics who are willing to write pro-tobacco material without mentioning their tobacco connections [third-party = 'independent commentator'], or sometimes allow their names to be used as bylines on articles written by tobacco company staff.
The list often has some comments on their usefulness, and the notes on this person says:
Dwight Lee
Professor of Economics
University of Georgia
[Marden was the chief contact with the major think-tanks and millionairre family foundations.]
1998 Aug 15: The Florida "Press Journal" carried an article "Government assults 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.
Lee is listed under the heading
GEORGIA, University of Georgia
- DECLINED: Augusta Chronicle
- PUBLISHED 7-28: Athens Banner Herald
This doesn't mean that these economists stopped working for the tobacco industry — just that they kept their communications to the telephone — and Savarese didn't send their material on to the Tobacco Institute for vetting and legal checks.
1999 Jan: -July Visiting Scholar, Liberty Fund, Inc. Indianapolis, IN
[Liberty Fund is virtually a subsidiary of the Center for the Study of Public Choice at George Mason, and runs annual conferences at the center.]
2011 Dec: Two of the more greedy economists in academia write an article published in the Cato Journal. "Markets and Morality" by JR Clark and Dwight R Lee (both cash-for-comments economists) The byline carries the information that:
J. R. Clark is Professor of Economics at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, where he holds the Probasco Chair of Free Enterprise.
Dwight R. Lee is the William J. O'Neil Professor of Global Markets and Freedom at Southern Methodist University.
| Independent Institute |
|---|
| The Independent Institute, which is itself a component of the Atlas Group of ultra-free-market think tanks with links to the Alexis de Tocqueville Institute [all heavily dependent on commissioned corporate funding] appears to have taken over the role of administrator of the Tobacco Institute's cash-for-comments network at the end of the 1990s.
Their research director and journal editor, Robert Higgs, was already a member of the network. Tobacco funding continued to flow to the Independent Institute which appears to have taken on the role of 'warehousing' these academic supporters to insulate them from discovery. The Institute acquired the bulk of the cabal of cash-for-comments economists who were still operating, and some who had been retired: Senior Fellows
|
CONTRIBUTORS:samf scsu dlo2
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic License