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 5/8/2013


WARNING: This site deals only with the corporate corruption of science, and makes no inference about the motives or activities of individuals involved.
    There are many reasons why individuals become embroiled in corporate corruption activities - from political zealotry to over-enthusiastic activism; from gullibility to greed.
    Please read the OVERVIEW carefully, and make up your own mind.


Smoking-Gun docs.


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

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


James Savarese
Robert Tollison
Ctr.Study Pub.Choice

John Bagby
Randy E Barnett
Barry Baysinger
William Clarritt
Lloyd R Cohen
Steven B Dow
Steven Eagle
Robert ('Bob') Ekelund
John A Gray
Ronald X Groeber
D Bruce Johnsen
James R Kearl
Paul Lansing
Donald P Lyden
William C Mitchell
Richard Nathan
Marvin Newman
Allen M Parkman
David A Reese
John C Ruhnka
George M Sullivan
Douglas Whitman
Anthony ('Tony') Wiener




William C ('Bill') Mitchell     [Prof]    

— An Oregon professor of political science who was willing to write pro-advertising articles for the Tobacco Institute and who became part of the cash-for-comments economists network. He was an enthusiastic supporter of the cigarette industry. —  

Profesor William C Mitchell of Oregon was one of three academic economist [along with Ekelund and Parkman] who was used both in the cash-for-comments network economists, and also the smaller network of legal academics also run by James Savarese. He was a hard-core member of the network — always looking for the extra dollar.

Tobacco lobbyist James Savarese and Professor Robert Tollison of George Mason University collaborated in the 1980s to provide the tobacco industry, through the Tobacco Institute, with networks of academics in various disciplines who would be willing to write and sprout propaganda material ... always provided the payments for these services were not directly tracealble back to the Institute or to any of the cigarette companies.

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

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

The economist working for Savarese, always claim to be 'independent' 'professionals' and ' academics', and they exploited the fact that they came from some credible university. They never revealed the source of their funding in their op-eds or letters-to-the-editor.

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

The aim was to have, in each State, at least

  • 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 any 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!

Unfortunately, it worked.


The world is awash with William Mitchells, so beware.
    In the tobacco archives there is also a Sir William Mitchell of Oxford University, and a WC Mitchell and a WG "Champ" Mitchell (RJR Nabisco)
    This timeline is for William C Mitchell, Professor of Political Science, Department of Political Science, University of Oregon, Eugene who was actually a key member of both the economist's and the fredom-to-advertise networks.
    [And maybe the William C. Mitchell, Retired Chairman, Lake Shore Bancorp., Inc. 1530 Basswood Circle Glenview, Illinois ?]
    Kansas had a lawyer-lobbyist William L Mitchell (Mitchell & Henry) who also worked for the same group at the Tobacco Institute in the 1983 period as "Legislative Counsel'.
    William F. Mitchell, President Environmental Tectonics Corp. This may be the same as the William Mitchell, AREAL, involved in the TI's Indoor Air Research plans.
    There is also a William Mitchell College of Law.

Some key documents

• Professor of Political Science, Department of Political Science, University of Oregon, Eugene. OR.

1985 Dec: /E President Ronald Reagan asked Senator Bob Packwood, chairman of the US Senate Finance Committee, to design a proposal for comprehensive tax reform

which would reduce the highest individual income tax rate down to 35% from its current 50% level, but retain adequate incentives for business investment, and avoid inclusion of any new taxes.

    In an attempt to do this without reducing the total amount of tax revenue that is currently collected, the Packwood plan proposes to offset reduced revenues from income taxes by what the Wall Street Journal has referred to as a "backdoor increase in excise taxes."

    The Packwood plan proposes to eliminate the income tax deductibility of excise taxes and import tariffs paid by businesses [and it] would increase federal excise tax receipts by an estimated $75 billion over five years. Approximately $13 billion of this would be a result of a direct increase in excise taxes on motor fuel, wine, distilled spirits, and tobacco.

    See also in this document James Savarese's report to Fred Panzer at the Tobacco Institute on the progress of his Packwood Excise Tax/Op-Ed project. This economist and 18 others are writing opinion pieces for their local newspapers, and sending letters to their congressmen.
[The Packwood Plan triggered a substantial increase in the activities of the cash-for-comments economists already employed by the tobacco industry and led to the creation of the very substantial network of academic economists in every state who could be called upon to help fight tax increases on cigarettes — and later public smoking bans.]

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

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

Prof William Mitchell
    Depart of Political Science, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon 97403, 503-686-4879

1986 Mar 20: Tobacco Institute document: Background Update Of the Estimated Effect of the Packwood Tax Plan On the Price Increase Necessary For Cigarettes

If the deductibility of the excise taxes is eliminated, then most, if not all, of this tax increase will be passed on to tobacco consumers as price increases to cover the additional corporate taxes they will be required to pay, plus the indexed excise tax requirement.

    On the basis of 1985 sales, and the level of federal excise taxes paid on cigarettes, the level of taxable sales would be: $4.5 billion / $0.16 = 28.125 billion packs — the remainder are either sent overseas as exports or to armed services, or to government institutions.

    If the Packwood plan is adopted, and if the effective tax rate on tobacco corporations is 35 percent as in 1983, the increase in corporate income taxes would be about $1.83 billion.

    It must be assumed that this tax increase will be passed on to consumers in order to maintain net income. This will cause a decline in demand on the base level of 28.125 billion packs.

1986 April: Professors Joseph M Jadlow (Oklahoma) and Charles Maurice (Texas A&M) have prepared draft articles attacking the Packwood Tax Plan. James Saverese has sent them, together with clippings of articles already published, along to Fred Panzer at the Tobacco Institute for correction and clearance. (See page 10)

    It lists many dozens of articles which the cash-for-comment economist on the network have now written, including one:

Professor W Mitchell
Submitted to Paper: 3/28/86, Eugene Register Guard
Current Status: Published 4/9/86
Letter have been sent on 3/28/86 to Senators Packwood and Hatfield

    The Tobacco Institute also keeps a record of his submissions and letters to his State Senators, which is circulated to the tobacco companies (here Lorillard).

    One of the network economists, William Mitchell, has also written an "Open Letter to Senator Packwood" attacking his plan, and this is being circulated along with a letter from "Opportunities Industrialization Centers of America, Inc."

1986 Apr 1: An Open Letter to Senator Robert Packwood (by Wm Mitchell) has been sent to the network economists to help them write their articles. it is written on University of Oregon letterhead.

    This is a checklist of those in the 1) Writing Stage 2) Submitted to Newspapers 3) Letters Written to Senators.

    William Mitchell is recorded here as having had the letter-to-the-editor submitted to his designate newspapers.

1986 Apr 9: A list of excerps from major newspaper editorials and op-eds about the Packwood tax plan. Mitchell is quoted as having written a letter to the editor:

From William C. Mitchell, Professor of Political Science, University of Oregon, to: Eugene Register-Guard, April 9,1986

'The allocation of unwanted tax burdens and the elimination of tax privileges cannot vie with the appropriation of public monies for public acclaim... I should add that I also rue the use of the tax code as an instrument of social control. In any case, I oppose wiping out the gains of lower income tax rates for ordinary income taxpayers by these back-door moves and direct excise tax increases."

1986 Apr 11: The Tobacco Institute plans for State-by-State actions to generate opposition to the Packwood Tax Plan.

1986 Apr 15: Jim Savarese is reporting to Fred Panzer at the TI about the [anti] Packwood Tax Plan project. He includes numerous letters sent to Senators, copies of published op-eds, and a revised op-ed for Maine and one for Minnesota, He lists the successes of the network economists, including:

OREGON, Prof W Mitchell
[Submitted to] Eugene Register Guard 3/28/86
[Letters sent to Senators] Packwood and Hatfield 3/28/86
Published 4/9/86

    On the same day Jim Savarese is reporting to Fred Panzer at the TI about the [anti] Packwood Tax Plan project.
We have contacted the following people and have asked them to request to testify before the Senate Finance Committee on April 21, 1986. As of today, no one has been asked to testify, but here is the current status.
  • J.J. Boddewyn, New York - called and wrote [CUNY]
  • B. Poulson, Colorado - called and wrote
  • Michael Crew, New Jersey - called and wrote [Rutgers]
  • William Mitchell, Oregon - called and wrote [Uni of Oregon]
  • Richard McKenzie, Missouri - called and wrote [Washington Uni, St Louis]
  • Ann Harper-Fender, Pennsylvania - called and wrote [Gettysburg College]
  • Joseph Jadlow, Oklahoma - called and wrote [Oklahoma State]
  • Robert Tollison, Virginia and D.C. - called and wrote [George Mason]
  • John Howe, Kansas - previous commitment
  • Terry Anderson, Montana - previous commitment
  • Lee Anderson, Delaware - previous commitment
We will check back with these people daily to see if they have heard anything and I'll let you know as soon as we are successful.

1986 Apr 17: Citizens requesting to testify before the Senate Finance Committee in opposition to excise tax provisions of the Draft (Packwood) Tax Reform Bill.

    This long list of tobacco lobbyists, unionists, and political think-tank players is divided by state and includes a number of economists from the cash-for-comments network.

  • Barry Poulson, University of Colorado
  • Richard McKenzie, Washington University at St Louis
  • Michael Crew, Rutgers University
  • JJ Boddewyn, City University of New York
  • Joseph Jadlow, Oklahoma State University
  • William Mitchell, University of Oregon
  • Ann Harper-Fender, Gettysburg College
  • Robert Tollison, George Mason University

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]

Mitchell in Oregon has been given the target of planting his article on the Statesman Journal and was due for payment of $900.

    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 Jul 8: William Mitchell has taken the Tobacco Institute's commission to write a letter to the General Services Administration, opposing their plan to ban workplace smoking in government buildings. He writes on University of Oregon letter-head, and claims to be involved as...

a state employee who has been a life-long non-smoker.

    And, quite frankly, I do not like smoking and am prepared to believe that smoking does have some adverse effects for others in addition to those felt by smokers. Nevertheless, I oppose the proposed regulations for a number of reasons.
He neglects to mention the $1000 payment he received from the Tobacco Institute as one of the reasons.

1986 Jul 21: Sam Chilcote of the Tobacco Institute writes to the members of the Executive Committee detailing their successes in generating objections to the proposed GSA [Government Services Administration] anti-smoking bans.

    They have persuaded the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) to help having the rules amended, and have turned out their friends and associated companies to generate letters of objection.

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

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

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

    Letters of objection (all remarkably similar in content) from numerous academic economists were also attached. They all seemed to focus on one extraordinary aspect: the cost of implementating the ban.

    They all attacked the GSA's calculation "that the costs of NO-SMOKING signs in government buildings would cost less than $100 million annually." Robert Tollison had circulated a much higher estimate of costs (which some of the letter-writers mentioned)... and all of the economists' letters completely ignored any cost savings, such as lower cleaning and painting costs in government buildings; reduced sick days; higher productivity, etc.

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

1986 Aug 12: James Savarese writes to Fred Panzer at the Tobacco Institute who has complained that the tobacco industry needs more academic lawyers willing to provide comment in the media in support of the industry. [They are beginning a new project, and so Savarese deals with the top man rather than the middle-manager level (Peter Sparber and Susan Stunts).]

    This must be an extension of some previous project — perhaps the beginning of the Tobacco Ad-ban project — and, as with the academic economists, they want at least one paid-behind-the-scenes legal academic on-tap in each state.

    The idea is to have these academics promote the tobacco industry's causes by writing op-ed articles for their local newspapers, and acting as 'independent' witnesses at State legislature hearings or local government ordinarnce hearings, etc. Their status as an academic (rather than being crass-commercial) is the important factor. Savarese writes:

    There are 19 people on the list, 16 are lawyers and 3 are economists. The three economists are Bob Ekelund in Alabama, Bill Mitchell in Oregon, and JR Kearl in Utah.
    • Professor Ekelund is an expert on the economics of advertising and knows the law.
    • Professor Mitchell is a political scientist tuned into the constitution and an expert on first amendment arguments.
    • Professor Kearl is probably the only person in Utah who will make these arguments.
    We have used both Ekelund and Mitchell on other projects with the Tobacco Institute.

        We are still having problems with New Jersey but have calls in to several people. I'll let you know as soon as we get someone there. As you can see, the majority of these people are new with the exception of Ekelund, Parkman, and Mitchell. They all understand the issue and will be on call should we need them.
This is an extension of the economists networks and uses some of the same cash-for-comments academic economists (even though they are not lawyers). Savarese also attaches the annual report from the Public Choice Center at George Mason University. [This was Tollison's money-laundry service]

    The reference for this academic was:
Professor William Mitchell

Department of Political Science, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403, 503-6B6-4B79
[Comments:] Bill will be in Washington in late August for the American Political Science Association meetings. He would like to go to lunch with us on August 28. I didn't make any commitments.

1986 Aug 12: The cash-for-comments academic lawyer network was run by Savarese. It included three economists

enclosed is the academic lawyer list. There are 19 people on the list, 16 are lawyers and 3 are economists.

    We are still having problems with New Jersey but have calls in to several people. I'll let you know as soon as we get someone there.

    As you can see, the majority of these people are new with the exception of Ekelund, Parkman, and Mitchell. They all understand the issue and will be on call should we need them.
[The two copies of this list of cash-for-comments lawyers have minor differences, probably reflecting the date of recruitment of the academics. See both below.]
  • ALABAMA, Professor Robert Ekelund, Dept of Economics, Auburn University [Also economists network]
    • Los Angeles/Southern California — Professor Donald P Lyden (Woodland Hills, CA) Don is a business law professor at California State University at Northridge
    • San Diego — Lloyd R Cohen, JD. PhD — California Western School of Law, San Diego.
  • COLORADO, Professor John C Ruhnka, University of Colorado, Graduate School of Business Administration, Denver
  • FLORIDA, Professor Marvin Newman — Rollins College in Winter Park, Clearwater,FL
  • ILLINOIS, Professor Randy E Barnett, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago-Kent College of Law, Chicago
  • IOWA, Professor Paul Lansing — Department of Industrial Relations, Phillips Hall, University of Iowa
  • KANSAS, Professor Douglas Whitman — University of Kansas School of Business, Lawrence KS
  • MARYLAND, Professor John A. Gray — Loyola College, School of Business and Management, Baltimore,
    On vacation until 8/18/86
  • MICHIGAN, Professor Steven B Dow— Michigan State University,Dept of Business Law, East Lansing/Detroit
  • MINNESOTA, Dr David A Reese, Gustavus Adoiphus College, St Peter, MN
  • NEW JERSEY/Camden/Rutgers, Professor William Clarritt — Rutgers University, Department of Business and Accounting, Newark, NJ
  • NEW MEXICO, Professor Allen Parkman — School of Management, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, [Also economists network]
    • New York City, Anthony Wiener, Professor of Management, Polytechnic University of New York, Brooklyn
      Tony will be out of the country during August. He was very enthusiastic about the free speech arguments. Harvard J.D., with strong economic emphasis in his teaching and research.
    • Rochester, Professor George M Sullivan — Rochester Institute of Technology, College of Business, Rochester, NY
      George would like to see a legal brief on the subject he is arguing.
  • OHIO/Cincinnati, Prof Richard Nathan, Ohio State University, Columbus ohio
  • OREGON, Professor William Mitchell — Department of Political Science, University of Oregon, Eugene, [Also economists network]
    Bill will be in Washington in late August for the American Political Science Association meetings. He would like to go to lunch with us on August 28.
  • PENNSYLVANIA, Professor John Bagby, State College, PA
    John is a business law professor at Penn State, which is about halfway between Pittsburg and Philadelphia.
  • UTAH/Salt Lake City, Professor JR Kearl — Department of Economics, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT
    Jim is Mormon, so he has a problem with most Tobacco Institute issues; however, he says he would probably be comfortable with a 1st Amendment op-ed on the advertising ban.
  • TEXAS, D Bruce Johnsen— Department of Management, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX

1986 Dec 8: Sam Chilcote is summing up the Tobacco Institute's activities in fighting the Packwood Tax Plan which attempted to impose special excise taxes on tobacco, alcohol and fuel (in the oil crisis years) to reduce use. Packwood also wanted to make these taxes and tarffs non-deducatable for federal income tax purposes.

    The document bundle (219 pages) includes:

  • Pages 2 to 34: A major study done for the TI by Policy Economics Group
  • Pages 35 to 50: Another major study commissioned from DeSeve Economics for the Coalition Against Regressive Taxation (CART) [funded by tobacco to act as a front]
  • Pages 51 to 57: A couple of papers done for Covington & Burling
  • Pages 58 to 100: A long document which has deliberately NOT included the name of the organisation which produced it within the document itself. (But done by deSeve Economics Associates Inc).
  • Pages 101 to 129 : A paper on the "Burden of Tobacco Taxes on Selected Demographic Groups"
  • Pages 130 to 144: Some booklet trying to rabble-rouse the Hispanic and Black communities and make them believe Packwood is attacking them racially.
  • Page 145 to 177: A Citizens for Tax Justice 'poll' on attitudes. and Coalition Against Regressive Taxation document
  • From Page 178 on: many of the op-eds they have had published in newspapers by the cash-for-comment academic economists, (including one from this source.)

See Mitchell article on page 182 of the document bundle.

1986 Dec 11: James Savarese sends Fred Panzer at the Tobacco Institute a summary of the activities of his network of economists. This is effectively the beginning of the main cash-for-comments economists network.

Dear Fred,
    I have attached a list of all the economists we have used along with the projects they have worked on in behalf of the Tobacco Institute.
There are now 62 names on the list (Some states have 4 or 5) not counting himself and Bob Tollison. The details given for each consist of State, Regional Division [of the TI], Name, Address and Telephone number. Added to this is a list of the 'Projects' they have completed (in later lists, also the names of Congressmen they have contacted.)

    Virtually all of these cash-for-comment academics have been generating op-ed articles for newspapers, or have, in some unspecified way, opposed the Packwood Excise Tax plan — or perhaps helped fake up one of the 'Chase' [Econometrics studies]. A few participants have attended Congressional or government inquiries ['Treasury I') or local ordinance hearings as 'independent witnesses' while secretly acting for the tobacco industry. Two of the 64 members (Ann Harper-Fender and Gary Anderson) were acting termporarily as advisors to Ronald Reagan's Advisory Council on Intergovernmental Relations— which sought to bring pressure on the FDA, EPA and OSHA and stop them being pro-active with smoking bans.

    Other participants have been promoting the industry line at various academic conferences and fora [mainly as keynote speakers at economic society meetings] , and a few of the core-team were involved in brianstorming sessions with members of the tobacco industry looking for new angles for their PR, and for possible research project which might generate some economic propaganda for the industry.

    Many of them have joined in with the industry's orchestrated letter-writing campaigns opposing workplace smoking bans.
  • GSA = 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:
Oregon [ Region V ]

Professor William Mitchell

    Department of Political Science, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon 97403, 503-686-4879

    Services rendered:
    • Packwood
    • GSA letter writing campaign

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

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

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

    The attached invoice covers the project of re-contacting the original 42 economists and coming up with the present 34 people.
[The invoice is missing, and he gives no details of the current project.]

    An internal memo within the Tobacco Institute explains to Regional Directors why they had needed Savarese to check on availability:
The primary purpose of this contact is to determine if a given economist is capable of testifying effectively before a legislative body.

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

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

1987 Jan 6: Savarese writes to Fred Panzer at the Tobacco Institute.

Attached are the three op-ed articles and the current lawyers list. As you know, the Institute has paid for the lawyer list. These three op-eds were sent to Anne and you before the holidays. The attached invoice is for production of the three pieces.

    Production of three advertising opinion editorials..... $3,000
['Anne' is probably Anne Duffin, but could be Anne Tollison.
    The list is the same as the longer version above.]

1987 Feb 6: Jim Savarese, Bob Tollison and Henry Butler write to "Participants in advertising op-ed project"[the academic economists on the Tollison/Savarese list].

We are finally ready to get this first op-ed project off the ground. I am asking you to review the attached materials and write an editorial for a major newspaper in your state. This article should support the basic right to advertise legal products and oppose attempts to restrict advertising either by outright bans or by punitive use of the tax code.

    Obviously, the point of this exercise is to support tobacco's right to advertise on basic constitutional grounds. Arguments which touch on issues such as censorship, cutting off the free flow of information, and even the experiences in other countries with such bans might be useful.

    Upon completion of a draft op-ed, please send it to me immediately via Federal Express. I will go over the article and return it to you for submission to a newspaper. At that time you will be given some guidelines for submitting your editorial to a newspaper and an appropriate newspaper in your state.

    If you have any questions, please feel free to call Anna Tollison, Jim Savarese, or Linda Prichett at 202-466-7590. You can also direct any technical questions to Bob Tollison at 703-323-3771 or Henry Butler at 703-841-2665.
[Note this letter gives us a detailed account of how the op-ed system worked, and how much these "independent" academics were expected to conform to tobacco industry control in return for their generous payments.

    Note also, that this is directed to new academic economists. The letter below, appears to have been for the established cash-for-comment academics.]

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

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

1987 Feb 6: [Same day as above] a letter to "Economists" from Jim Savarese, Bob Tollison and Dwight Lee [Note, not Henry Butler here] Re" Excise Tax Op-ed" says:

We have received our first op-ed project of 1987 and for many of you it is a familiar one. The issue once again is opposition from any and all reasonable angles to an increase in cigarette excise taxes.

    We are attaching some materials which may be of help in formulating your argument and generating relevant data. Some of the more salient points are listed below:
[This list gives figures, promotes the regressive nature of such taxes, and requests "earmark" arguments against the use of excises to fund Medicare, health care, environmental protection.]
It is important that we generate a generalized opposition to the principle of earmarking revenues.

    Upon completion of a draft op-ed, please send it to me immediately via Federal Express. I will go over the article and return it to you for submission to a newspaper. At that time you will be given some guidelines for submitting your editorial to a newspaper and an appropriate newspaper in your state.

    If you have any questions, please feel free to call Anna Tollison, Jim Savarese, or Linda Pritchett at 202-466-7590. You can also direct any technical questions to Bob Tollison at 703-323-3771 or Dwight Lee at 404-542-1311.

1987 Feb 26: Savarese to Panzer on Tobacco Ad-Ban Op-ed Project

I have attached three more editorials. They are from:
  • Donald P. Lyden, Southern California
  • William C. Mitchell, Oregon
  • Paul Lansing, Iowa This brings the total as of today to five editorials.
I will wait to hear from you before I send these back to the authors for newspaper submission.

[The other two were specialists in Industrial Relations, rather than economics]

1987 Mar 16: Savarese writes to Fred Panzer at the Tobacco Institute about the operations of his legal-advertising network (not the main economists network — Parkman is a member of both).

Enclosed are revisions to articles by [D Bruce] Johnson, [Steven] Eagle, [Donald P] Lyden, [William C] Mitchell, [Paul] Lansing, [Lloyd R] Cohen, and [Douglas] Whitman.

    The [Allen] Parkman piece won't do. It needs to be entirely rewritten.

    We will get back the next batch of three soon:
  • "Law, Advertising, Cigarettes" by Marvin E, Newman, Orlando, Fla,;
  • "If We Let Congress Across this Line — What Next?" by John C. Ruhnka, University of Colorado;
  • "Proposed Ban on Tobacco Advertising" by Steven B. Dow, Dept. of Business Law, Michigan State University.

    Mitchell's draft article (included here) is "The Case Against an Advertising Ban on Tobacco" and it has been extensively edited and 'improved' by Tobacco Institute staff.

1987 Mar 17: The Status report on the Tobacco Ad-Ban project has numerous comments about the editing and rewriting of articles, and the submissions for publication of the various cash-for-comments lawyers involved in this scam. [See actual]

    They are still filling in some important states in the network:

Pittsburgh and Philadelphia — We are working to find a good academic-minded lawyer in the state of Pennsylvania.
Anna Tollison, who signs herself "Assistant to Mr Savarese" has updated the Status Report. For this member she writes:
OREGON (Mitchell)
3/19 Sent back to author for submission to Oregonian

1987 Mar 24: Jim Savarese writes to Jeff Ross at the Tobacco Institute about the "Tobacco Excise Tax Op-ed Project".

Attached please find two more excise tax op-eds and a copy of the clipping from the Hartford Courant.

    As of today, 18 articles have been written and 2 articles have been published. As I mentioned earlier, the Des Moines Register has accepted an article and we have a good chance at the Houston Post.
Attached were 7 new articles (in draft form) from Professors Chuck Mason, Dennis Logue, Charles Maurice, Dominick Armentano, William Mitchell, Robert McMahon, and Clifford Dobitz.

    Mitchell's contribution is "The Taxman Cometh." Without directly promoting the tobacco industry cause, he uses cigarettes as an example of government's "proclivity" to tax everything.
Although excise taxes are politically popular in the short run, they are unsound in the long-run, ineffectual social policy, and manifestly unfair. They should be resisted.

1987 Apr 14: 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.

Salem, Oregon Statesman-Journal , April 14, 1987
"Although excise taxes are politically popular in the short run, they are unsound in the long run, ineffectual social policy and manifestly unfair. They should be resisted."

William C. Mitchell, professor of political science, University of Oregon

1987 Apr 14: Jim Savarese sends payment details for the "Tobacco Ad Ban Project" to the Tobacco Institute.



Local Newspaper

ALABAMA Ekelund Montgomery Adv. $400
LA Herald Ex.
San Diego Union
COLORADO Ruhnka Denver Post
FLORIDANewmanOrlando Sentin
INDIANALanfvardtIndianapolis St
ILLINOISKindtChicago Tribune$400
IOWALansingDes Moines Reg.$800
KANSASWhitmanKansas City Star$700
MARYLANDGray Baltimore Sun
MICHIGANDow Lansing St. Jrnl
MINNESOTAReeseSt. Paul Pioneer
NEW JERSEYClarrittNewark Star
NEW MEXICOParkmanAlbuquerque Jrnl
(not spec.)
Democrat Chron

OHIOEagleToledo Blade$800
OREGONMitchellOregonian $800
UTAHKearlSalt Lake Trib
TEXASJohnsenDallas Times $700

Bob Tollison, Bill Shughart, Gary Anderson & Carol Roberts
re-writes, editing, and research, — 11 articles + production
. Expenses$450
. TOTAL $16,450

    A later May 7 account show higher payments were made

Cuttings of published articles were coped to the Tobacco Institute. See

1987 Apr 17: Savarese to Panzer re Senate Finance Committee Testimony:

I have enclosed a copy of the letter that Bob Tollison received from the Senate Finance Committee in regard to his request to testify before the committee on April 21.

    Most of our economists have received the same letter. Here's the way it looks now
  • B. Poulson, Colorado — no word as yet
  • R. McKenzie, Missouri — rejected
  • M. Crew, New Jersey — rejected
  • J.J. Boddewyn, New York — no word as yet
  • J. Jadlow, Oklahoma — no word as yet
  • W. Mitchell, Oregon — rejected
  • A. Harper-Fender, Pennsylvania — rejected
  • R. Tollison, Virginia and D.C. — rejected

1987 May 5: Cotton Mather ('Matt') Lindsay of Clemson University has written an article "Excise Taxes: Facist Finance" which is being circulated at the Tobacco Institute. He has discovered through his extensive research that:

it is difficult to achieve vertleal equity [equal burden on everyone] through excise taxes because the amount of the tax paid depends on purchases rather than income.

    Breweries and tobacco companies write checks to the government for the excise taxes on beer and cigarettes, but here economists agree; these companies pass these taxes on to consumers. One's share of the burden of the revenues raised by these taxes depends on how much beer one drinks and how much one smokes.

    The unfairness of these excises is manifest; it is not merely another economists' debating point. The tobacco excise tax, for example, is the most regressive tax in the federal system. It is paid only by smokers who are today predominantly lower-middle income earners, lower income working women and blue collar workers.

    Some have argued that these taxes are appropriate because the funds can be earmarked for expenditures like Medicare, environmental protection and even public employee pensions. Why beer drinkers and cigarette smokers ought to pay more for such things is far from clear, however. To the extent that these activities shorten life, they relieve the burdens of Medicare and pension funds by removing potential claimants from the eligibility roles.

    Viewed from another perspective, smokers and beer drinkers not only bear a disproportionate share of taxes because they pay excises on these commodities, but they get less for their money, too. Because they live a shorter life span, they collect less in retirement benefits and receive fewer Medicare benefits.

    This may be fine for Mussolini, but it is antithetical to tax principles in a free and open society.
This simplistic analysis is accompanied by a list of the cash-for-comments economist from the network [to whom it will presumably be sent as an example (See note "at last....")] together with handwritten notes as to the skills and value of each as witnesses at legislatures or local ordinance hearings.

Professor William Mitchell:
"Yes, Good witness"

1987 May 6: Mitchell has written a Tobacco Institute-inspired article "Banning cigarette ads not the way to help others" for the Oregonian.

    He uses the old tobacco claims that advertising is not an important factor in recruiting new smokers [which begs the question as to why the industry throws away billions of dollars are year on such an unproductive enterprise] and he tries to increase his credibility by exploiting his non-smoking status — a well known and well-established lobbyists' ploy.

While I personally am a life-long non-smoker, I do not believe that my civic well-being will be advanced by bans on cigarette ads;

See Page 8

1987 May 18: The Tobacco Institute had James Savarese & Associates's accounts audited because of "possible improprieties noted during the examination of the initial two-month period." The auditor found that:
  1. It was a one-employee operation - Savarese billed at a rate of $150 per hour, or approximately $300,000 a year.
  2. He only keeps rough accounts and has no contract with the Tobacco Institute.
  3. He marks up the conveyed cost of all subcontracters by varying amounts up to 100%.
  4. Often the name of the subcontractor is not disclosed or [their existence] establishable... because of concerns that disclosure of their remuneration by the Tobacco Indsitute could harm the credibility of the work they produce."
The examination of the books revealed to the auditor that:
  • The inital "Economic Impact" research was done by Robert and Anna Tollison, with help from William F Shughart, and EA Masaitis.
  • The Economists list was put thogether by Robert and Anna Tollison, with help from Carol Roberts and DRL Inc.
  • A so-called "Prohibition Video project" done by Mary Claire Sanders (charge at $300 per week — totally $4,700) seems to have been a hidden supplementary payment made under directions of senior staff at the Tobacco Insitute. Ms Saunders was employed by the TI through a temporary employment services to work with the TI on Federal Relations.
Recommendations: That "independent consultants and subcontractors working under Savarese's direction, bill to, and be paid directly, by The Institute unless there is an important business reason to do otherwise. "
[There is no record that economist-contractors were paid directly, so the TI must have found "important business reasons to do otherwise."]

1987 May 18: The same day as the [above] audit report, James Savarese & Associates was placed under contract with the Tobacco Institute for two years. There is nothing unusual in the contract except that:

  • The Tobacco Institute wanted approval rights over all staff.
  • They attached a list of billing rates for various staff and services.
  • Approval was now with TI's "Vice President for Issues Management." [ Susan Stuntz]
  • Robert Tollison was formally recognised as a primary subcontractor of James Savarese & Associates, to be paid at $100 per hour.
  • Leslie Dawson, Savarese's full-time employee, was paid at $95 per hour.
  • William F Shughart, EA Massitis, Anna Tollison and Carol Robert were approved subcontractors paid at unspecified amounts.
  • There is no suggestion that the Tobacco Institute began paying contract academics direct (as per auditor recommendations).

1987 May 22: Evaluation notes from the Regional Director of the Northern Sector about each of his cash-for-comment economists says about this academic:

Yes: Good witness

1987 May 28: George Minshew at the Tobacco Institute receives an email from his Regional Director "Economic Witness Evaluations - Region V"

I've talked with eaoh of the lobbyists in Region V coneerning the list of economic witnesses provided by Public Affairs.

    Each of the lobbyists felt strongly that the program could be effective; especially if TI was to develop a method to throughly brief potential witnesses "pre-Iegislative crisis". Following is a brief evaluation of each economist provided by the appropriate lobbyist.
  • Professor Suuner LaCroix,
    Department of Economies, University of Hawaii, Honolulu
          Counsel Suzuki has not had an opportunity to utilize Professor LaCroix in past legislative sessions. However, he does feel that he could be an important asset in future legislative battles.
  • Professor Allan Dalton,
    Economics Department, Boise State University
          Counsel Bill Roden has met and talked with Professor Dalton on several occasions, however they have never discussed excise taxes. Professor Dalton's professional reputation is excellent and Bill feels that he would be an articulate witness for a legislative hearing. Counsel Roden has not asked Professor Dalton to testify in the past, but will discuss possible future testimony with the Professor before the start of the next legislative session.
  • Professor Terry Anderson
    Department of Economics, Montana State University, Bozeraan, MT TI
          Counsel Jerry Anderson reports that Professor Anderson testified during the 1985 legislative session regarding an excise tax increase. The testimony which he provided was well received as being credible and authoritative. Counsel Anderson also retains Professor Anderson to testify on behalf of his oil industry clients. When it is appropriate during future legislative sessions, Counsel Anderson intends to continue utilizing this resource.
  • Professor William Mitchell Department of Political Science, University of Oregon, Eugene
          Professor Mitchell expressed his Interest in the excise tax issue and demonstrated his expertise in a recent guest editorial for The Oregonian. TI Counsel Hank Crawford feels that Professor Mitchell's reputation is excellent and his testimony at future legislative hearings would be crucial.
  • Dr Mark Schmitz,
    Seattle WA
          Counsel Bill Fritz does not feel that Dr Schmitz would be an appropriate witness for TI at this time.
  • Dr Dennis L. Chinn, PhD
    Consulting Economist, Bellevue, WA
          Dr Chinn has provided extensive writing, consulting, and expert testimony on behalf of TI during past legislative sessions. Counsel Fritz feels that Dr Chinn is an effective consultant and his services will definitely be utilized again in future tax fights

1987 June 9: The Tobacco Institute's Phase II - Excise Tax Op-Ed project involved an article-writing campaign by cash-for-comment economists.

    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 were in partnership, and 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.
OREGON,Mitchell, Salem Statesman Journal, [circ.] 60,400, [pub date] 4/14/87

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:
  • 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.
This is not a question of academic freedom, but of trusted academics engaged surrepticiously in commerical lobbying.

1987 Jun 22: Schedule of Payments for the "Tobacco Ad Ban Project" Some of the lawyers appear to have dropped out.



Local Newspaper
ALABAMA Ekelund Montgomery Adv. $2000
LA Herald Ex.
San Diego Union
COLORADO Ruhnka Denver Post $1800
FLORIDANewmanOrlando Sentin $800
INDIANALanfvardtIndianapolis St $1500
ILLINOISKindtChicago Tribune$1400
IOWALansingDes Moines Reg.$2000
KANSASWhitmanKansas City Star$2000
MICHIGANDow Lansing St. Jrnl $1500
MINNESOTAReeseSt. Paul Pioneer $1500
NEW MEXICOParkmanAlbuquerque Jrnl $1500

OHIOEagleToledo Blade$1200
OREGONMitchellOregonian $2000
TEXASJohnsenDallas Times $1500

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".

Mitchell for Statemn. Jrnl —Owed $1100 — Total to date $2000
Also there were payments to George Mason production staff ( Bob Tollison, Bill Shughart and Gary Anderson) for rewrites ($27,500) and a $5,800 payment for replacement of five economists (presumably because they were unproductive or unsatisfactoy). Carol Roberts was also paid for the final production. ($5,000)

    Total here with expenses was $33,810 on top of the $40,525 paid to the network economists.

1987 July: a selected group of the economists have been commissioned to write op-eds about cutting the deficit — and to de-emphasise the value of excise taxes. Generally they follow the line of listing four possibilities approaches

  • a general consumption tax (efficient but regressive)
  • increased excise taxes (inefficient and regressive)
  • a national lottery (regressive and competitive with State lotteries)
  • increased income taxes (unpopular)
In this bundle are very similar articles planted on their local newspaper in the March-April period by
  • Dwight Lee (2 of),
  • Dominick Armentano (3 of),
  • John Howe,
  • Joseph Jadlow,
  • S Charles Maurice (2 of),
  • Thomas Pogue,
  • Cecil Bohanon (2 of),
  • Chuck Mason,
  • JR Clark (2 of),
  • Allen Parkman.
  • Robert Ekelund Jr. (2 of),
  • William Mitchell,
  • Cliff Dobitz (2 of),
  • Barry Poulson,
  • William Hunter,
  • Michael Kurth,
  • John David,
  • David Gay,
  • Lee Anderson,
  • Robert McMahon,
  • Craig McPhee,
  • Brian Goff (2 of),
  • Dennis Logue,
  • Thomas Wyrick,
  • Arthur Mead,
  • Richard Wagner.

[This was one of their most successful projects. Professor Dominick Armentano writes to Anna Tollison [wife of Robert] that "... the article went national"]

1987 Aug 21: Jeff Ross at the Tobacco Institute has prepared a consolidated summary of "Field Staff Evaluation of Economists" for his superiors, William Kloepfer and Peter Sparber. They have been asked to look at 34 of these academics. This includes an outline of their recent achievements.

Professor William Mitchell
University of Oregon Eugene, OR

Excise Tax Op Eds: Salem Statesman Journal — 04/14/87
Economic Witness/Testimony:
Field Staff Contact: Yes.
Field Staff Evaluation: Excellent reputation; testimony at future legislative hearings would be instrumental.

1987 Aug 31: Peter Sparber [Issues Manager] to Bill Kloepfer [PR head] at the Tobacco Institute:

Jeff [Rose] has done a good job of summarizing the economic consultant situation and I am attaching my copy of his report with some marginal notes. I think he should consider sending a collection of all of the published op-ed pieces to each of the consultants for the sake of inspiration.

    In the case of those who have not had an article accepted for publication I would like to know whether they submitted one.
[This memo leaves no room for doubt that these economists knew precisely who they were working for, and why they were being paid (about $1000 per article) by the tobacco industry.]

    The economists were visited by State [regional] tobacco staff, and subject to an evaluation of their work and their prospects. Not all measured up. Jeff Ross reported:
Two general comments from field staff warrant some consideration. Michael Brozak recommended a political orientation to prepare witnesses for potentially politicized hearings.

    We agree and recommend that State Activities consider advising field staff to conduct such briefings as appropriate. Richard Scanlan suggested that an economist from the state capital city is much more valuable. We have asked Savarese and Tollison to see if they can identify a candidate.

1988 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.
    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.
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]
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:
  • 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.
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.

    They also want to commission studies. They suggest:
  • 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.
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.

    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:
Targeted paper: Eugene Register Guard
Economist: Bill Mitchell, University of Oregon

[Why selected:] Sen. Bob Packwood, ranking Minority Member of the Senate Finance Committee, is from Oregon.

1988 Jan 28: The Secretary of State for Oregon is seeking comments on a ballot initiative (Measure 5) which rests on additional money raised from cigarettes (1 cent a pack) and beer excise taxes being used for intercollegiate athletic programs,

    The Teamsters Union and William C Mitchell file objections.

1988 Feb 8: The Tobacco Institute to its Regional VPs and Directors.

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

1988 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.

    Sen. Bob Packwood, ranking Minority Member of the Senate Finance Committee, is from Oregon.

Targeted paper: Eugene Register Guard
Economist: Bill Mitchell, University of Oregon

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.

    Mitchell has managed to plant "Tax increases not solution to reducing deficit." on The Register-Guard (June 20)

1988 June 2: James Savarese has advised the Tobacco Institute on the current status of the "NEC Excise Tax" project. The cash-for-comments economists involved were Abrams, Armentano, Clark, Dalton, David, Davis, Howe, Logue, Maurice, Mitchell, Parkman, Sandler, Tuerck, Wyrick, and Miletello

As it now stands, 5 articles have been published, 2 articles (New Mexico and Missouri) are forthcoming, 6 articles have been submitted for publication, and 5 articles are in the revision stage. We have contacted the authors of the articles which are in the revision stage and those articles should be submitted by the end of next week.

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 July 6: /E 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 Oct 17: Jim Savarese, writes to Fred Panzer about their new Tobacco Ad-ban project. This is a different group to the economists, but William Mitchell serves in both capacities (as does Robert Ekelund and Allen Parkman);

I have attached a list of some of the lawyers who participated in the Ad Ban campaign in February 1987. These are the ones I would recommend to use again, but remember we haven't contacted these people since 1987 so I don't know if they are still available or still at the same schools. We should also try to find a couple for the Northeast Area.
He lists 14 tame lawyers who wrote articles for them in 1987, and among the list was "Oregon, William Mitchell, Oregonian — 5-6-87"

1988 Dec 8: Jim Savarese has sent a revised version of Mitchell's article along to Fred Panzer. Mitchell has obligingly made the required changes:

Attached is op-ed from William C. Mitchell with your revisions. Please obtain legal clearance.

    At much the same time Mitchell has sent in a draft of his paper "Advertising of Tobacco Products" which pre-empts both the inauguration of President George HW Bush and the expectation that the Democrat Congress will be implementing bans of this kind.
If the government decides to ban all advertising of tobacco products, it will have set a most dangerous precedent for then it will be increasingly difficult to stop with a ban on ads for that single product. Why not prevent advertising of guns, alcohol, coffee, violent sports, truffles, "Big Macs," beef steaks, butter, and all those wonderful things that define us as sinful.

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]
    • Bill Orzechowski, Tobacco Institute
    • Robert Tollison, George Mason University
    • Richard Wagner, George Mason University
    • Dwight Lee, University of Georgia, Athens
    • Michael Davis, Southern Methodist University
    • Gary Anderson, California State at Northridge
    • William Prendergast (resource: Prendergast/Solmon papers)
    • Other Network economists [see Secondary attached list below]

          "Due by mid-year is a book examining earmarking and "user fees" from a public choice perspective. The treatise will contain 8-10 chapters written by respected economists, including, Henri LePage and Nobel laureate James Buchanan."
    The Tobacco Institute's list of cash-for-comments professors and senior academics who were available to write op-eds and give evidence at Congressional hearings, etc. had grown extensively.

    William Mitchell, Univ. of Oregon

[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 Feb 28: Mitchell has written to Congressmen Peter DeFazio (and another unreadable) and to Senator Packwood.

Enclosed is a copy of a brief paper I prepared during the Christmas vacation on the advertizing of tobacco products. As soon as I learn of specific measures on the matter I will rewrite the paper as an OP-ED and submit to Oregon newspapers. Although various Congressional proposals will differ, I doubt that my principles and approach will be significantly altered. Thus, you can anticipate the major themes I am likely to emphasize in any future OP-ED.

    Your own views on this -"important issue are of interest to me and should they, presently, differ, I hope that you will consider revision.

    It takes a couple of months, but Mitchell gets replies.

1989 Mar 14: James Savarese & Associates is billing the Tobacco Institute for

Tobacco Advertising Ban Project:

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:
      Received by Savarese   12-1
      Sent to Fred Panzer      12-1
      Returned to Savarese   12-12
      Returned to the Economist 12-15
Rejected byEugene Reg. Guard
Resubmitted 1-25Statesman-Journal

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.

  • Robert Tollison
  • Richard Wagner
  • David ER Gay
  • Dwight Lee
  • William C Mitchell
  • Burton Abrams
  • Cecil E Bohanon
  • Charles Breeden
  • William J Hunter
  • Bruce Benson
  • Burton Weisbrod
  • Bruce Yandle
  • Roger L Faith
  • Roger Congleton
  • James Buchanan
  • Gary Anderson
  • Peter J Boettke
  • Jeffrey R Clark
  • Robert J Staaf
This document also contains a list of the Public Choice Society's participants, many of whom were also members of the economist's network.

1989 April 18: Susan Stuntz (Issues Manager) at the Tobacco Institute memoes her boss Sam Chilcote. She is sending him material previously used for a two-day "Gerry Long" presentation. He wants to use it in a shorter one-day (unspecified) briefing session.

[Gerald H Long was the CEO of RJ Reynolds who in 1988 had just taken over as Chairman of the Tobacco Institute's Executive Committee and wanted to make changes.]

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

The outline for the Powerpoint slides is here in full, together with the names of the politicians they were required to influence. It boasts that the..
Economists' Network 64 Strong [is] Targeted to Congressional Tax Writing Committees [and utilizing the] Production of Op-Eds on Federal Tax Policy.
[List of economists]

1989 Dec 14: Jim Savarese is listing the economists taking part in their new Excise Tax Op-Ed project.

I have also listed the newspapers we plan to target and a package of the materials we are sending to the economists.

    We should start getting drafts of the op-eds around the first of the year.
This economist is on the list for OREGON, Eugene Register Guard

Multiple projects
Mitchell, Ekelund, Parkman and Staaf worked for both the Economists network (run jointly by Savarese and Tollison) and for the Advertising-ban network (run entirely by Savarese).

    There were two major Tobacco Advertising Op-ed projects, one in 1986 and the second in 1989-90.

    It is noteable that very often professors of business or business law working for them in the Ad Op-ed projects came from the same universities as the core members of the Economists network. Presumably these economists had been asked to recruit someone from the other discipline.

1990 Jan 16: Savarese has sent Carol Hrycaj at the Tobacco Institute another first draft of a Mitchell article. It is a pre-emptive attack on President Bush who faces a problem of a $40 billion deficit reduction.

In addition to the uncertainties and constraints, there is the all-important, oft-repeated promise of President Bush: "Read My Lips: No New Taxes." We could manage very well, indeed, with no new taxes if spending could be cut but neither President Bush nor the Congress is willing to do that. Both are caught between the proverbial rock and a hard place.
He is apparently writing this article to alert readers to the possibility that the administration might try to raise cigarette taxes.

    Mitchell's article (roughly corrected by the Tobacco Institute) is sent to David Remes at the tobacco lawyers Covington and Burling for a legal check.
Enclosed, for your review, are three op-eds and three letters prepared by consulting economists.

    The articles, prepared by Dwight Lee, J. R. Clark and William Mitchell, are a part of an op–ed program on the current excise tax/"user fee" debate. The authors will seek publication in local newspapers.

    The letters, written by Lee, Clark and William Shughart, respond to reports that an administration "task force" is considering recommending tobacco tax increases on the grounds that such taxes are "user fees." The authors will send the correspondence to select administration officials.

    Martha Warren at Shook Hardy & Bacon, the more secretive of the tobacco lawyers, gets the same letter and attachments.

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.

William Mitchell, Univ. of Oregon
has been given the Eugene Register Guard as his propaganda target.

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.
This is an updated list with the current locations of each, with phone numbers and addresses.
Prof William Mitchell
Depart of Political Science, University of Oregon
Eugene, Oregon 97403 503-686-4879

1990 May 15: Mitchell gets a standard form-letter thank-you note from Senator Mark Hatfield for "providing me with your views on excise taxes and user fees. I appreciate your taking the time to contact me." [Aw! Shucks! It was nothing Senator. And it earned me a thousand bucks.]

Rep Peter DeFazio, however, writes back with a two-page letter in political economy from the viewpoint of Deomocrat: he thinks the Reagan 'tax reforms' were " "one of the greatest rip-offs in the nation's history."" He wants corporate loopholes closed, and the rich to pay their fair share.

    He appears to be trying to recruit Mitchell to his cause. Clearly, he hadn't discerned that Mitchell was an academic lobbyist.

1990 Jun: - July The Monthly Communications Activities report of the Tobacco Institute lists:

  • The Economic Policy Institute (EPI) prepared a response to the recent Congressional Budget Office study, "Federal Taxation of Tobacco, Alcoholic Beverages and Motor Fuels." Distributed to Members, the media and other interests, the response rebuts the CBO's methodology and concludes: "No matter what criteria for the tax burden one uses. increasing excise taxes will mean an increased tax burden on the majority of Americans of modest incomes." A copy of EPI's material and the National Journal article featuring the analysis are enclosed.
  • Economists are weighing in on the federal budget debate with a new series of anti-excise tax op-eds in key congressional districts. Economists appearing in print (copies enclosed) include :
    • JR. Clarke, Jackson (TN) Sun and Memphis Commercial
    • Ryan Amacher, Anderson (GA1 Independent-Mail;
    • Todd Sandler, Fort Dodge (IA) Messencter;
    • Domenick Armentano, Hartford (CT) Courant;
    • William Mitchell, Register Guard (OR); and
    • Barry Poulson, Alamaso (CO) Valley Courier.

See page 5

1990 June: He wrote op-ed and/or gave witness for the Tobacco Institute. He is now available for consultation.

6/90 Anti-excise tax/"no taxes" op-ed published in The Register Guard

1990 June: The Annual Report by Carol Hrycaj to the Tobacco Institute makes special mention of Mitchell.

After weeks of budget discussions involving administration officials and congressional leaders, President Bush rescinded his "no new taxes" pledge by issuing a statement calling for "tax revenue increases." The debate then shifted from whether taxes would be raised to which taxes; reports indicated that cigarette excises were at the top of the list of revenue options.

    The recently commissioned consulting economist anti-excise tax op-ed campaign moved forward quickly with the economists preparing and submitting for our review several draft articles.

    We also requested that an economist in Wyoming be identified and approached to participate in this effort.
[Their old network member Professor Charles F Mason of the University of Wyoming was about to drop out. However Todd Sandler appears to be still available at the same university.]

    By month's end, placements included: Todd Sandler, the Fort Dodge Messenger, William Mitchell, the Eugene Oregon Register-Guard, Ryan Amacher, the Anderson Independent-Mail, J.R. Clark, the Memphis Commercial Appeal and the Jackson Sun.

    We developed an outline for an economist media tour program to be launched in light of recent tax developments at the federal level. Consulting economists would be sent to select markets in key congressional districts to discuss elements of the tax issue with the media.

1990 Jun 12: Clipping of an op-ed by Mitchell for the Tobacco Institute which appeared in The Register-Guard "To reduce federal deficit, reduce government." (attacking President George Bush I and Congress)
[Who needs tax... or government. Let anarchy prevail! Back to the Stone-Age.]

1990 Aug: This long document has media tour records [being conducted by Fleishman-Hillard] for the cash-for-comments

  • economists network
  • ventilation network members (mainly HBI)
  • biological scientists network,
  • academic lawyers nework
  • labor network and
  • advertising academics network
The economist's media tours are to promote the Wagner and Tollison book on the Social Cost of smoking which had been written for the Tobacco Institute. and reviewsd by many of the cash-for-comment economist network members.

    Also there is attached a list of Savarese's network economist triumphs which has the intriquing heading "Consulting Economists — Not on Philip Morris List" which suggests that PM was running a parallel operation to that of the Tobacco Institute.

    This list holds the recent successes in planting op-eds on local newspapers, and a few appearances of economists at State hearings, conferences, etc.

William Mitchell
Professor of Political Science, University of Oregon

6/90 Anti-excise tax/"no taxes" op-ed published in The Register Guard

1990 Aug 3: Sam Chilcote at the Tobacco Institute has advised the Members of the Executive Committee of plans to develop a celebrity speakers program using academics and other expert consultants. There are offer the speakers both money and personal promotion:

[W]hile it is clear that there are a number of individuals who can and are speaking out on our issues independent of The Institute, there also is much more that could be done. There are, for example, opportunities to develop higher profiles for those individuals with whom we enjoy an existing relationship, and to increase within the media an awareness of their availability.

    There also are a number of individuals who have been identified who do not currently have a relationship with the industry, but whose views appear to be compatible with our own. Should the Executive Committee decide that it wants to proceed with an expansion of our speakers' program, these individuals would be contacted to determine their interest in our issues.

    The addition of new speakers to our program will be expensive. Most of these individuals command substantial consulting fees; media and other activity will require a new commitment of funds, although an exact amount cannot be determined until candidates have been approached.
He then lists:
  • Authors, newscasters and newspaper columnists
  • Well-known politicians, political aides, White House staffers, State authorities, agency administrators, etc
  • Heads of various coalition groups (American Advertising Federation. etc)
  • Cash-for-comments legal and business academics from Savarese's network list.
  • Cash-for-comments 'risk assessment' academics and promoter.
  • Cash-for-comment experts in indoor air pollution and ventilation systems.
  • Cash-for-comment academic economists + some likely allies:
    • BRUCE L. BENSON, professor of economics, Florida State University and board member, James Madison Institute, a Tallahassee think tank.
    • DWIGHT R. LEE, professor of economics, holder of the Ramsey Chair of Private Enterprise, University of Georgia
    • JAMES C. MILLER, Citizens for a Sound Economy Foundation, Washington; former director of OMB
    • WALTER E. WILLIAMS, professor of economics, George Mason
          University, Fairfax, Va.
    • BOB TOLLISON, George Mason University, Center for the Study of Public Choice
  • Some more minor network academics, together with their recent achievements.
This economist, along with dozens of others, is thought to be a potential speaker and is credited with recent achievements:
William Mitchell
Professor of Political Science
University of Oregon

6/90 Anti-excise tax/"no taxes" op-ed published in The Register Guard

1990 Oct: /E Tobacco Institute document. It lists the services that academics and secret consultants have provided to the tobacco industry during 1989 and 1990 — both as witnesses and as authors of articles and letters.

  • Pages 2 - 9     Advertising: lawyers and advertising administrators
  • Pages 10 - 30 Science and Public Policy on ETS/IAQ
  • Pages 31 - 39  Taxation
    This gives the dates of each of the services, and any 'Current Projects' they may be working on:
William Mitchell
    Professor of Political Science, University of Oregon
  • 6/90 Anti-excise tax/"no taxes" op-ed published in The Register Guard

See page 32-5

[TI budget papers show that each op-ed still earned the economists $3,000. Presentations to conferences earned them $5,000. Savarese was paid $70,000 to $100,000 pa for this project, and Ogilvy & Mather $250,000.]

See page 5

1991: In a nice touch of irony, Mitchel and Michael C Munger wrote "Economic Models of Interest Groups: An Introductory Survey."
[You'd have to agree that he was an expert on this subject.]

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

William Mitchell
Professor of Political Science, University of Oregon
  •   6/90 Anti-excise tax/"no taxes" op-ed published in The Reaister Guard

1991 Jan: /E Tobacco Institute draft plan for 1991 with emphasis on "Taxes." These are the economist-related paragraphs:

To discourage reliance on consumer excise taxes on cigarettes to meet social and economic objectives by demonstrating that excise taxes are regressive and inconsistent with fair taxation.

Goals and Tactics:
  • Commission two op-ed articles in 1991 from consulting economists. As articles are published, provide to other Institute decisions for promotion and submission to appropriate policy makers.
  • Conduct at least 10 presentations by consulting economists on the excise tax issue before national, regional and state tax policy conferences.
  • Continue to utilize consulting economists for testimony and briefings. Expand appearances to include presentations to business clubs and the business press. Conduct media refresher courses for public speaking appearance and delivery of testimony.
  • Utilize the consulting economists for an op-ed program that addresses the national earmarking issue and state specific earmarking issues. As articles are published, provide to other Institute divisions and promote to appropriate public policymakers. Use field staff network to support distribution efforts.

1991 Jan 8: Savarese has sent the current list of network economists to Carol Hyrcaj at the Tobacco Institute. It contains three new names, but otherwise is essentially the same as the old lists.

    ALABAMA, Robert B. Ekelund, Jr., Auburn University
    ARIZONA, William J. Boyes, Arizona State University
    ARKANSAS, David E. R. Gay, University of Arkansas
    CALIFORNIA, Gary Anderson, California State at Northridge
                Roger Arnold, California State Univ. - San Marcos
    COLORADO, Barry Poulson, University of Colorado
    CONNECTICUT, Dominick Armentano, University of Hartford
    DELAWARE, Burton Abrams, University of Delaware
    FLORIDA, Bruce Benson, Florida State University
    GEORGIA, Dwight R. Lee, University of Georgia
    IDAHO, Allan Dalton, Boise State University
    ILLINOIS, James Heins, University of Illinois
    INDIANA, Cecil Bohanon, Ball state University
    IOWA, Todd Sandler, Iowa State University
    KANSAS, Michael Babcock, Kansas State University
    KENTUCKY, Brian Goff, Western Kentucky University
    LOUISIANA, Michael Kurth, McNeese State University
    MAINE, Robert McMahon, University of Southern Maine
    MASSACHUSETTS, David Tuerck, Suffolk University
    MISSISSIPPI, Bill Shughart, University of Mississippi
    MISSOURI, Joe A Bell, Southwest Missouri State University
                Thomas I. Wyrick, Southwest Missouri State University
    MONTANA, Terry L. Anderson, Montana State University
    NEBRASKA, Dee Martin, University of Nebraska
    NEVADA, John Dobra, University of Nevada Reno
    NEW HAMPSHIRE, Dennis Logue, Dartmouth College
    NEW MEXICO, Allen Parkman, University of New Mexico
    NORTH DAKOTA, Cliff Dobitz, North Dakota State University
    OHIO, Richard Vedder, Ohio University
    OKLAHOMA, Joseph Jadlow, Oklahoma State University
    OREGON, William Mitchell, University of Oregon
    PENNSYLVANIA, Ann Harper-Fender, Gettysburg College
    RHODE ISLAHD, Arthur Mead, Universityof Rhode Island
    SOUTH CAROLINA, Ryan Aiaacher, Clemson University
    SOUTH BikEOTA, Dennis lain, Augustana College
    TENNESSEE, JR Clark, The University of Tennessee at Martin
    TEXAS, S Charles Maurice, Texas ASM University
                Michael Davis, Southern Methodist University
    VIRGINIA, Richard B Wagner, George Mason University
    WASHINGTON, Richard D. Zerbe, Jr., University of Washington

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

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

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

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

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

1993 Apr 27: Mitchell has sent a rough draft of another of his excise-tax article to the Tobacco Institute. This is a pre-emptive strike against the Clinton Health Plan, which was to be financed by a cigarette excise tax: it has been heavily edited within the Tobacco Institute.

    Some text and/or comments have been REDACTED.

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.
Clearly, by 1993, many of the original network members were dropping out. The Tobacco Institute also appears to have been having problems getting even those academics who stayed loyal to write articles that justified their $2000 to $3000 payments. [Perhaps some of them developed a conscience!]

    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:
    Prof William Mitchell, Dept of Political science, University of Oregon, Eugene.
    • Mar 23 — [TI designated newspaper/s] Eugene Register Guard and Oregonian
    • Apr 9 — Recieved 4/26/93 — Sent to Cal 4/26/93 — Received 4/29/93 — Waiting - legal 4/28/93 — Returned 4/29/93 — Rev. Draft 4/30
    • May 12 — Submitted to the The Oregonian
    • May 18 — (as above)
    • June 2 — Submitted to The Oregonian
    • June 14— Submitted to The Oregonian (rejected)... resubmitted to Eugene Register Guard (rejected)
    • Aug 3 — (as above)

1995 Jan 3: The Independent Institute is promoting their books and services to Sam Chilcote, president of the Tobacco Institute.

    One of their latest ventures is a book

Beyond Politics now provides the systematic and authoritative analysis of the dysfunction of modern politics, why the public is so outraged, and what reforms are essential to restore the Jeffersonian vision of self-government. The book addresses such issues as social welfare, education, consumer protection, crime, the environment, trade, employment, and much more.

    [Authored by] William C Mitchell and Randy T Simmons are professors of political science respectively at the University of Oregon and Utah State University, and research fellows at the Independent. Institute, a public policy research organization in Oakland, California.

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:

    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
They had been told to "attack the FDA proposal from an anti-big government, anti-regulatory perspective" with a number of pre-determined themes
  • 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 Nov 16: William Mitchell's op-ed "FDA sees crisis where none exists" appeared in the Register-Guard newspaper. It is an attack both on President Clinton and on FDA Commissioner David kessler He is still forgetting to mention in the article that the writing was funded, edited and legal-checked by the Tobacco Institute.

[See page 70 in this 204 page file]

1995 Dec 8: The Savarese Status Report on the FDA Op-ed Program says that Mitchell's draft op-ed would be published by The Register Guard 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.

At this time, we are asking those economists that have published, to forward a copy of their article to their congressman/congresswoman.
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:
  • 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"
[These last two were obviously a fill in for a Texas and a Wisconsin economist who had dropped out or the network.]

1996: Vedder is now a research fellow with the far right-wing think-tank, the Independent Institute along with fellow cash-for-comment network economists, William Shughart, Robert Higgs, William Mitchell, and Lowell Gallaway.

Research Fellow Richard Vedder (Ohio U.) testified before the Kemp Tax Reform Commission (7/12), and analyzed US fiscal problems on"NewsTalkTV,"and in TheWall Street Journal(11/14) and The Detroit News and Free Press (11/19).

    OUT OF WORK, his book with Lowell Gallaway (Ohio U.),was acclaimed in several articles by AP columnist John Cardiff ,and recommended in Philanthropy (Fall '95). Gallaway and Vedder are now writing a book on immigration for the Institute.

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:

Professor William Mitchell, Department of Political Science, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon
  The Register Guard - Published November 16,1995
  [No details of any Congressmen contacted]
Attached 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.
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:

  • 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
[Along with the core group of Tollison, Wagner, Ekelund, etc. these are mostly the 'stayers'.]

1996 Feb 23: The cash-for-comments economists network was still functioning under Savarese & Associates, and this economist was still listed as providing op-ed and Congressman-contact services for the tobacco industry. They were still trying to plant anti-FDA/Clinton op-eds on their local newspapers.

1996 Mar 5: He has sent another of his op-eds and a letter to Congressman Peter DeFazio... using University of Oregon letterhead, of course.

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.
  • 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.
The general list also records this economist other attempts.
  • The Register Guard Published November 16,1995
  • Contacted Congressman DeFazio 3/5/96

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:

Professor William Mitchell, Department of Political Science, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon 97403
Submitted to: The Register Guard - Published November 16,1995
Contacted Congressman DeFazio 3/5/96

1998 Jun 10: An internal Tobacco Institute memo from Walter Woodson to Lance Morgan

Here is more information from the Savarese group. I would like to return these to Savarese on Friday. Please call if you have comments or suggestions.
Attached is a long draft article "The Threat to Economic Growth" by Lowell Gallaway which has been subedited by someone at the Tobacco Institute.

    It praises Clinton for his budget restriant measures, while offering a pre-emptive strike against the possibility of tobacco tax increases [The McCain Bill].
The impact of the federal spending diet has been the elimination of the fiscal budget deficit. However, now that the deficit is gone, a new revenue bonanza, such.as that envisioned in the tobacco legislation, will be the equivalent of putting a feast before a hungry person who no longer feels obligated to exercise constraint. The result is very likely to be a spending binge that will undo the progress of recent years.
For some unexplained reason, at the end of this draft document it carries the name of William C Mitchell, University of Oregon. This suggests it was being ghost-written for Gallaway.

1998 Aug 15: The Florida "Press Journal" carried an article "Government assaults success" by cash-for-comments economist DT Armentano which attacks the McCain tobacco bill and the FDA.

    The list of activities of the other economists shows that the network continued to be operated by the Tobacco Institute itself (under Walter Woodson, and Lance Morgan - both Public Affairs division). [However Savarese is still in the picture.] The op-eds are now being rejected by many newspapers, who are no longer willing to publish tobacco industry propaganda.

And, since legally discovered tobacco documents had already begun to appear on-line, the Tobacco Institute has carefully deleted the names of the Professor of Economics who wrote each op-ed piece.

Mitchell is listed under the heading

OREGON, University of Oregon
  • DECLINED: The Oregonian
  • DECLINED: Eugene Register Guard

The Savarese network of economists continues behind the scenes until at least early 1999. However, after the Cipollone Case (when thousands of tobacco documents were released to the public) and following the Master Settlement Agreement (1997-98) when millions of documents were put on-line, the evidence of later activities in the tobacco archives evaporates. 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.

2000 /E: He was a research fellow at the Independent Institute where the tobacco industry parked their tame economists following the Master Settlement Agreement. The Institute appears to have taken over the money-laundering role of Savarese.

2006 Jan 2: Mitchel died. See Obit in Public choice.



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