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

OPINION ONLY

The idea of using Robert Tollison and Richard Wagner (two economists, then with the Virginia Polytechnique) to create a network of economist willing to act in support of the tobacco industry must be credited to the PR consultant, George Berman, who suggested in May 1979 that the secretive ICOSI [International Committee on Social Issues] attack the concept of social-cost analysis [the idea that smoking cost the community more than it generated in tax revenues] by using academic economists to dispute the health activist's estimates. It took the industry many years to act on his suggestions.

However Ogilvy & Mather, then working for the Tobacco Institute, began to use Tollison and his associates in various ways, and their consultant Jim Savarese began building a network of academic economists willing to work for the tobacco industry.

In 1985, a Tobacco Institute document, "Federal Markets," was sent to the Institute's Regional and State Directors which included a long list of the likely allies the industry had among academic economists in opposing the earmarking of cigarette excises for healthcare and for other purposes. The industry was particularly interested in finding economist who would attack the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which it always feared would attempt to regulate cigarettes as a drug.

The Tobacco Institute's network contractors (essentially Tollison and Savarese) kept a registry of those academics willing and available to write articles or letters on demand, provide witness services at legislative or local ordinance hearings, etc. or give lectures to various influential bodies — or have one-to-one meetings with legislators.

They were not to divulge the industry connections, and they were never required to make any outright statement in support of smoking. In fact, the complete opposite was the case ... those who could maintain proudly that they were non-smokers were seen to be more sensible, and to have more credibility with gullible readers who thought that political influence involved brass-bands and flag waving zealots.

Writing economic and political op-ed pieces and letters to the editor were the easiest way for these academics to earn some quick cash without sticking their neck out enough to be noticed. In their articles they attacked the principle of cigarette taxes, not the taxes themselves. They attacked the idea of the FDA extending its mandate, rather than the question of whether nicotine was a drug.

Payments were laundered through a couple of channels linked to the George Mason University's Center for the Study of Public Choice and its director Robert Tollison, and also through a James Savarese & Associates (and probably some tobacco lawfirms).

The purpose of the network was to provide propaganda and lobbying services to the tobacco industry in all 50 US States, utilizing prominent academics at the local universities who would be trusted by their local communities. Small-town America did not trust Washington politicians or ivory-tower gurus, but they did often accept pronounciations by their own local academics.

The scam ran very successfully for a couple of decades. It was considered influential enough for the Tobacco Institute to continue its funding when other projects suffered budget cuts. Savarese created networks of academic lawyers, air-quality experts, advertising lecturers, in addition to this group of about 100 economists. As a result of these corruption networks, many hundreds of op-ed articles appeared in many dozens of influential newspapers across America.

For more background information on how Savarese, Tollison and the Tobacco Institute operated these networks, see:

• economists and other networks
  
• cash-for-comment academic economists
  
• Robert D (Bob) Tollison
  
• James M (Jim) Savarese
  
• Savarese's letter to op-ed writers.
  
• George Berman's original idea

Barry Poulson was one of the earliest and longest-lasting of the cash-for-comments academic network economists.

Some key documents

• Economist, Head of the Department of Economics, University of Colorada, Boulder CO

1984 Jul: The Tobacco Institute's Cigarette Excise Tax Plan.

The plan augments our basic lobbying efforts by relying on groups outside the industry — some not regularly associated with the industry — to argue against excise taxes for us.

    It is an ambitious program, based on the notion that many of the most effective protests against tobacco taxes will come from groups philosophically distant from The Institute. Many such groups agree with us on the excise issue, even though they disagree with us on other matters.

    At the federal level, supporting Congressional members from the tobacco states is essential to our lobbyists. The tobacco members consistently vote as a unified group — something that is rarely seen in Congress today. They are our lobbyists' most important resource.

    The program recommends that economic and other consultants assist us in developing, "packaging," and presenting our anti-excise arguments in legislative testimony or meetings with coalition members.

Resources:
Economic consultants with different areas of expertise will conduct research and act as spokespersons for The Institute and organizations supported by The Institute. Specific activities with economists are discussed throughout the tactics.

Tactics:

• Stimulate reputable public finance economists at key state universities to determine the validity of state revenue forecasts, perhaps on behalf of state business organizations and present arguments against excise taxes in various forums; e.g., meetings with potential coalition members or budget officials.
• Encourage economists to make the case against regressive taxation in meetings with potential coalition members and legislators.
• Retain public finance economists affiliated with non-profit organizations to research the subject and use their findings in forums such as:
  • Private meetings with state legislators or staff ;
  • formal testimony before government bodies ;
  • targeted media appearances;
  • speeches before business, civic, labor, and other groups ;
  • tax symposia in key states where the proceedings could be published for use in other states ; and
  • articles which raise the visibility of key arguments in the business, academic, and popular press.

Strategies:

• Presenting specific members of the House Ways and Means and Senate Finance Committees with arguments prepared by economists with whom they share some common interest; e.g college affiliation, service on the same commission.
• Gaining the support of Citizens for Tax Justice (CTJ), the most influential labor/liberal tax reform group in the country, in opposition to excise taxes.
• Relying on the AFL-CIO — via The Bakery, Confectionery, and Tobacco Workers Union — to ensure that the labor/liberal tax package that emerges in the next session of Congress does not include tobacco.

Appendix: A list of economists in key states who may be willing to act as industry and third-party spokespersons on the tax issue.
Following is a list of economists in key states who might assist us as experts receiving honoraria. We have begun contacting them to ensure their willingness and expertise. We are asking each about past experience; work with similar issues; previous work with the industry; published articles or research; and availability.

    Our intent is to have a group of individuals whom we can call upon as needed to testify, conduct special research and discuss their research projects and/or views on excise taxes with budget officials, potential coalition members, legislators and the media.

1985 Jan 31: Hurst Marshall has distributed this Tobacco Institute list of economists from the cash-for-comments network. It has been organise by State, and includes the names of Congressmen they wish to influence.

Attached for your information are the names of economists who have been identified by PR to assist TI on the federal cigarette excise tax issue.

These people are also available to testify at the state level.

    If you feel that this type of witness can be of assistance to you on state cigarette tax issues, please contact Fred Panzer for details and arrangements.

    Please notify your lobbyists as to the availability of these people. At the same time, you may wish to ask them for their ideas or suggestions for other economists within their states.

COLORADO (Sen. Armstrong)
  •   Professor Barry Poulson,
      University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado

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

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

    If you feel this type of witness can be of assistance to you, please contact me for details and arrangements. If you have any ideas or suggestions for other economists within your state, please let me know, as we are always expanding our resources.

COLORADO
(Sen. Armstrong)

Professor Barry Poulson
University of Colorado Boulder, Colorado

1985 Feb 21: Roger Mozingo of the Tobacco Institute is sending his state directors a list of resources available to fight against excise taxes in their states. Barry Poulson heads their state list of available economic witnesses for Colorado.

1985 Aug: Poulson wrote an op-ed in Colorado Springs Gazette Telegraph on the negative effects of proposed public smoking legislation in Colorado Springs.

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.

1986 Jan: The Tobacco Institute's Public Relations Resource Catalogue for their Regional Directors, lists documents, booklets, article, posters and people who can help them fight local public smoking ordinances and threats to raise the excise taxes on cigarettes.

    It provides a long list of economists who are willing to speak at hearings, write letters to the editor, or create op-eds for the newspapers to counter any threat to public smoking or possible increase in excise taxes.

    The Tobacco Institute offered their Regional Directors the C/Vs of all of these economists, and said

"Requests for economists should be made ASAP. Allow at least one week. PR approval needed."

• Professor Barry Poulson
  Head, Department of Economics, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO
  
  Poulson wrote an op-ed on negative effects of proposed public smoking legislation in Colorado Springs. Article appeared on Aug. 4, 1985 in Colorado Springs Gazette Telegraph.

Public Smoking/Witness: Local economists are available on two-weeks notice to provide economic testimony on the public smoking issue. Those economists who have testified or prepared op-ed pieces on the economic effects of public smoking are marked accordingly. The others may be briefed on the potential cost to government of implementing smoking restrictions.

Tax witness: [He will] "explain why excise taxes are regressive and unfair to consumers and unsuitable and unreliable as a means to increase the federal revenue."

    Those economists who have testified or prepared op-ed pieces on the economic effects of public smoking are marked accordingly. The others may be briefed on the potential cost to government of implementing smoking restrictions.

1986 Mar 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 these draft articles, 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:

COLORADO
Prof Barry Poulson

Submitted to Paper: [No date] — Denver Post
Current Status: [N/a]
Letter: Sent to Senator Armstrong

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

    This cash-for-comments participant has written both the article and the letters to Senators, and has attached a copy of the article sent back to the Tobacco Institute.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1986 Apr 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.

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

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

1986 May: /E A Tobacco Institute list of "Schedule of Payments - Excise Tax Op-Ed project" (April-May 1986) lists those academic economists who have already planted their article on a local newspaper, and the amount they are to be paid (generally $900 to $1100). However a number 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]

Poulson in Colorada has been given the target of planting his article on the Rocky Mountains News and was due for payment of $900.

    A later Schedule of Payments increases this amount by another "$1100.00 — Paid in Full"

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

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

    Section 1 is headed

List of sources. Local and national experts you can call for quotes or background information. It promotes the services of three specialist lobbyists

• Lewis Solmon - an academic who discounts problems of workplace smoking
• Al Vogel - who claims to be an expert in public attitudes to smoking
• Mike Forscey, a labor lawyer/lobbyist who helped the tobacco industry keep the union movement on-side.

1986 May 1: Barry Poulson submitted a written statement to the Committee on Finance, using Univesity of Colorado letterhead.

1986 May 16: Jim Savarese and Bob Tollison have reviewed the "Social Cost' (OTA) research proposals received and they suggest to the Tobacco Institute those that "Merit Consideration for Funding:"

Although these can be improved in some regards to ensure they are most useful to the industry, three proposals seem to have a good deal of merit.

1. "Is Absenteeism Related to Smoking? An Empirical Study" by Robert Ekelund, Richard Ault, and John Jackson. This is a solid, well thought out proposal. I think they could show that smokers are not more absent from work, other things equal.
2. "The Relevance of Consumption Benefits from Smoking: An Empirical Assessment" by Dwight R. Lee and Phillip A. Cartwright. This is a good proposal to estimate the benefits of smoking, which, strangely enough, has never been done. This research will be quite useful.
3. "Employment Effects of Smoking Bans in Public Accommodations" by CM. Lindsay and M. T. Maloney. This is an interesting proposal about smoking bans and the impact on restaurants.

• "Improving the Accuracy of the Assessment of Social Cost Associated with Smoking" by Barry W. Poulson.

1986 May 30: Fred Panzer of the Tobacco Institute was contacting British-American Tobacco's PR executive, Tom Humber [also Burson-Marsteller and National Smoking Alliance] sending him some of the examples of the network economists.

Enclosed are: (1) The first wave of 27 op-ed reprints, (2) A second wave of 32 op-ed articles (21 published and 11 unpublished), sent out on Packwood's first tax reform proposal.

    I've also included one on the Chase [Economtrics] study. There are a few others being rounded up, as well as a syndicated excise tax feature series we developed. Out of all this should come something useful for your people.

1986 June 5: Susan Stuntz writes that she is interested in the absenteeism proposal by Ekelund, Ault and Jackson, and the food-service industry/smoking ban study by Lindsay-Maloney. She thinks the Cartwright-Lee and Poulson projects are worth reviewing.

    Savarese's attached note says about this proposal:

Proposals that Sould be Revised and Re-submitted
"Improving the Accuracy of the Assessment of Social Cost Associated with Smoking" by Barry W. Poulson.

Barry Poulson, U. of Colorado
Poulson outlines, correctly, the sources of error in the OTA study document. His classification of error sources and alternative estimation methods.are valid and of some interest, albeit too general. His development of alternative methodologies for measuring social costs of smoking in stage 2 may not be an entirely positive contribution against the arguments of the antismoking forces. [It may result in findings that are counter-productive to their propaganda]

    This proposal mentions social costs but it does not define the scope and type of social costs to be studied, nor does it mention the disagreement on social vs private costs.We need much more detail about the approach, a concise objective, and the expected results.None of these ideas suggests whether health care cost specialists will be consulted.

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.

• 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

[We know from other sources that the economists earn about $1000 per article, with the payments being laundered through James Savarese & Associates]

1986 Oct 3: A Tobacco Institute report on the economists network, lists the Congressmen they are expected to influence,and the economist's various academic specialities.

    This early list is probably the most detailed of all. A later section of this 43 page document also runs through the 28 main states giving the names and details of witnesses willing to speak to legislators on Taxes (almost exclusively economists), and those available as witnesses for the tobacco industry on Public Smoking issues (economists and a range of others)

    A major effort had also been made recently to enlist fire officers and brigades to counter demands for a 'fire-safe' cigarette which had low ignition propensity.

COLORADO, (Sen. Armstrong)

[Economist:] Professor Barry Poulson, University of Colorado , Boulder, Colorado flows., 303-492-8291
[Speciality:] Economic history and development studies - migration and capital

Tax Witnesses:	Materials available
Barry Poulson	Colo. data card "Excise Taxes: The Fairness Issue" "More Taxes on Tobacco...." Earmarking topic sheet Letter writing brochure.
Public Smoking Witnesses:	Materials available
Al Vogel (productivity) Steve Schlossberg (labor implications) Lew Solmon (economics) Bob Klotz (enforcement)	Voter survey Economic survey Labor assistance Response Analysis summaries Public Smoking topic sheet "Some Considerations" workplace kits "In Defense of Smokers" reprint "The Other Side of the Smoking Controversy" reprint Letter writing brochure Advertising.
Fire:
Fire Safety Education Grant to: Denver Fire Department — Myrle K Wise New Tools for Volunteer Fire Fighters
Media Relations:
Contacts are in place in Denver. Contact Bill Toohey for assistance.

1986 Oct 3: The State Directors for the Tobacco Institute have been reviewing all economics network witnesses in their territories, and culling those who are not actively participating. The Washington DC office is now circulating to its State Directors a list of the economists available who...

"...have been identified in several states by J. Savarese as available and hopefully capable to testify in our behalf, or aid in our defense against proposed state of local legislation, from an economic aspect.

COLORADO (Sen. Armstrong)
Professor Barry Poulson,
University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, 303-492-8291
[Specializing in] Economic history and development studies - migration and capital flows.

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

Dear Fred,
    I have attached a list of all the economists we have used along with the projects they have worked on in behalf of the Tobacco Institute.

• GSA = Government Services Administration.
• 'Ways & Means' = Congressional committee on finances
• ALEC = American Legislative Exchange Council (a formalised way for big business to directly influence Congressional and State politicians)
• Chase Econometrics = A company that did economic impact studies for the tobacco industry in various locations to 'prove' that smoking bans would destroy local economies.
  
      The references for this network member were:

Colorado [Region VIII]

Professor Barry Poulson

Head, Department of Economics, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80302, 303-492-5168

Services rendered:
• original excise tax op-ed
• Packwood
• brainstorming/research proposal
• testimony: taxes - Colorado
• ALEC excise tax panel - Denver
• GSA letter writing campaign

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1987 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.

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

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

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

1987 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:

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 May 18: The same day as the [above] audit report, James Savarese & Associates were 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 here of the Tobacco Institute paying contract academics direct (as the auditor had recommended).

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 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 "Prohibiiton 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. "

1987 May 28: Economic Consultants in Region VIII — Recruitment document from TI staffer Stan Boman to his superior Hurst Marshall in State Activities at the Tobacco Institute — this follows the shake-up by the audit.
[The Tobacco Institute has just had James Saverese & Associates/Bob Tollison's books audited because they suspected laundered payments hadn't been made to the economists. This was a change to a formal retainer to the Tobacco Institute.]

Following is the information you requested on TI economic consultants in Region VIII. Contact will be made during the next week with Allen Parkman in New Mexico and Chuck Masen [sic] in Wyoming. I will update my report accordingly at that time.

Colorado: Prof Barry Poulson
Contact made — Personal Visit
Results of Contact — Excellent - extremely knowledgeable and persuasing
Recommendations — Recommend retaining him and using him extensively in the future.

Kansas: Prof John Howe
Contact made — Personal Visit
Results of Contact — Good — Scholarly appearance and demeanor — very knowledgeable
Recommendations — Recommend retaining him,

Missouri: Prof Arthur Denzan
Contact made — Phone call
Results of Contact — Cordial — good speaking voice — seems eager to help
Recommendations — Recommend retaining him, and using him at first opportunity

Oklahoma: Prof Joseph Jadlow
Contact made — Personal visit
Results of Contact — Positively excelent! — Extremely articulate and advocates our position very well
Recommendations — Recommend his continued retainer.
[Note: 'continued'. ]

Texas: Prof S Charles Maurice
Contact made — Personal visit
Results of Contact — Makes a good impression — seems eager to be of help
Recommendations — Recommend retaining him.

1987 June 9: The Tobacco Institute's Phase II - Excise Tax Op-Ed project was now 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.

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]

COLORADO, Poulson, Rocky Moutain News, [circ.] 293,000, [pub date] 4/26/87

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

In COLORADO
Poulson for Rocky Mountain News —Owed $1100, — Total to date $2000

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)

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.

COLORADO

Professor Barry Poulson University of Colorado Boulder, CO

Excise Tax Op Eds: Rocky Mountain News — 04/26/87

Economic Witness/Testimony: Field Staff Contact: Yes.

Field Staff Evaluation: Extremely knowledgeable and persuasive; recommend using extensively.

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.

1988 Mar 31: The Tobacco Institute's list of available economists, with details of their target for a review of Robert Tollison and Richard Wagner's "Smoking and the State" book (secretly funded and published by the tobacco industry). Jim Savarese writes to Jeff Ross who looks after the cash-for-comments network:

I have listed below potential areas where we could place book reviews for the Tollison/Wagner monograph.

Colorado

Targeted paper: Rocky Mountain News
Economist: Barry Poulson, University of Colorado.

1988 May 26: Savarese advises the Tobacco Institute that

We have initiated the book review project. A copy of the book and a short summary were sent out today to 17 economists across the country with instructions for writing a brief review suitable for newspaper publication.

    I have attached a list of the economists. I'll keep you up to date as soon as the reviews start rolling in.

1988 Oct: A Savarese memo notes that his review was sent to and printed in the

1. Rocky Mountain News
2. Colorado Springs Gazette Telegraph.

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.

  COLORADO
  
  Prof Barry Poulson, University of Colorado

See page 5

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

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

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.

1990 May: Brennan Dawson's report on the economist network activities made to the Tobacco Institute's Communications Committee. She is focussing on the successes in generating op-ed writing for the industry.

Barry Poulson, Professor of Economics, University of Colorado
      5/90 — Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in Alamosa Valley Courier

See page 34

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.

COLORADO
Professor Barry Poulson Department of Economics, University of Colorado
Boulder, Colorado 80302 303-492-5168

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
        Appeal;
  • 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 Aug: This long document has media tour records [being conducted by Fleishman-Hillard] for a few different cash-for-comments networks:

• economists network
• ventilation network members (mainly HBI)
• biological scientists network,
• academic lawyers nework
• labor network and
• advertising academics network

Barry Poulson
Professor of Economics, University of Colorado
      5/90 Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in Alamosa Valley Courier

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.

• 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 a board member of the 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; and the 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.

Barry Poulson
Professor of Economics, University of Colorado
      5/90 Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in Alamosa Valley Courier

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:

Barry Poulson
    Professor of Economics, University of Colorado

• 5/90 Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in Aiamosa Valley Courier

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: 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.

Barry Poulson
Professor of Economics, University of Colorado
  •   5/90 Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in Alamosa Valley Courier

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

1993 Apr 8: The economist's network is still functioning, but Savarese and Tollison have negotiated a different deal for the participants. Savarese now bills the Tobacco Institute for economist network op-ed commissions, half-down and half on delivery. They are being paid for preparing the articles rather than only when they succeeded in getting their articles published. This bill is for $37,000.

• Op-ed article by Robert Tollison to be submitted to Wall Street Journal —$4,000.00
  
  
• Rebuttal article by Bob Ekelund, Auburn Univeristy, to be submitted to the Birmingham News — $3,000.00
  
  
• "Monster" tax op-ed project using twenty economists to submit articles in opposition to using excise taxes on cigarettes to finance health care reform — to be submitted to twenty newspapers in twenty different states. FIRST HALF = $30,000.00

[They now get $3,000 each per article — half on commission and half on delivery — while Tollison gets $4,000]

1993 Apr 13: Calvin George writes to his Tobacco Industry boss Susan Stuntz asking for permission to spend the $67,000 for the 22 op-eds listed by Savarese.

As previously discussed, the 20 economists proposed for the comprehensive op-ed program in opposition to excise taxes for health care reform have been selected with two primary criteria in mind:

• first, capacity to reach major media markets in states and Congressional Districts represented by key members of the Senate and House Leadership, as well as the Senate Finance and House Ways and Means Committees; and
  
  
• second, the previous track record of the economists in being able to place successfully op-eds in the major dailies identified.

The cost of this project would be $67,000, which is consistent with previous experience for similar efforts. I am recommending approval of this proposal. Funds are available for this purpose in #1305-7301 under the line items for "Economists to deliver briefings, testimony, and write articles..." ($45,000) and "Op-eds on...health care costs" ($25,000).

1993 Jun: Three of Poulsons op-eds clippings credit him as a 'Senior fellow in economic policy at the Independence Institute in Golden Colorado', rather than an economist at the University.

• Clinton cigarette tax is just a smokescreen in Pueblo Cheftain
• Editorial Comment "The tobacco tax smokescreen" in Commerce City Beacon. [See page 3]
• "The Tobacco tax smokescreen" is published in the Colorado Leader. [See page 4]

1993 July 16: Susan Stuntz at the Tobacco Institute writes in a memo:

Three newspapers in Colorado have picked up Barry Poulson's op-ed on cigarette taxes for health care reform. Copies of all three are attached, along with a status report on the op-ed project.

1993 Aug: The records of "Published Monster Tax Op-eds" shows that Poulson had managed to get three articles published in local papers.

• Commerce City Beacon 6/9/93
• Pueblo Chieftain 6/6/93
• Colorado Leader 6/12/93

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.

COLORADO
Professor Barry Poulson, Department of Economics, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO
• Mar 23 — [TI designated newspaper/s] Denver Post and Colorado Leader
• Apr 9 — Received 4/16/93 — Sent to Cal [TI] 4/16/93 — Received from Cal 4/22/93 — Waiting legal — Returned 4/29/93 — Revised draft 4/20
• May 12 — Resent to Cal [George at the Tobacco Institute]
• May 18 — Resent to Cal 5/12/93
• June 2 — Submitted to Denver Post
• June 14— Submittted to Denver Post
• Aug 3 — Published in Commerce City Beacon 6/9/93; Pueblo Cheftain 6/6/93; Colorado Leader 6/12/93; Denver Post

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

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

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

In countries that have imposed these types of regulations, patients face delays of months and years for surgery, government bureaucrats decide treatment options instead of doctors or patients, and innovations in medical techniques and pharmaceuticals are dramatically reduced.

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

• 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.

1995 Dec 8: The Savarese Status Report on the FDA Op-ed Program says that Poulson's draft op-ed had been declined by the Denver Post but would be probably be published by the Rocky Mountain News.

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.

• Professor Cecil Bohanon — "Revised op-ed returned to economist 11/10"
• "Professor Pogue has been contacted. We are waiting to hear whether he will be able to particpate."
• Professor Kurth — "Will have op-ed to us by next week" [for checking]
• Professor Ridgway — "Will have op-ed to us in a week"
• Professor Gallaway — "Returned revised op-ed to economist 11/2"
• Professor Davis — "Returned revised op-ed 11/3"
• Clifford Fry, Resources Inc, Bryan Texas — "Had to identify new economist. Sent materials 11/14"
• Prof Charles Breeden, Marquette University, — "Had to identify new economist. Sent materials 11/14"

1996 Jan 5: The last of Savarese's Status Reports which used the names of the economists. This was for the FDA Op-Ed Program

    Clearly they were having reduced success in planting these articles on the local newspapers.

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:

COLORADO
Professor Barry Poulson, Department of Economics, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO
  Denver Post - declined: Rocky Mountain News [They also declined, but the article was later planted on the Colorado Springs Gazette Telegraph]
  "Last contact 12/19" [Meaning he didn't always reply promptly to their queries]

1996 Feb 5: The economist's network went into a period of decline around this date — the economists were obviously fearful of having their names exposed, and so the Status Reports made to the Tobacco Institute began to carry only the names of their institutions, not the economists themselves. [A policy not always adhered to.]

    Barry Poulson was not listed here.

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:

Ongoing
• An extensive economist op-ed program was implemented to focus media attention on the FDA's agenda. The program attacks the FDA proposal from an anti-big government, anti-regulatory perspective. Targeting key Congressional districts:
• Economists prepared and submitted op-eds for publication to major
      newspapers in select states :
  • Dr William Boyes, Arizona State University
  • Dr Barry Poulson, University of Colorado
  • Dr Dominick Armentano, University of Hartford
  • Dr Dwight Lee, University of Georgia, Athens
  • Iowa economist tbd [To Be Determined]
  • Dr Cecil Bohanan, Ball State University
  • Dr Robert Pulsinelli, Western Kentucky University
  • Dr Michael Kurth, McNeese State University (Louisiana)
  • Dr Bill Shughart, II, University of Mississippi
  • Dr Joe Bell, Southwest Missouri State University
  • Dr Terry Ridgway, University of Nevada, Las Vegas
  • Dr Allen Parkman, University of New Mexico
  • Dr Lowell Gallaway, Ohio University
  • Dr Ed Price, Oklahoma State University
  • Dr William Mitchell, University of Oregon
  • Dr J.R. Clark, The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
  • Dr Michael Davis, The University of Texas at Dallas
  • Robert Higgs, Independent Institute, Edmonds, Washington
  • Dr Charles Breeden, Marquette University

1996 Mar 1: The FDA Op-Ed Status Report shows that Poulson has drafted his article for the Denver Post; sent it to the Tobacco Institute for checking and legal clearance, and it had been returned to him. The Denver Post had declined to publish as had the Rocky Mountain News and the article was now with the Colorado Soring Gazette-Telegraph

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.

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.

      Denver Post - declined
      Rocky Mountain News - declined
      Colorado Springs Gazette Telegraph - Publication forthcoming

1996 May 17: Kelleigh Varnum-Roffman of Savarese & Associates is reporting to Walter Woodson at the Tobacco Institute re the FDA Project. She includes:

• Updated status report on the FDA op-editorial program
• Original copy of Cliff Dobitz's (ND) published op-editorial
• Copy of Michael Kurth's (LA) letter to Congressman Hayes

To date, 15 of 20 articles have published. Please find below some brief notes regarding the status of the remaining op-editorials.

• Publication of Barry Poulson's (CO) op-ed is forthcoming.
• 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, Lee is pursuing other outlets for submission.
• Cecil Bohanon (IN), Terry Ridgway (NV) and Mike Davis (TX) are checking with the editors of their papers. They will report back to me on the status of their articles. We will pursue other outlets for submission if any of the above are declined.

Professor Barry Poulson
      Denver Post declined
      Rocky Mountain News declined
      Colorado Springs Gaztte Telegraph will published soon.

1996 June 24: Someone slipped up and included names in the Status Report on the FDA Op-Ed Program which showed that

Professor Barry Poulson had submitted his article to:
      Denver Post — declined
      Rocky Mountains News — declined
      Colorado Springs Gazette-Telegraph — publication forthcoming
Last contact 6/14

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:

COLORADO
Professor Barry Poulson, Department of Economics, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80302
Submitted to: Denver Post - declined:
Rocky Mountain News - declined:
Colorado Springs Gazette Telegraph - Publication forthcoming
[Last contact 6/14]

1997: There is no economists network activity for this year in the tobacco archives.

1998 June:

1998 June 18 In this year the network was revived with an extra layer of protection included against discovery. The communications links between the economist and the Tobacco Industry now passed through:

• James Savarese & Associates, to the
• BSMG public relations company (James Morgan), and then to
• Walter Woodson at the Tobacco Institute
• And after checking and improvement by the Public Affairs and legal staff
• back through Morgan and Saverese to the economist.

    Tollison appears no longer to have been a partner with Savarese in the venture. Savarese's company had been re-absorbed into Ogilvy & Mather (now called Ogilvy Adams & Reinhart), which itself had become part of Cassidy & Associates [Along with Powell Tate]

    The Names of the economists were no longer used on lists sent by Savarese to the Institute — only their Institutions.

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

    The list of the 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.]

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

Poulson is listed under the heading

COLORADO University of Colorado

• DECLINED: Rocky Mountain News:
• FORTHCOMING: Denver Post
• Submitted to: Independent Institute (news service)
  COMMENT: Paper is telling economist they are going to publish

CONTRIBUTORS:SHHS samf gwf2