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 6/28/2013

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
Michael L Marlow
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
Daniel ('Dan') Williamson
Paul W Wilson
Thomas Wyrick
Bruce Yandle
Boon Yoon
Richard O Zerbe
Benjamin Zycher




Robert D (Bob) Tollison     [Prof PhD]    

(mistakenly called John in one document)

— The principle organiser of cash-for-comments economists, and life-long servant of the tobacco industry. —  

Tollion was a disciple of James Buchanan and George Tullock, founders of Public Choice theory in economics, and he led a group of similar acolytes that gathered around Buchanan and Tullock. The center of this movement was at Virginia Polytechnic where they had established the Public Choice Society and the Center for the Study of Popular Choice.

The group, as a whole, transfered to the newly established George Mason University which didn't have an economics department, and they took their think-tank and corporate financial links with thim. These ties were not just to the tobacco industry, but to the Koch and Olin Foundations, and to many industries that faced regulatory threat from government agencies. We simply know more about the tobacco industry scams than the others because of the amount of documents available.

Robert Tollison was a Professor of Economics at George Mason University at a time when it was loaded with far right-wing, pro-market, libertarian ideologs. Many of them — led by Tollison — also enjoyed lucrative part-time occupations working for tobacco and for any other industries that needed their ideologically persuasive support.

Tollison is also listed as the Director of the Center for Study of Public Choice, which was a portable astro-turf/think-tank that migrated from the University of Virginia to George Mason University along with a group of Public Choice economists. Tollison was also closely associated with Clemson University for most of his life (although he only taught there briefly) — and it also provided many economic lackeys for the tobacco industry.

The cash-for-comment economists network

Tobacco lobbyist James Savarese and Professor Robert Tollison of George Mason University collaborated in the 1980s and 1990s 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 university experts' at Congressional hearings, and secretly 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-cut: so support of the cigarette companies could always be portrayed as simply the promotion of free-market economics including the rights of individuals to make public choices ... and of the need for small government ... or even of support for the first Amendment to the Constitution.

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

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 of the Tobacco Institute was to have in each State

  • one to three academic economists,
  • 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. The articles were cleared by the Institute and its lawyers, and then copies were also 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. Those who could boast of being 'non-smokers' were especially prized — presumably since, without the distorted minds of an addict, those not dependent on tobacco was thought to exhibit a clarity of economic analysis unavailable to the smoker!

Unfortunately, this worked.

It is fair to say that Tollison was more than just a friend of tobacco; he was part of the industry's inner-circle of organisers and promoters who worked dilligently to preserve the industry's right to kill its customers. Among economists, he stands out as one of the tobacco industry's more prominent "Merchants of Death."

Tollison's think-tank, policy & political links

  • Director Center for Study of Public Choice (and its Foundation). This became his own portable think-tank/foundation to launder grant funding.
  • Committee on Taxation and Economic Growth (Founding Member) - a lobby group created by Tollison with James Savarese and Ogilvy & Mather for the Tobacco Institute.
  • Tobacco industry's economists network — he was the main organiser of cash-for-comment consultants.
  • Alexis de Tocqueville Institute — Academic & Science Advisory Board
  • American Enterprise Institute — Research Advisory Committee, Center for Study of Government Regulations (1980-86)
  • Locke Institute — on the Academic Advisory Council
  • Independent Institute (Board of Advisors & editor of Public Choice)
  • Progress and Freedom Foundation (Director + Adjunct Scholar) (1997-00)
  • Center for the Study of Market Processes (Director) (1989-94)
  • Private Enterprise Research Center, Texas A&M University
  • Center for Education and Research in Free Enterprise (Texas A&M Uni)
  • Public Choice Society (President)
  • Southern Economic Association (President)
  • Public Policy (Associate Economic Editor)
  • Japanese Public Choice Society (Special Director)
  • Citizens for a Sound Economy (Board of Directors)
  • Institute for Research on the Economics of Taxation (Academic Advisory Committee)
  • Economic Policy Committee of the US Chamber of Commerce
  • Articles in: Wall Street Journal, Washington Times, Regulation, Economic Affairs, and Daily Report for Executives.
Other affiliations listed: AEI, Cato, Claremont College, Clemson Uni, Federalist Society, Heritage Foundation, Hoover Institute,

Other affiliations he hasn't listed: Tobacco Institute, INFOTAB, Philip Morris, RJ Reynolds, British-American Tobacco, Ogilvy & Mather, The Heidelberg Appeal (SEPP and ICSE), Institute for International Health & Development,
Corporate Connections
  • Tobacco Institute and ICOSI/INFOTAB
  • National Basketball Association
  • General Mills, Inc.
  • Nestle's, Inc.
  • Pepsico, Inc.
  • Ashland Oil and Chemical Co.
  • L'Air Liquide, Inc.
  • Gas Appliance Manufacturers' Association
  • Neal and HarweIl
  • National Beer Wholesalers' Association and Anheuser-Busch, Tnc.
  • H.J.Heinz Inc.
  • Aero-Go, Inc.

This is a man who must have spent most of his life attending meetings and conferences of far right-wing organisations who were trying to control the US political and economic system. It obviously provided a good living.

Tollison and James Saverese put together the cash-for-comments network of like-minded academic economists for the Tobacco Institute in 1985/86 — although some effort seems to have been made by Saverese (initially) to conceal Tollison's involvment from the industry. It is noteworthy that many of the early lists of cash-for-comment networkers includes Tollison as just one of many potential authors of op-eds — when clearly he was a principle in the operation.

Tollison's main economist co-authors and occasional partners
  • Richard Wagner (numerous books and articles)
  • Robert Ekelund — Merchantilism as a Rent Seeking Society
  • Robert E McCormick — sports articles
  • Brian L Goff
  • William F Shughart

Grants for research
The tobacco companies had a number of avenues (both individually and collectively) for providing both legitimate and dubious grants to academic researchers involved in any aspect of smoking or the related sciences. it was important for them to be seen to be 'following the rules' since most intelligent people were suspicious about their motives — and their ability to recruit prominent academics to support their causes.

So all research proposal were rigorously passed through so-called 'independent' Scientific Advisory Boards; checked by lawyers; then paid to the Grants & Contracts officers at the universities. On completion they would be passed for peer-review at some recognised scientific journal. These procedures were rigorously followed — most corruption occured through the industry directly bribing the scientists for other services, and by the fact that the journal editors were also consultants, as were members of the SABs and peer-reviewers. The tobacco industry itself secretly controlled about a dozen 'peer-reviewed scientific journals'.

In the case of these economists however, these standard procedures were simply ignored. Even when payments were made to universities, they went in the form of donations to foundations (ie George Mason Foundation) which kept them outside the university's ethical research-grant processes.

Some key documents

• Tollison was an economist/entrepreneur with Virginia Polytechnic and later George Mason University who ran the Center for the Study of Popular Choice, The Public Choice Society, and the cash-for-comment network of academic economists in each US State.

See this CV

1942: Born Spartanburg, South Carolina

1957: George Mason was founded as a branch of the University of Virginia and became an independent institution in 1972.

1964: Tollison received his AB in business administration Wofford College

1965: Moved to Virginia Poly. Teaching at Longwood College and working on his PhD.

1965: MA in economics, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa

1969: completed PhD at University of Virginia. Began teaching as Assistant Professor at Graduate School of Business and Public Administration, Cornell University (until 1973)

1971–72: Also claimed to be a Senior Staff Economist on the President's Council of Economic Advisers [Nixon-Agnew administration]

1972: George Mason became an independent institution in 1972. It's campus at Fairfax is about 15 miles from Washington DC

1972–73: Staff Economist, Council of Economic Advisers for the Nixon-Agnew Administration [Two different dates and titles given in his C/Vs]

1973: Associate Professor in Economics, Texas A&M University

1974–76: Professor and Head of the Economics Department of Texas A&M University

1976–77: Visiting Professor, Law and Economics Center at University of Miami, Law School

1977: Robert Tollison, Randall Holcombe, Mark Grain and Thomas Deaton "Rational Choice and the Taxation of Sin," in the Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 8

The traditional literature on sumptuary taxation indicates that these taxes are the result of a majority of individuals imposing their moral code upon consumers of goods that are thought to be undesirable. Undoubtedly this explanation is not trivial, and accounts for the existence of the sumptuary taxes, the authors report.

1977–81: Professor of Economics Virginia Polytechnic Institute/State Uni
    Also Executive Director of Center for Study of Public Choice which was then at Virginia.

1977 June: A secret "Operation Berkshire" meeting of international tobacco executives at Shockerwick House in the UK set up an organization later called the International Committee on Smoking Issues (ICOSI — later still called INFOTAB).

    ICOSI had four special working parties of disinformation specialists chosen from each company. One group was given the job of countering the claim that smokers imposed a high cost on the society by virtue of their higher rate of illness, absenteeism, fires, cleaning costs, welfare payments to dependents, etc. This was called the Social Acceptability Working Party (SAWP) and the issue was called "Social Cost".

    Tollison and Wagner were later recruited to help the SAWP of ICOSI promote their "Social Cost" arguments.

The International Committee on Smoking Issues (ICOSI) was put together by the international tobacco companies at a secret meeting in the UK, under the code-name "Operation Berkshire". It had a number of sub-committees, one of which was the "Social Acceptability Working Party (SAWP) which hired consultant George Berman of Devon Management in the USA to create a small cabal of prominent academics who would work for the industry without revealing their connections.

    The most prominent of these were:
  • Robert Tollison - economist, George Mason Uni
  • Richard Wagner - economist, George Mason Uni
  • Peter Berger - sociologist at Rutgers university
  • Sherwin Feinhandler - cultural anthropologist Harvard University Medical School
  • Robert Nozik - philosopher, at Harvard University
  • Aaron Wildavsky - political scientist UCLA Berkley

1979 Jan: An account of the fees and expenses which have been billed by tobacco lawyers Jacob & Medinger to RJ Reynolds Tobacco. These are for the ICOSI [international disinformation] operations, specifically for the Social Acceptability Working Party (SAWP). These figures probably represented RJR's usual one-quarter share (with British-American, Philip Morris and other smaller companies). So multiply these figures by four to estimate actual payments.

  • George Berman — $260
  • Prof Robert Tollison — $811
  • Prof Martin Gruber — $1500
  • Prof Edwin Elton — $1500
  • SJ Feinhandler —- $726
  • Edward Harris —- $308
  • Prof Robert Nozick — $1250

1979 Jan 30: Tobacco lawyer, Jacob & Mendiger who looked after the tobacco industry's secret payments, presents a supplementary bill which adds a few new names and entries for ICOSI/SAWP operations:

  • Dr Peter Berger — $750
  • Edward Harris — $766 (additional payment)
  • Prof Robert Tollison — $1200 (additional payment by SA1 Ck#146?)
  • Prof Robert McCormick — $1125 (by SA1 Ck #165)
  • Institute for Policy and Management Research — $16,000 (SA1 Ck #147)
Also another:
  • Prof Robert Tollison — $957 paid through SA1 #162 & 163 (April)
  • Richard E Wagner — $1740 paid through SA1 #164 & 165 (April)
  • Edward Harris — $2,134 paid through SA1 #168 (June)
  • Peter Berger — $1500 paid through SA1 #169 (June)
Awaiting approval was:
  • SJ Feinhandler — $15,642
  • Weiss/Watson — $8168
  • Inst for Policy and Management Research $20,283
Estimates for month of June (George Berman commissioned) were:
  • SJ Feinhandler — $16,000
  • Robert Tollison — $ 250
  • Richard Wagner — $ 250 [Tollison's partner]
  • Inst for Policy and Management Research $16,000 (SA1 Ck #147)

[The SA1 note on some of the accounts probably refers to the Special Account No.1 held by Jacob & Medinger for making secret payments to people who wanted their cash payments to remain confidential — either for tax reasons, or to avoid a potential money trail. ]

1979 Feb 8: Tobacco Institute memo on Social Costs by B&W's Ernest Pepples: This strategic planning document is a review of the Social Cost of Smoking project. The TI is running this line in parallel to ICOSI [the International tobacco disinformation organization].

The public perception of social costs as a policy issue is very low but it is becoming a crucial element in the thinking and deliberation of government authorities. It also appears to assume an important place in the attack plan of anti-smoking groups. A default on this issue by the industry surely will result in unfavorable public opinion.

    To avoid an adverse mindset on the question of the social costs of cigarette smoking, the industry needs to embark on a thorough, well done and properly supervised program for dealing with this issue.

    I understand that ICOSI considers the so-called GIRA study an example of what not to do. Reportedly the study makes the lugubrious argument that some positive value should be assigned to the early death rate of smokers, that their early death saves society the geriatrics and nursing home costs of old age. [However, this turned out to be the only argument that the economics could mount in support of the tobacco industry.]

    Set out below is a general outline of the program which is being proposed to ICOSI — George Berman and Ed Jacob have worked on it and Dennis Durden is at least generally aware of it. Preliminary steps have been taken to assure the feasibility of' the projects and recommendations. For example, six consultants have been contacted and have expressed a willingness to participate in some of the projects under consideration.

    [A] manual would be prepared by outside contributors, some based in the United States and some recruited in places outside the United States by ICOSI members. The areas of expertise and the individuals already consulted for purposes of preparing such a manual and of achieving the second goal [critiquing claims], which in responsive capability, are as follows:
EconomicsRobert Tollison
FinanceMartin Gruber
Anthropology Sherwin Feinhandler
SociologyPeter Berger
PhilosophyRobert Nozick
Political ScienceEdward Harris
The first phase consultants have examined some of the basic adversary papers. They conclude that the "social costs" studies are not well done, and that the value judgments employed are extremely vulnerable.

    Tollison apparently thinks they are just bad economics. For instance, he points out that the charge attributed to the cost of absenteeism, is suspect.
[See more on the other individuals and the arguments they have concocted.
They need to justify their appearance fee.]

1979 May: Social Cost — Social Value paper by George Berman for ICOSI. He points to the rising clamour about the cost to various countries of smoking-related diseases...

"a bill of smoking costs which are paid for by society.

    It would be pointless to just dispute these arguments with similar data, to attack their numbers with our numbers. Instead, our strategy is to attack the concept of social cost analysis. We have found that these concepts are most vulnerable. If we can undermine the concepts, then we do not have to enter into public debate over specific numbers. Our attack consists of four major themes:
  1. These Social Cost concepts are bad economics
  2. They do not fit into a philosophy of personal freedom and civil liberty.
  3. Smoking benefits society and its members in many complex ways
  4. Anti-smoking programs and groups are harmful to our society.
He goes on to develop arguments about the necessary countermeasures needed. Firstly he attacks cost-benefit analysis, saying:
The application of social cost analysis to smoking is defective economics applied to uncertain data. To develop this point we have called on two leading economists from the Center for the Study of Public Choice, at Virginia Polytechnic Institute.

Dr Richard Wagner is the author of 11 books and monographs and over 20 articles. During the last six months he was visiting Professor of Economics at the renowned University of Konstanz.

    His colleague, Dr Robert Tollison has served as a consultant to the US Government Treasury Department, Commerce Department, Office of Technology Assessment, and the Council on Wage and Price Stability.

    These two gentlemen are co-authors of a forthcoming book called "Personal Liberty, State Action and Economic Coordination", a title which certainly covers the subject of this project. The economists working on this project are first developing a "Layman's Guide" to social cost/benefit analysis [which] will address three key questions:
  1. When is social cost/benefit analysis called for?

        If I agree to pay the price of a pack of cigarettes, I am saying that the benefits I get are at least as large as the cost of the resources used to make the cigarette. Thus, there is no justification for the larger society to intervene.

        [T]here may be a few cases where smoking creates uncompensated costs for non-smokers. But the economists are quite certain that most of the alleged medical expenses do not qualify as social costs. And the much larger charges of absenteeism and lost productivity are not social costs at all.
  2. What should be analyzed?
    It does not make sense to analyze an entire industry's social costs. The only valid and useful analysis is one that focuses on a proposed government action.

        If the government is going to restrict smoking in restaurants, the benefits to individuals of these actions must exceed the cost to other individuals.
  3. What is the proper objective of the analysis?
    From the point of view of economics the objective of government intervention is to resolve uncompensated costs... in a way people at large would, if they could negotiate with those getting the benefits.

        The proper aim of cost/benefit analysis would be to help find a solution which is "fair" to both sides.
They have also asked others to contribute:
  • Dr Robert Nozick, Professor of Philosophy, Harvard University [A prominent guru of Libertarianism]
  • Sherwin Feinhandler, President of Social Systems Analysts and lecturer at Harvard University Medical School ["How smoking defines your personal space!"]
  • Dr Peter Berger Professor of Sociology at Rutgers University [who notes that many techniques which strengthen the position of the religious advocate, are found among anti-smokers: "Elitism Messianic Drive, Punishment... Class Antagonism."]
  • Dr Aaron Wildavsky, Chairman of the Political Science Department, University of California, Berkeley and President of the Russell Sage Foundation [to isolate and define the motivations and the alliances of the active anti-smoking leadership. They are anti-capitalist, anti-industrial, anti-multinational and countermodern.]

1979 May 14: George Berman, (Devon Management) who consults to the international tobacco industry lobby group, known at this time as ICOSI (later INFOTAB) has prepared a speech"Social Costs - Social Values" to introduce European tobacco lobbyists associated with the Social Acceptability Working Party (SAWP) to the concepts of economics — and to acquaint them with ICOSI's strategy to counter 'Social Cost' claims.

[These claims are that smokers impose an 'external' cost on society, and therefore high cigarette excises are justified. SAWP also encompasses the idea of non-smokers accepting the right of smokers to smoke.]

    Berman has put together a core team of US academics — and this speech is an attempt to widen his group out by recruiting European academics also.

    He has identified:

  • Richard Wagner and Robert Tollison as two economists who are willing to help the industry.
    Dr Richard Wagner is the author of 11 books and monographs, and over 20 articles, in the field of public finance and economics. During the last six months he was Visiting Professor of Economics at the renowned University Of Konstanz.

        His colleague, Dr Robert Tollison has served as a consultant to the US government Treasury Department, Commerce Department, Office of Technology Assessment and the Council On Wage And Price Stability.

        These two gentlemen are co-authors of a forthcoming book called 'Personal Liberty, State Action And Economic Coordination', a title which certainly covers the subject of this project.

        The economists working on this project are first developing a "Layman's Guide" to social cost/benefit analysis. This Layman's Guide will include the participation of economist s from countries other than the United States. When a basic position has been established, the economists will examine closely the social cost.papers which have appeared in each country. A critique of each paper will be filed with ICOSI alongside the paper itself..

        This will provide us with a weapon against arbitrary, careles s attacks using "Social Cost" as a rationale.
  • Robert Nozick — an eminent US philosopher.
    We have asked one of the leading philosophers in the US to develop a philosophical position which will, again, be further addressed by his counterparts in the UK and Europe.

    Dr Robert Nozick is Professor of Philosophy at Harvard University. He is best known for his recent book, "Anarchy, State And Utopia", a clearly-written statement of the Libertarian.position, which won the 1975 National Book Award.
  • Sherwin Feinhandler - US cultural anthropologist
    Sherwin Feinhandler is a cultural anthropologist who has examined reports on the social role of smoking in over 180 different cultures. As a result of these studies, he is convinced that smoking provides certain universal benefits, although they may appear in different forms from time to time and in different societies

        Dr Feinhandler is President of Social Systems Analysts, a consulting firm which evaluates the ways in which various activities are important to society. he is a lecturer at the Harvard University Medical School, and his testimony before Congress on public smoking was most helpful.
  • Dr Peter Berger sociologist and author.
    Dr Peter Berger has consented to advise us on this project, and Dr Aaron Wildavsky to manage the necessary research. Dr Berger is a professor of Sociology at Rutgers University, the widely-known author of a dozen books in his field, and innumerable articles. He has written of anti-smokers:
      The anti-smoking attitude is only one item in the consciousness of a specific group of people. it should be seen in relation to other items in that consciousness...

        Ask this simple question: what are other causes to which the anti-smokers are likely to be attracted? There is, probably most important of all, the various causes espoused by the Environmentalist movement.
    • Modern industrialism is perceived as a gigantic death machine.
    • Commercially produced foods are supposed to poison us, and the only salvation is in the return to some form of organic nutrition.

    Lots of people are concerend about Nuclear Power, Industrial Pollution, Population Growth, or Smoking and Health. But only a few dedicate themselves to public and legislative action.

        We need to isolate and define the motivations and the alliances of the active anti-smoking leadership. we need to do this in order to prepare effective countermeasures, but even more important, to expose this group as responding to a very different set of values than most people. To assist in this research, we have called on Aaron Wildavsky.

  • Dr Wildavsky a UCLA, Berkely political scientist.
    Dr Aaron Wildavsky was Chairman of the Political Science Department at the University of California in Berkeley. He was Dean of the Graduate School of Public Policy there, and, more recently, President of the prestigious Russell Sage Foundation.

        Dr Wildavsky believes we are dealing with broad ideological themes — Anti-capitalist, Anti-industrial, Antimultinational and Countermodern. These views favor a return to a more primitive life while retaining all the expensive benefits of the Industrial Society.
    [Wildavsky was clearly convinced a rabid rouser against activists - convinced that anti-smoking activism was part of a Communistic plot organised as a worldwide web with some James Bond-type villain at the center pulling all the strings.]
When this research is completed we will have a foundation for dealing with the Social Cost issue. We will have attacked its economic reasoning. We will have looked at the dark side of its philosophy, and related that philosophy to the larger motives of the Anti-smoking Leadership. We will have explored the Social Benefits of Smoking, and the Social Costs of Smoking Restrictions.

    Hopefully, we will be able to stop this attack before it stops us.

1980 Sep: Michigan Governor's panel on smoking says that Tollison's paper is "the first definitive study on the social cost problem"

1981–83: His biography says that at this time he was the Director of Bureau of Economics, Federal Trade Commission [Reagan - Bush Administration]

1981–83: Director, Bureau of Economics, FTC. Reagan First Term, political appointment. (left at the time of forced mass Agency resignations, Watt, Burford-Gorsuch, etc)

1981 Jan 7: The international (ICOSI) tobacco industry's Social Costs/Social Values: Progress Report has a series of notes:

  • The report by Drs Tollison and Wagner, "Consumer Protection, Public Policy and Cost-Benefit Analysis", has been completed. The authors have requested support in preparing this for publication as a monograph.

  • The Tobacco Institute has assisted Dr Peter Witonski with researach on a manuscrupt, "The Social Costs of Smoking" which has been accepted for publication in the spring issue of Policy Review. Dr Witonski is adjunct professor of public policy at Georgetown University in Washington.

        He obtained his PhD at Oxford, and is the author of a great many articles and books, including a prize-winning (American Political Association) four-volume work entitled "The Wisdom of Conservatism".

  • George Berman's paper which he presented at the Australian Association of National Advertisers was published in its entirety in B&T [Advertising trade newsletter].

  • Dr [Sherwin] Feinhandler has submitted two drafts for review — one about the social role of smoking, and another about the use of anti-smoking activities to demark and promote social class distinctions. These have been reviewed for content and returned.

  • The following have accepted invitations to speak at the Wharton Conference: Peter Berger, Stephen Littlechild (UK) Sherwin Feinhandler
    Alan Woodfield of New Zealand hopes to be ablt to present a paper, but cannot confirm this just yet. [He was working for the Tobacco Institute of Australia],

  • Anti-smoking Groups: Dr Wildavsky's draft has eben cleared by legal counsel and is under review by the Project Team.

  • Smoking Restrictions in the Workplace: The project team from AT Kearney has been strenghtened by the addition of a research psychologist and an industrial engineer.

  • Civil Liberties: We are working with Matrix Corporate Affairs of London to develop this project around academic consultants in two European countries.

    They saw their main threat as coming from WHO and also asked for decisions on:
  1. "Through what organization/s will ICOSI sponsor the Wharton Conference?"
  2. Approval to support Tollison and Wagner in publishing their text
  3. Strategy for countering the WHO program on the Social Cost of Smoking [under the headings] Surveillance, Communications, Preparation, and Action

    Also reviewed was a background piece on the Social Costs arguments and the role of SAWP. The Progress Report for SAWP says that a new program of the World Health Organisation requires changes to their own program.
We have observed the WHO program to control smoking gaining strength rapidly. Not only has its budget increased sharpiy, but also its ability to influence other transnational agencies has developed apace.

    A brief study of the WHO program found that it is funded almost entirely by specially donated funds dedicated to anti-smoking objectives. Thus, the program is not in contention with other WHO programs for internal funds.

    The more effective the program is the more rapidly it will grow. And WHO has
    made clear that it plans to involve not only the FAO, but the ILO and the IMF as well.

[Note: Knowledge that the anti-smoking activities received special funding didn't stop their main attack on the WHO [via Bob Tollison, Paul Dietrich and the Institute for International Health & Developments (IIHD)] charging that WHO's primary mission was being distorted by the anti-smoking campaign. Tollison and Dietrich directed their fury at WHO's priorities and the so-called 'wastage' of its limited budget on smoking prevention programs, rather than concentrating on AIDS, malaria, etc. It was sheer hypocricy.]

1981 May: [Admission made in 1998 Dec 9 trial] George Berman (of Devon Management Resources) who recruited both Robert Tollison and Richard Wagner for the international smoking lobby ICOSI was being deposed in an Iron Workers Local v Philip Morris case.

He admits to the recruitment of the first six scientists/academics on this list. They were employed him when he organised the May 1981 Wharton Conference for Philip Morris:

  • Q.   Robert Nozick
  • Q.   Robert Tollison
  • Q.   Aaron Wildavsky
  • Q.   Peter Berger
  • Q.   Steven Littlechild
  • Q.   Sherman Feinhandler
  • Q.   Robert McConnick (sic McCormick)
    A.   No       (He also said No for three others as not recruited by Berman... but probably by Tollison)

    Q.   The individuals who you were developing counter measures to respond were making assertions to the public that were not true. Is that the belief at the time ?
    A.   Yes, that's correct.
Q. Did you, in terms of completing the project for SAWP on social costs, hire outside consultants yourself?
    A Yes

    Q You hired Dr Feinhandler, correct?
    A That's correct.

    Q The cultural anthropologist?
    A That's right

    Q You hired Dr Wildavsky, correct?
    A That's correct."
    Q Dr Wildavsky's role was to kind of present a profile of the anti-smoking groups and their leaders. Am 1 correct?
    A Yes.
    Q That was done with an eye towards somehow driving a wedge and 1 think your exact words were between anti-smokers and nonsmokers?
    A Thai's correct.

    Q You also hired Dr Wilder and Tollison who were economists to look at the issue
    A That's correct.

    Q Up hired Dr Nozick, who was a philosopher to kind of philosophy about the issue?
    A That's correct.

    Q Did these people all prepare papers pursuant to their consultancy and give them to you?
    A All but Nozick.

1981 Nov: Philip Morris USA announced a grant of $135,000 over a four year period to Clemson University, for an educational program to train scientists and educators who work with tobacco. Tollison moved to Clemson a short time after.

1982: Seven economic faculty members of Virginia Poly resigned en masse and transfered to George Mason University, along with about a dozen doctoral students.

    The faculty members included
  • Geoffrey Brennan,
  • James Buchanan (the guru),
  • Dwight Lee,
  • David Levy,
  • Joseph Reid,
  • Gordon Tullock (another guru),
  • Mark Crain and
  • Robert Tollison,
GMU had just implemented a PhD program in economics.

    In the fall of 1983, both Charles Rowley and the Center for Study of Personal Choice (Buchanan was still nominally in charge) also relocated to GMU.

1982 Sep: The Annual Report of the FTC mentions two joint papers with Tollison and Shughart and other cash-for-comments economists.

Dual Enforcement of the Antitrust Laws, by Richard Higgins, William Shughart, and Robert Tollison, September 1982.
    In this paper, a model was developed which shows that independent dual enforcement leads to more antitrust activity at a lower unit cost than would be obtained with a single agency.

        On the other hand, the paper states that if the agencies collude, as they appear to do under present institutional arrangements, dual enforcement leads to less and more costly antitrust activity than would otherwise result. According to the paper, empirical tests using historical agency budget and case production figures do not refute the models main predictions. It concludes that more enforcement activity would be obtained at a lower unit cost if the 1948 FTC-Justice liaison agreement were abandoned.

Antitrust Over the Business Cycle, by Ryan Amacher, Richard Higgins, William Shughart, and Robert Tollison, September 1982.
    According to this paper, two broad and venerable hypotheses can be deduced from the literature about collusion, antitrust, and economic activity. These are that both private collusive agreements and producer protection regulation should vary inversely with the business cycle. This paper gives evidence which supports both contentions. Employing data on general antitrust law enforcement activity and complaints charging violations of the Robinson-Patman Act, strong counter-cyclical tendencies are found in collusion and governmental regulatory intervention.

[These economists all had first-hand experinece with "collusion, antitrust, and economic activity.]

1983–84: Tollison was briefly Professor of Ecconomics with the far-right-wing Clemson University during this period.

1983 Jan 8: Tollison's draft outline of the book "Smoking and Society." It is to have chapters straight out of the tobacco companies playlist:

  • Introduction: Some scientists have drawn unfounded conclusions regarding smoking and its relationship to health.
  • Chapter 2: Smoking has not been shown to be causal to diseases. A plauible counter-hypothesis is that smokers are constitutionally different from non-smokers
  • Chapter 3: Overview of physiological and psychological effects of smoking - and the 'crucial distinction between addiction and habituation' showing that smoking is not addicting.
  • Chapter 4. Advertising does not help them recruit new smokers. Just competition between brands. Genetics determine whether a person smokes.
  • etc. etc.

1983 Feb 28: /E A 142 page report from the Secretary-General of INFOTAB (the successor to ICOSI) provides an "Overview of International Issues and Developments." One section is headed:

Social Cost — Project Report
Professor Solmon, Dean of the Graduate School of Education has completed work for this committee with emphasis on rebutting published works of Weiss on aspects of smoking, particularly in the workplace.

    Each of the elements used by Weiss to demonstrate that smokers are more costly to employ than non-smokers, e.g. absenteeism, low, production, excess morbidity, has been totally rebutted.

    Solmon's paper has been accepted for publication in "Personnel Administrator" the journal in which Weiss appeared. It provides us with the opportunity to use this work for reference and a detailed methodology for dealing with this issue in the future, including Winnipeg [The World Conference on Smoking and Health] where Weiss' work is being presented.
Business Week have also published a letter from Professor Solmon in a rebuttal on the same issue. The prominent journal, Newsweek USA, has also been contacted by Solmon and warned by him of accepting Weiss' contentions in an article to be published in their journal.

    Solmon has also addressed the subject of Government regulations on smoking, refuting the basis for government policies in these areas, drawing on the works of Tollison and Wagner in a more, simplified form. This work is expected to be finalised within a month and submitted for publication in a recognised journal.

    This will provide additional reference material to the work available: over the authorship of Littlechild and Woodfield which was initiated at the Wharton Conference.

1983 Sep 19 - 22: InfoTAB's National [cigarette] Manufacturer's Association Workshop in Washington. Bryan Simpson, the Secretary General of Infotab, talked briefly about they projects on "Social Costs Associated with Smoking"

The charge that the cost of servicing alleged smoking-related diseases is higher than any possible benefits continues to be made, mainly by politial and lay opponents of smoking. INFOTAB and its advisers are preparing and endeavouring to have published reliable views from economist which deny these charges.

    Important scientists helping in this area are:
  • Professor [Lew] Solmon, [School of Education at UCLA]
  • Professor [Robert] Tollison, [George Mason University]
  • Professor [Sherwin] Feinhandler [ex-Harvard, now Social Systems Analysists, Inc]
  • Professor [Stephen C] Littlechild [University of Birmingham, UK]
  • Alan Woodfield (a New Zealand lecturer in economics)

See page 198

1983 Dec: /E A George Mason Uni/Center for Study of Public Choice attack on the World Health Organisation "WHO: No Rx for a Healthier World", by Tollison and Wagner.

    It follows the old tobacco line of promoting the idea that WHO budgets should be spent on vaccination, not on tobacco limitation. James Gwartney, Paul Dietrich, Thomas DiLorenzo, Petr Skrabanek, Robert McCormick, James Bennett, James le Fanu, Bill Niskanen, and many other tobacco lackeys are quoted

1984: Professor of Economics and Director, Center for Study of Public Choice, George Mason University.

1984: Began working for the US Tobacco Institute while also working for the International lobby group (ICOSI and later INFOTAB)

1984: Professor of Economics George Mason University
    Director of the Center for the Study of Public Choice

1984 Jan: Although the documentation is scarce, it is quite clear from that available that the Cash-for-Comments Economists Network had begun to operate by this time.

Kenneth Greene and Harold Hochman had originally joined forces with James Savarese to help the Tobacco Institute lobby in New York State. Then Robert Tollison and Richard Wagner, who had been working for the international ICOSI organisation, had then transfered over Tobacco Institute control to expand the network to other US States.

1984 Apr 26-27: Proceedings of a Conference on "Consumer Protection Economics" sponsored by the FTC's Bureau of Economics. [Note Ryan Amacher of Clemson had just left the FTC]

    This document contains a study by Richard S Higgins (then FTC) and Fred S McChesney (then Emory University) "An Economic Analysis of the FTC's Ad Substatiation Program" which is an attack on the new principle that advertisers had to be able to prove that their claims were true — as against the FTC being required to prove that they were false. Cigarette filters and health claims were one of the FTC's main focusses at this time.

    The article carries the footnote

* The views expressed here are the authors'. They doubtless do not reflect the views of some Commissioners, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Commission itself.

    We received helpful comments on earlier drafts from Ronald Bond, Gerard Butters, David Haddock, Cotton Lindsay, Robert Mackay, Michael Maloney, the late Steven Marston, Robert McCormick, William Shughart, Robert Tollison and Bruce Yandle
[The two authors, Ryan Amacher and the six [bold] commentators were all tobacco network academics.]

1984 Apr 18: The New York Restaurant Association (funded by the Tobacco Institute) has organised 'a coalition' to fight smoking bans in private workplaces and restaurants. They claim that just in Suffolk County it will cost businesses $15 million per year.

The coalition has retained the services of James Savarese and Associates, Inc., to produce the study which is attached. The principal authors of the study arc Professor Harold M. Hochman and Professor Robert D.Tollison. Professor Hochman is Director of the Center for Business and Govcrnment at the City University of New York. Professor Tollison, formerly a senior staff member of the President's Council of Economic Advisors and Director of the Bureau of Economics at the Federal Trade Commission, is currently on the economics faculty at Clemson University.

1984 Apr 30: The Tobacco Institute's Cigarette Exercise Tax Plan (DRAFT) shows that they are disillusioned with President Reagan because, after the deregulatory fiascos of his first term, he was now leaning more towards the use of excise taxes to offset some of the income tax reductions given to the wealthy — resulting in a fast-growing deficit which had now reatched $200 billion.

Outlook for 1985

Once the elections are over, it is almost certain that the new Congress will consider a significant tax increase. Since an enormous amount of revenue is needed to balance the federal budget, it will be very difficult to keep federal cigarette excises out of a final tax package.
Earmarking of cigarette excises for Medicare was being suggested. The various state excises were also under consideration.

    They also suggest the hiring in each state:
Economic Consultants
One public finance economist for 10 days @ $1,000 including meetings with coalition members and/or the Governor's staff; research and preparation; and testimony. TOTAL $10,000

One economist for a union workshop on the tax issue, including 3 or 4 training sessions over the course of a convention. TOTAL $5,000

Six economists @ $5,000 and one senior economist @ $20,000 for a tax symposium, including publishing of the proceedings at $3,000. The senior economist would play an oversight/organizational role and would be responsible for editing the proceedings. Such a symposium would be staged for regional or national impact. TOTAL $53,000

One economist provided to a public employee union to do original research on the need for adequate services to be funded by broad-based taxes; this would include the final report and testimony. TOTAL $25,000
It also had draft copy and designs for a couple of different booklets aimed at different states, and others aimed at labor/union and racial groups, and it identifies the Congress Committeemen and state Assembleymen who should be targetted as most likely to be influenced, adding an appendix which lists economists who could be enlisted to help.
Potential Economic Consultants
    Following is a list of economists in key states who might assist us as consultants. 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 speaking availability.

    As discussed in the body of this program, our intent is to have a group of individuals who we can call upon regularly to testify, conduct special research projects, and discuss their research and/or views on excise taxes with the media.
  • California, Thomas Borsherding, Claremont College
  • Connecticut, William McEachern, University of Washington
  • Florida, Richard Wagner, Florida State University
  • Georgia, Fred McChesney, Emory University Law School
  • Illinois, James Heins, University of Illinois
  • Massachusetts, Harlan Platt, Northeastern University
  • Minnesota, Thomas Stimson, University of Minnesota (St. Paul Campus)
  • New York, Harold Hochman, City University of New York
  • Ohio, David Klingaman, Ohio University
  • Pennsylvania, Mark Pauly, University of Pennsylvania
  • Texas, Charles Maurice, Texas A&M University
  • Washington, Yoram Barazel, University of Washington
  • Washington, D.C. Robert D. Tollison, George Mason University
  • Wisconsin, Burton Weisbrod, University of Wisconsin

    Tollison is the most influential and prestigious on this list; he would be hired to consult on federal tax situations and to oversee efforts of the others throughout the country.

See last page
Yoram Barazel is the only name on this list who appears to have resisted the Institute's overtures.

1984 Jun: /E Remnants of a Tobacco Institute report with information about the Savarese cash-for-comments economists network. [Dated by other documents].

First, the scorecard on the project to get our economic consultants pitching op-ed letters on tax policy, including low-rating of excises: — 31 drafts completed; nine delivered to editors; six published or accepted for publication.
They have also been writing material for Sam Howard, Vice President of the Hospital Corpororation which was published by the US Chamber of Commerce (or National Chamber Foundation)
Back to our economists, some ten of them have started running economic seminars and pitching the resulting papers for publication in professional journals.

1984 June: /E Tobacco Institute appendixes to some report. Page 5 is a list of "Potential Economic Consultants."

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 projects, and discuss their research and/or views on excise taxes with budget officials, potential coalition members, legislators, and the media.
Thirteen consultants are ordered by State.
California Thomas Borsherding, Claremont College
Connecticut William McEachern, University of Washington
Florida Richard Wagner, Florida State University
Georgia Fred McChesney, Emory University Law School
Illinois James Heins, University of Illinois
Massachusetts Harlan Piatt, Northeastern University
Minnesota Thomas Stimson, University of Minnesota, St. Paul
New York Harold Hockman, City University of New York
Ohio David Klingaman, Ohio University
Pennsylvania Mark Pauly, University of Pennsylvania
Texas Charles Maurice, Texas A&M University
Washington, DC. Robert D. Tollison, George Mason University
Wisconsin Burton Weisbord, University of Wisconsin

    Using these economists the Tobacco Institute issued a booklet attacking Federal Excise Taxes (in general) under the name of
"The Committee on Taxation and Economic Growth" [which] opposes excise taxes and believes government should seek other ways to raise revenue.

    The following excerpts, taken from public testimony before the U.S. Treasury Department, present some of the strongest arguments against excises. [Five are quoted, with Tollison saying:]
    "... The excise tax thus misallocates resources in the economy, imposing a deadweight cost on society.

        Unlike the revenues raised by the tax, these deadweight costs are not merely transferred from the private sector to the government. Rather, they represent a permanent reduction in society's welfare..'
There is no specific mention of cigarettes and, of course, no mention that this booklet was funded and circulated by the Tobacco Institute.

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.

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.

  • 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.
  • 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.

Cash-for-Comment Economists
California Thomas Borsherding, Claremont College
Connecticut William McEachern, University of Washington
Florida Richard Wagner, Florida State University
Georgia Fred McChesney, Emory University Law School
Illinois James Heins, University of Illinois
Mass. Harlan Platt , Northeastern University
Minnesota Thomas Stimson, University of Minnesota (St.P)
New York Harold Hockman, City University of New York
Ohio David Klingaman, Ohio University
Penn. Mark Pauly, University of Pennsylvania
Texas Charles Maurice, Texas A&M University
Wash.DC. Robert D Tollison, George Mason University.
Wisconsin Burton Weisbord, University of Wisconsin
[This was the core group which established the cash-for-contents network. Over the years the numbers reached over 100.]

    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.

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.

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.

  • 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.
  • 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.

1984 July: /E Tollison's preface says that the book "Smoking and Society" was

"an outgrowth of a workshop of smoking and society held in in NY City in the summer of 1984,..."concerned scholars" conventional wisdom."
However it was privately acknowledge only a meeting of the potential authors of the chapters in the book which came to be entitled: 'Smoking and Society: Towards a More Balanced Assessment' This set out to proved that cigarettes don't cause cancer (essay by psychologist, not MD) and included chapter heading like "Overzealous Crusaders Endanger a Free Society"

Tollison's special treatment
Although the network of academic economists was run by James Savarese for the Tobacco Institute, Tollison clearly held at least part of the action.

    For instance, while the op-eds written by the hundred-or-so academics at other universities were sent back to Savarese, who then passed them to the Tobacco Institute (and then to the lawyers) for clearance, there is no evidence that Tollison's articles went through the same process. None of the lists even bother to include his name... it is assumed.

    His wife Anna was also employed by Savarese as a network administrator, and his staff at the Center for Study of Public Choice at GMU were paid for network services (on the side). A few of Tollison's associates and friends like Wagner, Shughart, Lee and Ekelund also received special treatment.

    While other network economist were given a franchise to create op-eds for small-town and regional newspapers (some with only circulations of a few thousand), Tollison's main target was the prestigious New York Times. He was probably paid a special bonus for these exposures, but the payment details appear to be hidden somehow.

    It is clear that he was a partner in the network operation with Savarese, responsible mainly for the recruitment and organization of the economists.

1984 Jul 11: The long (53 page) Cigarette Excise Tax Plan of the Tobacco Institute. Tollison at George Mason University, is listed here as a "Potential Economic Consultant" who has been contacted by the Tobacco Institute [along with many of his other long-term tobacco-friendly associates].
[This document would have had wide distribution to Federal lobbyists and to State Directors — so the wording was probably carefully designed to be innocuous]

1984 Oct: Book Free to Smoke (revised by PM), Had chapters by Page 6: Editor: Robert D. Tollison, Ph.D. Director, Center for Study of Public Choice George Mason University Fairfax, VA 22030
Contributors: Domingo M. Aviado, Peter L. Berger, Jean J Bodewyn, James M Buchanan Douglas Den Uyl, Hans J. Eysenck, Sherwin J. Feinhandler, Peter Gray, Stephen C. Littlechild, Charles D. Spielberger, James M. Savarese, William F. Shughart, Ingo Walter, TOB10800.95

    See details in this draft promotional copy

1984 Oct 31: [In the 447 page Final Opinion in the case USA and others vs Philip Morris et al]

During 1984, the Tobacco Institute paid $70,000 for one half the cost of a monograph commissioned by INFOTAB, edited by Robert Tollison, Professor of Economics at Virginia's George Mason University, titled "Smoking in Society."
It was planned to enlist many known tobacco-friendly academics to write chapters.
  • Hans Eysenck, University of London
  • Charles D Spielberger, University of Southern Florida
  • Domingo Aviado, Atmospheric Health Sciences
  • Sherwin J Feinhandler, Social Systems Analysts
  • Douglas Den Uyl, Bellarmine College
  • William Shughart II, Clemson University
  • Peter Berger, Boston University
  • Ingo Walters, New York University
  • Stephen Littlechild, Uni of Birmingham,
  • James Savarese [Later Tollison's partner]
  • Jean Boddewyn, Baruch College, CUNY
  • James Buchanan, George Mason University.

Tobacco Institute Memo
Tollison's Project Outline
Final Court Opinion page 297

1984 Nov: Professor Henry Butler [partner/associate of Tollison and Savarese in the economists network] sends his C/V to the Tobacco Institute. It has three referees:

  • Henry G Manne, Director, Law and Economics Center, Emory University, Atlanta
  • Robert D Tollison, Director, Center for Study of Public Choice, George Mason University.
  • James S Mofsky, School of Law, university of Miami

1984 Nov 9: The economists have suggested to Savarese that the Tobacco Institute should attempt to use economic forums to spread their propaganda in 1985. The TI should pay the network economists to attend and give papers at these forums. They have suggested:

  • Public Choice Society, New Orleans, LA, February 21-23
  • Eastern Economic Association, Pittsburgh, PA, March 21-23
  • Southwestern Social Science Association, Houston, TX, March 20-23
  • Western Economic Association, Anaheim, CA, June 25-29
  • Southern Economic Association, Dallas, TX, November
These become projects for the network economists.
It is important to bear in mind that these papers must be a cut above the testimony we produced for the Treasury hearings, but they do not have to be of professional journal quality.

    This is not to say that we wouldn't want to get several of these published independently in academic journals, but rather that this is not necessary in the majority of cases.

    Again, unlike the Treasury hearings, the authors would have to do a good deal of the research themselves. We would work with them to insure that the main points are made, but we do need them to commit some of their time to the production side. [Note how this is being spelled out. Clearly most of the research data in previous papers had been handed to the economists, with their papers or testimonials already written.]

    In order to get on the program of these meetings , we will need to rely heavily on Bob Tollison, who has just been elected President of the Southern Economic Association for 1985.

    With the help of Tollison, Tom Borcherding, and Hal Hochman; we can probably appear before each of these groups.

    If The Institute is interested in pursuing their idea, I am available to work with Tollison to draw up a brief one page outline for programs for each of these forums. I will check.with the economists we have used to ascertain their availability ahd interest — and any ideas they might have concerning specific papers.

1984 Nov 20: O&M is organising the first economists forum at the Public Choice Society meeting in New Orleans, Feb 21-23.

The topic would be "Public Choices About Tax Reform."

W.F. Shugart II, an economist from Clemson University, would chair the panel. Those who would present papers would be:
  • Thomas Borcherding, from Claremont Graduate School. Subject: "Tax Reform and Simplification: A Public Choice Perspective."
  • Harold Hochman, from City University of New York. Subject: "The Value-Added Tax: Do We Need Another Excise Tax?"
  • Fred McChesney, Emory University Law School. Subject: "Tax Reform in a Rent-Seeking Perspective: The Role of Interests."
  • Gary Anderson, an economist from George Mason University, would be the discussant.
Bob Tollison would be responsible for getting us on the program. He and Jim Savarese would work with each of the people to ensure that each paper contained a clear anti-excise tax message.

    Shughart and Anderson would also mention excises in their presentations. We will be obtaining CV s from Anderson and Shugart, who Jim and Bob Tollison know well. The other economists have all worked with us before.
Savarese's estimate of the costs for running this Economists' Forum project with the three papers at $2,000 each and Gary Anderson with $1000, plus travel, hotel, administration, etc. was $16,000.

1984 Nov 27: Ogilvy & Mather are organising an Atlanta Tax Symposium, for the Tobacco Institute on Jan 18 1985. They have enlisted:

  • Congressman Wyche Fowler ("who has agreed to accept an honorarium"!)
  • Tom Morgan, Dean of Emory Law School (moderator)
  • "Robert Tollison and Fred McChesney will present remarks, which
        Jim Savarese will assist in preparing."

    On another subject, attached you will find CV's on William Shughart and Dwight Lee, who will participate in the Public Choice Society meeting in February.

    The Public Choice Society, whose annual meeting we have recommended as a forum for the excise tax program, is an organization of economists, political scientists, historians, and social scientists. It was founded in 1960.

    Dennis Mueller, an economist from the University of Maryland,
    is this year's president. Bob Tollison is a member.

1984 Dec: /E Infotab 1985 Plan and Budget

Public/"Passive" Smoking [Page 10] With the cooperation of the Tobacco Institute, USA, the Tobacco Advisory Council, UK and the Verband in Germany, coordinate, activity in:
    Social Costs & Values
    • The comprehensive monograph "Smoking and Society" which will be published in April 1985 will be distributed as widely as possible and skilled writers will be engaged' to write articles from the 14 chapters of this book.


Tollison transfers from Clemson to George Mason University.
He is a Research Associate with the Center for Study of Public Choice and becomes its Director.

1985–86: The Center for Policy Studies at Clemson University appeared to be publishing studies by the cash-for-comments economists, McKenzie, Shughart, Tollison, Kimenyi, Yandle, Matt Lindsay, Maloney, McChesney, Staaf. Laband — and others not apparently in the network.

1985: Tollison was President of the Southern Economic Association through 1985. James Buchanan was President of the Mont Pelerin Society.

1985 Feb 8: Robert Tollison, now the director of the Center for the Study of Public Choice (GMU - but apparently not on staff), Fred McChesney (Emory University School of Law) are running a symposium on excise taxes at Emory University for the Tobacco Institute.

This one hour symposium will focus upon the major tax issues facing Congress in 1985. The panelists will discuss issues such as the flat tax proposal, a national sales tax and the closing of tax loopholes.

    The Tobacco Institute has a draft copy of a brochure for this seminar [Filed under "Testimony"] which says, "McChesney will take a Liberal Position and Tollison will take a Conservative Position" and it gives Tollisons's affiliations with GMU but not the Center.

    It also reveals that Ogilvy & Mather would provide a video record of the event.

1985 Feb 21: Susan Stuntz, Issues Manager at the Tobacco Institute is sending material to:

  • James Saverese , then at Ogilvy & Mather
  • Bob Tollison at George Mason University
  • William Shughart, Clemson University

1985 Mar: /E Aaron Wildavsky, President of the American Political Science Association, [and a secret recipient of regular tobacco industry funds] wrote in the Spring 1985 Public Interest:

Connecting economics and politics, in a way very important for schools of policy, was one of these minuscule elites that do not show up in anybody's survey of mass opinion, but which are nevertheless significant; namely, the "public choice" movement, composed of social scientists who apply economic analysis to politics. These are the people behind the balanced budget-spending limit amendment, behind the flat tax and variants thereof, behind the rationalization of limited government. When public choice theorists started developing persuasive models of organizations, their influence loomed large. Schools of public policy needed some way to connect politics, economics, and organizations, and public choice was what there was.

1985 Mar 20: -23 [The report is dated Dec 18 1984] Jim Savarese, as subcontractor to Ogilvy & Mather, has set up seminars for some of the industry's cash-for-comments economists under the auspices of the Southwestern Social Science Association and the Eastern Economic Association. Jim Savarese writes to Trish Milita of O&M who refers this to the Tobacco Institute:

Attached are the panel sessions that were accepted by both the Southwestern Social Science Associations and the Eastern Economic Association in March, 1985.

    These are very strong academic panels and add a great deal of depth to our list of consultants for future use.

    I know all of these individuals personally except for Henry Butler who is a friend of Bob Tollison's at Texas A&M. They all understand their mission and will be submitting papers for us to review well in advance of the meetings.
[There can be little doubt as to what is meant by "their mission", and it is inexcusable for a genuine academic of this standing to submit a paper, about to be presented to an academic conference, to a PR company for vetting in advance of the conference.

    This is lobbying... pure and simple. These are lobbyists, not economists.]
  • The SouthWestern Social Science Association seminar run by O&M in Houston (Mar 20) was on "Taxation and Social Process. It had Robert Ekelund in the chair, and papers by Henry N Butler, Joseph M Jadlow and Richard E Wagner. Keith Watson was a discussant.

  • The Eastern Economic Association seminar, run by O&M in Pittsburgh (Mar 21) was on "Perspectives on Tax Reform". It had Robert Tollison in the chair, and papers by William Shughart, Gary Anderson, and a joint paper by John Bowman/Michael Pratt. The discussant was George Hoffer.
All of the speakers here were employed by the tobacco industry to promote their Social Cost and Taxation agendas.

1985 April 9: The OTA's Workshop on the Costs of Smoking in New York has not invited Tollison. These documents have mortality estimates, etc. for 'social cost' - extensive details about how these are calculated.

1985 May 5: Ed Battison, who was a contract economist briefly employed by the Tobacco Institute has produced a summary of Tollison's book "Smoking and Society" which had used the proceedings of the 1984 Workshop in New York City to create 'an authorative textbook"

[This was a trial run of the Philip Morris technique of totally controlling the speakers at a supposed 'scientific conference' — then publishing the proceedings — which was later used in the McGill University ETS symposium in November 1989]

    The document has outlines of the main speakers and what they said at the conference.
  • Robert D Tollison
  • Eysemek [probably Hans Eysenck]
  • Charles D Spielberger
  • Domingo M Aviado
  • Sherwin J Feinhandler
  • Douglas J Den Uyl
  • William F Shughart & RD Tollison
  • Peter Berger
  • HP Grant & Ingo Walters
  • Stephen C Littlechild
  • Bill Shughart and James Savarese
  • Jean J Boddewyn
  • James Buchanan
It notes
'it should be pointed out that each paper contains much more detail and information on each subject than presented here. Some of these points present a structure for defense of [against] prosmoking views that are applicable to legislative hearings and lobbying during 1985 and 1986.

    He also produces a list with the prominent inclusion of many of the same people listed above. The document identified a
"List of Professional Persons who have potential to testify
  • against excise taxes or antismoking bills;
  • for smokers rights;
  • against cooercion of smokers;
  • against earmarking excise taxes for public health care"

[It includes]
George Mason University, Center For Study of Public Choice,

- has written on tax reform, social costs of the cigarette excise. Disinterest In Deregulation in the American Economic Review, 1984;
- Economic Regulation, Competitive Government, Specialized Resources; Instead of Regulation—Alternatives to...;
- Rent Seeking, A Survey;
- F.T.C. Since 1970 — Economic Regulation & Bureaucratic Behavior, 1982;
- Rational Choice & The Taxation Of Sin — a Reply by Grain, Deaton, Holcombe, & Tollison in Jour. of Public Econ.,v.16,1981.

He is an authority on the economic inefficiency of excise taxes by his study of their higher than expected social costs.
It adds the note " Other persons have been identified, but at present, it is not known clearly what their positions on the issues or on testimony are.

1985 May 5: Ed Battison from the Tobacco Institute has summarised Robert Tollison/s 1984 Workshop papers on "Smoking and Society" and also lists scientists and academics who would probably "Testify Against Excise Taxes or Anti-Smoking Bills, for Smoker's Rights and Against Cooercion of Smokers and Against Earmarking Excise Taxes for Public Health Care".

    He says about this individual:

ROBERT D. TOLLISON, economist, George Mason U.,Center For Study of Public Choice, has written on
  • tax reform, social costs of the cigarette excise. Disinterest In Deregulation in the American Economic Review, 1984;
  • Economic Regulation, Competitive Government, Specialized Resources; Instead of Regulation—Alternatives to...;
  • Rent Seeking, A Survey;
  • FTC Since 1970 — Economic Regulation & Bureaucratic Behavior, 1982;
  • Rational Choice & The Taxation Of Sin — a Reply by Grain, Deaton, Holcombe, & Tollison in Jour.of Public Econ. 1981.
He is an authority on the economic inefficiency of excise taxes by his study of their higher than expected social costs.

1985 May 5: A Tobacco Institute summary of "Smoking and Society" edited by Robert Tollison. It gives details of the main speakers enlisted for a New York City Workshop run to benefit the industry, and it outlines the ideas which were translated into chapters for this book "Smoking and Society".The speakers at this workshop all work for tobacco as paid consultants or lobbyists:

  • Robert Tollison — professor of libertarian economics and organiser of the cash-for-comments economists network,
  • Hans Eysenck (misspelled) — famous behavioral psychologist, and tobacco consultant,
  • Charles D Spielberger — psychologist "Why People Smoke" (every reason other than addiction),
  • Domingo Aviado — pharmacologist (also worked for pharmacuetical industry),
  • Sherwin Feinhandler — sociologist and life-long tobacco lobbyist,
  • Douglas J Den-Uyl — Philosopher and political scientist (ethics!),
  • William F Shughart — Public Choice economist, associate of Tollison and Buchanan
  • Peter Berger — sociologist
  • HP Grant & Ingo Walter — business administration/finance,
  • Stephen C Littlechild — Professor of Commerce UK,
  • James Savarese — labor and economics lobbyist,
  • Jean J Boddewyn — professional advertising effects denier,
  • James Buchanan — guru of Public Choice Economics and partner of Tollison.
There are also notes on Glen Loury (economist), Walter Williams (economist), Amitai Etzioni (sociologist), Ricahrd Wagner (economist) Dwight Lee (economist), Peter Blau (psychologist), Terry Anderson (economist), and Theodore Sterling (computers/stats and professional lobbyist.).

[Every one on this list is a well-known, well-document tobacco lobbyist with academic background who was willing to support the industry if paid for their services. Most held academic posts as Professor.]

    The summary of this speaker's comments is:
Tollison introduces the workshop effort by discussing Smoking: Toward A More Balanced Assessment. He identifies the areas of assessment as 1) economic as in cost/benefit analysis; 2) sociological or cultural aspects; 3) philosophy of personal freedom; and 4) the scientific or health aspects.

    He notes that much smoking adversary work is emotional, faulty, unproven, or beyond common sense. Consumer protection has real but often unmeasured cost or C/B?s. Benefits are often underplayed and given only passing attention on smokers' side.
He also adds his conclusion:
Tollison concludes that antismoking movement can lead to restriciting other forms of behavior as well, and could result in totally regulated society. On the other hand, the antismokers say that the debate about the costs and harmful effects of smoking is over, but they ignore the facts to the contrary, the weak data, multiple risk factors, and other alternative hypotheses about the evidence.

1985 June 6: James Savarase & Associates has submitted its bill to Peter Sparber at the Tobacco Institute. The billing shows that some economists were paid via Robert Tollison, and that an Emory University Symposium had been held with Congressman [Wyche] Fowler.

  • Robert D. Tollison (includes services of four economists and expenses) Completion of 40 States' Economist List.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . $6.055
  • Emory University Symposium with Congressman Fowler (Robert Tollison and Fred McChesney + $1,500 to Emory Law School).  .  .  .  .  .  . $10,006
  • Public Choice Society Session.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . Total $17,326
    • Robert Tollison ($6863),
    • William Shughart ($2908),
    • Fred McChesney ($2748),
    • Thomas Borcherding ($3033)
    • Dwight Lee (DRL Inc) ($1773)
  • Op-ed Project Professional Fees and Expenses.  .  .  .  . Total $23,346
    • Robert Tollison (also laundering payment to four economists) — $15,346
    • A James Heins, Richard Vedder, Todd Sandler, Ryan Amacher, Joseph Jadlow, Henry Butler, RN Ekelund, Fred McChesney — (each $1000)
                        TOTAL A/C was for $56.733.81

See also previous links to Congressman Fowler

1985 June 10: Maureen Delanty (O&M)'s May Monthly Report lists her activities.

  • Participated in luncheon meeting with Steve Schlossberg and Mike Forsey to discuss labor relations opportunities for TI. We are trying to confirm Schlossberg's recommendation of Forsey with other sources.
    [Both were later widely used by Labor Management Committee.]
  • Briefly discussed with Pete Sparber use of economic consultants to promote Chase Econometrics' study of the tobacco industry. Once study is available, we would like to review and prepare recommendations for this project.
    [Chase did both a general and numerous State-specific studies, custom-designed to produce the results the tobacco industry wanted.]
  • Briefly discussed with you use of economic consultants on public smoking issue. We should discuss some target states so we can make recommendations and get started on this project.
  • Delivered brochure on health care financing. We also printed stationery for Committee on Taxation and Economic Growth for cover letter signed by Bob Tollison. Distribution list is being compiled and brochure will be mailed as soon as possible.
  • Continued to prepare op-ed articles on tax reform and work with area economists to place in newspapers in home districts of members of House Ways & Means and Senate Finance Committees.
  • With Fred Panzer and Jim Savarese, coordinated Bob Tollison and Richard Wagner's responses to OTA on the earmarking of cigarette excises for health care financing.
  • Arranged for Citizens for Tax Justice and Hal Hochman, professor at City University of New York, to testify before Representative Rangel on the taxation of low-income wage earners. This involved coordination of testimony with the subcommittee and making final revisions on Hochman's statement.

1985 June 12: The formal "Committee on Taxation and Economic Growth" put together by the tobacco industry to support its propaganda, now has its own letterhead to write to Congressional politicians and aides. It claims to be a

"bi-partisan organization of public policy experts and public finance economists founded in 1984 to examine ways of creating a federal tax system which will provide adequate revenue in an efficient, equitable manner.
The letterhead shows that:
  • Robert Tollison of George Mason Institute is Chairman,
and the Executive Board consists of:
  • Thomas Borcherding, Claremont Graduate School
  • Harold Hochman, Baruch College, CUNY
  • Cotton M Lindsay, Clemson university
  • Fred McChesney, Emory university,
  • Dwight Lee, University of Georgia
  • Richard Wagner, Florida State Uni.
[Note Delores Martin's name is not on the letterhead, even though she was involved initially, and later with the network.]

1985 June 21: James Savarese submits his bill to the Tobacco Institute for the academics who have written articles or made speeches for the Tobacco Institute.

  • Op Ed Project — $1000 each in 'professional fees'
    for Abrams, Alston, Armentano, Harper-Fender, T Anderson, Denzau, Bohanon, Jadlow, Wagner and Menchik.
  • Southwest Social Science Meeting — Houston
    • Keith Watson ($1,000),
    • RB Ekelund Jr ($2,003)
    • Joseph Jadlow ($2,605),
    • Richard Wagner ($2,716)
    • Robert D Tollison ($5,000)
    • Henry N Butler ($2,070)
  • Eastern Economic Assoc, Meeting — Pittsburgh
    • George E Hoffer ($1,431)
    • Gary M Anderson ($2,450)
    • Robert D Tollison ($6,375)
    • Bill Shurghart III ($2,529)
    • Michael D Pratt ($1,288)
    • John H Bowman ($1,000)

1986 Aug /E About this time the Virginai Polytechnic team migrates to George Mason University

1985 July: A later document says:

Tollison testified against the Workplace Smoking Bill proposed by the DC City Council in July 1985.

1985 Oct: A later document says:

Tollison testified against [] the Federal Workplace Smoking Bill (S 1440) in October 1985. He also has prepared other testimony on the issue.

1985 Nov: The Public Relations Resources Catalogue of the Tobacco Institute.

  • Resources are defined as witnesses, materials, publications, corporate relations, and public service programs. Public Service programs center mainly on the success of the Fire Safety education grants and "Helping Youth Decide." [aka HYD program]
These programs are listed in the Fire and Youth and Sampling issues sections, respectively.
It also lists all the standard cash-for-comments economics, and has some special notes on some of them. This economist is credited:
Tollison testified against the Workplace Smoking Bill proposed by the DC City Council in July 1985, and the Federal Workplace Smoking Bill (S 1440) in October 1985. He also has prepared other testimony on the issue.

1986: At some time during this year Dennis Logue (network economist from Dartmouth College) and Robert Tollison supposedly did a study which showed that the cure was worse than the smoking disease. This was claimed many years later in a Philip Morris pamphlet:

[The Claim:]
Studies have concluded that smoking restrictions reduce worker productivity because of time lost for smokers to leave their work areas in order to smoke outside or in a breakroom. Productivity losses can double or triple when nonsmokers are given similar breaks.
  • Dennis Logue, Ph.D., and Robert D. Tollison, Ph.D., released a report in 1986 that analyzed the estimated economic impact of instituting smoking prohibitions (except in designated smoking areas) in private and public workplaces in the state of New Hampshire. According to the report, a major concern of private employers is the potential loss in productivity that would occur if employees were not allowed to smoke at their worksites. It would be necessary to institute breaks for employees that would result in significant lost work time and, therefore, lost production.

        Logue and Tollison evaluated the cost of instituting two 10-minute breaks/day based on average hourly compensation rates and concluded that productivity losses in private workplaces could range from $21.9 million to $65.1 million in New Hampshire.

        The study also pointed out concerns with instituting breaks for smokers that might not also be offered to nonsmokers, particularly among nonprofessional, clerical, and union workers. Expanding breaks to all workers would significantly increase costs by as much as double or triple the total costs.
  • In another report released in 1986, James Savarese & Associates attempted to quantify the economic effects of extending smoking restrictions in effect in New York City to all "public places". Using similar assumptions for expanded break policies in workplaces to Logue/Tollison, the study conservatively estimated that productivity losses in private workplaces in New York City would total approximately $50.4 million.
  • In 1988, James Savarese & Associates released a report analyzing the potential impact of instituting a total prohibition on indoor smoking in public places in Oregon. Under reasonable assumptions, the report showed, productivity losses could easily reach $34 million per year. The study also showed that 3,190 jobs could be lost under the smoking ban.

[Not only do Tollison and Savarese organize the network, they will also personally produce custom-to-fit studies to prove whatever the Tobacco Institute requires.]

1986: Tollison (as editor) publishes book Smoking and Society (the name of a June 1984 conference in New York).

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

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

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

"Requests for economists should be made ASAP. Allow at least one week. PR approval needed."
He is listed [along with 50 other economists] as a contact in:
  • Dr Robert Tollison
    Director, Center for the Study of Public Choice, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA,

    Tollison testified against the workplace smoking bill, proposed by the DC City Council in July 1985, and the Federal workplace smoking bill (S.1440), in October, 1985. He also has prepared other testimony on the, issue.
He is available on two weeks notice as a witness for hire.
Public Smoking/Witness: Local economists are available on two-weeks notice to provide economic testimony on the public smoking issue. Those economists who have testified or prepared op-ed pieces on the economic effects of public smoking are marked accordingly. The others may be briefed on the potential cost to government of implementing smoking restrictions.

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

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

1986 Jan 20: Chris Cory of PM Inc is trying to promote this pro-smoking book:

"There is a serious and useful scholarly case to be made that the conventional wisdom about smoking behavior is either wrong, unproven, built upon faulty analysis, or pushed well beyond the point of common sense." — Smoking and Society: Toward a More Balanced Assessment" from Tollison's Center for the Study of Public Choice at George Mason University.

    [Philip Morris] International is keeping tabs on the book (INFOTAB supported the project somehow). I got my copy from Don Harris. Andrew Whist gave advance copies to the PM Board in December. "

Chase Econometrics = BULLSHIT
1986 Feb 26: Richard Wagner wrote a private note to his friend Robert Tollison.
Here is a draft copy of my op-ed piece on the Chase bullshit.

    There is some really wacko stuff in that model: increased employment increases wages, but wages have nothing to do with employment; higher wages increase inflation, but inflation has nothing-to do with wages, and money has nothing to do with inflation. Inflation has nothing to do with interest rates. And....

    At any rate, I can live with the enclosed essay or some modestly revised version of it, but there is no way I can get any deeper into multiplier effects, interindustry flows, and the like
[They were promoting a series of faux-economic impact studies on the effects of smoking bans which were done for the Tobacco Institute in specific cities, by Chase Econometrics.]

1986 Mar 13: Savarese writes to Fred Panzer at the Tobacco Institute about the "Chase Study/Op-eds".

  • The St Louis article has been approved and submitted to the St Louis Despatch.
  • The Baltimore article has been approved, but not yet submitted.
  • John Militello's Philadelphia article is awaiting approval
  • Richard Wagner's Miami article is being discussed.
  • Four new articles are enclosed
    • Chicago (by Henry Butler)
    • (Another by Butler) for either Dallas or Houston
    • New York (by Michael Crew)
    • Atlanta (by Dwight Lee)
  • In writing stages are articles for
    • Los Angeles (by Thomas Borsherding)
    • Cleveland (by Richard Vedder)

[Note how flexible they are between Dallas and Houston — the articles can quickly be modified to suit the city]

1986 April 3: Savarese writes to his economists thanking them...

... 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.
He also wanted a cost approximation, and would then request a formal proposal "for which you would be compensated"

    The list of eocnomists to which this was sent includes some with ticks, which match later projects, indicating that these were those who formally replied. Thiw was filed under "Brainstorming / Research Ideas"

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

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

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

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

    A month or so later the GMU production staff were also being paid $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.

Chase Econometrics Studies
1986 May 19: Scott Stapf at the Tobacco Institute sent to Peter Sparber a "Final report on the Chase Econometrics project." It detailed the successes of the 'Chase Campaign'
  • Press promotion: City press tours of Sacramento, Columbus, Albany (failed in New York City) Florida still to come.
  • Letters to the Editor being generated through field staff and TI media team members.
  • Economists op-eds (using Chase data) through the Savarese network
  • Smaller business publications
  • Major industry trade releases (Doremus & Co)
  • Labor publications (they have briefed Ms Jacobsen)
  • Materials production - all printed and readied for distribution
(including slide show)

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

    Section 1 is headed

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

1986 May 6: The April - Monthly Status Report from Ogilvy & Mather to Susan stuntz at the Tobacco Institute. He is being CCd. They are working on:

  • Generated eight proposals for research by economists on Social Cost Issue.
  • Drafting BNA [Bureau of National Affairs] Op-ed article to run under Ray Scannell's byline. [BC&T Labor/union contact for the tobacco industry]
  • Executed Op-Editorial Program for 19 economists in states with Senate Finance Committee Members, including personal letters to all Senators in these states.
  • [Citizens for Tax Justice] CTJ/Excise Taxes — agency assisted in planning and orchestrated Dirksen Senate Office Building press briefing on April 21st attended by eight reporters. O&M prepared and mailed 200 press kits. Coverage appeared in the Washington Post, the New York Times etc.
  • Agency produced for CTJ bumper stickers and assisted in implementation of Hill event with Senator Bradley and Congressman Rostenkowski.
  • Mailed over 400 copies of a follow-up Op-Ed by David Wilhelm.
  • OTA Report "Passive Smoking in the Workplace" — Jim Savarese [Tobacco Institute] arranged for Bob Tollison to submit comments to O&M and reviewed
        several sections

1986 June 11: Peter Sparber at the Tobacco Institute memoes his boss, Fred Panzer, enclosing a number of Congressional statements.[Days after they were given]

Enclosed are statements prepared for various Congressional hearings on the tax issue that specifically comment on earmarking to some degree.

    These statements are by:
  • Henry Butler of Texas A&M,
  • William Shughart and Dwight Lee of George Mason submitted to Ways & Means, June 20, 1985;
  • Bob Tollison of George Mason for the Chafee subcommittee on September 10, 1985;
  • Randy Rucker of North Carolina State on the Rose bill on July 18, 1985; and
  • CM Lindsay of Clemson for hearings on the Stark bill which never were held.

    I've asked Jim Savarese, who provided these papers, to begin working on copy that could serve as the text for multipurpose anti-earmarking publications.

1986 Aug: The Regional Vice Presidents (RVPs) and Regional Directors (RDs) of the Tobacco Institute in charge of various areas have supplied comments on their Economic Witnesses. Six of the RVPs thought it important that the economist was a resident of the State, "Ideally associated with the State University", while three did not, provided they were "presented to the legislators by a 'credible... organization' (e.g. chambers of commerce, labour union)." [Provided they hid their tobacco industry backing behind a front organization.] The consolidated and encapsulated comments included:

Region VI
Robert Tollison (George Mason University)
In his testimony on the District of Columbia workplace smoking legislation, Tollison's knowledge was "good but, [hisl presentation and persuasiveness [were] marred by his not admitting from the beginning that the study was sponsored by TI."

Richard Wagner (Florida State University)
    [He] was regarded as "more effective" than Tollison on knowledge, presentation and persuasiveness.

    Emphasizing the need to present the economic impact of smoking restrictions, RVP would like these witnesses again.

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 a record of the first year of operations of the main cash-for-comments economists network.

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

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

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

    Many of them have joined in with the industry's orchestrated letter-writing campaigns opposing workplace smoking bans.
  • GSA = General (Government) Services Administration.
  • 'Ways & Means' = Congressional committee on finances
  • ALEC = American Legislative Exchange Council (a formalised way for big business to directly influence Congressional and State politicians)
  • Chase Econometrics = A company that did economic impact studies for the tobacco industry in various locations to 'prove' that smoking bans would destroy local economies.

        The reference for Robert Tollison was for National converate:

Professor Robert D. Tollison

    Public Choice Center, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia 22030, 703-323-3771

    Services rendered:
    • testimony: smoking restrictions — Federal (2 times) and D.C.
    • Atlanta Tax Conference - Cong[resssman] Fowler
    • economic impact study — GSA smoking restrictions
    • regional hearing — Treasury I - DC.
    • TODAY show
    • monograph with R. Wagner
    • article in Tobacco newsletter
    • speech at INFOTAB [Int'. Tobacco Info. Center]
    • economic impact study: New Hampshire with D[ennis] Logue

1987 Jan 20: Susan Stuntz, as head of the Public Affairs Division (PAD) of the Tobacco Institute has put together an overview of their 'readiness' for Federal Hearings on tax, advertising and public smoking bans. This is a 21 page detailed document worth reading. It includes many items related to the cash-for-comments economists network:

  • Identification of witnesses from among appropriate ally and coalition groups.
  • Development of arguments and identification of experts and coalitions to argue that excise tax increases are not an appropriate means of financing health care costs.
  • Op-ed articles, letters to the editor, etc., from academic resources.
  • Continue efforts to obtain copies of GSA comments, via Freedom of Information request.
  • Identification of potential Congressional witnesses, and Congressmen who would be amenable to invite other scientists who support the industry's view on ETS to testify.
  • Approval to proceed with economic impact studies and/or voter surveys. One-month lead time is requested on both. On the former, decision will be needed as to whether to seek labor sponsorship.
Tax Hearing Readiness: They have five 'basic arguments' that cigarette excise taxes are:
  • Regressive
  • Unfair
  • Inefficient
  • Inadequate
  • Unconstitutional
and they intend to mobilize their Core Witness List to promote different aspects of the argument, including the economists:
  • Robert Tollison, Professor at George Mason University and director of the Center for Public Choice.
  • Richard Wagner, Professor of Economics, University of Florida.
  • Darwin Johnson of Policy Economic Group to discuss his study of the excise tax burden on five specific demographic groups.
Many other consultant lobbyists were also named, and the evidence that they could be expected to state, is also included.

1987 Feb 3: PM memo

The first Philip Morris Distinguished Visiting Professor of Business and Society at Baruch will be Gordon Tullock, one of the intellectual fathers of the "public choice" movement in economics. The leader of that movement, James Buchannan, just won the Nobel Prize, and Tullock has collaborated with Buchannan on several books.

    Like Buchannan, Tullock is a professor at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia. Part of his [C/V] vita is attached (he is prolific, and I've omitted 22 pages listing articles and book reviews). As you know, a number of professors at George Mason wrote articles for the book Smoking and Society: Toward a More Balanced Perspective (Tollisson).

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 Apr: Report of the Tobacco Institute

Economic consultants have submitted for publication 23 op-eds on the excise tax issue. Sixteen articles have been published in House Ways and Means and Senate Finance committee member districts.

    On the state side, Bob Tollison prepared testimony in opposition to California legislation to increase the state's cigarette excise tax. The bill's sponsor withdrew the bill from consideration before Tollison had an opportunity to testify. Tollison is scheduled to testify on another California excise tax proposal next month.

    Our plan to aggressively address the "social cost" issue has been revised to incorporate the comments of TI staff and legal counsel. The plan will be presented at the next meeting of the Communications Committee. Bob Tollison also has revised the "social cost" book and is prepared to seek publication.

    In Need of Attention
  • Completion of economists op-ed assignment.
  • We await word from State Activities Division on the status of field staff meetings with economists.

1987 Apr 6: Tax Notes article "House Budget Committee Approves $18 Billion Tax Increase":

Republican opposition to tax increases was clearly evident during an April 1 meeting of the House Republican Study Committee (RSC). [Reagan Administration's] OMB Director Miller and a number of conservative economists appeared before the panel ostensibly to review the tax proposals that have been proposed by House Speaker Jim Wright, D-Tex.
James C Miller III later became a cash-for-comments economist. Also appearing were
  • Robert Tollison, George Mason Uni. [network economist]
  • Richard Vedder, Ohio State [network economist]
  • Alan Reynolds of Polynomics [Hudson & A de Tocqueville Insts.]
  • Paul Craig Roberts, Georgetown Uni [TI consultant]
  • Richard W Rahn, US Chamber of Commerce. [coalition economist]

    The RSC media advisory

    Fleishman-Hillard report to Tobacco Institute.

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 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 of the Tobacco Institute paying contract academics direct (as per auditor recommendations).

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 "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. "
[There is no record that economist-contractors were paid directly, so the TI must have found "important business reasons to do otherwise."]

1987 June 16: Another cash-for-comment economist, Walter Williams, as Chairman of the Advisory Commitee of the Institute for Research on the Economics of Taxation (IRET) has written to Robert Tollison, inviting him to join the Committee (and Tollison accepts). IRET

[IRET was merged with the Citizens for Tax Justice, and run by Ogilvy & Mather for the Tobacco Institute. Bother IRET and CTJ were totally corrupt organizations. Both Philip Morris and RJ Reynolds had seats on the Board]

1987 Sept 1: Issue manager Susan Stuntz writes to Jim Savarese outlining eight projects she wants to work on in the following months.

  1. AFL-CIO meeting in Florida
  2. John Lyons will be her backup on the Labor Management Committee
  3. Ray Scannell to advise on when to run the Surgeon-General ETS ads.
  4. Ogilvy & Mather's marketing plan for National Energy Management Institute (NEMI)
  5. Survey of smoker's attitudes towards the hospitality industry (HF&S)
  6. Airline smoking hearings
  7. Tollison double payment
    [Professor Robert Tollison ran the economists network with Jim Savarese. He handled recruitment, and laundered some of the payments via his Center for Study of Public Choice at George Mason University]
  8. CIAR and PASS research program [briefcase air monitoring] Need a backup lab.

1987 Nov 1: - 4 The Tobacco Institute's annual Government Relations Seminar. This is a winter knee's-up where the various State Representatives get to bring their wives for three days of wining and dining with the Washington TI staff. It is held at the Ritz-Carlton [and Hilton Beach Hotel], Lugana Baach, Calif David and Karen Weeks (affiliation given as IAPAG) are special guests.

    Robert Tollison and Gray Robertson are keynote speakers. Anne Roberson is a guest. Tollison's biog:

Professor of economics and director of the Center for Study of Public Choice at George Mason University. Tollison also has consulting affiliations with Pepsico, the National Basketball Association, Federal Trade Commission, US Treasury Department, and the Office of Technology Assessment, among others.

    Tollison has conducted extensive research on the Issue of "social costs*, associated by some with the use of tobacco. He has spoken to the issue before legislative bodies and other groups.

    The author of several books, Tollison also is on the board of directors of Public Choice Quarterly and book review editor of Public Choice. Tollison received his Ph.D. from the University of Virginia and his M.A. from the University of Alabama. He earned his undergraduate degree from Wofford College.

1987 Dec: /E Annual Report of Citizens for a Sound Economy lists a number of cash-for-comments Professors of Economics as an Academic Advisors of their Foundation, or on their Board of Directors.

  • Dom Armentano, University of Hartford
  • Robert Tollison, George Mason Uni (Center for Study of Public Choice)
  • James Buchanan, George Mason University
  • Richard McKenzie, Clemson University
  • Jennifer Roback (Center organiser) George Mason Uni
  • Richard Stoup, Montana State University
  • Walter E Williams, George Mason University

    Also tobacco lobbyists, Robert Crandall of Brookings Institute, Stuart Butler of the Heritage Foundation and many others.

1987 Dec: /E Philip Morris InternationalCorporate Affairs speech (probably made by Bill Murray). He is promoting the activities to counter the WHO-led attack on public smoking restrictions:

In the past 18 months, we therefore sponsored three major scientific conferences in Europe, Japan and Latin America.

    At the beginning of the year, we had recruited 20 medical witnesses, by years end, the number stands at 50. We aim to raise the number to 100 during 1988. They come from every corner of the globe, and most importantly, relevant medical disciplines.

    We have commissioned the only comprehensive work in existence on this subject. Here is an advance copy of a book entitled "Clearing the Air" [edited by Robert Tollison] It includes contributions from medical scientists, a civil liberty authority, a sociologist, a trade union leader, an employer, a nobel prize winning economist, even a member of the House of Lords - and many others.

    Lexington Press, the publisher, will mount an international advertising campaign in selected media, comprising hard-hitting statements by the authors: the book will be translated to French, German, Spanish and Japanese — even Sanskrit, if necessary.

1987 Dec 28: Peter Sparber has prepared the Tobacco Institute's "Public Affairs, Management Plan, Progress Report (to Dec 1987)" The staff are dealing with a number of issues:

  • Excise Tax — run by Jeff Ross
  • Public Smoking — Susan Stuntz, Chip Foley, Sharon Ransom
  • General Coaltions — Susan Stuntz
  • Advertising Issues — Fred Panzer
  • Scientific Affairs — Peter Sparber
  • Media Relations — Brennan Moran
  • Accidental Fire — Lisa Osborne
  • Misc — Anne Dedick runs Production Services. John Lyons deals with Information
Jeff Ross reports on the Excise Tax Issue.
On other issues, we met with Bob Tollison to discuss implementation of our 1988 "social cost" plan.

1988: PhD, Economist, George Mason Uni He is listed here as Editor of "Clearing the Air" and is on their list of consultants [2021012419]
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.

1988 Jan: The plans and budgets for various sections of the Tobacco Institute include a section on the "Social Cost Issue" to be handled by Jeffrey D Rose and Carol Hrycaj.

    This is an attempt to counter the argument that the society has a right to institute cigarette excise taxes and introduce public smoking bans because smokers impose a substantial additional burden on non-smokers through additional medical costs, cleaning, general pollution, etc.

Implementation of our 1988 "social cost" plan is well underway. A network of "social cost" economists has been identified and held an organizational meeting in Washington, D.C. Also, several projects are underway to demonstrate the significant historical and economic contribution of tobacco to our nation's heritage.

Highlights: We have identified an initial group of economists to work on the "social cost" issue. They include:
  • Bob Tollison, George Mason University;
  • Richard Wagner, Florida State University;
  • Dwight Lee, University of Georgia;
  • Robert B. Ekelund, Jr., Auburn University;
  • Gary Anderson, California State at Northridge;
  • Richard Higgins, Howrey & Simon; and
  • James Savarese, Savarese & Associates.
We held an organizational meeting to review "social cost" issues and to brief the economists on our issue plan.

    Research needs presented to the economists included:
  • review and critique of existing "social cost" literature;
  • productivity and absenteeism;
  • insurance costs;
  • social security/Medicare cost; and,
  • application of "social cost" economics to other industries
. We will receive research proposals in the next few weeks and will select projects to begin immediately. Robert Ekelund already has submitted a proposal concerning absenteeism.

    Bob Tollison is preparing a proposal for an academic symposium on the "social cost" issue to be held once initial research is complete. The economists also are indentifying opportunities to deliver presentations on the issue before regional and national economic conferences.

    The Tollison and Wagner "social cost" book is scheduled to be published in March. We met with Tollison and public affairs counsel to discuss a media tour and other promotional ideas.

    We are negotiating with Chase Econometrics and other economic consulting firms on updating the Chase study on the economic impact of the tobacco industry. We will coordinate the project with State Activities Division's new economist once he comes on board.

1988 Jan 7: Professor Robert Tollison has a contract with Philip Morris for the book "Clearing the Air" which was to be (nominally) published 'independently' by Lexington Books, under a convoluted agreement which allows the cigarette company...

... to adapt and reprint portions of the Book and to stop publication of the Book.

    You have also represented to us that you have the right under the Publishing Agreement, exercisable upon written notice to Lexington Books any time after sixty days from the date of publication of the Book, to have Lexington Books withdraw the Book from the market and terminate all distribution of the Book.
[This gives the cigarette company legal denial that they were the publisher of the book — they can claim that they only bought the rights to extract material.]

    The Book is comprised of articles by several authors, which you are compiling and editing, and an introduction and conclusion written by you. In consideration for the rights granted to us pursuant to this agreement, we agree to pay you $20,000 during the month of January, 1988.

    We further agree to pay the authors the following amounts on your behalf for their contributions to the Book:

Mark J Reasor $10,000 [Lifelong academic tobacco lobbyist and 'scientific' witness]
W Allan Crawford $ 7,500 [Australian medico and regular tobacco witness]
Gray Robertson $ 7,500 [Pseudo-Indoor Air Quality 'expert' with company ACVA/HBI; also a member IAPAG]
Walter Williams $ 7,500 [Professor of Economics at George Mason Uni, syndicated columnist, lifelong tobacco lackey]
James M Savarese $10,000 (Preparation of manuscript and coordination with René Rondou)
Jody Powell $10,000 [Pres. Carter's press aide; Democrat lobbyist/PR; associate of Savarese at O&M/Cassidy.]
R Emmett Tyrrell $ 7,000 [Richard Mellon Scaife employee; editor of American Spectator; member of Libertad]
Peter L Berger $ 7,500 [Boston Uni Sociologist; long-term tobacco lackey; member of Libertad.]
Burt Neuborne $ 7,500 [Academic New York Uni Law School; ACLU president; long-term tobacco lackey]
Lord J Bruce-Gardyne $ 8,000 [ex-UK Thatcher govt. Economic Secretary (cig. excise tax); European tobacco advertising and tax harmonisation lobbyist.]
George Mason Foundation $ 5,000 reprint of James M.Buchanan article

    You agree to include the following acknowledgement in the preface of the Book: "This book is about environmental tobacco smoke, and has come to fruition with the support of Philip Morris Inc. This support was useful to our endeavors, but in no way influenced the opinions expressed by the authors." [But they had the right to censor anything written.]
This contract was signed by PM International's Corporate Affairs head, Andrew Whist — one of the most notorious corrupt lobbyist-executives in the tobacco business.

1988 Feb 2: James Savarese reports to the Tobacco Institute on a meeting with a "core group of economists"...

To exchange thoughts and ideas on the social cost issue with the goal of determining projects and making assignments for 1988.

    [In order to attack] Anti-smoking activists [who] have distorted the issue of social cost. Even though economists ridicule their statistics, politicians and the press believe them.
The core group consists of
  • Gary Anderson
  • Bob Ekelund
  • Richard Higgins
  • Dwight Lee
  • Jim Savarese
  • Bob Tollison
  • Richard Wagner
with the support of PR/lobbyists from
  • Leslie Dawson, Karen Hochberger, Richard Marcus.- from Ogilvy & Mather and James Savarese & Associates
  • Mike Forscey - lawyer from Wunder and Diefenderfer, working for the Labor Management Committee of TI
  • Jeff Ross, Carol Hyrcaj and Paula Duhaime from the Tobacco Institute
Conclusions: This is lobbying pure and simple: The conclusions of their report expose numerous outright admissions as to the scientific and academic subterfuge these people are knowlingly engaged in.
  • The higher rate of illness of smokers is a 'private cost' not a social cost [and therefore should be ignored.]
  • It is not politically useful for us to argue the primary health statistics.
  • Up to this time, ETS has not been translated effectively by the opposition into cost numbers. Rather, it is a regulatory issue. We cannot afford to lose the argument among people who think they are being harmed by ETS. If ETS causes harm, it becomes a classic case of real social cost.
  • We must make sure that primary costs of smoking be kept out of any social cost calculation. We must separate primary smoking statistics from ETS statistics.
  • More research is needed on ETS in order to deny health consequences
Primary assumptions that need to be countered.
  • Insurance and Health Costs: Health problems exist for smokers. The cost for health care due to excess illness or death of smokers equals smokers' cost to society.
    • Insurance premium — Discounts for non-smoker (not justified?)
    • Pension Plans — Increased mortality rates saves money
  • Productivity and Absenteeism: Smokers are absent more frequently than non-smokers.The time spent by a employee smoking on the job is time spent not working. These factors make the smoker a less productive member of society than a non-smoker.
    • The worker bears the cost of absenteeism via fewer raises, less advancement, or termination. Society bears no burden.
  • Social Security and Medicare: [Death benefits argument]
    • Based on lifetime calculations, smokers should be getting a rebate. We should propose a rebate program, rather than a tax program.
    • If non-smokers live longer, when the baby boomers reach retirement age, very high tax rates will be necessary to finance Medicare and Social Security. If smoking is banned, it would cause some serious problems in future years.
  • Fires: It is not a social cost for a smoker to burn his house down, just a private cost. Social cost only exists if a neighbor's house burns down (a much smaller number).
  • ETS: Blanket smoking.restrictions raise costs to private employers. If restrictions are cost effective, individual companies will adopt them.
    As a result of this meeting, we should devise a specific plan and timetable- of implementation with assignments for specific projects.

    We need to review and critique existing materials and develop our own core of research.
They then allocated Research projects to the economists and disussed additional research ideas which might prove useful to the industry. Both the Southern and Eastern Economic Association presented forums at which the economists could present papers and...
    Tollison is looking for one or two others. Major session of a university to bring together all relevant research on social cost will be planned after research projects are completed. Proceedings will be published in a monograph.

1988 Apr 15: Bill Orzechowski, the staff economist at the Tobacco Institute is sending a list of their consultants to Randy Thompson, who is an Issues Manager at RJ Reynolds.

    This is for International Smuggllng and Cross Border Issues:
Potential Witness List (Alphaberical listing)

Economics - Public Policy
  • Mike Davis, PhD, Economic professor at the University of Texas, Dallas.
      Mike has testified on behalf of the Tobacco Institute on cross border sales and cigarette smuggling from Mexico in the context of a Texas cigarette tax increase on two or three occasions. He appeared before the Texas legislature in 1997 on behalf of TI to defeat a proposed 20 T'exas cigarette tax hike. He is a good witness and gets up to speed rather quickly.

      Contact: Bill Orzechowski, Rob Walker

      Relationship: Testified for TI on a few occasions and was media trained by TI.
  • Dwight Lee, PhD - Professor of economics at University of Georgia.
      Ramsey Professor of Economics and Private Enterprise at the University of Georgia, a position he has held since 1985. He is also the current president of the Southern Economics Association. He has had full-time tenured faculty appointments at the University of Colorado, Virginia Tech University, George Mason University, and the University of Georgia. He is a well respected economist. He has co-authored seven books, written numerous articles and lectured extensively.

      Contact: Bill Orzechowski, Rob Walker

      Relationship: Has testified on numerous occasions for the industry on state and federal cigarette tax issues.
  • Robert Tollison, PhD - professor of economics at George Mason University.
      He is past president of the Southern Economics Association. He is the author of numerous articles and books. He has had considerable experience in all phases of tobacco economics - a pioneer of sorts. He has testified on tobacco tax issues at federal and state levels. The "dean" of tobacco economics.

      Contact: Bill Orzechowski or Rob Walker

      Relationship: Dr Tollison has testified for the industry on numerous occasions.
  • Richard Wagner, PhD - professor of economics in the Public Choice Center at George Mason University.
      The author of many articles and books. He is a leader of the public choice area of economics and is the editor of the Constitutional Political Economy journal. He has great deal of experience on state cross border issues and tobacco taxes.

      Contact: Bill Orzcchowski or Rob Walker

      Relationship: Dr Wagner has testified for the industry on numerous occasions on state cross border issues.

    [The four listed above are all members of Tollison/Savarese cash-for-comments network. The three listed immediately below are contractors via think-tanks.]

  • Steve Entin - President Institute for Research on The Economics of Taxation (IRET)
      He has great deal of experience in the corporate tax arena. Has testified or appeared as guest speaker in front of "tough" audiences such as public health groups and done a very good job with our issues.

      Contact: Bill Orzechowski, John Dunham

      Relationship: Appeared at Tax Foundation seminars that PM has helped finance. Often calls TI for advice and materials on tobacco tax issues.
  • Pat Fleenor/JD Foster - two economists at the Tax Foundation.
      Pat Fleenor is an economist with the Tax Foundation, and J.D Foster is the President and Chief Economist of the Tax Foundation, The Tax Foundation monitors tax and fiscal activities at all levels of government. The group supplies objective fiscal information and analysis to business, government and the general public. The group has done extensive research on cross border cigarette sales and smuggling.

      Contact: John Dunham, Wayne Winegarden

      Relationship: PM and Tl has given financial support to the Tax Foundation. The Tax Foundation did a study for TI on cigareite excise tax differences and cigarette tax evasion.
  • John R McGowan, PhD - Gustave Klausner Associate Professor of Accounting.
      He has provided international tax consulting services to the Missouri Society of CPAs and is the author of many articles. McGowan is currently studying the issue of state excise taxes and their effect on interstate smuggling and crime.

      Contact: John Dunham or Wayne Winegarde.

      Relationship: Dr McGowan has participated in Tax Foundation seminars that PM has helped finance. His current paper is being funded by NAPO, which PM has financially supported.
International Smuggling and Crime Issues
  • Mario Possamai - Vice President, Forensic Investigators Associates
  • Rod Stamler - Chairman, Forensic Investigators Associates (Toronto)
  • Jacob Sullum/Ed Carson - Reason Foundation,
Social and Crlme Aspects of Smuggling
  • Ron Martel - former Mayor of Cornwall, Canada
Tax Administrators
  • Robert Shepherd - Deputy Commissioner - Enforcement, New York State Department of Taxation
  • Monte Williams - Administrator, Excise Taxes Division, California State Board of Equalization
  • Bill Chamberland - Tax Specialist Washington Department of Revenue
Other Names
  • Roger Overholser - Florida wholesaler affliated with Florida Tax. Watch.
  • Jeff Groh, Jerry Bowerman, John McGaw - BATF smuggling experts
  • Andre Reiman - A Senior Vice President for a PM subsidiary in Europe
  • Adam Andre-Brown - Spokesperson for RJR subsidiary in Geneva.
  • Per Brix Knudsen - Director Anti-Fraud Unit - European Union.

1988 Apr 30: Helmut Gaisch's Monthly Report on FRT S&T activities:

HER [Helut Reif] - Meeting with Dr Tage Voss, a Danish "TV Doctor", who has written 35 books on health questions and has been well known for his TV programmes for some 20 years. His "trademark" is a cigar in his mouth and the Danes regard him as an advocate of the pleasures of life in a balanced way.

    He has proposed to write a preface to Tollison's book "Clearing the Air". This would give him the opportunity to sum up the most important messages of this book. He also agreed to write articles for the periodical of the Danish pro-smoker's association "HEN-RY".

1988 June: Robert Tollison has just completed a video for the tobacco industry "Excise Taxes: the Hidden Burden" which is on "on the regressive nature of excise taxes and their effect on the tobacco industry and the economy."

1988 June 13: James Savarese to Susan Stuntz at the Tobacco Institute:

Here are two more book reviews of the Tollison/Wagner book. I'll wait to hear from you before proceeding any further.
One of these was from Cecil Bohanon at Ball State University, and the other (which needed more sub-editing) was from Ryan Armcher at Clemson University. A hand note says:
"Next stage? — Placement, Publication attempts."
Susan Stuntz has handwritten a note and refered the reviews to her assistant Debbie Schoonmaker,
These two are pretty good, I don't see much problem with them.
And Debbie replies
Does this mean Covington & Burling (the tobacco lawyers) clearance is unnecessary?
to which Susan replies "Unfortunately C&B and SH&B should review — but explain circumstances of publication".
[They had to have both of these major tobacco law firms clear the articles before they were released for publication — even though the Tobacco Institute's name was not on the released documents — just in case it ever leaked out who funded the book and the reviews.]

1988 June 14: Robert Tollison (at the request of the tobacco industry) was interviewed by the potential author of a book on the industry. His notes are still available in their original rough-typed form. Essentially he holds that:

  • Smoking's benefits can be measured by the "'willingness of people to pay for the product.'"
  • As with the risk of breaking a leg while down-hill skiing, smoking is just a risk-benefit calculation of the individual who enjoys it.
  • This is a class issue. It provides "solace or fulfillment for those less economically, socially or pofessionally advantaged"
  • The industry has done a poor job defending its position intellectually — so the antis are winning this "one-sided debate."
  • The industry needs people [lobbyists like him] out there framing these arguments. That's what his book 'Smoking and Society' is all about.
  • He would end the [US tobacco grower's] price support system to allow cheaper imports of tobacco.
  • The EPA and the Surgeon-General are politicized and are empire building.
  • The science hasn't established that passive smoking harms health
He's an applied econometrician,..He got a call 10 yrs ago from somebody at Phillip Morris looking for a legitimate scholar to do a book like 'Smoking & the State' — & one thing led to another.

    PM had him do "Clearing the Air " [a] more recent reader on ETS. They paid the bill for it... [words mixed up here] Both were also backed by the industry — but RT [Tollison] makes it clear he doesn't feel he's prostituting himself doing this: "We're applying basic economic theory to the cigarette field — all we did was look at the issues; If I had to contort myself intellectually, I wouldn't have gone into it"
There's also an overview of the book Smoking & the State from Tollison's perspective.

[These interview notes were circulated around the industry. This document came from the files of Lorillard.]

1988 June 14: Susan Stuntz at the Tobacco Institute and Debbie Shoonmaker are rewriting an Ogilvy & Mather 'review' of the Tollison/Wagner book "Smoking and the State" which is to be circulated for publicity. Susan writes:

" I don't like it [the O&M review] You're right — it reads like a book review.

    Summary should first knock down the anti-claims in the first 1 or 2 pages, [snip] The Tollison-Wagner stuff should come first — that's the point we're trying to get across."
The Ogilvy & Mather copy has been modified by Shoonmaker virtually to the point of extinction.

1988 June 16: The TI's Susan Stuntz speech on "Indoor Air Quality Programs" and Jeff Ross on the issue of "Social Cost."

A few months ago we initiated a comprehensive new program to address the social cost issue.

    I'm sure you all know the often quoted remark from Fletcher Knebel "It is now proved beyond doubt that smoking is one of the leading causes of statistics" Nowhere are those statistics more prevalent or more ludicrous than in Social Cost Economics.

The overall objective of our program is to show there are no Social Costs of smoking.

    And as a corallary objective, to reveal the absurdity of Social Costs Economics and its implications on individual choices.

    We're off to a good start in implementing this new program and we'd like to go well beyond what we originally planned. Let me summarize these new activities.
  • First, we've established a core group of Social Costs Economists from respected academic institutions across the country.

        They will take the lead in arguing against social cost economics.....testifying..... dealing with the media.... conducting briefings.... and producing research.
  • A new wave of research will be ready by the end of August.
      • To promote Japan. with its smokers as highly productive — and therefore evidence against these social cost arguments
      • To compare tobacco with coffee, sugare and beef etc, and so generate support from other industries [Slippery slope argument]
      • Study on absenteeism to absolve smoking illnesses and blame job boredom and income levels as causes.
      • Tollison/Wagner Book and author media tours.
  • Our team of Economists will be addressing their colleagues at the Atlantic, Southern and Western Economic Association meetings. we will promote the final reports from these meetings.
  • Also, an academic symposium on the Social Cost Issue will be held this fall at George Mason University. The symposium will feature findings of research projects currently underway.
  • Another facet of our program focuses on the business community. We're establishing a coalition of businesses concerned with the slippery slope implications of social cost economics. The US Chamber Foundation has agreed to take the lead in organizing the coalition.

1988 June 30: The Smokers Newsletter has an editorial:

We recently finished a book titled "Clearing The Air — Perspectives on Environmental Tobacco Smoke" edited by Robert D Tollison, copyrighted in 1988 by D.C. Heath and Company, and published by Lexington Books.

    The book is a collection of subjects relating to the dilemma of tobacco smoke. The twelve authors are a mixture of smokers and non-smokers. The Appendix is very informative. Most importantly, the book is factual.

    The authors include names prominent in their respective endeavors. They are: Mark J Reasor, W Allan Crawford, Gray Robertson, Walter E. Williams, Rene Rondou, Jody Powell, R. Emmett Tyrell, Jr, Peter Berger, Burt Neuborne, Lord Bruce-Gardyne, James L Buchanan and Mr Tollison.
Every one on this list, with the (possible) exception of Rondou and Bruce-Gardyne, is a well-known, and well-exposed professional lobbyist for the tobacco industry
  • Rene Rondou was the secretary-treasurer of the Bakery, Confectionery and Tobacco Workers (BC&T) union in the USA, who in Oct 26 1970 had been elected as President, Tobacco Workers' International Union.
  • Lord Bruce-Gardyne was once the UK Minister Of State For The Treasury (collector of excise taxes). He played a secondary role advising the UK Tobacco Advisory Committee on how to make approaches to the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

1988 July 27: Richard Wagner, writing on the letterhead of the Center for Study of Public Choice at George Mason University, writes to James Savarese [as surrogate for the Tobacco Institute]. The tobacco industry is fighting to block the 'ear-marking' of cigarette excise taxes for Federal health programs.

    He is outlining a book editing project being mounted by himself and Robert Tollison. All of the chapter writers involved [apart from a French economist Henri LePage] were cash-for-comment economists.
He outlines the contributions of five cash-for-comments economist, plus the editorial services of himself and Tollison:

  • Charging Beneficiaries for Public Services: User Charges and Earmarked Taxes in Principle and Practice. Kimenyi was involved with Lee and Tollison in writing Chapter 10:
    "Earmarked Taxes, Lobbying, and Budgetary Choice"
    Earmarking injects very different incentives into the budgetary process, as compared with general fund financing. With general fund financing interest groups have strong incentive to compete for larger shares of the budget, but only weak incentive to lobby for tax increases. Earmarking creates a strong incentive for interest groups to lobby for tax increases, and this paper will explore the consequences and implications of this difference in incentive.

    This chapter ended up later described in these words:
  • Chapter 9"Tax Earmarking and the Optimal Lobbying Strategy," by Mwangi S. Kimenyi, the University of Mississippi; Dwight R. Lee, University of Georgia; and Robert D. Tollison, George Mason University.
    The authors investigate how lobbying by special interest groups differs when excise tax revenues are earmarked, as compared with going into a general fund. Using models and examples, the authors show that tax earmarking leads to lobbying in favor of increasing tax revenues.
The Tobacco Institute's Tax Hearing Readiness Plan in the following year had a note saying:
Several new excise tax-related studies are underway and will be completed by spring 1989. In addition, an update of the Chase economic impact study has been commissioned.

    Due by mid-year is a book examining earmarking and "user fees" from a public choice perspective. The treatise will contain 8-10 chapters written by respected economists, including, Henri LePage and Nobel laureate James Buchanan.

    Preliminary research has been conducted assessing public attitudes toward excise taxes.

    Specialist PR firm Fleishman-Hilliard were then contracted to promote this book and its authors around the various states in the USA.


Wagner and Tollison propose that the book contain 12 chapters individually authored by themselves and five other members of our economists network. While these economists are all credible and respected academicians, the treatise will almost certainly be enhanced by contributions from Henri LePage and Nobel laureate James Buchanan

    The budget proposed for this project was $145,000 — with eleven of the cash-for-comments chapters earning their (often multiple) authors about $5,000 per chapter. James Buchanan, the guru of Public Choice, was willing to lend his name to the whole enterprise for $20,000. Dick Wagner and Robert Tollison also wanted $25,000 each for management and administration. [Savarese appears to have been cut out of this deal]

1988 Aug 1: Jim Savarese is billing the Tobacco Institute for services rendered during August. He has been

"working with economist on social cost research proposals"
  • Himself and Leslie Dawson $20,000
  • Subcontractor A [almost certainly Tollison] $2,000
  • Subcontractor B [Shughart or Lee] $2,000
  • Subcontractor C [Minnesota Tax Consultant]$1,500
Peter Sparber's invoice for July is also included. He was a senior executive of the Tobacco Institute, but he worked on contract.
  • Himself @ $200/hr $17,600
  • Lee Boggs Payne @ $100/hr $5,000
  • Expenses
      Dinner with Jolanda Janczewski re ENV services
      [She ran fake indoor air testing scams]
      Lunch Paul Cammer & Bruce Dickson re EPA Coalition
      [They ran the fake Business Council on Indoor Air for the tobacco industry.]
      Miscellaneous travel to firefighters meeting $2,563
[The chief firefighters were bribed not to support legislation imposing burning-time limits on accidentally-dropped cigarettes.]

1988 Aug 8: Robert Tollison is making a presentation to the Republican Platform Committee meeting in New Orleans on "The Budgetary Process and the Size of Government: Public Choice Lessons from the States" He send the tet of his speech to the Tobacco Institute before it is given.

    He begins by attacking the Governor of Massachusetts, Michael Dukakis's claim to have balanced his budget:

This is amusing for a couple of reasons. For one thing he does not tell us how he balanced these budgets. In the most recent case he increased the most regressive tax that he could find — the cigarette excise tax, largely a tax on poor people — to balance the budget.
He is not in favour of balancing budgets when this means increased cigarette taxes.

    The text of the speech has been circulated by Debbie Schoonmaker:
As you will note in the first paragraph of the statement, Tollison will use this opportunity to point out that cigarette excise taxes are most regressive and largely affect poor people.

1988 Sept 1: Jim Savarese is billing the Tobacco Institute for services rendered during August. He has been "working with economist on social cost research proposals"

  • Himself and Leslie Dawson $20,000
  • Subcontractor A [almost certainly Tollison] $3,500
  • Subcontractor B [Shughart or Lee] $1,800
  • Subcontractor C {Minnesota Tax Consultant]$1,500
  • Western Economic Association expenses
      [Held in Los Angeles]
      Dwight Lee $846
      Richard Wagner $830
      Paul W Wilson $625
Note: Two participants, Zycher & Borcherding, are from Los Angeles.

1988 Oct: Report on primary activites of the Tobacco Institute lists under the heading "Social Costs"

Due to scheduling conflicts, Tollison and Wagner's October media tours were moved to early next month. The authors of Smoking and the State will visit Detroit and Philadelphia in early November, and will be on the road to Cleveland/Columbus and San Antonio/Austin later in the month.

    We prepared supplemental materials for the Tollison and Wagner press kits to encourage discussion of the "slippery slope" arguments made by the authors.

1988 Oct: This appears to be three papers from various journals republished by someone for the Tobacco Institute. It is labled Scelte Pubbliche - the quarterly Journal of Public Finance and Public Choice which has published the first monograph "Social Cost, Rent Seeking and Smoking: A Public Choice Perspective", by Robert D Tollison and Richard E Wagner of the Center for Study of Public Choice, GMU.

The war on tobacco is being waged on two fronts, one medical and one economic The medical front is filled with the images of war: of a continually spiraling body count along with many other smokers left with diminished physical capacities. The economic front is naturally less dramatic for it attempts to reduce the castulties of war to some dollar magnitude. What results is an effort to measure the social cost of smoking. The idea behind such measures is to construct some meaningful metric that can personalize the health toll thought to be exacted by tobacco.

    For instance, in its wide-ranging survey of scholarship on the medical and economic consequences of smoking, the Office of Technology Assessment (1985) reported that different scholars had estimated smoking-related deaths to lie between 186.000 and 398.000 in the United States in 1982. Among this wide range of estimates, the OTA report went on to pick out 314.000 deaths as a best estimate.

    The economic toll associated with these deaths have been estimated by various scholars to lie somewhere between $40 billion and $100 billion in 1985 dollars, according to the OTA survey. Within this range of estimates, the OTA report selected $65 billion as a best estimate of the social cost of smoking.
The next 15 pages of this amazing academic paper then seeks to justify these social losses and social costs and attack claims that cigarettes are addictive. The motives of anti-smoking activists, they conclude is:
Bigger budgets, more grants, more notoriety, among other possible payoffs, would seem to fuel the efforts to resist smoking.

    We have gone into this matter in detail in our book (Tollison and Wagner 1988), but the point is actually quite simple. If we are correct, and we think that we are, that the social cost of smoking is zero, then the motivation to resist smoking either springs from considerations of ignorance or rent seeking. The most likely candidate theory to explain the public policy struggle over smoking, in our opinion, is the latter.

    For instance, regulations that restrict the ability of people to smoke in the workplace can be a means of transferring income from smokers to nonsmokers. Suppose smoking enhances the efficiency with which smokers work. A restriction on the ability to smoke will thus reduce the efficiency of smokers and increase the comparative efficiency of nonsmokers.

    Similarly, restrictions on smoking in restaurants can be a means of transferring income from smokers and from restaurant owners to nonsmokers. Those restrictions will reduce the demand for restaurant meals by smokers, who will thus shift to a less preferred consumption set.

    This decrease in demand will in turn reduce the net income of restaurant owners, as well as reducing the capital stock invested in restaurants in the long run. The reduction in demand caused by the regulation will, given the supply of restaurants, reduce the price of meals to nonsmokers.
[It is hard to credit that this sort of superficial special-interest bullshit actually gets into print, but it does — and what's more, some economists take it seriously.]

    This was followed by a 1991 Applied Economics paper, "Smoking and Absenteeism" but the ardent cash-for-comments networkers, Ault, Ekelund, Jackson, Saba and Saurman. You'd need to have a degree in advanced statistical convolution in order to read more than the first paragraph.

    Also attached is another paper by Tollison and Wagner, "Self-interest, public interest and public health. which lays the blame on the self-interests of the medical and activist communities.
Summary: Although the activities of physicians, as represented by the AMA, have long been viewed from a self-interest perspective by economists, public-health processes have not been subjected to such an examination. But just as the conduct of ostensibly charitable hospitals cannot be examined independently of the interests of the physicians who staff them, so too, we think, the conduct of public-health bureaus should not be examined in isolation from the interests of the medical community that they represent.

    An interest-group interpretation of public health would look to the ways in which public-health processes increase the aggregate demand for medical services, thereby generating quasi-rents for specialized input suppliers. We have explored in preliminary fashion some ways in which public-health agencies may advance the collective interests of physicians, though we would be the first to acknowledge that much work remains to be done on this topic.

1988 Nov 20: Tollison and Wagner have written another book "Smoking and the State" which is being favourably reviewed by their network of tobacco-friendly economists. Cliff Dobitz, a professor of economics at the North Dakota State University soundly endorses their...

"use of solid economics to expain the claimed direct and indirect costs of smoking in non-technical, easy to understand language. It is chock-full of insight, frequently supporte by data, about the alleged economic consequences of smoking."

1988 Nov 28: Debbie Schoonmaker at the Tobacco Institute writes to Savarese about Social Cost Research Papers.

Enclosed are drafts of the Wagner and Ekelund social cost papers.
Each has been reviewed and will not need further clearance provided the recommended changes are incorporated into the final versions of the papers.

    The legal comments are fairly straight-forward. If you or the authors need an explanation or wish to discuss further, please call.

    You'll also see that I've enclosed a copy of the California Health Department's "social cost" study. We can discuss this example in our "SWAT team" meeting.
She also attaches three lists of cash-for-comments speakers who have been selected to talk at various meetings of local economic associations they wish to influence [See earlier list]:
  • Atlantic Economic Assn., Philadelphia, Oct 6-9 , meeting on User Charges: has
    • Dwight LeeChairman + paper, "Some Bureacratic Implications
    • Richard Wagner"User Charges: Principles and Practice"
    • Bruce Yandle, "User Charges: Evaluation and Critique.
    • Discussant: Robert Staaf.
  • Western Economic Association, Los Angeles, June 30 — July 3 meeting on Tax Earmarking and User Charges.
    • Dwight R. Lee, "The Political Economy of Tax Earmarking"
    • Richard Wagner, "The Fiscal Politics of Tax Earmarking"
    • Paul Wilson,"User Charges and the Problem of Externalities"
    • Discussants: Thomas Borcherding and Benjamin Zycher, Rand Corporation [unknown relationship]
  • Southern Economic Association, San Antonio, Nov 20-22 on Excise Taxation
    • Robert Ekelund, Chairman:
    • Dwight R. Lee, "Political Economy of Corrective Taxation"
    • Randall Holcombe, Auburn University. "Excise Taxes in Theory and Practice"
    • Richard E. Wagner, "The Fiscal Politics of Excise Taxation"
    • Discussants: Joseph Jadlow, and Henry Butler,

1988 Nov 29: Savarese bills the Tobacco Institute for:

Final third, book Review Project for Smoking and the State by Robert Tollison and Richard Wagner $20,000.00
[This would include payments made to all the network economists who wrote op-eds promoting the booklet.]

    He also includes about $11,500 in further payments for the Tollison/Wagner media tours promoting the book, and also some $20,000 worth of professional and expenses claims for economist attending the Southern Economic Conference

1988 Dec 8: Savarese has billed the Tobacco Institute for

Phase II - Social Cost Research Project
First of three billings
  • [Robert] Ekelund - "Revenue Substitution from Smoking Regulation and Taxation: An Econometric Analysis"         $14,000
  • [Robert] Tollison & [Richard] Wagner - "Rent Seeking, Bureaucracy and Public Health Regulation"                                  $ 10,000
  • [Dwight] Lee - a paper on "The Political Economy of User Charges and Tax Earmarking"                                               $ 9,500
  • [Richard] Higgins - "The Excess Costs to Smoking Employees of Employer-Provided Retirement Benefits"                  $ 9,500

    TOTAL $43,000

1988 Dec 9: Tollison is in Denver Colorado on his media tour promoting the book "Smoking and the State". This is the full transcript of his interview with local radio-jock Jerry Castro. The focus is on excise taxes and social costs.

1989: Social Cost Issue, Consulting Economist Team. This document is assumed to be the Tobacco Institute informing their litigation team about the facts of the cash-for-comments academics network — and its offshoot, the core team trained in Social Cost Issues.

The social cost economic team includes: Robert Tollison, Richard Wagner, Dwight Lee, Richard Higgins, Gary Anderson and Michael Davis,
These six consulting economists are specifically trained in the social cost issue, and are "prepared for a variety of assignments, from presenting testimony to conducting research."
How we use them
  • Conduct research.
  • Prepare op-eds and letters to the editor.
  • Review and comment on (government and private sector] social cost studies and reports.
  • Media tours to promote Smoking and the State.
  • Conduct briefings on the issue/arguments with legislators, staff and lobbyists.
Kinds of things they do
  • Conduct and publish economic research (constituting the basis of the social cost program).
  • Write and place op-eds on discrete topics.
  • Prepare and submit letters to the editor.
  • Available to present testimony.
  • Media tours.
  • Make presentations to academic/economic peers.
  • Conduct briefings on the issue (during social cost economist network meeting with PAD, SAD, lobbyists and legal counsel).

1989: The Issues Management team of the Tobacco Institute reported monthly on the activities of Tollison and Richard Wagner in promoting their book "Smoking and the State" through an organised series of media tours conducted for the TI by Fleishman-Hillyard.

    • Dec —The successful social cost media tours continued in December with
    the economists traveling to northeastern and northwestern states. Robert Tollison and Richard Wagner, co-authors of Smoking and the State, traveled to Seattle/Tacoma, WA, Burlington, VT, and Portland, ME to discuss the social cost concept with the media. We provided Tollison and Wagner with background information on anti-tobacco legislative activity in the states.

    They also submitted a preliminary proposal for a revised and expanded edition of Smoking and the State. The authors suggest enlarging the treatise to cover more fully their economic approach to public policy.

    We prepared a memorandum to accompany the distribution of Tollison and Wagner's social cost research "Social Cost, Rent Seeking and Smoking: A Public Choice Perspective." A reprint of the article will be forwarded to interested parties.

    Year-to-date expenses on media tours etc. $471,320 (higher than anticipated)
[See record for other months in same file]

1989 Jan 10: /E This is a mixed bag of files dumped together. 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 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
  • 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 Savarese/Tollison list sent to the Tobacco Institute's. It details all of the cash-for-comments professors and senior academics who were available to write op-eds and give evidence at Congressional hearings, etc. Since 1986 it had grown extensively.

1989 Jan 27: Debbie Schoonmaker at the Tobacco Instutute has put together a brainstorming session following the OTA workshop involving : Charley Powers, Susan Stuntz, Brennan Dawson, Carol Hrycaj, Bill Orzechowski, Walter Woodson, Bill Prendergast,Karen Doyne, Mike Forscey, Rich Marcus, Jamie Moeller, Susan Ridge, plus contractors Jim Savarese, Bob Tollison, Dick Wagner.

I look forward to hearing everyone's thoughts on turning back the emerging trend in the states to use social cost arguments as a justification for increased taxation and regulation.

The "Big Lie" technique perfected by the tobacco industry.

    Court transcript (Feb 26 1999) discuss the tobacco industry's "Big Lie" techniques:
"A later document details the history of ICOSI (which later changed its name to INFOTAB), in hiring consultants, in getting articles published, and in conducting the counterattack against the "social costs" adherents. See Attachment K [Presentation on Social Costs/Social Values to INFOTAB Board of Directors Meeting, October 31, 1983.]

    Two of the consultants hired were Richard Wagner and Robert Tollison, who toured the country doing radio and television tours to promote the tobacco industry's "consistent line of defense."

    A transcript of one of Wagner's radio spots conducted in February of 1989 is attached as Attachment L [Radio TV Reports, Inc. transcript for The Tobacco Institute, Inc., re: Richard Wagner/Social Cost of Smoking, dated February 24, 1989.]

This transcript proves that Wagner was identified to the listening audience only as an "economist" and not as a paid consultant for the Tobacco Institute or for the tobacco industry. It further reveals that a two-hour live interview and numerous taped radio interviews were presented to audiences in Cincinnati, Ohio, on March 28 and 29, 1989.

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 May 31: Debbie Schoonmaker recommends funding of Tollison & Wagner's "Earmarking Book Proposal"

1989 June: /E Public Smoking Hearing Readiness" document of the Tobacco Institute gives "the industry's ability to respond to legislative hearings..."
    It includes a list of human and documentary resources:

  • Lew Solmon, UCLA
  • Bob Tollison, George Mason University
  • James Savarese, Savarese & Associates

1989 June 9: Richard Marcus of Ogilvy & Mather reporting to the Tobacco Institute on their May Activities.

  • Taxes: American Agricultural Movement (AAM) ; Citizens for Tax Justice (CTJ); Coalition on Human Needs (CHN); League of Rural Voters (LVR); Opportunities Industrialization Centers of America (OIC) [They were providing publishing services of some kind].
  • Public Smoking: Federal Union IAQ Issues (American Federal Government Employees [AFGE]); National Energy Management Institute (NEMI)
  • Media Tours: Social Costs Media Tours (Richard Wagner and Bob Tollison); Truth Squad Media Tours [Dave Weeks and Jack Peterson]
  • Labor Coalitions: LMC, unions, Pittsburgh project
  • Ad Bans: Jolly Ann Davidsons media tours.

1989 July 5: James Savarese advises the Tobacco Institute (TI):

Attached is a revised version of Bob Tollison and Dick Wagner's Phase II research project. They have incorporated Tl's changes and revisions.
This became Chapter 11 (Self Interest, Public Interest, and Public Health) in the book the Economics of Smoking published in 1991.

1989 Aug: Carol Hrycaj & Debbie Schoonmaker's monthly report to the Tobacco Institute on their "Excise Taxes" and "Social Cost" projects.
    Under "Social Costs" it lists:

Robert Ekelund's social cost research paper, "Some Economic Consequences of the Koop Doctrine: National and State Revenue Shortfalls from Smoking Regulation," was sent out for legal clearance. This is the last of the four papers commissioned this year.

    In advance of the scheduled August media tours, we provided background information to consultants on California and Alaska tobacco legislation. Tollison traveled to Sacramento and San Francisco; Wagner's Anchorage tour was cancelled at SAD's [State Activities Div] request.

    We worked closely with Media Relations on an op-ed to be submitted by Bob Tollison to the Los Angeles Times in conjunction with next month's media tour.

1989 Aug: to 1990 June Brennan Dawson's report on his activities to the Tobacco Institute's Communications Committee
    Detailed list of Tollison's "Social Cost" media tour for the Tobacco Institute See p 14 - 16.

    More details about articles letter, etc.

1989 Aug 8: Leslie Dawson of Savarese & Associate gives a status report on the Social Cost Project

  • Smoking & Absenteeism (Ekelund, Ault, Jackson, Saba, Saurman) — submitted to the Southern Economic Journal, then revised and resubmitted — no editorial decision yet.
  • The Social Cost of Everyday Life (Gary Anderson) — submitted to Contemporary Policy Issues — no editorial decision yet.
  • Smoking and the Problem of Social Cost (Tollison & Wagner — accepted by Journal of Public Choice (they controlled the journal)
  • Smoking and the Wealth of Nations (Wagner) — submitted to Journal of Contemporary Business.
  • Self-Interest, Public Interest, and Public Health (Tollison & Wagner) — submitted to to Journal of Public Interest and Public Choice
  • Smokers' Subsidy of Nonsmokers' Retirement Benefits (Higgins and Gordon Sufford from Capital Economics) — submitted to Social Science and Medicine
  • Social Cost and the Cigarette Excise Tax: A Misguided Rationale for an Inefficient and Unfair Policy (Dwight R. Lee) — Unpublished
  • Some Economic Consequences of the Koop Doctrine: National and State Revenue Shortfall from Smoking Regulation (Ekelund) - still at TI for review.

1989 Sep: Carol Hrycaj & Debbie Schoonmaker's monthly report to the Tobacco Institute on their"Social Cost" projects.

The eighth, and final, paper in the existing body of social cost research was cleared by attorneys. The author will seek publication opportunities.

    Social cost media tours hit a snag in September, but will be back on track in October, when Tollison and Wagner "hit the road" with two tours each.

Professor Robert Ekelund's paper, "Some Economic Consequences of the Koop Doctrine: National and State Revenue Shortfall from Smoking Regulation," has received legal clearance. The paper is the last in a series of eight social cost research projects commissioned since 1988.

    Bob Tollison and Dick Wagner were scheduled in September to promote Smoking and the State in two of the nation's largest media markets, Los Angeles and San Diego, CA. However, the tours have been rescheduled for early October.

1989 Nov: A report by the Tobacco Institute's Communications Division on "Media Tours by Consultants":

Professors Robert Tollison and Richard Wagner conducted media tours on the "social costs of smoking" in Las Vegas, Reno, Knoxville, Nashville and Atlanta.

    During the media interviews, Tollison and Wagner are adept at turning most interviews, and interviewers, to their arguments for reduced government intervention in matters of personal choice. Reports and transcripts are enclosed.

1989 Nov 13: Debbie Schoonmaker writes to her superiors at the Tobacco Institute about "Political Entry Barrier and Tax Incdence: The Political Economy of Sales and Excise Taxes," recently published in Public Finance. The authors are Robert Tollison, Gary Anderson and William Shughart — three of their favourite cash-for-comments academics. Walter Woodson has ccd the document to the Regional VPs, Kurt Malgrem, George Minshew and 'BC' with the note: "This piece may be of interest to you and some of your more 'scholarly' associates." It is an article on the "regressive" nature of excise taxes. Debbie says:

This hypothesis may be useful in tax battles in Congress and the states.

    While The Tobacco Institute did not commission the piece, legal counsel advises that we may use the article should we wish to do so.

[Note that she needs to tell everyone when the TI didn't commission Tollison's articles.

    About half the reference articles cited were written by fellow cash-for-comments economists.]

1989 Nov 14: /E Carol Hrycaj's monthly report to the Tobacco Institute on her project "Excise Taxes."

Economists Tollison, Shughart and Anderson have offered their article, "Political Entry Barriers and Tax Incidence: The Political Economy of Sales and Excise Taxes," (published in Public Finance) for our use. We are considering distribution options for the author's conclusions.

    A month later (report in same file) she reported.
Consulting economists Robert Tollison and Gary Anderson provided a state-by-state analysis based on the hypothesis set forth in their article, "Political Entry Barriers and Tax Incidence: The Political Economy of Sales and Excise Taxes." We will review the findings of the analysis and assess its utility in tax matters.

1989 Nov 30: James Savarese has left Ogilvy & Mather and set up his own business running a stable of cash-for-comments economists for the Tobacco Institute (in addition to other disinformation activities). He is still organizing economics seminars through the same organisations using the same tobacco-funded economists:

"The Political Economy of Tax Earmarking" [ie the use of cigarette excises to prop up Medicare/Medicade] Chairman: Robert Ekelund.
Papers by: Richard Wagner, Dwight Lee and Robert Tollison, with J Keith Watson and Mark Thornton as discussants.

1989 Dec: Carol Hrycaj report to the Tobacco Institute on her project "Excise Taxes."

Responding to reports that an administration "task force" might recommend raising cigarette excise taxes, we implemented a new op-ed program designed to reinforce opposition to federal excise tax increases.

    Consulting economists Robert Tollison and Gary Anderson provided a state-by-state analysis based on the hypothesis set forth in their article, "Political Entry Barriers and Tax Incidence: The Political Economy of Sales and Excise Taxes." We will review the findings of the analysis and assess its utility in tax matters.

    A second report under the heading "Social Costs" says:
The successful social cost media tours continued in December with the economists traveling to northeastern and northwestern states. Tollison and Wagner proposed revising and expanding their book, Smoking and the State.

    We developed a plan to disseminate the findings of the tobacco industry economic impact study. Copies of the study and executive summary will be available early next year.

    Robert Tollison and Richard Wagner, co-authors of Smoking and the State, traveled to Seattle/Tacoma, WA, Burlington, VT, and Portland, ME to discuss the social cost concept with the media.

    We provided Tollison and Wagner with background information on anti-tobacco legislative activity in the states.

    They also submitted a preliminary proposal for a revised and expanded edition of Smoking and the State. The authors suggest enlarging the treatise to cover more fully their economic approach to public policy and tobacco issues in light of recent legislative developments.

1989 Dec 11: Carol Hrycaj and Martin Gleason who are jointly running the Tobacco Institute side of the economists network at this time, memo Susan Stuntz about a Re: Treasury Department Task Force.

Rumors have circulated that a "Treasury-led task force" is considering recommending an increase in federal tobacco taxes.

    In response, we plan to work with consulting economists and allies to maintain an anti-excise tax environment, stressing that cigarette excise taxes are not "user fees," and increasing these taxes would violate President Bush's "no tax" pledge.

    Following is a description of four specific anti-tax projects:   • Op-ed Program: We have directed consultants to begin work on an anti-tax editorial program in key Congressional districts. [snip] Once the articles are published, they will be forwarded to the appropriate administration officials.   • Communication with Treasury Department Officials. We have identified a potential opportunity to communicate with Treasury Department officials concerning the recent statements on tobacco excises.

    If we pursue this option, key Republican economists would send letters to Treasury officials debunking the connection between excise taxes and user fees. This effort would be similar to the exchange of letters between Robert Tollison and Office of Management and Budget Director James Miller in 1987.   • Earmarking Session. Consulting economists will participate in a session on earmarking during the Southwestern Social Science Association Conference in March 1990.

Robert Ekelund will chair the session, "The Political Economy of Tax Earmarking. Robert Tollison, Richard Wagner and Dwight Lee will present papers (draft chapters of the upcoming book on user fees/tax earmarking). A preliminary agenda is attached.
[This matches the March 21 list below withTollison speaking on his tobacco-cleared subject: "Public Finance, Public Choice, and Tax Earmarking".]

1990: The 1990 Witness List is attached to the 1993 June 1 Tobacco Institute list of "Witness/Expert Appearances — Scientific/Legal/Spokespersons."

    It lists many known consultants in various fields who work on contract for the tobacco industry, including:

Tom Lauria, Mike Buckley, Simon Turner, Gio Gori, Bill Wordham, Gray Robertson, Peter Binnie (Now HBI), Larry Holcomb, John Fox, Rich Silverman, Walter Merryman, David Remes, Frank Powell, Melinda Sidak, Rudy Cole, Larry Halfen.
[Note that Binnie appears to be concentrating on airports (not aircraft)']

    Attached is a 1991 Witness List which also includes:
Brennan Dawson, Jeff Seckler, Jim Goold, Joe Pedelty, Jolly Ann Davidson, Dick Wagner, Bernadette Davidson, Walt Decker

    And a 1990 Witness List (page 35) which includes:
Bill Orzechowski, Mike Davis, Morris Coats,
There is also a document which has attached the 1989 Witness List with (in addition to above) has:
Dwight Lee, David Weeks, Alan Kassman, Bob Tollison, Richard Wagner, Jack Peterson, "Bestype Consulting", Dennis Vaughn,
And 1988 Witness List which has most of above, plus:
A Katzenstein, David Brenton (focus on airlines)

1990: A later (1992) overview and proposal for another media tour stresses the success of Tollison and Wagner in promoting the tobacco-funded book "Smoking and the State".

During the 38 media tours for "Smoking and the State", Wagner and Tollison conducted 235 interviews in 54 markets in 27 states during an 18 month period from 1988 - 1990.

1990 Jan: This is a list of the work that scientists and academic consultants working for the Tobacco Institute have achieved over the past year.

    Brennan Dawson, PR head of the Tobacco Institute, report on their activities to the TI's Communications Committee She gives details of their work in planting ghosted academic-op-ed pieces for the tobacco industry. Some of the economists managed to plant these TI-written articles on a number of newspapers.

    On Dawson's Tobacco Institute list these names are marked "Consulting Economists, not on Philip Morris' List" which suggests that another subsantial list of tobacco-serving economists also existed elsewhere

  • Robert Tollison, Duncan Black Professor of Economics, George Mason University [He is probable the author of the main op-ed featured below]
    • 1/90 Letters to administration officials debunking excise tax/"user fee" connection
  • Richard Wagner, Chair and Harris Professor, Department of Economics, George Mason University [close associate of Tollison]
    • 1/90 Letters to administration officials debunking excise tax/"user fee" connection
  • Dwight Lee, Ramsey Professor of Economics, University of Georgia
  • 1/90 Op-ed on excise taxes and user fees published in Macon TelegraBh News

    On the Tobacco Institute list these names are marked "Consulting Economists, not on Philip Morris' List"
  • David Gay, Professor of Economics, University of Arkansas
    • Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in Arkansas Democrat April 1990
  • Barry Poulson, Professor of Economics, University of Colorado
    • Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in Aiamosa Valley Courier May 1990
  • Dominick Armentano, Professor of Economics, University of Hartford
    • Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in New Haven Register Jan 1990
  • Michael Babcock, Professor of Economics, Kansas State University
    • Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in The Topeka Capital-Journal March 1990
  • Thomas Wyrick, Professor of Economics, Southwest Missouri State University
    • Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in News-Leader May 1990
  • Clifford Dobita, Professor of Economics, North Dakota State IIniversity
    • Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in Grand Forks Herald Mar 1990
  • Richard Vedder, Professor of Economics, Ohio University
    • Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in Plain Dealer Jan 1990
  • Joseph Jadlow, Professor of Economics, Oklahoma State University
    • Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in The Tulsa Tribune Apr 1990
  • Ryan Amacher, Dean of the College of Commerce and Industry, Clemson University
    • Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in The Anderson Independent-Mail Feb 1990
  • J R Clark, Hendrix Professor of Economics, University of Tennessee
    • Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in The Paris Post-Intelligencer, The Weekly County Press, Kinusoort Times-News, The Commercial Appeal, the Jackson Sun. May 1990
  • John David, Professor, West Virginia Tech
    • Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in The Charleston Gagette Feb 1990
  • William Hunter, Associate Professor of Economics, Marquette University
    • Excise Tax/"user fee" op-ed published in The Milwaukee Journal Feb 1990
  • Todd Sandler, Professor of Economics, Iowa State University
    • Anti-excise tax/"no taxes" op-ed published in Fort Dodge Messenger Jun 1990
  • William Mitchell, Professor of Political Science, University of Oregon
    • Anti-excise tax/"no taxes" op-ed published in The Register Guard
    Jun 1990
Clearly dozens of recruited academic economists have planted essentially the same story as an op-ed in their local newspapers, under their own names — implying that this is their own work. In fact, they were acting as tobacco industry cash-for-comment lobbyists.

Robert Tollison of George Mason university was both an organiser of economists, and a diligent consultant to the tobacco industry. With his associate, Richard Wagner he was probably the author of these op-eds.

    This is only a small section of the list, and many of the economists are listed as having provided other similar services. See document.

1990 Jan: - Feb The Tobacco Institute's "Communications Activities" report says:

In place of "Truth Squad" media tours. Jack Peterson, Dave Weeks and Larry Holcomb have been conducting interviews on the publication of the report from the ETS Symposium held at McGill University.

    Professors Tollison and Wagner conducted media tours in Springfield, MA and Louisville. In Springfield, Tollison had a live television appearance on a network affiliate and taped a radio debate opposite Ed Sveda of GASP. Wagner's media tour in Louisville was immediately following the HHS report claiming "social costs" of $52 billion per year from smoking, and Wagner was able to effectively argue that smokers more than pay their own way. Reports and transcripts are enclosed.

    Tollison also responded to an editorial in the Washington Post proposing an increase in "user fees."

1990 Jan: /E Tollison's witness-rehearsal document "Questions for Friendly Witnesses (Tollison) http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/yaf52f00/pdf
    (Health Official)

    "Questions for Unfriendly Witnesses" (Louis W Sullivan - HHS Secretary)

1990 Jan 23: Robert Tollison sends Martin Gleason the "Preface and first five chapters of the book "Charging Beneficiaries for Public Services User Charges and Earmarked Taxes in Principle and Practice." plus the 'third of the four billings for this project" = $36,250
    (The total must have been $145,000)

    This bundle [316 pages] consists of the contributions from Richard E Wagner, Gary M Anderson, Bruce Yandle. Dwight R Lee, Henri LePage, Mwangi S Kimenyi and James M Buchanan.
[All cash-for-comments economists]

    It also contains comments from Michael T Buckley at Covington & Burling

1990 Feb 1: Savarese's report to Susan Stuntz at the Tobacco Institute lists a number of projects involving the cash-for-comment economists:

  • "Smoking and the Problem of Social Cost: A Survey" by Tollison and Wagner, published in Journal of Public Finance and Public Choice - reprints have been distributed.
  • "Smoking and Absenteeism: An Empirical Study" by Ault, Ekelund, Jackson, Saba, and Saurman - submitted to Applied Economics.
  • "Smokers Subsidy of Nonsmokers' Retirement Benefits" by Higgins and Shuford - submitted to Social Science and Medicine.
  • "The Social Costs of Everyday Life" by [Gary] Anderson submitted to Contemporary Policy Studies.
  • "Social Cost and the Cigarette Excise Tax: A Misguided Rationale for an Inefficient and Unfair Policy" by [Dwight] Lee - submitted to Contemporary Policy Studies.
  • "Self Interest, Public Interest, and Public Health" by Tollison and Wagner - accepted for publication in Public Choice.
  • "Some Economic Consequences of the Koop Doctrine: National and State Revenue Shortfall from Smoking Regulation" by Ekelund - returned to Ekelund for submission.
  • "Smoking and the Wealth of Nations" by Wagner - submitted to Journal of Contemporary Business.

    Began Phase III of the social cost research. Proposals have been submitted to TI.

1990 April: The monthly Tobacco Institute report for March from Carol Hrycaj who is in charge of the issues surrounding Excise Taxes, says

Following the meeting in February on bootlegging cigarettes in the states, we received a proposal from consulting economists to conduct an in-depth analysis on the issue. We have commented on the plan generally, and await State Activities' assessment of the document.

    Consulting economists made presentations on tax earmarking during the Southwestern Social Science Conference in Fort Worth, Texas. Robert Ekelund chaired the session "The Political Economy of Tax Earmarking." Participants included: Richard Wagner, Dwight Lee and Robert Tollison. The presentations were based on material that will be contained in the upcoming treatise on earmarking.

    [This document shows that her 'Professional fees" budget for the year was $158,750 and she had already over-spent by $60,000. She also had a budget of $233,975 for the support of 'organisations', which may have included payments to the GMU's Center for the Study of Public Choice.]

1990 June: /E Excise Tax Letter-Writing Fact Sheet. This is a list of points that the Tobacco Institute wanted the economists to include in their op-ed articles.

  • Excise taxes are regressive
  • Excise taxes are fundamentally inequitable
  • Excise taxes are an unfair burden on minorities
  • Government data demonstrates the unfairness of excise taxes.
  • Excise taxes are arbitrary
  • Excise taxes are hidden taxes
  • Excise taxes are an unfair burden on businesses
  • Excise taxes are bad economic policy
  • Excise taxes are historically controversial.
This was followed by
  • pages of data so that the economists got their facts right,
  • a series of quotes that could be incorporated into the article.
  • pages of State-by-State data including the number of jobs that the Tobacco Institute estimated would be lost by higher cigarette excises
  • lost revenues for each State, due, it was claimed, to cross-state bootlegging and smuggling.
  • a list of Congressmen to be contacted in every region.
  • Tollison's C/V

1990 June: Carol Hryjak reports to the Tobacco Institute on her progress with the "Social Cost" program.

Consulting economists presented papers on the social cost issue during the Western Economic Association's annual meeting in San Diego, California. Dwight Lee chaired the session entitled, "Smoking and Public Policy." Papers were offered by Lee ("Smoking and Public Policy"), Gary Anderson ("Politics, Redistribution and Smoking") and Benjamin Zycher ("Insurance and Smoking: Market vs. Government"). A full report on the conference is expected next month.

    We have agreed to support consulting economists' presentations during sessions of two other major academic conferences later this year: the Atlantic Economic Society and the Southern Economic Association. Both will focus on aspects of "user fees" and budgetary politics.

    Consulting economists Bob Tollison and Richard Wagner began work on the manuscript for the revised edition of Smoking and the State.

    We received a proposal from consulting economist Dwight Lee to write an article on the social cost issue for placement in an economic periodical, The Margin. The publication is required reading for students of economics at universities around the country.

    We continued to work on the social cost plan for 1991, with a final draft submitted for Public Affairs review.

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

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

    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:
Robert Tollison
Duncan Black Professor of Economics
George Mason University

8/89 Published letter to the editor, New York Times, on the impact of tax increases on teen smoking

Smoking and the State media tour: Sacramento/San Francisco, CA (6 radio interviews)

10/89 Smoking and the State media tour: Los Angeles, CA (interviews: 4 radio, 1 print)

11/89 Smoking and the State media tour: Atlanta, GA (interviews: 4 radio, 1 print); Reno/Las Vegas, NV (interviews: 5 radio, 1 print)

Published "Political Entry Barriers and Tax Incidence: The Political Economy of Excise and Sales Taxes," in Public Finance

Published "Social Cost, Rent Seeking and Smoking: A Public Choice Perspective," in Journal of Public Finance and Public Choice

12/89 Smoking and the State media tour: Burlington, VT (interviews: 2 radio, 2 television) and Portland, ME (4 radio interviews)

1/90 Smoking and the State media tour: Springfield, MA (interviews: 4 radio, 1 television)

Letter to columnist George Will rebutting "social cost" arguments

Letters to administration officials debunking excise tax/"user fee" connection

2/90 Anti-excise tax letter to the editor published in the Washington Post

3/90 Smoking and the State media tour: New York City (4 radio interviews)

Presentation on tax earmarking and regressivity at the Southwest Social Science Association conference in Fort Worth, TX

5/90 Testified before Senate Finance Committee on "social costs"

6/90 Submitted article on taxes and "social cost" to Paraplegia News

1990 Aug 24 - 26: Tollison is on a "Social Cost" Media Tour of Columbus and Cincinnati, promoting his and Wagner's book "Social Costs and the State" He managed to give 11 radio and TV interviews in a couple of days, See Page 14.

    His partner, Richard Wagner, was in Houston doing the same (but less successfully) See Page 16.

1990 Aug 27: Brennan Dawson's report of her division's activities for June and July. It was made to the Tobacco Institute's Communications Committee, and it explains:

  • The Economic Policy Institute (BPI) 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 an 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 congressiona l districts include: Economists appearing in print (copies enclosed)
    • JR Clarke, Jackson (TN) Sun and Memphis Commercial Appeal
    • Ryan Amacher, Anderson (GA) Independent-Mail;
    • Todd Sandler, Fort Dodge (IA) Messenger;
    • Domenick Armentano, Hartford (CT) Courant;
    • William Mitchell, Register Guard (OR);
    • Barry Poulson, Alamaso (CO) Valley Courier.

    It also lists (among dozens of consultants writing op-eds and appearing as witnesses) The "Social Cost" Media Tour of Robert Tollison and Richard Wagner, with details of the radio and TV stations, occupy Pages 13 to 16.

1990 Aug 29: Robert Tollison, on Center for Study of Public Choice letterhead, makes a submission on ETS to the Environmental Protection Agency. He writes:

My general overall assessment is that the EPA analysis of cost saving is flawed beyond repair. It is based upon a failure to apply basic economic principles, the application of which lead to the conclusion that there are presently no uncompensated costs in the workplace arising from ETS; hence, there can be no cost savings from banning ETS in the workplace.
[Most of this document is his CV and bibliography]

1990 Sep 26: Kurt Malmgren's Tobacco Institute telex re: Sacramento County, California Ordinance

On September 25, the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors on first reading voted 3-2 to adopt a strict ordinance banning smoking in the workplace and phasing out smoking in restaurants by 1993.

Terry Eagan — along with expert consultants Gray Robertson (IAQ), David Weeks, MD, (ETS), John Fox (labor/management attorney) and Melinda Sidak (C&B) were the subject of print and broadcast interviews.

    Please contact me if you have questions, as we prepare for the referendum phase of this project.
The file then includes a long list of "Scientific/Other Witnesses Appearances & Media Tours - 1990" Along with all the other commercial IAQ shills ( Robertson, Seckler, Turner, etc) willing to testify for cash are a couple of volunteers from the academic economists network:
  • March 16 — Topeka, KS — Legislative Hearing — Dwight Lee
  • March 30 — Park Ridge, IL — Local Hearing — Dwight Lee
  • March 21 — "Social Cost" media tour, New York City — Bob Tollison
  • April 12 — Honolulu, HI — Legislative hearing — Dick Wagner
  • April 30 — New Hanover, NC — Local Hearing — Dwight Lee
  • April (Editorial tour) — "Social cost" Texas Newspapers — Mike Davis
  • May 9 — Baton Rouge, LA — Legislative hearing — Morris Coats.

1990 Sep 28: Comments Critical of the Draft EPA, ETS Policy Guide.

Robert D. Tollison, Duncan Black Professor of Economics
George Mason University Fairfax, VA 22030
Tollison's comments center on Chapter 8 of the Guide. In general, he feels that EPA's analysis of cost saving is 'flawed beyond repair."

[Note a large number of objectors, all dated their submission 28 September... whereas another group were around mid October]

1990 Oct 15: The daily diary of Tom Osdene (Director of Science & Technology at Philip Morris) shows that he wants the Social Policy Institute at George Mason, to have some student write a paper for Japanese or Korean market

1990 Oct 19: Richard Wagner, as section-chairman of the Atlantic Economic Society [subtitled "Patriots of the Future", Williamsburg] reports to James Savarese on a session he has run on "User Fees and Budgetary Politics." [The document is clearly designed as proof of payable services to the TI]

    He outlines his introductory remarks, then writes:

The participants did the rest. Dwight Lee, Fred McChesney, and Robert Tollison each presented their papers dealing with aspects of the session's theme, and Kevin Grier and Bruce Yandle offered some interesting observations in discussing the papers.

    Indeed, one of Bruce Yandle's comments was to the effect that the three papers together provided a quite coherent, alternative body of analysis to the conventional literature on user fees.

[All speakers and pre-selected discussants were members of the cash-for-comments network]

1990 Oct 25: Smokepeace '90 organised in Helsinki, 25-27 Oct 1990 by the Considerate Smokers Association, the Finnish equivalent of Smokepeace. The practical arrangements were taken care of by the tobacco industry which paid the costs of the conference. They bought in experts from 22 different countries.

    Tollison is present at the Helsinki meeting He quotes Australian pro-tobacco jounralist Paddy McGuinness

1990 Oct 30: Philip Morris's Tom Osdene maintained a diary which provides plenty of uncensored information about his activities as a main disinformation executive.

    They need a social cost article written for Asia to counter an active anti-smoker Judith Mackay.

Who will write on it or speak on it? Japanes or Korean.

    Social Policy Institute at George Mason. Have Tollison identify some student. Next time Don [Harris] is in New York, designate someone to do [this] for Asia.

1990 Oct 31: Ekelund has sent Savarese his "Proposed Program for SouthWestern Social Sciences Association Meeting" for approval. He will chair the session to be called "The Political Economy of Dedicated Taxes"

    It will have papers by Dwight Lee, Robert Tollison and Richard Ault. Also Mark Thornton, John Keith Watson and John Jackson will be discussants.
[All cash-for-comments academics. Watson is now at the University of SouthWestern Louisiana]

1991: Tollison CV (heavily redacted) has been sent to the Tobacco Institute

1991 Feb 5: James Savarese writing to Carol Hrycaj at the Tobacco Institute.

I've enclosed a final draft copy of Bob [Tollison] and Dick [Wagner]'s book, Economics of Smoking: Getting It Right. Let me know if you have any questions.

1991 Mar: /E Robert Tollison and Richard Wagner publish "The Economics of Smoking" written by themselves to counter the "Social Cost" arguments:

  1. Tobacco Warfare In America: An Overview
          [A Battlefield Tour]
  2. Welfare Economics, Public Policy, and Smoking
  3. The Taxation And Regulation of Smoking:
          [Principle vs. Expediency]
  4. Smoking and the Economic Cost of Lost Production
          [Absenteeism isn't a problem!]
  5. Markets, Insurance, and the Medical Costs of Smokers
  6. Medicare, Medicaid, and the Social Cost of Smoking
          [Principle, Expediency, and Wealth Transfers]
  7. Smoking, Business Costs, and Social Cost
  8. ETS And Governmental Protection Of Consumers And Workers
          [An Alternative Explanation]
  9. Advertising, "Addiction," And The Denial Of True Choice
          [Consumer Sovereignty or Health Fascism?]
  10. Self Interest, Public Interest, and Legislation
  11. Interest Groups And The Public's Health
          [Self Interest in Public Interest Organizations]
  12. Principle And Expediency In Public Policy

1991 May 30: Leslie Dawson and James Saverese appear to have joined Powell Adams & Rinehard, a subsidiary of Ogilvy & Mather, who have taken over the economist network. Robert and Anna Tollison's names appears not to be mentioned from this poinr on in regards to the day-to-day operations of the economists cash-for-comments network — although the Center for Study of Public Choice at GMU was still involved.

1991 June: Richard Wagner and Robert Tollison have written a light-weight economics article "Robbing Peter to Pay Paul: The Reality of User Fees and Dedicated Taxes".

    The draft has been sent to the Tobacco Institute for editing and legal checks. A footnote tells us that:

Dr Richard E. Wagner is the editor of the forthcoming book, Charging Beneficiaries for Public Services: User Charges and Earmarked Taxes in Principle and Practice, to be released June 1991. Dr Robert D. Tollison is a contributor to the book. Both are professors of economics at George Mason University.
There are only minor references to tobacco and cigarettes, and none to the fact that the tobacco industry paid to have this article published.

1991 June: /E The Tobacco Institute's Public Affairs division has been asked to find $1 million in budget cuts. They have produced a detailed list of what would be cut in 1992 if they were forced to make these economies. This is an extensive list with Total amounts budgetted for each project.

Social Costs:
Cancel all media/op-ed activity surrounding promotion of new earmarking and updated "social cost" books       $ 63,000

Cancel plans for production and limited promotion of economist critique of HHS "social costs" model being used to promote tax increases in the states.       $ 22,000
[This refers to their attacks on the SAMMEC calculations.]
They list 31 line items for a total saving of $1,100,000.

1991: June. Calvin ('Cal') H George and Carol Hrycaj were now looking after the "Social Cost" issues management at the Tobacco Institute. Their report for June shows:

A task force comprised of consultants and TI staff was convened to discuss the promotion of The Institute's social cost resources and to address using the resources more aggressively in the workplace and public smoking areas..

    The first draft was received of consulting economist Robert Ekelund's critique of the underlying methodology the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) used to estimate the "social cost" of smoking. Review and clearance of the white paper will be completed this summer. We anticipate promoting the HHS critique this fall in major media markets and to key policy makers.

    At the state level, social cost media tours were activated to respond to Pennsylvania Governor Casey's use of "cost" arguments to justify the proposed 30-cent hike in the state's cigarette excise tax. In advance of the tours, we developed the pitch materials and worked closely with Media Relations to finalize details for the visits.

    Consulting economist Robert Tollison and a spokesperson from The Institute traveled to Harrisburg and Philadelphia to discuss the social cost concept and tobacco-related issues with the media. Richard Wagner discussed the taxes and social cost theory with reporters in Pittsburgh and Scranton.

1991 June 25: Jim Savarese has billed the Tobacco Insitute for an article written to order by Wagner and Tollison attacking Governor Casey's cigarette tax proposal as "Unfair and Inequitable". They each charge $1,500 per day for two-days of writing time... a Total of $6,000.

1991 June 25: Carol Hrycaj memos Martin Gleason:

Attached, for your reference, is Dick Wagner's chronology of action on the tax earmarking book. Note that a representative from Routledge met with Wagner in June 1990 and indicated that a nine month publication schedule was possible, making the book available in early 1991.

    It appears that the authors acted to see that the publication would be in print in a timely fashion. I talked to Bob Tollison about the June 12, 1991 entry that says, "call to Alison Kirk, received 5 September 1991 as publication date — after much delay over increasing TI order." Bob clarified that the TI order did not impact the publisher's anticipated delivery date.

1991 June 28: Wagner and Tollison have now become regulars on the Tobacco Institute's schedule of conducted media tours. This is a list of the various 'witness' activities during 1991. Most are 'ventilation experts' promoting the idea that passive smoking isn't a problem in offices and workplaces. Jolly Ann Davidson is selling the TI's "Helping Youth Decide" message about teenager smoking.

    The economists are opposing 'earmarking' of cigarette taxes for the support of health initiatives:

  • Wagner in Concord, New Hamprshire, on 12 and 13th March
  • Wagner in Madion Wisconson, on 2nd and 3rd April
  • Tollison in Columbus Ohio on 9th and 10 of April.

1991 July: Tollison and Wagner have sent a draft of a study to the Tobacco Institute: "The Value of Tobacco Sales to the Air Force Commissary System."

While tobacco products represent about ten percent of Air Force commissary sales, their prohibition would reduce commissary net income by between 25 and 37 percent.

    While the five percent surcharge applies to all products, tobacco products are particularly lucurative sources of income through coupon redemption fees and discounts for early payment of invoices. Tobacco manufacturers pay shelf allocation fees to the commissaries for shelf space. Altogether, the direct sale of tobacco products generated $18.3 million in fiscal 1990, which was 12 percent of commissary net income.

    Second, tobacco products generate a considerably larger sales volume per foot of shelf space or per square foot of commissary space than other products. They also entail considerably lower personnel and inventory costs. Less than two percent of the commissary labor force is engaged in the handling of tobacco products.

    Altogether, the prohibition of tobacco products in Air Force commissaries would reduce commissary net income by between $38.7 million and $56.2 million, which is between 25 percent and 37 percent of fiscal 1990 magnitudes. This would equate to building four fewer replacement commissaries annually. The elimination of tobacco products would damage strongly the economic basis of the Air Force's commissary system, undermining a good part of the commissary benefit to smokers and nonsmokers alike.

    They also sought to expand this with a proposal to the Tobacco Institute labeled: "The Tobacco Tax Burden on Our Military Personnel".
This proposed study seeks to analyze the impact of cigarette excise taxation on the military population at large, including active duty personnel, reserve personnel, retired military and veterans. There is good reason to think that cigarette taxation, as well as restrictions on indoor smoking, burden the military population more heavily than the civilian, in this report we will explain why this is so and will assess the extent of those penalties.
They want $40,000 to prepare and publish this study.

1991 July 26: A summary of the current "Proposals from Economists" at the Tobacco Institute.

  • Productivity: A popularized version, including discussions of health costs, insurance, and general costs of everyday life [proposal from Wagner & Grier].
    • 20-25 pages for management/business journal — cost $18,500
  • Earkmarked Excise Taxes for Health Care: A Fiscal Mismatch (Grier & Wagner)
    • Sent to Marty Gleason and Carol Hrycaj at the TI on the 9 April 1991 — total fee $32,500.
    • Resent 15 May 1991 - tentative approval.
    • Resent once more on 17 July 1991 — total fee $42,000
  • Smoking & Workplace Efficienty: An Assessment of the Record
    (Productivity Study - Wagner/Grier)
    • Sent to the Tobacco Institute 7 March 1991. Approved 10 April 1991 — total fee $42,500.
    • Revised version sent to Carol Hrycaj on 19 March 1991
    [Note says "Tell them will pay next year" (must have overrun the budget)]
  • Excise Taxes and Excise Tax Increases: Effects on Rural Americas (Ekelund).
    • Sent to Cal George at the Tobacco Institute July 1 1991, — total fee $28,000.
  • Scientific Fraud and the Organization of Science (Wagner/Tollison)
    • Sent to the Tobacco Institute on 12 April 1991 — total fee $29,500
  • Sports Advertising: (Ekelund)
    • Sent to Shelia at the Tobacco Institute (approved) 19 Mar 1991 — total fee $26,500
  • Bootlegging Study II: (Ekelund)
    • Cal George and Carol Hrycaj were looking after it.
    • Sent to Tobacco Institute 7 March 1991 — total fee $27,000
    • Specific State studies were $4,500 each.
[Note: US Average Annual Salary in 1990-91 was $9,669]

1991 Aug 5: Martha Rinker (Issues Manager) to her superior Marty Gleason at the Tobacco Institute.

We have one productivity work in progress, the Wagner and Grier "event study." The first draft of this project is expected in September. Its $42,500 price was taken into consideration during the budget process. RJR [RJ Reynolds] is very excited about this study and are anxious to see the final report.

    Four proposed projects emerged from the meeting held a few weeks ago: a popular paper discussing the [Robert] Ekelund, et al results, a speaking tour, an op-ed program, and a possible health costs study.
  1. The preparation and publication of a popular article by [Richard] Wagner and [Robert] Tollison that would include a discussion of the Ekelund et al results, health care and insurance costs issues, and the social costs of everyday life.

        The proposal is more than we want or need. A 20-25 page paper like this would have to published in a university business journal. What we had in mind, and I've discussed this with Savarese, is a shorter article to be placed in the personnel or human resource trades. The article would be good for reprints and possibly a TI brochure.
  2. The preparation and testing of a speaking project for [Dwight] Lee and Tollison. The tasks would include the preparation of a standard speech and the solicitation of speaking engagements with Chamber of Commerce type audiences.
  3. An op-ed campaign based on the paper prepared by Wagner and Tollison listed in the first task above. The op-eds would be written by economists in the targeted areas identified by TI.
  4. A possible health costs study looking at the actual costs of smokers and non-smoker
The only task that has had a price tag attached to it is the "popular" article, $18,500. This should be less when the project is pared down to the size and audience discussed above. The speaking project would include the cost of preparation of the speech andtravel and expenses for the economists. The op-ed project costs would be the hourly fees for the economists preparing the op-eds. And, finally, the health care costs study would be the costs of recovering the information, research and writing of the study.[Projected total costs were $100,000]

    Work could begin in the first and last projects late in 1991 with delivery of the papers (and payment for the work) in 1992, The "popular" paper would mainstream the information we now have and need to circulate to counter the anti's. The other two tasks, preparation of a speech, solicitation of speaking engagements and writing op-eds could be started early in 1992.

1991 Nov 19: Carol Hrycaj sends a memo to Walter Woodson (TI Public Relations head):

Attached, as you requested, is a list of excise tax (and social cost) witnesses. The list of youth issue witnesses will be forwarded as soon as possible.

    The following conservative economists are academics whose testimony is from a public choice perspective. Regional or local economists may be identified as appropriate.
She lists Robert Tollison, Richard Wagner and Dwight Lee

1992: Tollison and Wagner have finished their book, "The Economics of Smoking" For much of this year they were tied up with promoting the book in various ways. [See some of the concluding pages to the book ]

Efforts to attribute a cost of lost production to smoking, as well as a cost of medical care, commonly and wrongly attribute to smoking the entire amount of what is really a joint cost. This problem arises because smokers and nonsmokers are not identical in all respects other than smoking. Among other things, smokers have an above-average representation in blue collar occupations, they also consume on average an aboveaverage amount of alcohol, although there are many teetotaling smokers and nonsmoking alcoholics,3 and they generally exercise less than nonsmokers, although smoking bicyclists, swimmers, and joggers can be found.

1992 Jan: Tobacco network economists/organisers Robert Tollison and James C Miller III (ex-FTC, ex-OMB, ex-Reagan Administration and now a professional lobbyist with CSE and AdTI) have published "A Benefit-Cost Analysis of Mandatory Workplace Smoking Policies," A "Revised Draft" has found its way into Lorillard's files.

    The opening paragraph is legalistic crap about the OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory affairs, conducting a regulatory impact statement on the problem.It quotes all the old familiar family members of the economist's network.

Conclusions: This study finds that the cost of mandatory workplace smoking policies would place a large economic burden on the private sector and would provide no offsetting benefits.

1992 Mar 20: Richard E Wagner is now at Harris University. He and Tollison (GMU) are arguing with Dr Joseph P Newhouse of Health Policy and Management, Harvard University, over the social cost of smoking.

[The Tobacco Institute, naturally gets a copy of the correspondence]

1992 Aug 6: Anne Tollison working with Jim Savarese has sent the draft copy of a Tollison/Wagner op-ed "Scientific Integrity Consumed by Anti-Smoking Zealotry" along to the Tobacco Institute. It has been edited and sent to the Orange County Register because it was specifically intended to help the industry counter threatened smoking bans in California.
[There's not the slightest indication that the authors were aware of the hypocricy of the title of their attack on anti-smokers, and their own stance on 'scientific integrity'.]

    Savarese's editors have made many changes and corrections. A note has been attached probably suggesting that the article could also be planted in the "LA Times, Sacremento Bee, San Diego Union, or San Francisco Chronicle."

    In the article they complain bitterly about a social cost study which supports the smoking ban, saying

The plain truth of the matter is simply that smokers more than pay their own way in California, and there is no scientific economically sound case for increasing the tax on cigarettes. Indeed it is the smokers of California who paid $100,000 to the authors of this fallacious study.
[Talk about the pot calling the kettle 'BLACK']

    The Tobacco Institute has cleared it after the fact:

1992 Sept: A "Public Smoking" report by Karen Fernicola Suhr at the Tobacco Institute lists under "Project and Activity Status"

Grier/Wagner draft of "Workplace Efficiency: A Market-Based Assessment": Authors are attempting to get the article published in the Journal of Law and Economics.
[Kevin B Grier is a Professor of Economics at George Mason University who worked with Wagner on occasions.]

    The "Social Costs" report by Calivn George lists under "Message development and Media Strategies."
Worked with consultants and the economists' network on placing an op-ed developed in August in response to a recently released study by the Institute for Health and Aging at the University of California at San Francisco, which alleged that cigarette smoking imposes a $7.2 billion annual "cost" on Californians.

    Op-ed was sent to two additional major California daily newspapers, neither of which have published the piece.

1992 Oct 13:: Sharon Boyse writes to Paul Dietrich. She says they have had to hire Tollisson to give Dietrich's WHO speach in Venezuela conference. Will Paul give him some details since he knows nothing. Not with your credentials (and nor, incidentally, do we need or want to) in terms of membership of PAHO

    Since we have been paying you a retainer this year for this information... we felt it reasonable to ask." [Dietrich did not think it reasonable to ask] [300515944]

SAMMEC (Smoking-Attributable Mortality, Morbidity and Economic Costs) was a software program developed initially by James M. Schultz and the Minnesota Department of Health in 1985 and 1986. It became famous in academic circles after being used in one well publicized nationwide study — the National Status Report on Smoking and Health published in 1990 (the "Sullivan Report").

    The SAMMEC II version was then developed for evaluating state, city, and national populations in order to determine the so-called "social costs" of smoking.

1992 Oct 16: Jim Savarese is sending the Tobacco Institute a promotional program for the Tollison/Wagner book "The Economics of Smoking" which is being promoted also by their paper attacking the regulatory agency use of a cost-benefit modelling technique known as SAMMEC II.
[SAMMEC = Smoking-Attributable Mortality, Morbidity and Economic Costs.]

    He encloses a report on the media tours run by O&M for the previous Tollison/Wagner book "Smoking and the State"

During the 38 media tours for Smoking and the State, Wagner and Tollison conducted 235 interviews in 54 markets in 27 states during an 18-month period from 1988 - 1990.
Savarese then provides a rationale for a further media tour promoting the new book. He is still working closely with Ogilvy & Mather
[ Cassidy & Associate was in the process of taking over the smaller lobbying companies O&M, James Savarese & Assoc. and Powell-Tate — but each retained its own identity. This document is probably a pitch by the new conglomerate, to retain the Tobacco Institute business.]
The materials we developed for the initial "social cost" media tours were highly effective in aiding our efforts to schedule interviews. For the new "social cost" tours, we will develop
  • pitch materials for a press kit similar to those developed for the initial program. The kit would likely include:
    • pitch letter
    • biographies of Wagner and Tollison
    • a popularized summary of The Economics of Smoking and the "SAMMEC II" paper
    • any applicable charts/graphs which also can be reproduced for local newspapers and television
    • one-page sheet describing the estimated "social costs" of various activities
  • A matte service piece signed by Wagner and Tollison will focus on the three main themes of the program, perhaps using the "slippery slope' argument or the ongoing smokers vs. nonsmokers battle as the main hook. Emphasis will be placed on "Sammec II" in order to lend more substance to the article.
  • a second matte service piece should be a review of the book by a member of Jim Savarese's economists' network. Such a review would provide the new book with the credibility of an independent expert and would help increase the book's visibility in a costeffective manner, much in the same way Todd Sandler's review supported Smoking and the State.
  • Opinion editorials by the economists will be prepared for placement in state capital publications in states where "social cost" is a major issue. Ideally, placements would occur in conjunction with media tour visits.
  • In addition, op-eds written by members of the Savarese economists' network will discuss issues raised in the book and "Sammtec II." The economists are very successful at placing pieces in their local papers. As with the matte service reviews, these pieces would lend credibility to the book and the analysis.
  • There is a need for a responsive mechanism to handle media references to the SAMMEC study on "social costs."
  • Additionally, we will prepare a standard letter to the editor on the flaws of the SAMMEC study — providing room for localization in the first and last paragraphs. The letter will be distributed to, and eventually authored by, a Savarese and Associates economist in the particular state.
  • In order to give full exposure to both the "SAMMEC II" paper and The Economics of Smoking. George Mason University's Center for the Study of Public Choice has indicated that they will publish the "SAMMEC II" paper as one of their Working Paper series. This will give added credibility to the paper as a truly scholarly piece of research.

Wagner and Tollison stand as important resources for the Institute. Their expertise and credibility on the "social cost" issue enables them to assist the Institute in efforts to defeat measures to increase government regulation of tobacco.

    Promotion of their new book, The Economics of Smoking and the "SAMMEC II" paper will constitute an essential component of these efforts, allowing Wagner and Tollison to reinforce and expand the messages disseminated during the initial "social cost" program.

    The promotional program we have outlined will maximize use of Wagner and Tollison. The program elements will effectively take the spokespeople's messages to a wide and diverse audience.

    Another version of this proposal from the TI files also carries a budget:
  • Ogilvy & Mather estimate they will need an additional $22,000
  • James Savarese & Associates wants a further $26,000 for the economists to create Op-eds, Letters to the editor, Mattes and for media tour time.
    Further activities of the network economists are billed at between $200 and $250 per hour.

1992 Nov 11: Tollison has sent a draft copy of a Letter to the Editor (intended for USA Today) to the Tobacco Institute to check before mailing to the newspaper.

    He opposes cigarette tax increases entirely on humanitarian grounds, because it takes money from the " low-income, blue-collar, single-mother smokers," and turns it over to "well educated, high-income public health bureaucrats, doctors, and professors."

There is no reason or justification whatsoever to increase cigarette taxes, especially so that public health professors can get bigger grants.

1992 Dec 12: A Philip Morris boilerplate document with answers to anti-tobacco claims has extensive quotes from Tollison and Wagner as well as NEMI and its other scientific lobbyists. The questions alone make a good case that "social costs" exist.

    Claim 1: As employees, smokers are less productive than nonsmokers.
    Claim 2: From the employer's standpoint, employees who smoke are more costly than nonsmoking employees.
    Claim 3: Smokers impose higher "maintenance" costs on their employers than non-smokers.
    Claim 4: Smokers are more prone to injuries and accidents on the job than are nonsmokers.
    Claim 5: Smokers waste more time on the job than non-smokers.
    Claim 6: Smokers cause health insurance rates to be higher for nonsmokers.
    Claim 7: Smokers miss work more often than nonsmokers.
    Claim 8: Banishing smoking and smokers from the workplace would boost morale and improve productivity.

1993: Working with the TI making media tours and Legislative Appearances.

1993 Jan: Issues Manager Calvin George is outlining his plans for the Tobacco Institute operations in the following year. He is working with CART and organising "The Political Element in Science and Technology: SAMMEC II and the Anti-smoking Lobby" which is being published in March by GMUs Center for Study of Public Choice, and also The Economics of Smoking. They are planning media tours for late March and April.
[SAMMEC = Smoking-Attributable Mortality, Morbidity and Economic Costs.]

1993 Jan 15: Bob Tollison is now working for British-American Tobacco under the control of Issues Manager, Sharon Boyse. He has been recruited as a substitute for Paul Dietrich, the Saturday Review editor-in-chief (See explanation below Apr 29) in helping the tobacco industry run media junkets. Tollison's new job is as a speaker attacking the World Health organisation — in particular, its anti-smoking Japanese head Dr Nakajima.

Although Paul Dietrich has over the years provided us with many newspaper articles on the WHO, we do not have from him a detailed written critique of the WHO and its budgetary policies. We have therefore commissioned Robert Tollison, an economist who may be know to many of you for his books "Smoking and Society" and "Clearing the Air", to prepare the attached review on our behalf.

    Please note that figures and data from this report may be used as desired. However, anyone wishing to refer in any public document or medium to Tollison as the source of the statements contained within should contact me first so that we can clear it with him - the paper is not a published one.

    See also clippings on WHO attacks from the law office of Dietrich:

1993 Feb 12: Tollison replies to Sharon Boyse at BAT, offering to publish the WHO paper through the Center for Study of Public Choice.

I would be happy to pursue publication of the WHO paper. I would need to clean it up some. But I don't have any special ideas about where to submit it.

    One thing I can do automatically is make it a working paper issued by my Center. This is a form of publication, e.g., Tollison, "WHO," Center for Study of Public Choice, Working Paper No. 15, February 1993.

    This is easy if it is sufficient for your purposes. Our working papers are bound in dark green covers. Beyond this, I could pursue publication in some sort of public policy journal, but as you know , from submission to publication, this course of action takes some time ,

[Note Tollison's trusted typist of these letters is his network administrator, cr = Carol Roberts]

1993 Feb 19: Robert Tollison is dealing with Sharon Boyse at BAT over the design of a paper to attack the World Health Organisation which is using part of ts budget to run anti-smoking campaigns. Tollison has offered to publish the paper through the Center for Study of Public Choice.

Thanks for considering publishing the WHO paper, I think we would rather have something a little more formal than your working paper.

    The best option I have been able to come up with involves Digby Anderson, who you may have met in Venezuela at our media briefing. He is director of the Social Affairs Unit in the UK, and their major activity is to publish books and booklets on issues such as this. In fact, he has working with him a man called James Le Fanu [a prominent UK newspaper columnist and tobacco 'consultant'], who is at the moment involved in a book on UNICEF which includes a little on the WHO. They would be very interested in having you combine your work with theirs, and contributing a section to the book or something similar.

    I hope this would be acceptable to you, and you will probably receive a letter from them about this in the next week or two. If this does not seem desirable to you for any reason then please let me know.

I gather that they will pay you their usual small author's fee, but as mentioned previously, although we will be financially supporting actual publication costs of the resulting book through a donation to the SAU, we will also cover any additional costs you may have — I would, however, be grateful if you could estimate any such costs to me first of all

1993 Feb 22: Tollison writes back to Boyse accepting the arrangment. The amount offered through the Social Affairs Unit must have been high:

It doesn't seem like a [separate] fee is necessary here. If you wanted to make a small contribution (<$500) to my Center to cover the odds and ends costs of getting the paper out, this would be fine. But even this is not necessary.

[However, it later transpires that he wants $21,000 to research the subject, on top of the SAU-laundered payment.]

1993 Mar 10: Cal George to Susan Stuntz at the Tobacco Institute reports on the activities of his economists network.

Richard Ault and Robert Ekelund's critique of SAMMEC II software for estimating the alleged "social costs" of smoking, "The Political Element in Science and Technology: SAMMEC II and the Anti-Smoking Lobby," is being published as a working paper this month by George Mason University's Center for the Study of Public Choice.

    As you know, a plan has been developed for promotion of this study, along with Bob Tollison and Richard Wagner's newly available book on "social costs" , The Economics of Smoking, using Tollison and Wagner as spokespersons from the Center for the Study of Public Choice and experts on the application of "social costs" theory.

    SAMMEC II continues to be the primary tool being used by antismoking forces to argue for increased tobacco taxes and regulation, particularly on the health care reform front.

    I convened a meeting with State Activities, Media Relations and OA&R [Ogilvy Adams & Reinhard — the new version of O&M] last month to discuss experience in promoting the earlier book, Smoking and the State, and the collective judgement on where we could get the best return on a limited investment of two, two-city media tours to promote the study and the new book.

    The consensus at that time was for the states of Oregon and Minnesota, including most likely the state capitol and one other media market. OA&R was also to check on the availability of Tollison and Wagner.OA&R has determined that Tollison and/or Wagner should be available both the last week of March and the first week of April.

In addition to the above activities designed to promote the findings of the SAMMEC II study, the other key element of our strategy to counter "social costs" assertions is the development of a stock (or "canned" ) op-ed and/or letter-to-the-editor capacity to quickly respond to the use of SAMMEC II-derived numbers/studies that appear in the media from time to time.

    Such an op-ed was developed by Bob Tollison last September in response to a University of California study that used SAMMEC methodology. While Tollison was not successful in placing this particular op-ed, the piece itself was sound and I have asked State Activities to circulate it to field staff so that they will be aware that there is the capacity to respond and will alert us to opportunities to do so.

1993 Mar 23: Jim Savarese is proposing to Calvin 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.
• Op-ed article by Robert Tollison to be submitted to Wall Street Journal $ 4,000
• Rebuttal article by Bob Ekelund, Auburn University, to be submitted to the Birmingham News $ 3,000
• "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
TOTAL $67,000
They have provide a list of the proposed lucky recipients of $3,000 in largess from the Tobacco Institute for bashing out a quick op-ed from the material provided to them.

1993 Apr 1: James Savarese sends the Tobacco Institute "a brief analysis of the indirect cost of smoking prepared by Bob Tollison. It is a draft 3 page article, with editorial corrections... to which are attached a number of pages of handwritten editorial notes and newspaper stories. One note asks 'Cal' [Calvin George] whether the article can be published to counter the American Cancer Society's "Great American Smokeout" event.

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 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 Apr 29: Cal George writes to his supervisor Susan Stuntz about a "Tobacco Tax Burden on Military Personnel study."

Please find attached a proposal prepared for Savarese and Associates at our request by Robert Tollison and Richard Wagner to conduct a study of the impact of the cigarette excise tax burden on the military population at large, including active duty personnel, reserve personnel, retired military and veterans.

    This study would be an extension of Tollison and Wagner's earlier research on the economic impact of cigarette sales on the operations of military commissaries.

    Based on what is already known about the demographic characteristics of military personnel, including household income and incidence of smoking, it is expected that clearly demonstrate the regressive nature of tobacco excises on these populations.

    The health care reform debate will heat up once the Clinton Administration releases its plan in late May and veterans' groups can be expected to play a crucial role in pursuing the maximum benefits at the least cost for their members. Should tobacco excises be included in the financing, as is widely believed will be the case, this study should be useful to veterans' groups opposing such an approach to financing health care reform. The study is expected to be available in approximately four weeks.

    Should you approve this recommendation, I have attached for your approval a check request form for partial payment. The balance would be due upon completion of the study.

    The approval and budget figures are not attached to this copy of the note, but they appear to have gone ahead with the study... then messed up the payments. See the exchange of notes and emails later in the year from the same file.

1993 April 29: Sharon Boyse (head of disinformation at BAT) and Matt Winokur (her equivalent at Philip Morris) were jointly running media junkets around the world, taking compliant hack journalists to exotic locations to listen to the spiel of paid shills. They used a relatively stable group of UK and US speakers which usually included Ray or Phil Witorsch (speaking on medical aspects), Jean Boddewyn (on advertising), Gray Robertson or one of his staff from Healthy Buildings International (speaking on the so-called 'sick building syndrome'), a Washington lawyer from C&B or SH&B, some local lobbyists (depending on the country), and the semi-famous magazine editor/lobbyist Paul Dietrich.

    Dietrich was an old Republican fund-raiser who had married Laura Jordan Dietrich (Reagan's ambassador to the UN), and moved up in the world. The famous Saturday Review magazine was secretly owned in the June 1984-88 period by the tobacco companies and Dietrich had been put in charge (editor-in-chief) with Nixon's faithful aide Frank Gannon as his editor. The magazine failed and was sold off into the Penthouse magazine stable.

    Dietrich was then given control of a Philip Morris front organisation called the Institute for International Health & Development (IIHD) (supposedly based in Geneva) which ran its own magazine and specialised in attacking the World Health Organisation over the cost of its anti-smoking projects. He also managed to worm his way onto the advisory board of the Pan American Health Organisation (PAHO)

    The IIHD had also been given the job of publishing, translating and distributing the faux-proceedings of the closed McGill University ETS Symposium, set up, funded and controlled entirely by Philip Morris. However he began to over-charge for his services and was fired by Sharon Boyse. She writes:

... we found it necessary to obtain a replacement for Paul Dietrich's usual WHO presentation and Bob Tollison agreed to step in at the last minute.

    Tollison has agreed to carry out more work on the WHO and to publish, at our instigation, a collaborative effort with Digby Anderson of the Social Affairs Unit (SAU), on the WHO and other similar organisations. We are funding this publication through the SAU.

However, understandably. Tollison is concerned about using Dietrich's data for a publication, especially given that in Dietrich's present state of mind he could well take offense and cause a major international incident! Tollison has therefore requested that we provide him with sufficient modest funds to do his own rapid but essential work into the WHO budget so that he cannot be accused of stealing Dietrich's data.
[But he can be accused of using selective data — and of reversing the normal order of inquiry. His attack on the WHO came first, and the facts he relied on to prop up his arguments came later.]

    Given the interest of this to both our companies, and the use that we will have for Tollison in the future in media seminars in Latin America and elsewhere, would you be prepared to split the funding of this project with us. We will carry on the funding of the SAU project independently. The cost for PM would be US $10,250.
[Tollison and Wagner did this project jointly, so they each made $10,500 just from the basic research phase.]

1993 May 20: Wagner and Tollison have put together a 40 page draft of the WHO paper and faxed it to Sharon Boyse:

Herewith is a draft of the WHO paper. I hope you like it, and we would be happy to respond to coments.

I have not sent it to anyone else, including John Rupp or Digby Anderson.

    Please advise if you would like me to do so.

[This exposes the true nature of the relationship they had with Digby Anderson and the Social Affairs Unit — which was only acting as a front for BAT. John Rupp is the key US tobacco lawyer with Covington & Burling.]

    She replies the next day suggesting he send it to Rupp and Anderson. She makes a minor suggestion about infant and childhood disease statistics, and how...
... a more clear contrast of those two percentages, which are bound to be dramatically different, would not go amiss.

    Will provide you with final details on the subcontinent media seminars as soon as possible; many thanks for your fax on the subject and this is to confirm that financial arrangements are acceptable to us.

    Attached to the main document is a series of tables on the WHO's Tobacco OR Health programme which shows that the authors knew that these programs were funded by a special series of ear-market grants from developed nations, quite separate from the normal third-world heath budgets. It was the "Voluntary Fund for Health promotion" and totalled about $300,000 in 1994-5.

    They chose to ignore this inconvenient fact.

    The final paper was sent to Digby Anderson, who signed off on it about 6 July. Significantly, Tollison now sends "our invoice for the project" to Sharon Boyse at BAT, not to Digby Anderson.

1993 May 24: Susan Stuntz had to warn her staff that the OTA Report [New OTA Report Suggests That Smokers Already Are "Paying Their Own Way" — And Then Some"] prepared for the Tobacco Institute by Richard Wagner and Robert Tollison had series errors and needed to be replaced by this later version.

The one distributed late last week had numbers problems — all of the ones included in the paper didn't add up. This version attempts to correct that probles and also incorporates several additional suggestions from Federal Relations.

    Hopefully this is the last go-round.

1993 June 9: The Tollison-Wagner attack on the OTA study has finally been completed to the satisfaction of the Tobacco Institute. "The Office of Technolgy Assessment on the Costs of Smoking: Wrong Again."

    Cal George at the Tobacco Institute writes to his boss Susan Stuntz:

On the whole I think this is an excellent paper.

    I have made a few changes and am ready to send it to the lawyers with any changes you might have.
[So much for academic integrity and the constant claim that these papers are the honest opinions of the authors...?]

1993 Jun 25: Tollison to Susan Stuntz and Cal George, with 3 pages of copies of letters to editors

"These have been submitted via fax to New York Times, News and Observer, N [and?] Professor [Mark] Fleming at NC State."
[Tollison has drafted letters-to-the-editor's for the Tobacco Institute — perhaps Fleming has put his name to them?

    In 1990, Mark R Fleming was the legislative assistant to Senator Jesse Helms (Raleigh, NC) and in July 1991 Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. also had an R Mark Fleming as Manager, State Government Affairs, These are probably the same person. He was finishing his MBA at North Carolina State University]

1993 June 25: Robert Tollison has sent a "Possible submission to the New York Times" along to the Tobacco Institute marked "Draft - Not for Quotation without Permission." It criticises pervious writers, and claims that increases in excise taxes on cigarettes produce no revenue.

    He quotes the study by Kevin Grier and Richard Wagner who "calculated that 35-40 cents a pack was a revenue-maximising rate for state excise taxes on cigarettes." and that high excise "will lead to a reduction in Federal excise tax collections." [Previously they had maintained the opposite — that higher excise takes were a rip-off directed at the poor.]

1993 June 29: Sharon Boyse spells out to her PR staff in the Asian cigarette subsidiaries the projected costs of an eight day media tour of India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka.

    They will be using Professors Jean Boddeyn, Ian Hindmarch, Robert Tollison, and Digby Anderson (SAU),+ a lawyer from C&B. Total cost for consultant fees is 67,000. (roughly $18,000 each)
[The Indian Subcontinent Media Seminars were a joint-company operation with BAT, Philip Morris and Rothmans. They expected to reach about 60 journalists]

1993 Jul 1: Cal George of the Tobacco Institute is returning a TI-corrected, edited and legally cleared copy of a Tollison/Wagner article "The Office of Technology Assessment on the Costs of Smoking: Wrong Again" to Bob Tollison.

    The OTA had updated its 1985 estimates of the public/social cost burden of smoking to $68 billion (1990 estimate) using the standard SAMMEC (Smoking Attributable Mortality, Morbidity Economic Costs) model. By contrast, smokers were contributing only $13 billion in special excise and sales taxes (State and Federal combined).

    Wagner and Tollison had been contracted to challenge these figures because the estimate contradict the industry claims that smokers more than pay any additional health-care and other tobacco-related costs via excise taxes. Tollison and Wagner (with Tobacco Institute help) conclude that...

"Properly analyzed, the "social costs" of smoking are zero."
and complain that the elements used in their calculations...
... involve a great deal of assertion, conjecture, and
    even mythology.

    In any full system of accounting, it could only be concluded that smokers are supporting nonsmokers. All of the costs of smoking are borne by smokers themselves and beyond this smokers would seem to contribute to the general treasury through cigarette excise taxes.
At least two Tobacco Institute staffers have added material or made corrections — but the paper doesn't acknowledge any outside contributions via copy or funding.
[This is corporate creative accounting at its best.]

1993 July 6: Susan Stuntz circulates more economist letters/op-eds for the file.

  • Tollison has a letter that appeared in the New York Times in support of the Wagner/Greir view on cigarette tax excises against that of Professor Grossman (who both he and Wagner had challenged before)
  • Dwight Lee had "Smokers already playing their fair share for health care" in the Altanta Journal.
  • Cecil Bohanon and James McClure had planted "The prohibitive taxation of cigarettes" on the Indianpolis Star.
  • Also included was a clipping of an old Ekelund/Thornton essay which had run on May 19 in the Altanta Journal and Constitution

1993 July 6: [Later WHO expose] April note to PM re the break with Dietrich over Spanish translation of McGill doc. Tollison to Sharon Boyse "I have enclosed the final copy of our WHO paper. Digby Anderson has signed off on it, and expects to publish it in September. (also invoice) She replies - wants him to modify bit on infant deaths —

    May 1993 Sharon Boyse got the first look at the paper, before Digby Anderson - co-written with Richard E Wagner... accuses WHO of not being an "effective promoter of health".. and suggests it could be "judged guilty of malfeasance. "Is there anything about health that should take it out of the realm of market provision?" A brief mention of smoking, along with other dangerous practices like eating fatty foods, Then a couple of pages of discussion about infections diseases and market failure - the public goods arguments for provision of public health. http://tobaccodocuments.org/psc_who/WHO065.html

1993 July 9: Sharon Boyse of BAT writes that they have had a major falling out with Paul Dietrich and that Robert Tollison has replaced him for media junkets and their anti-WHO activities.

On the subject of Mr. Dietrich: unfortunately, we have had a major falling out with him and as a consequence have determined to have nothing further to do with him. In brief: he proved to be less than honest in relation to a project he was undertaking for us with one of his publishing companies, publishing a Spanish version of the McGill ETS book.

    When questioned his reaction was quite puerile and verging on the insulting to ourselves and to Covington & Burling. Added to which, we were not getting value for money from the consultancy fee we were paying him.

    Unfortunately, that means that we have lost him from our media seminars, and that is actually quite a loss because it was the one area he was very effective (although I have to say that after the Bali meeting, as we progressed to Taiwan, he became more of a liability than an advantage! - Lecturing the Taiwanese, who think of themselves as the real China and the People's Republic as a bunch of interlopers, on why they should not have insisted on being called the Republic of China, is in a society like that one far from tactful!)

    We have replaced Paul in media seminars with Bob Tollison, However, he does not have Paul's connections with the WHO/PAHO or his journalistic experience.

    Tollison has also been funded by us to write a book with the Social Affairs Unit here on the WHO budget and health priorities which should appear shortly.

1993 Jul 22: The final corrected version of the Tollison/Wagner OTA "Wrong Again" paper has been returned with corrections and cleared for publication.

    For some reason the Tobacco Institute now admit their involvement. The document says:

This manuscript was produced under a grant from The Tobacco Institute. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of The Institute or its member companies.

[They lied about this being 'produced under a grant'... but even this admission of TI involvement makes this an oddity.]

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:
    Robert Tollison, Center for the Study of Public Choice, George Mason University, Fairfax
    • Mar 23 — [TI designated newspaper/s] No information given
    • Apr 9 — [No information]
    • May 12 — ]No details]
    • May 18 — [No details]
    • June 2 — [No information]
    • June 14— Submitted to Wall Street Journal. Also, editorial to New York Times 7/2/93
    • Aug 3

1993 Aug 5: Cal George to Susan Stuntz:

The American Legion and National V.F.W. conventions scheduled for later this month offer excellent opportunities for anti-excise tax activities in conjunction with the Veterans Rights Coalition's participation in these events.

    As you know, preliminary findings from the veterans excise tax study being conducted by George Mason University economists, Bob Tollison and Dick Wagner, will be available at the end of this week.

    An executive summary, utilizing these findings, will be prepared for distribution at the conventions.
They also plan to move an anti-consumer tax resolution, recruit Consumer Tax Alliance (CTA) members, provide a booth with stamps and postcards (eg "A Message from a Vet at the American Legion Convention") for recruits to send to their Congressmen.

1993 Sep 28: Sharon Boyse writes to BAT executives saying that they have sponsored Robert Tollison [and Richard Wagner] to publish the Anti-WHO book through the auspices of the Social Affairs Unit in London.

"Essentially, the argument is that the WHO has its priorities wrong in placing so much emphasis and spending so much money on western-type health prevention issues (smoking, seat belts, alcohol, etc) instead of concentrating its resources on major killers in the developing world.

    The launch of the book has received considerable publicity in the UK, particularly in the Sunday Telegraph, Relevant articles are attached.

    The book is currently in the final stages of publication and we have put in a substantial order from the printer.
She wanted the national subsidiaries of BAT to buy copies (list included).

    The attached Sunday Telegraph article (Sep 24 1993) "WHO's Kidding WHO?" was written by tobacco lobbyist, newspaper columnist, and book-Foreword-writer James Le Fanu and a reporter, Nicholas Farrell. It claims that the WHO headquarters in Geneva was "a bureaucratic quagmire run by 1,400 staff on an average tax-free salary of 70,452." [They were easy targets — there's no doubts that some were overpaid.]

    It also attacked Dr Nakajima, the anti-smoking Japanese head of the organisation, and began the process of trying to get him removed from office. Le Fanu had already picked his replacement — the Algerian pro-smoking candidate (deputy director) who Dietrich and the USA State Department (under John Bolton and Laura Jordan Dietrich) also actively promoted. The Sunday Telegraph devoted a major article to the suggestion that Nakajima and his other Japanese associates at WHO had links to the Japanese underworld.

    Le Fanu quotes Tollison as "dryly oberving that the WHO is not using its resources effectively...." Tollison wanted the WHO to stop spending money on 'western' problems like tobacco smoke.

1993 Oct: The international INFOTAB newsletter "InfoTopics" has a front-page story

World Health Organization under scrutiny

WHO BENEFITS from WHO? The Decline of the World Health Organization criticizes the top-heavy bureaucracy at the World Health Organization, the WHO's spending patterns, and its move away from its original mission of helping provide developing countries with the public health assistance crucial to their long-term development.

    The authors, Robert Tollison and Richard Wagner, suggest that WHO should concentrate on helping third-world nations where the great public-health need exists, instead of spending valuable resources on administration costs and on funding "western" campaigns such as those on drug and alcohol abuse, road safety and smoking.

1993 Nov: Dwight Lee gave testimony before the US House Ways & Means Committee on behalf of the Tobacco Instititue. He relied heavily on the Tollison/Wagner books and other cash-for-comments publications.

1993 Nov 24: BAT has made a donation to Social Affairs Unit and Digby Anderson to support his publication of Tollison's anti-WHO booklet. ["Who Benefits from WHO"] (Dietrich was supposed to write this but "his services were dispensed with") Tollison and Anderson got together at a "joint BAT-PMI journalist's briefing in Venezuela".

1993 Dec: /E The Tobacco Institute's paper "1994 Projected Expert Witness Needs".

This year is expected to present unusually heavy federal, state and media activity, and the total cost of presenting appropriate witnesses Is likely to be considerably higher than in 1993. It is anticipated that the current TI budget for 1994, with only $220,000 allocated to witnesses and submissions, will not be sufficient to meet the major needs for expert assistance.
They are excluding those staff who provide witness services, and their lawyers who are paid via retainers.
The consultants described here are those for whom the Institute incurs significant expense for appearances, usually a per diem charge ranging from a low of $1,500 up to $30,000, plus travel expenses as appropriate. The "Anticipated 1994 Costs" are the total costs projected, including travel expenses.

    In addition, the Tobacco Industry Labor Management Committee will coordlnate assistance on tobacco tax and smoking Issues; the Committee bears any related expenses, and such requirements are not included here

Total Funding Required
The lowest amount that The Institute can hope to expend on federal, state and media witnesses In 1994 is $357,504. The high estimate for providing witnesses and support programs is $1,501,500. It is very likely that actual usage will be In the range of $750,000 to $1,000,003.
The witness requirements are divided into four main "Issue Area" categories: Taxes; Smoking/ETS ('aka Public Smoking'); Youth/ADAMHA/FDA, and "Fire-Safe" Cigarette.
[ADAMHA = Alcohol, Drug Abuse & Mental Health Administration — a regulatory arm of Health and Human Services.]
Federal Legislative Requirements
Congress is expected to hold one-to-two hearings on the tobacco tax increases for health care reform; One witness would be required for each hearing.
Economic Witnesses: Robert Tollison, Richard Wagner, Dwight Lee
Anticipated 1994 Cost:
Per hearing $12,000 — Total $12,000 - $24,000

State Legislative Requirements:
Interest in general tax Increases will be tempered by elections in many states in 1994.However, tobacco excise taxes are expected to be high on legislators' lists of "user fees" for increases
Economic Witnesses: Same as above
Total number of appearances projected: 8 hearings and briefings
Anticipated 1994 Cost: Per hearing $10,000 to $15,000 — Total $80,000 to $120,000

Media Support and Other Events (Taxes): The Media Division is often asked to provide an expert on economic and social cost issues for in-depth responses to media inquiries. Furthermore, it is anticipated that TI will present at least one press conference or similar event on the tax issue this year.
Witnesses: Same as above
Anticipated 1994 Cost: Per use $2,500 to $10,000 — Total $10,000

[So it was anticipated that in 1994 Tollison, Wagner and Lee would make between them $ 102,000 and $ 194,000 just from providing witness services alone. They were also running networks, writing and publishing books, doing pseudo-research, and producing letters-to-the-editor and op-eds on a wholesale scale.

    The media annual income for someone with a Doctorate in 1994 was $61,921. For a high-school graduate it was $28,037, and for someone with less than a 9th grade education, it was $17,532]

1994: To be available in Australia for Senate Inquiry. [700361114]

1994 - 96: Tollison finally became President of the Public Choice Society.
He was now at the peak of his career.

1994 Jan: The BAT Bulletin (the company's internal newspaper) ran a major article "Who Benefits from WHO?" which praised the Tollison/Wagner report published by the UK Social Affairs Unit. It is fulsome in its praise for Tollison and Wagner, but forgets to mention that the company paid them for their anti-WHO activities.

    The main article carries sidebars with titles like "Time to redefine WHO", and "Block on protective research" — on the neglected study of Parkinsons and Altzheimers — which quote from an article in New Scientist (probably planted by tobacco) which says that

epidemiological studies have suggested that cigarettes can protect against these currently incurable disease, [and] that researcher, funding bodies and pharmaceutical companies have failed to follow up these leads because of the stigma attached to smoking.

1994 Jan 14: Sharon Boyce, the 'Issues Manager' [Disinformation executive] at British American Tobacco (BAT) advises her Australian PR team leader on contracting economists for seminars for journalists and editors.

I have asked our consultants for suggestions for additional experts who could be of assistance in preparing submissions but I have to say that so far, only Tollison has been suggested.

    If you would like us to provide any contact with Tollison or Wagner, then please let me know as they are consultants to us and I have previously invited both to participate in our media seminar programme. If either were to be invited to Australia for the purposes of discussing these issues, then I would strongly recommend Tollison and not Wagner.

    Wagner clearly knows his stuff and is able to write it down clearly enough, but he appears to be incapable of expressing himself lucidly in conversation and is the most awful presenter I have ever come across! Similarly, if you would like comments from either of them on AC1L's review, then please let me know.

[See ACIL cost-benefits draft report ]

1994 Feb: The Arise Arena newsletter produced by a fake scientific organisation dedicted to promoting the idea that tobacco is not addictive ( Associates for Research into the Science of Enjoyment) has a long article on the Tollison/Wagner WHO report.

The Tollison-Wagner influence
In 1994 the influence of Tollison-Wagner book The Economics of Smoking (and their earlier Smoking and the State) was very substantial because of the global nature of the tobacco industry; the immense public relations campaigns the inustry could mount against threats; the number of scientists and economists they had as secret/open consultants who could be paid to support their statements; and the complicity of some major parts of the media in supporting tobacco advertising and big-corporation influence.

    There was also an ideological element — this was a period of intense polarisation over the Vietnam War and both health and environmental activism.

    The Tollison-Wagner economic claims were used in the USA to fight all sorts of smoking bans; as a primary source by Jane Gravell at the Congressional Research Service to oppose tax-funding of health care; to counter OTA calculations of social cost; at the Waxman hearings; to attempts to shut down the Duty-Free airport scams; to counter attempts at limiting smoking on international flights; by ACIL Economics to counter legitimate calculations of 'social costs' in Australia ; in the UK and Europe; etc. etc.

    They have become the authorities on this subject by virtue of the extraordinary tobacco industry promotion — and their propaganda is now amplified by a circular feed -back into other tobacco industry pseudo-research and propaganda projects.

1994 Projected Expert Witness Needs.

1994 Mar: Two copies of a Tobacco Institute document list scientific witness-payment and estimates for their core group of 'consultants' (one document has additional handnotes).
The Tobacco Institute is responsible for ensuring presentation of credible expert testimony on tobacco proposals in federal, state and media and other arenas. This testimony often comes from independent contractors or consultants who must be fairly compensated for their time and expenses.

    This year is expected to present unusually heavy federal, state and media activity, and the total cost of presenting appropriate witnesses is likely to be considerably higher than in 1993. It is anticipated that the current TI budget for 1994, with only $220,000 allocated to witnesses and submissions, will not be sufficient to meet the major needs for expert assistance.

The consultants described here are those for whom the Institute incurs significant expense for appearances, usually a per diem charge ranging from $1,500 to $3,000, plus travel expenses as appropriate. The "Anticipated 1994 Costs" are the total costs projected, including travel expenses.

    Tobacco Institute staff often provide testimony at hearings and such appearances incur costs for legal preparation and travel to state capitols. This type of witness need is not included in the following tally.

    Covington & Burling provides a range of assistance in preparation of witnesses, review of testimony and written submissions. Costs for C&B assistance is noted here only when an attorney is the actual witness.

The lowest amount that The Institute can hope to expend on federal, state and media witnesses in 1994 is $357,500. The high estimate for providing witnesses and support programs is $1,501,500. It is very likely that actual usage will be in the range of $750,000 to $1,000,000.
  • Economist - Tax Issues.
    The State and Federal Legislative requirements for economic witnesses were estimated at $12,000 per hearing, with Robert Tollison (who charged $5,000), Richard Wagner and Dwight Lee (who presumably charged $3,500 each).
    • Federal/State Legislative Requirements: Total hearing costs for economists in 1994 between $92,000 and $144,000.
      [Which makes their earnings for witness appearances alone between $40,000 to $70,000 per year each]
    • Media support and Other Events: The same three economists charged between $2,500 and $10,000 per time to front at press conferences, and discuss 'economic and social cost issues for in-depth responses to media inquiries."
            The TI had an annual budget allocation of $10 to $50,000 for these services.
  • Smoking and ETS Issues
    • ETS Science witnesses Gio Gori, Maurice LeVois, Larry Holcomb
      [Note says:] "Used legislative — 3 hearings. 4 witnesses cost $22,0000 total."
    • Ventilation witnesses Gray Robertson, Simon Turner (both Healthy Buildings International (HBI))
      [Note says:] "$120,000 to HBI pays all but expenses."
    • Employer Liability Law Victor Schwartz, John Fox.
      [Note says:] "Projected, 1 more hearing — 2 witnesses — cost $5-10,000."

        Attached page says: "DC Area Indoor Air Quality Symposium, March 1994: also appearing (but paid by companies): Fox, Schwartz, LeVois.
  • Federal Regulatory Requirements:
      Scientific witnesses to appear at OSHA public hearings:
      Alan Gross
      Maxwell Layard
      Maurice LeVois
      Paul Switzer
      Peter Lee
      Gary Flamm
      Gio Gori
      Mark Reasor
      Mike Guerin
      Joseph Wu
      Ronald Hood
      Ray Witorsch
      Phil Witorsch
      Gray Robertson
      Elia Sterling
      $3-500 per submission;       $5-10,000 per hearing
      Total $48,000 (no hearings) [Presumably this was a retainer fee]
      Total $230,000 (with hearings)
      [Note says:] "Covington & Burling projections — Witnesses $420,000 + Legal $550,000 = Total $970,000"
  • State Legislative Requirements: were estimated at $30,000 to $90,00 for HBI, Holcomb, Fox and C&B.
  • State Regulatory Requirements for the same group, plus Maurice LeVois involved 15 to 25 appearances at a cost between $2,500 and $7,500 er appearance... Anticipated Total $27,500 to $187,500
  • Media Support at State Hearings between $2,500 and $5,000 per time, up to $25,000 overall
  • Scientific Analysis and Review Program:
    Through Covington & Burling, The Institute has provided its consultants with up to date information on ETS and IAQ science. This information has prompted additional research, comment and publications by these scientists, and provides them with the tools to prepare credible, timely testimony when required. The funding for the 1994 operations of the ETS literature database was encumbered by The Institute in 1993, so costs for 1994 will relate to the review and response to such literature and any new research to be prepared for use in the above federal and state arenas.

    Anticipated 1994 Cost: Per project $7,500 to $15,000
    Total $75,000 to $150,000
  • Youth Issues, ADAMHA, and FDA Regulations:
    These required the support of Floyd Abrams, Burt Neuborne, Martha Rogers, Roger Blackwell, Scott Ward and Jolly Anne Davidson at an anticipated total cost of $45,000 to $300,000
    [Note says] "Per hearing - $25-75,000 - High figure includes Abrams"
    • Jolly Anne Davidson and C&B support was wanted tor 13 State Legislative hearings at between $2,500 and $5,000 each (total up to $65,000)
    • Media Support for Surgeon General's report could add $50,000
  • Fire-Safe Cigarette requirements
    Required the services of C&B, and consultants Phil Schaenman, Fred Clark and Steve Spivak.
    • Federal hearings at a per-hearing cost of $10-25,000 — Total up to $50,000
    • State hearings at per-hearing cost of $15-20,000 — Total up to $60,000

Incomplete Document with notes:

1994 Mar: The Tobacco Institute of Australia (TIA) has paid economics firm ACIL Economics (Aust) to produce a cost-benefits of smoking study in their country. This was theoretically an attempt to provide an 'independent analysis' of the economics of the cigarette business and its health implications in opposition to the (Collins/Lapsley) C&L Study made for the Department of Health which estimated that smoking cost the community $6.8 billion each year.

    ACIL determined that tobacco contributed $3.5 billion to GDP, and with excise taxes etc, the net benefits each year to the Australian economywas $12.5 billion — much more than the meat industry, and equal to that of the iron and steel industries.

    On the question of 'causes of death' (including 'death benefits') they say:

The difficulties in confidently attributing the cause of death in this analysis are widely recognised and understood, particularly in the context of tobacco.

    It is surprising, for example, that the caution sounded earlier by prominent researchers in the tobacco area, such as Tollison and Wagner in the United States, in their analysis of the economics of smoking, was not heeded. That work addressed specific challenges for research in attempting to attribute deaths to a single factor. They pointed to errors in medical reporting of the causes of death, joint causes (for example, exercise, alcohol, occupation), and the fact that nonsmokers can be afflicted by the same illness as smokers.

    Books and articles by Tollion and Wagner are referenced repeatedly in the submission.

1994 Mar: The Tollison and Wagner calculations in "The Economics of Smoking" book were also assumed to be correct in the study conducted by Jane Gravelle and Dennis Zimmerman for the Congressional Research Service — which, itself, become widely quoted by the tobacco industry as an 'independent analysis'.

1994 March 16: Donna Staunton (TIA) to Henry Goldberg of PMA. She says

In December 1993, the Tobacco Institute commissioned ACIL to prepare a major report which analysed both the costs and benefits of smoking for Australians and Australia. The report was commissioned to counter a major study on social costs published by Collins & Lapsley in 1988. The Collins & Lapsley study is cited frequently in government circles and by anti-smokers to justify, inter alia, the imposition of higher taxes on tobacco products. The ACIL report was also aimed at informing the Industry Commission inquiry.

    The ACIL report was completed in February 1993. The report has been distributed to a number of influential players in the policy debate. In addition, the Tobacco Institute has arranged for 1,000 copies of the report to be bound and printed for wider distribution.

    The Tobacco Institute proposes to send a copy of the ACIL report to a number of Federal and State politicians, to a large number of economists throughout Australia, to various health departments throughout Australia, to various university and other libraries, and to other allied industries. The Tobacco Institute has also summarised the ACIL report into a booklet which will have a more general distribution.

    Following their publication, the ACIL report and the Tobacco Institute's submission were distributed to a number of journalists. To date three newspaper articles have been published and a number of radio interviews have been held.

    The Tobacco Institute has also arranged for a number of external reviews of the ACIL report. Those external reviews will be utilised at the appropriate time - most likely at the time of the public hearings. Reviews have been conducted by Robert Tollison (USA), Professor Ross Parrish (Australia) and Dr Robert Albon (Australia). All three of the external reviewers will be available during the public hearings for media comment.

1994 Apr 20: Tollison is now charging the Tobacco Institute $5,000 for each hearing he attends. Dwight Lee only charges $4,500.

1994 Apr 28: Robert Tollison appeared before the US Senate's Committee on Finance giving evidence for the Tobacco Institute against cigarette taxes. He insists that, despite his TI connections: "the views I am expressing are my own."

  • "...as a means of reducing smoking. Use of the tax code to induce conformity with socially approved norms of personal behavior is totalitarian in its implications."
  • it would be unfair to make smokers pay through increased excise taxes for any health care 'costs' that they may impose by virtue of their chosen lifestyle. They are already more than paying their way.
  • reducing consumption would result in increased unemployment nationwide, and reduce state revenues, which would trigger additional federal spending which would offset any "new" revenues.
He quotes extensively from:
  • The Congressional Research Service (CRS) study (which had quoted extensively from him, in a circulatory self-referencing manner)
  • Professor Dwight Lee, (network economist) on absenteeism
  • Office of Technology Assessments (selectively)
  • His own book with Richard Wagner (smokers are mainly blue-collar workers, therefore subject to other toxic influences)
  • Professor Richard Ault (another network economist) on absenteeism.
  • Price Waterhouse (paid contractor to the Tobacco Institute)

1994 May: economic expert on tobacco related matters. WRO prepped him for questions from committee members [2040410909]

1994 May 4: Tollison has given evidence to the Senate Finance Committee.
    [The Tobacco Institute gets a copy of the correspondence]

1994 May 11: Tollison gave evidence before the US Senate's Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Regulation. Although he appeared

... at the request of The Tobacco Institute, the views I am expressing are my own.

    The focus of my comments is the Environmental Protection Agency's cost-benefit analysis of legislation that would ban or severely restrict smoking in virtually all nonresidential buildings in this country.
The EPA is not to be trusted because:
Before completing its cost-benefit analysis, EPA had gone on record as an enthusiastic supporter of national smoking restriction legislation. In fact, EPA released a "Fact Sheet" calling for smoking bans and/or severe restrictions as early as 1989 — four years before completing ite controversial 1993 risk assessment on environmental tobacco smoke ("ETS").'
Apparently 'doing its job' is, to Tollison, evidence of bias, and therefore a compelling reason to ignore the conclusions of the agency.

    He revised all the various anti-agency claims and scuttlebutt to do with the EPA, especially quoting the Congressional Research Service study (which quoted him and Wagner extensively). As with Jane Gavelle of the CRS, he has now crossed the line from being an economist to that of a post-hoc peer-reviewer of the biomedical and epidemiological evidence relied on by the EPA.

Professor Richard Wagner and Richard Ault are also trotted out to support his and the Tobacco Institute's views.

1994 May 17: The Tobacco Institute has commissioned the Alexis de Tocquville Institute to hire S Fred Singer, Kent Jeffreys and a number of their cash-for-comments economists to produce a long report attacking the EPA's risk assessment procedures (not just on tobacco), trying to label them as purveyors of junk-science.

Bill Orzechwski at the Tobacco Institute is writing to Cesar Conde.[who, at this time he was co-director of the AdTI with Jack Kemp; shortly after he became Executive Director].

  1. FINAL DRAFT. Signed off by [Fred] Singer, [Kent] Jeffreys, and AdTI executives. [We would] Welcome review by your lawyers — but please keep edits to a minimum — major changes will have to be re-approved by the authors and AdTI executives.
  2. Includes language and stylistic changes you suggested regarding references to health risks from smoking.
  3. Also beefed up the cost benefit section with excerpts from Bob Tollison's testimony.
  4. The authors will try to move the completion date for overall study (including sections on chlorine, Superfund, and Radon) from June 15 to June 6 — but it is going to be very difficult. Again, I entered into an arrangement for completion dates based an the conversation you and Margaret had during lunch a few weeks ago. It is extremely difficult to keep accelerating these completion dates because Singer/Jeffreys have other committments built around this project's completion date.
  5. Academic and Science Advisory Board: Do what you can to get Tollison, etc. (also I need some more scientists, epidemiologists, etc.) I approach the following people —
    • Michael Darby, Professor of Economics UCLA
    • Michael Boskin, AEI
    • Thomas Hopkins, Professor of Economicas, Rochester Inst, of Technology
    • Kip Viscusi, Duke University
    • Richard McKenzie, University of Cal.
    • Ken Chilton, CSAB, Washington University
    Let's shoot for 10 people — but I think six good names would be sufficient.

    [The cost of this project to the Tobacco Institute was $20,000.]

1994 Aug: See the full outline of his involvement in creating the fake
Alexis de Tocqueville ETS/EPA report
written by S Fred Singer and Kent Jeffreys, secretly for the Tobacco Institute.

1994 Aug 11: The Alexis de Tocqueville Institute has produced a report by S Fred Singer of SEPP via Philip Morris's own PR-firm APCO, for the tobacco industry and other industries in a small coalition.

    This was a well-funded, and well-camoflaged attack on the activist concerns about Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS), which hid behind the potential problems raised by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over radon, pesticides and the SuperFund toxic chemicals in the environment. It says:

" Science, Economics, and Environmental Policy: A Critical Examination" is an evaluation of the data, statistical analyses, and underlying scientific theories that underlie the Envirorunental Protection Agency's (EPA) policy decisions on environmental tobacco smoke, radon, pesticides and hazardous clean-up under the Superfund law.

    With the total costs of environmental regulations estimated to be $150 billion annually — or $1,500 per U.S. household — it is extremely important that environmental decisions be based on sound scientific analyses of potential risks to public health and the environment, and that the costs of environmental regulation be weighed against the benefits. [Note the lack of conculsions that it was even more important for American industry to clean up its act and stop polluting!]

    But as Dr John Graham of the Harvard Center on Risk Analysis notes, "While it may seem obvious that EPA should use good science, students of the Agency have documented that the Agency's leadership, when preoccupied with public fears and legal pressures, has sometimes allowed good science to be neglected."
[Of course, no one mentioned that John Graham and his Harvard Center for Risk Analysis were also tobacco industry-funded lobbyists.]

    The aim of this report was to group together a number of different environmental threats (which most Republicans had been convinced were fallacious), create a giant scarecrow, then classify them jointly as examples of the EPA's strawman threats to health. This, they held, was evidence of the radical agenda of the EPA and other anti-smoking, anti-polluting zealots.

    The Advisory Panel for this operation comprised Robert Tollison, Richard Wagner, Dwight Lee, Gary Anderson, Mark Thornton, Robert Ekelund, Jeffrey Clark, and Richard Vedder from the cash-for-comments economists network, as well as a few other tobacco industry consultants and well-known lobbyists.

This report market a turning-point in the tobacco industry's fight-back operations. Philip Morris had just successfully established The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition (TASSC). Steve Milloy at TASSC had the job of labelling any anti-tobacco study results as 'junk-science' and APCO who secretly ran TASSC, had extended the reach of this new 'junk-science' operation to embrace mutual-help relationships with the major poisoning and polluting industries which were becoming embroiled in the problems of climate change.

    This was one of the tobacco industry's contributions to the 'anti-science' movement which was intended to counter both anti-smoking and climate change research.

1994 Aug 11: Tollison has been working with S Fred Singer and Gerhard Stoher (both of SEPP) on "Science, Economics and Environmental Policy" a project which has been conducted via the Alexis de Tocqueville Institute trying to create a climate of opinion against anti-pollution climate-change science.

    They are trying to generate the idea that science used by the regulator and health and environmental advocates is all "junk-science." This paper is a direct attacking on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) whose risk assessment has recently labled tobacco smoke as a Group A carcinogen.

    The report quotes Tollison's opinions on the EPA and gives his credentials:

Economist Robert Tollison, former director of the Bureau of Economics at the Federal Trade Commission, has analyzed the EPA's cost-benefit analysis and found it to be "fundamentally flawed." According to Tollison, EPA's "cost-benefit analysis involves the kind of numbers game for which government agencies have been justly criticized." In so doing, Tollison raises the specter that EPA has seemingly fitted economic analysis to the policy conclusions it desired.
Alex de Tocqueville paper

    Tollison found telling weaknesses within the EPA cost-benefit analysis. For example, EPA assumes in its cost-benefit analysis that eliminating exposure to ETS in workplaces and in public places would significantly reduce the incidence of heart disease. Incredibly, savings attributable to the EPA's hypothesized decrease in the incidence of heart disease among nonsmokers account for the overwhelming majority of all dollar benefits estimated by the EPA to be associated with national smoking restrictions, according to Tollison.

    Yet, the EPA's well-publicized risk assessment was primarily concerned with alleged lung and respiratory complications from ETS — not heart disease. In fact, the EPA never developed a risk assessment between ETS and heart disease, undoubtedly believing that the evidence for such risks were weak. Instead, it merely assumed that such causation exists even though the EPA nor any other government agency has concluded that ETS is a cause of heart disease.

    At least two-thirds of those on the Academic Advisory Board listed here are known tobacco scientists and the other third are strongly implicated as "small government-less regulation" fellow-travellers.

1994 Oct: Center for Study of Public Choice (handled by TI) - Congressional Hearing [2045690096]

1995: Advisory Board of Independent Institute

1995 Jan 3: Tobacco Institute document "Expert Witnesses Used in 1994" lists under "Consultants"

Robert Tollison, Ph.D.
  • $ 7,000 Senate Finance Cmte health care tax hearing 4/28/94
  • $ 7,500 Written submission to Senate Environment Subcmte on Clean Air hearing on EPA's risk assessment of ETS 5/11/94
  • $19,125 OSHA Comments & comments on EPA's cost/benefit analysis of Waxman
  • $ 7,000 OSHA hearing testimony Nov-Dec

[So in 1994 he made $40,625 for four witness depositions and appearances for the TI — quite apart from the cash-for-comments network operations]

1995 Mar: /E "Post Hearing Comments in Federal OSHA IAQ Proceedings.
TI Scientific Consultants:

Robert Tollison/Kip Viscusi
  • Response to OSHA economic witnesses.
  • Review and comment on small business testimony. — $ 15,000

1995 April: The Western Economic Association International journal Economic Inquiry publishes another (probably the last) tobacco-funded study done by the Auburn University cabal of lobbyists. "The Demand for Cigarette Smuggling" by Richard P Saba, T Randoph Beard, Robert B Ekelund Jr, and Rand W Riessler. Predictably, it attacks cigarette excise taxes because this encourages inter-State smuggling, and it is loaded with tables of data which could only have come from Tobacco Institute files.
[The cigarette companies were later charged under RICO statutes with having fostered this smuggling]

    The authors are thankful for the help they received from John Jackson and Bob Tollison — but not (apparently) for the Tobcco Institute which doesn't get a credit.

    Essentially the study's conclusions are that the inelacticity of demand for cigarettes [a euphemism for 'nicotine addiction'] means that the addicts will cross borders to buy them cheaper if they can.

1995 May 24: James Savarese and Robert Tollison have jointly submitted a major "Social Cost Program" to the Tobacco Institute.
The alleged "$20 billion" in social costs attributed to smoking is currently being used as the basis of federal legislation and lawsuits initiated by the states to recover Medicare and Medicaid costs from tobacco companies. The purpose of this program is to provide information to the industry's anti-regulatory allies in Congress. primarily Republicans. to show that this cost figure is outrageously wrong.

    The program will consist of five parts :
  1. A 25 page white paper prepared by Dr Robert Tollison and produced by George Mason University. This will debunk the core theoretical arguments used by the anti-smoking coalition to claim that there is a social cost to smoking.

        Specifically, the study published by Rand Corporation in JAMA will be directly attacked by arguing against the study's position that there is a large insurance externality in the social costs ot'smoking. It will be shown that the authors of the Rand study have made a serious analytical error which causes a huge overestimate of the social costs of smoking.

    [It is nice to have the conclusions agreed upon BEFORE you do the study!]

    This paper will be readable, but technically designed for publication in JAMA or other major economic journals. An initial version will be prepared as a George Mason University, Departntent of Economics, working paper for circulation to interested parties.
          COST — $27,500 and take 1 month to complete.

  2. A 25 page white paper which is a budgetary analysis of the incidence of Medicare/Medicaid usage after taxes by smokers and non-smokers. This will be designed for a general audience and will show in a simple, understandable fashion the degree to which smokers pay their own way in the public health care program.
          COST — $35,000 and take 1 month to complete.

  3. A sophisticated op-ed program based on the white papers written by Dr.Tollison. We will attempt to place this op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times and the Washington Times, in that order.
          COST included in with White Paper.

  4. A more comprehensive op-ed program which will involve a network of 20 economists attempting to place op-eds in major newspapers in targeted Congressional districts. Development of these op-eds will be supervised by Dr Tollision and will be based on the findings of the white papers. Placements will be matched with key Republicans in Congress, both out of the ranks of the leadership and the new Republican members. In some cases. key Democrats have been targeted.
          COST — $3,000 per market

  5. A round table conference of issues raised based on the theme "Defunding the Nanny State" to include leading scholars on this issue. Suggestions for the round table panel are as follows: Dr Robert Tollison; Jeff Eisenach/Progress and Freedom Foundation; Jim Miller/Citizens for Sound Economy; Dwight Lee; William Kristol
          COST — $5,000 to $7,500 per participant
                      — $5,000 Organisation and Administration
                      — $15-25,000 travel, hotel, meals etc.
                      — $15,000 editing writing and publishing proceedings

They also thoughtfully included a list of Congressmen to invite/influence, and the newspapers that would receive op-eds from the compliant cash-for-comment economics in the network.

1995 Aug 30: The Tobacco Institute is distributing a list of "Potential FDA Contacts" to all the US cigarette companies. [It has a code to distinguish those which the TI will handle and those with company links.]

Most of the groups listed below are likely to submit comments on FDA regulation of tobacco products. Many of these same entities also are quite likely to speak and act against FDA regulation through means other than comments.

    The industry has contacts with nearly all of these groups. [See pdf for full lists]
  • Agricultural Groups
    [about 25 on list]
  • First Amendment Groups [Anti-ad ban — Commerical free speech]
    A number of industry personnel have working relationships with the following and others with a stake in the preservation of the First Amendment:
  • Advertising
    There are First Amendment and economic issues which can be addressed by a number of groups including the following :
  • Organised Labor
    The institute is well positioned to coordinate comments, media and congressional/other visits by groups under the umbrella of the Labor Management Committee. The companies are best positioned to coordinate any "march on Washington." The following are among key LMC contacts:
  • Economists
    Economists can be deployed to illustrate the dramatic costs associated with various elements of the FDA proposal. Through TI's economist network, op-eds can be drafted and submitted to papers in 30+ states.
    • Bob Tollison, past chief economist at the FTC and currently working with the Speaker of the House on an FDA-related project.
    • Dwight Lee
    • de Seve
    • economist network — [See network lists]
  • Think Tanks
    Many of the following groups are prepared not only to submit comments, but also provide economic analyses of various sorts and play a role in the media and legislative programs, as well as general "atmospherics."
    • Alexis de Tocqueville Institution
    • Independent Institute
    • Business Leadership Council
    • Empower America (and their network of 800 conservative talk show hosts)
    • National Center for Policy Analysis
    • Institute for Policy Innovation
    • Capital Research
    • CATO Institute
    • Citizens for a Sound Economy [Later FreedomWorks]
    • Citizens Against Government Waste
    • Heritage Foundation
  • Other Companies/Groups that have spoken out against the FDA or face its power down the slippery slope of over-regulation.
    A number of industries have spoken out on FDA abuses ; others are now likely to ioin the chorus. The industry has contacts with many of the specific groups or types of groups listed below.

1995 Oct 1: "The Sleaze Factor:UN Blues" broadcast on Channel 4 Robert Tollison with Paul Dietrich in program attacking WHO. Tollison says he is a "professor of health policy at an American university"

1995 Oct 17: Diana Avedon who runs the media tours for the Tobacco Institute reports on the availablity of witnesses.

  • Larry Holcomb has been highly praised by both the field staff and lobbyists. He brings knowledge and credibility concerning the ETS science and has been well received both in legislative settings and one-on-one's.
  • Larry Halfen: Backing Larry [Holcomb] up when he has been unavailable, is Larry Halfen. While Larry Halfen had not been used extensively in previous years, Larry did exceedingly well out in Oregon on the state level, both in testifying before the legislature and one-on-one's with individual members. Larry also testified and provided written testimony in Columbus, OH. There are additional expert witnesses if either Larry is unavailable.
  • Gary Robertson, Simon Turner, Peter Binnie, Jeff Seckler, (all HBI). Following up the science arguments with credible solutions, HBI continues to provide expert testimony in the area of ventilation and indoor air quality. In addition to legislative testimony and one-on-ones with legislators and council members, HBI did extensive work with the Denver Airport project, working with city officials in developing an equitable solution to accommodate smokers and nonsmokers.
  • Dr [Gio] Gori has testified and met with bill sponsors with great success.
  • John Fox has been instrumental in answering liability concerns. He has also written an op-ed and a letter to the California Restaurant Association.

    Attached is a list of requests pending for Scientific witnesses. For Tollison and Wagner:
Social Costs Tours.
Economists Bob Tollison and Richard Wagner will be on a media tour to promote their "social costs" book and to discuss the issue in general.
  • April Trenton
  • May St. Louis
  • June Tucson

    By early 1996 the Tobacco Institute appears to have ceased funding Tollison and Wagner to produce new studies.
          The network of economists was now down to a core group of a half-dozen, and now working through the Independent Institute.
          There are many more documents with the names Tollison and Wagner in the tobacco archives after this date, but they generally reference papers and books produced earlier.
          Their names also turn up often in the spate of law cases taken against the tobacco companies.

1996 Jan: /E An advisory on handling "Tax Arguments." is being circulating by the Tobacco Institute. It contains many admissions about the tobacco industry's underhand dealings and their exploitation of ethnicity, class and discrimination to flog their propaganda:

  • Economic Impact Study - The American Economics Group (AEG) has recently published a large study on the economic impact of the tobacco industry entitled "The US Tobacco Industry in 1994: its economic impact in the states." Economic losses due to any federal cigarette tax increase can be quickly estimated and enumerated for all states and the nation. AEG on fast notice can generate economic loss statements for all states. We currently have on hand the loss projections for a $1.00 tax increase.
  • Regressivity: Key Studies - A variety of studies have been used to illustrate that cigarette taxes take a bigger chunk out of low income budgets compared to higher income budgets. A variety of studies by Peat Marwick for CART [Coalition Against Regressive Taxation] were done to portray the regressive impact of excise taxes.
          CTJ [Citizens for Tax Justice] also developed studies on regressvity. One study entitled "Nickels and Dimes" listed the regressive impact of major excise taxes by state and was used to a fair degree. The study is now dated and use has dwindled over the years.
          The most recent large effort was by Peat Marwick in 1993 that attempted to show the impact of higher excise taxes by listing the median household incomes by congressional districts. Median income is very low in a variety of key districts - often well below $30,000. The idea was to couple this finding with the fact that cigarette taxes would hurt the poor the most.
  • Minority Groups - We have often used arguments that since blacks, Hispanics and women make lower incomes that excise taxes are especially harmful to such families. A variety of labor union and public interest groups make this argument on our behalf. The general approach is to compute excise taxes as a percentage of income paid by such groups compared to the "rich". The minority groups often pay 7 to 12 times higher than the rich.
  • Rural America - We have used a study by Eckelund and Long [sic Robert Ekelund & James Long of Auburn Uni] to show that excise taxes hurt rural America more since average income of rural people is less than urban workers. Farm groups have carried this message for us.
  • Blue Collar Discrimination - We have used the argument that raising cigarette taxes to fund deficits is often a way for the rich to dodge the deficit reduction bullet by passing the tax on the blue collar worker who spends more on these items as a percent of income.
  • Earmarking - [Much more here] In 1991, we financed the publication of an academic readings book on the earmarking issue entitled "Charging, For Government: Earmarked taxes in Principle and Practice" edited by Richard Wagner.
  • Tax Resources - Outside Groups
    • The Economist Program - We have a core group of approximately 7 to 12 economists who will write op-eds and testify for us at all levels of government.
    • Tax Foundation - This group is working on the cross border and smuggling issue. they will soon release a major study on cigarette tax evasion and smuggling. We hope to utilize them with op-eds, news releases and cross border studies.
    • AEG - This group will continue to work on our economic impact studies and will develop cross border studies at the state level.
    • [Alexis] De Tocqueville Institute - This group is on retainer to do work on tax issues. They were helpful in defeating federal tax increases releasing studies on Canada's cigarette smuggling problems. They were also quite helpful on the ETS issue releasing a major study in 1994.
[Note that the core group of cash-for-comments economists was shrinking fast. It had been almost one in each state, but was now down to a dozen or so.

The tobacco industry virtually ran and controlled the CART and CTJ (both coalitions).
The Tax Foundation was a subsidiary of Citizens for a Sound Economy.]

Excise Tax Forum
1996 Aug 14: Philip Morris and RJ Reynolds were trying to put together a coalition of tobacco and alcohol companies and organizations to run a three-day "Comprehensive Inter-industry Forum on Excise Taxes", to be held early January 1997 in Palm Beach, the Bahamas, or Nassau.

    It would bring together "15 Leading Academics, 10 Industry Representatives, 5 Decision Makers, and 5 Representatives from the Public Policy Community [eg. think-tank operatives]."

    It would be funded by the tobacco companies through the Coalition Against Regressive Taxation (CART) [a tobacco front], but officially run by the Tax Foundation [A subsidiary of Citizens for a Sound Economy which is now known as FreedomWorks.]
The Excise Tax Forum will produce two immediate deliverables:
  • A special journal supplement, and related articles summarizing the proceedings of the meeting. It is anticipated that this will be published in a scholarly economic journal:
  • Press materials and video summarizing the meeting, and its findings.

    In addition, participants in each of the four workshops will determine at least one area for additional research. The result of each of these research projects will be an academic journal article and related press material.

Estimated Cost.
Provisions wIll be made to provide small honoraria to forum participants [those who attend, not just those who speak] and all expenses will be paid by the sponsors. These expenses include airfare, ground transportation, 2 hotel nights, and all food and sponsored entertainment.

    As crrently envisioned, the cost for the Excise Tax Forum will be approximately $195,000.[Plus the cost of future research committed.]

    It is recommended that a small New York based boutique shop, Current Medical Directions (CMD), be hired to undertake this event.

1998 Apr 30:: "There's no economic excuse for a higher cigarette tax." which is an Institute for Research on Economic of Taxation (IRET) publication.

There are enormous problems with this theory of social costs and the attempt to correct perceived market failure through taxation. Dr Roy Cordato has written an IRET study' rebutting every major category of argument employed by the social engineering school of taxation.
As an indication of Tollison's value to the tobacco industry, his publications are referenced three times here.

1998 Aug 11: Consultant submissions Regarding ETS to Regulatory Agencies on behalf of Philip Morris. This is a series of lists of those who were willing to give pro-tobacco industry testimony for the company at Congressional hearings, EPA SAB meetings, etc. 19 pages of names.

    1999: The Savarese-Tollison 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 network activities disappears from the tobacco archives.

    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 because it no longer existed. It was dismembered as part of the Settlement Agreement.

    This professor appears to have remained a member to the end.

    Savarese died in February 2009.

1999 July 27: An article in defence of WHO (distributed by BAT operatives) attacks both Paul Dietrich and Robert Tollison. Tollison was later hired as the prinicple speaker to journalists on the WHO after Sharon Boyse, the Issues Manager at BAT had a fall-out with Paul Dietrich over payments for past services.

Material from BATCo documents indicates that four years later they were studying WHO's program budget in detail and commissioning academics to write articles seemingly in their private capacity that questioned WHO spending priorities.

    For example, Paul Dietrich, President and sole member of the Institute for International Health and Development, who was influential in downplaying tobacco in a New York Academy of Sciences publication 18 months ago, and Bob Tollison, from the Centre for Study of Public Choice, were paid by BATCo to prepare articles that later appeared in the International Herald Tribune.

    The core of their argument was that WHO "spending should be concentrated on fighting diseases in third world nations, leaving rich, first world nations to finance their own programs. Hence, WHO funds would go for fighting malaria and cholera, but not go for the campaigns for seat belts or against cigarettes and alcohol (Tollison and Wagner, 1993)."

    This theme continues with Dietrich's most recent article in the International Herald Tribune urging a stronger attack on infectious disease (Dietrich, p. 14 , 1999). In reality, if these ideas continue to be repeated in major global media there is the threat that they will become accepted as fact.

1999 Oct 19: Thirty Seven right-wing academics have signed an "Open Letter to the Attorney General" in support of senior tobacco industry executives and helpers who were under threat of being charged with Racketeering under the RICO Act. This was two years after the signing of the Master Settlement Agreement (MSA)

    It appears to be a final-draft version (organised through George Mason University) from the Philip Morris files. It says [truncated]

  • The lawsuit instituted by the Department of Justice against the tobacco industry to recover Medicare expenses from smoking related illnesses is without legal or economic merit. This politically motivated, thinly disguised tax ignores the rule of law and establishes dangerous precedents and threats to free enterprise.
  • The tobacco industry should not be denied its constitutional right to require individual evidence of causation and damages.
  • The Administrations' effort to circumvent the will of Congress is transparent. Congress has already rebuffed federal government efforts to tax tobacco out of existence when it rejected the McCain tobacco tax bill in 1998. Other administration efforts such as the Food and Drug Administrations effort to expand its jurisdiction to include cigarettes and tobacco have been rejected by federal courts of appeals.
  • This action poses an unprecedented threat to commerce and constitutionally guaranteed freedoms. The federal assault on cigarettes threatens to establish a dangerous precedent for other industries.
  • The Department of Justice Tobacco Medicare litigation violates elementary considerations of fairness and undermines confidence in the constitutional system. We oppose this threat of vast expropriation of private property and this attempt at taxation through litigation.
It has been signed by many of the network economists (and other 'consultants' and academic lobbyists) from all the well-known laissez-faire universities. (At least half of the signatories worked for tobacco at some time.)

    However, Robert Tollison has not signed. despite the obvious presence of many GMU professors.

2000 Aug 5: WHO faces up to its tobacco links. The British Medical Journal Editorial provides commentary from a prominent medical journalist who had been fooled by Tollison's claims about WHO, which were made without revealing that he was funded by the tobacco industry. He believes that this subterfuge provides compelling evidence for transparency about competing interests.

Five years ago I wrote a critique of the World Health Organization in the BMJ. One of my sources was a report by an American economist, Richard Tollison [sic], which tore apart the WHO's budgetary priorities.

    Tollison's main claim was that too little of the WHO's money was spent on improving health in the developing world.

    One statement quoted in the BMJ ran,
    "The poorest nations in WHO are interested in basic public health, and not in the more exotic forays of WHO into the public health issues of the modern industrialised West."
What I and the BMJ and its readers didn't know, because the report didn't say, was that Tollison was in the pay of British American Tobacco.

    Nor did we know that such covert funding of "independent" commentators was just one part of an elaborate campaign by the tobacco industry to discredit the WHO and divert money and attention away from tobacco control activities.

    The WHO has been concerned for some time about the poor success of its anti-tobacco initiatives. The forced disclosure last year of 35 million pages of confidential tobacco industry documents alerted the WHO to the possibility of direct interference and led its director general, Dr Gro Harlem Brundtland, to set up an independent inquiry.

    The four external experts published their report this week. In it they conclude:
    "To many in the international community, tobacco use prevention may be seen as a struggle against chemical addiction, cancers, cardiovascular diseases and other health consequences of smoking. This inquiry adds to the mounting evidence that it is also a struggle against an active, organised and calculating industry."

2002: Tollison has retired to the School of Business, Uni of Mississippi. He holds the Robert M. Hearin Chair of Business Adminstration and Professor of Economics, College of Liberal Arts, University of Mississippi.

2004: / E Arizona State University ?

2010: Professor of Economics, Clemson University



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