Introduction to Think Tanks

• Think tanks = most powerful organizations most people never heard of
• Key role influencing local, state, national, global policy
• Hire smartest people, pay huge salaries to argue viewpoints to powerful people
• Some big American think tanks have more legislative power than elected officials
• So integrated into political process that Washington would halt without them
• Perceived as shadowy organizations vs. democratic cogs

Function and Purpose

• Politicians create laws in diverse fields impossible to fully understand
• Example: nitrates in aerial dispersed fertilizers + USDA agricultural risk coverage subsidies
• Most politicians not experts in fields they legislate
• Think tanks employ experts (farmers, chemists, scientists) to advise lawmakers
• Produce studies, surveys, data collection - expensive process
• Handle funding constraints normal researchers face
• Provide friendly service for lawmakers to call with questions/talking points

Growth and Scale

• Over 800 think tanks operating in America (MIT data)
• Number increased 58% in past 25 years (KAS data)
• Think tank exists for virtually anything laws can be made for
• Politicians phone call away from expert help on any issue

Funding Structure

• Some operate as semi-independent government agencies (US Bureau of Labor Statistics)
• Most have no official government connection
• Primary funding from companies in industries they represent
• Donations treated as 501c nonprofit (like Red Cross)
  • Any amount with complete anonymity
  • Anyone can donate
• Foreign governments donated minimum $175 million to top 50 Washington think tanks (2014-2018)
  • Real number could be up to $500 million
  • Donation records intentionally difficult to access

Influence Tactics

• Political lobbying highly competitive
• Big campaign donations insufficient for favorable laws
• Need politicians with right talking points
• Think tanks can:
  • Refuse to publish unfavorable reports
  • Adjust reporting methods until getting desired results
  • No peer review oversight
• Example: E-scooter companies funding Adam Smith Institute reports on safety/environmental benefits

Historical Manipulation

• Research used to argue against:
  • Smoking-cancer link
  • Sugar-obesity connection
  • CO2-climate change relationship
  • Military spending concerns
• Tobacco executive correspondence: "Doubt is our product... best means of competing with body of fact"
• Biased reporting effective at slowing political change that cuts profits

Current Battle: Ozempic vs. Food Industry

• Pharmaceutical companies promoting Ozempic for obesity
  • Public health think tanks advocating insurance coverage
  • Reports on weight loss benefits for individuals/healthcare system
• Fast food/soda/snack companies see threat to biggest customers
  • Think tanks publishing articles on unknown health risks
  • Lifelong medication uncertainty claims

Extreme Influence

• 2018 Journal of Public Choice report: think tanks with extreme leanings more likely cited in Congressional floor speeches

RAND Corporation Case Study

• One of largest, best-funded think tanks globally
• Received nearly $360 million in 2022
• Donors: US military, Department of Homeland Security, other governments
• Subsidiaries include Hudson Institute
• Directly involved in: Space Race, Vietnam War, National Healthcare, nuclear strategy
• Created "mutually assured destruction" Cold War policy
  • Necessitated huge military buildup
  • Government lobbying itself through think tanks

Employment Structure

• Technically nonprofits but pay huge salaries
• Many employees previously worked in public sector
• Cushy retirement plan for politicians
• Personal incentive for politicians to work closely with them

Legislative Drafting

• Key function: draft legislation politicians can pass into law
• Most politicians lack time/expertise/resources to write effective bills
• Rely on well-funded organizations for homework

Media Dependence

• Media relies on think tanks as much as politicians
• Think tank reports featured heavily in press
• In-house investigations impossible for most journalists
• Nobody fact-checking the fact-checkers