And that we regret that there was not a disclosure. I happened to call them on it that one day. Your viewers never knew this but on their website it is mentioned. I asked about it one day and it was suddenly outed, but how frequently does that happen . Does the public know . Host if you go to cspan. Org, you can find event eric is talking about, the passenger preclearance was the topic. What has been the reaction from think tanks . You feature several of them in your story, but what is the reaction, and have they changed policy . Guest even as we were working on the story, and it took us quite a long time, the think tanks were changing their policies. We did a survey late last year of like 25 think tanks and ask them about their policies regarding projectbased and outside scholars and potential conflicts of interest. We asked them a series of questions that were pointed. It is clear we were headed with the story. Even as we were asking those questions, the think tanks were starting to change their policies. Theicularly regarding outside work that scholars can have as consultants or lobbyists, which seems crazy, at a same time as they have a think tank title, you will see a fair amount of change on that. It seems inappropriate for a scholar to be simultaneously using his or her position at a think tank tumoto pontificate as a consultant to a Telecommunications Company or a lobbyist. I think youll see more policies in think tanks to prohibit that. Host you feature bookings institutions in your story. Tell us what you found out about andbookings institution, that i wanted to react to what they have to say about your reporting. Guest first, one thing i want to say, think tank they employ really smart people who have a great level of expertise. On death, congress and the administration relies on them for their knowledge. Dear their ability to put things into perspective. The reason that this is important and to some extent the public think they are wonks. Think tanks are part of the dce economy, the intellectual environment. I admit it i admire brookings in the work it does. I just want to preface anything that i am saying in general not just about brookings. We did focus a fair amount on brookings. And they are considered by the , in upen. They are ranked the number one prestigious think tank in the world. They are well respected. If there is a problem of thatings, it is up place it is integrity, independence and impact, it suggests there is a problem systemically. We spent a fair amount of time looking at them. We also happen to get a lot of internal documents from them that allowed us to see the kind of conversations they were having with donors and put it so attentional donors, and the money they were giving given. The began to look at the documents and shocked in some cases at the exchanges that were going on in which it were discussing things that were for consulting arrangements and consulting with potential dollars relative to things that in return foriver contributions. These are tax exempt organizations. They are supposed to be doing work that benefit society. They are not supposed to be there to help the process forprofit interest of their donors. We saw lines in the documents that showed us that they were providing donor benefits that seemed inappropriate. Host they said the reporters thesis to buttress their with phrases lifted from thousands of pages of in draftdocument using them out of context. Guest i admire a lot of the work that they do. Did,s a report that they kkr is an Investment Firm based in new york. Decided they would set up a multibilliondollar fund to do more investments in real estate and infrastructure. It significantly increases its donations to brookings. Personinate, a smart works at kkr. We see that he suggested to brookings that they write a report about publicprivate partnerships, which are type of private equity or investments that they make in sewer systems, fundsplants, the company the infrastructure. And maybe they should cowrite it with kkr. Brookings agrees to cope right this. It has been posted on the website and it promotes one of kkrs projects in new jersey. What you have by doing this report, you are putting the stamp of brookings on this kkr investment effort. To a donor. Hases so much of that kkr given hundreds of thousands of dollars to brookings. Introducehelp to help their executives to people in kkr. Helpingbrookings doing them . From mye benefits that reading of that in exchange for money. I dont see that as a role of a think tank. Host john in pennsylvania, in an dependent. Caller kudos to you for this article. Sinclair said it is difficult for a person to understand something when his salary depends on him not understanding it. That sums up these think tanks. Heritage, manhattan, american enterprise, all those guys. The Cato Institute was start by started by the koch brothers. There is money behind all of this stuff to push an agenda which is generally a corporate agenda. I want you guys to do a series this. S and expose its like you say, it is duping the American People. Guest what we observed is this is happening on the left and on the right. It is happening everywhere. Particularly when you have a situations where u. S. Scholars who have outside engaged engagements. When of the things we found is that think tanks give up these nonresident scholars titles. Then the individual in this happens on the left and right, the person walks around washington, saying i am a senior fellow nonresident. That they are also a consultant. Thing is there has been a pleasure for ration in washington, the story focuses mostly on the large institution. Are all the small places that have started out that call themselves think tanks. Are they really think tanks are advocacy shops that are using the cover of a think tank to promote agendas for the donors . It really has modeled it hurts the big institutions. These small places are narrowly focused on telecommunications and health care. Likehey seem to be almost industrydriven entities. The proliferation of those have made the think tank host a more context process. Taxxamination of 75 income an array of researchers who had simultaneously worked as lobbyists, members of corporate boards or outside consultants in litigation with only intermittent disclosures of their dual role at these think tanks. Syracuse new york, democrat. Good morning. Caller id like to know more about the center for American Progress. Being a democrat, i am wondering why they dont have more ideas offered to the public. Lets say the medical device taxes one of them. We know who runs podesta runs that organization and emmanuelle was one of the policy writers for the aca. Im wondering how a think tank and have no ideas asked to how now that theca, medical device tech is been delayed, i think its amazing that the think tank does not come up with alternative ideas, like why not tax cousin medics. Host ill have eric jump in and talk about this. Scene toey came on the some extent as an answer to the heritage foundation. It used to be that it was the conservative organization that dominated the clearly slanted space in the think tank world. Aftere extent, i think the clinton administration, the left realize, if there is going to be heritage, cato, to the conservative side than the liberals should have their own think tanks that promotes the progressive agenda. The center for American Progress was created by podesta, and now the clinton did campaign. Focused agendat driven organization that parallels, not as extreme as the heritage. Beginning of the growth on the left of ideologically oriented think tanks. Complicated washington is that you have more and more ideologically driven think tanks. Its hard to distinguish if its the ideology thats influencing the report or the strength of the argument and the data that is driving the conclusions. The center for American Progress is featured in the stories in a modest way. And anlow browner advisor in the Obama Administration had the title of scholar at the center for American Progress. It is an unpaid position but at the side time she had become a paid consultant to nuclear matters, which is a Nuclear Industry entity that is promoting the preservation of Nuclear Power plants in the united states. Presentations and places around the world where she was introduced as a former epa official and a distinguished scholar at the center for American Progress, then she wanted to talk about we need to do more about the Nuclear Power plants because they are in. Rtant part of our before the story came out, she stepped down theres a lot of things happening, she stepped down from her position. She is still on the board at cap. She played an Important Role in several administrations, but this is an issue. Host a are concerned their integrity will be questioned if it this continues it is any reaction from capitol hill . Is there any talk about doing something about their taxexempt status . I dont think it is any discussion of that. I spent a day on capitol hill before the story came out, near where the subway cars get out and senators came over to vote on various things. I try to talk to them about this topic. A couple of them said left at me laughed at me. A lot of them, those that did spend the time to speak with me for a couple minutes, richard blumenthal, from connecticut and Elizabeth Warren for quite a while on this. They are concerned about this. Those are two democrats. They do think about this a lot. They get these reports, these reports are landing on your desk by the dozens, these think tank reports. But members of the congress are concerned about where do these reports really come from them and who pays from them. Dont we need to know about them. That there is some discussion of, for example, there is some discussion, when you submit comments to the agency on a proposed rule and ase doing at as a dish a think tank scholar you should disclose you have a financial is interest. That should be disclosed as part of the comments, we need to know that information. Youre an expert and your argument is much more persuasive than the average person. When you come to testify a congress maybe you should have to disclose who funded your study. There are these truth and testimony forms you fill out. Funded bysearch get any particular company that is relevant to study . There is no question like that and maybe it should be included in the house rules. Guest for jeanette, republican. Thank you for waiting. I wanted him to react to think tank heritage. About 501c. O know thats kind of unrelated. How are they categorized in the tax code . 501c3s. Hey are01c 501c4s heritage is a model, with heritage in action how front they can become in terms of atticus efficacy as opposed to research. Advocacy as opposed to research. And Heritage Action which is a subsidiary have become much more aggressive in the last decade in terms of rating lawmakers on their position in a way that turns them more into Advocacy Organization then think tanks. It is a blurring of the lines. It is a complexity for the think tank community. What is a think tank. What are its principles, what is its role. Publicthe percent perceive that role to be. These are becoming increasingly bury blurry. It plays an Important Role. Integral tus as integrity and authority. If all of this is happening, it undermines its authority. It threatens its role in the ideas in washington. Host paul is next, independent. Caller i have a challenge for all of the cspan junkies out 79 and i have been watching cspan since brian lam first introduced it. The more that people talk, the longer they talk i think its generational. Every time that people are talking along and they use the i mean, you know, every time they interject that phrase which is kind of hard on after two or three hours of listening to people talk, i wonder how people understand how people understand how they are extending their conversation. If they had to put a dime in the jug every time they misuse those phrases we could pay off the national debt. Guest i work on that. Morning. Ood im a phd. I have done my own research and in rock with people interact with people. How potentially dangerous this is to the public and also how income believes the process in it convolutions the process in washington. Or it might actually be biased. Msnbc and without going into specifics of the positions of the respondents, one of the reasons put forward is on a study and it seemed to be refuted, it didnt really the month of rigor to generalize a statement across the board. Again particularly with the smaller new institutions that are narrowly focused on industry stec sectors, where the data is seems to be biased. The conclusions are clear from before the study was started. I think that is less of a problem at the big institutions. One of the things the big institutions say and i believe them when they take insistrom donors, they they maintain intellectual control of of the outcome of the report. They do the research and richard a conclusion that is contrary to and reach a conclusion that is contrary to they will still publish the court. Publish the report. I think that does happen. Dont think they typically will publish a report that would completely undermine the donors goals but maybe there will be aspects to the report that arent consistent with their corporate agenda. About with some of the smaller institutions, if the data is state stacked. Our guest is writing an article about think tanks and corporate influence. , theollowup on august 8 caller was asking about the impact of these reports, you talk about it in congress but what about the impact on the courts themselves you with using this type of research or data that has been influenced by corporate interests. Guest some of the think tank scholars are submitting amicus sidingin court cases and with their signing as researchers at a think tank and not disclosing that they may on the outside be consultants to industry players. The same thing is happening in court cases. One of the biggest things that can happen there is a fair amount of disclosure already. The problem with these people is frequently they will say, i am a consultant at economist inc. , they will mention the name of the firm but you wont know who their clients are. It doesnt do the viewer or reader much help if you have the name of the firm. The more disclosure the better off this world is. Florida,t lauderdale its your turn for a question or comment. Ler i want to thank ms. Mr. Lipton for being on your show and talking about this sort of thing. Just mention the fact that some of the smaller think tank when they are proselytizing, one doesnt know where they came you think this guy should know what he is talking about, which leads me to this. A lot of the same people show up on cspan. I love cspan that some of these people do show up on cspan. When some of these guys from smaller think tanks show up on cspan and Start Talking and they are treated as authorities by the hosts. Judge. T is not there to but people listening to them and not knowing where they are coming from when they are actually coming from somewhere have a point of view, just accept them as authorities. Thats one thing i would like to hear the guests talk about. When these people show up on callingw, are they cspan saying please let me come on and talk or is cspan calling them seeing we need a guest today. Out itften reach depends on the topic. We are topic driven. If there is something in the news about a certain topic we will sometimes not in the news, we are trying different voices and different perspectives to come on the program and talk about it. We try to balance out those perspective. If we have a conservative on a certain issue, we will have a liberal on to talk about that as well. You make a valid point. Our job is to ask questions about the gas that are sitting him, where did the Research Come from and where do you get your funding from. Those are questions that you all ask as well. It is your opportunity to talk to folks in washington and ask them those questions. Guest we have the same problem at the New York Times. Think hank scholars are often outside consultant. They dont disclose sometimes that this person is also a consultant to a telecommunications industry. We publish talking about Net Neutrality without disco disclosing Net Neutrality. It is hard to police this. The players that have the platforms must police it and we must interrogate and question the people who they are taking their questions from. In this area of scholarship, have you as an individual or your institution received funding and which specific companies have funded your work before should know that we give them a platform as a guest status or oped platform. I wrote the story with other the three of us spent two years on this. It was a long time coming. We did not work on it fulltime for two years that we had been collecting information. We sued the state department to get information. We waited 18 months for them state department to respond. This is a team of project and neck and myself and my editor thatarious other editors spent weeks and weeks of labor on this to tell the story comprehensively and we hope fairly. Host and we often reach out to these groups. We are often making the phone calls to find out if there is somebody who can speak to this topic. We do often receive hitches like other places, this expert who can talk about this topic. It is a twoway street. Transparent with folks about how it works and trying to find out the information like you said. Guest they will always volunteer it. It is our burden to make sure we get the information. Not a republican and and in annapolis you are next. Caller thanks for cspan and thank you mr. Lipton. I would like to say i find it rich that some representative from the New York Times would be discussing lack of disclosure and objectivity in anything. The New York Times has been so biased. I recently read two editorials by her own editors bemoaning the bias. When i hear you talking about the think tanks, if you was substitute the New York Times tanks and the dnc your statements would be a hundred percent correct. As far as someone holding up a think tank report, the New York Times is the gold standard, if someone reads it i