Dems Seek Answers on Heritage Foundation Law Clerk Training

Here is more from Bloomberg Law:

Six Democratic senators want to know if law clerks participating in a conservative organization’s training program violated the judicial codes of conduct.

The Heritage Foundation, which held the training program in February, has advocated for “repealing reproductive rights; dismantling affirmative action policies; limiting voting rights; and restrictive immigration policies,” the Judiciary Committee members said in a letter to James Duff, the director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.

The organization has touted its role in helping President Donald Trump select nominees to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The anonymously-funded program originally made participants pledge their secrecy and promise not to use their training for purposes contrary to the interests of the Heritage Foundation, the senators said.

It also held a session about immigration law on the same day that the foundation released a report concerning its immigration agenda, the letter said.

The senators asked whether any current or future judge or judicial employee asked the office for advice about attending that program, and what conclusion the office reached if they did. 

The letter cited guidance that the office issued after the program, which listed situations in which attending certain events could violate judicial codes of conduct.

Concerns are raised when the event sponsor engages in contentious debates over public policy and the program is funded by unknown sources, according to that guidance.

In response to the letter from the US senators, Heritage Foundation's John Malcolm issued this response, which denies any wrong-doing.

Here is more about the think tank's Federal Clerkship Training Academy.  And here is what the New York Times had to say about it.

Think Tank CAP Fires Two Staffers Amid Leak Investigation

Here is more from The Intercept:

The Center for American Progress fired two staffers suspected of being involved in leaking an email exchange that staffers thought reflected improper influence by the United Arab Emirates within the think tank, according to three sources with knowledge of the shake-up. Both staffers were investigated for leaking the contents of an internal email exchange to The Intercept, but neither of the former employees was The Intercept’s source.

One of those fired, Ken Gude, was a senior national security staffer. He worked at CAP since 2003 and previously served as the progressive think tank’s chief of staff.

A CAP spokesperson acknowledged two employees were fired as a result of the leak investigation, but said that the leak was not the reason they were fired: “We are not going to discuss internal personnel matters, but no one was fired at CAP for leaking or whistleblowing.” Internally, however, multiple members of CAP leadership have used the leak as the leading rationale for the firings in multiple settings, sources said.

At issue was an internal debate over how to frame CAP’s response to the murder of Washington Post contributing columnist Jamal Khashoggi, who was dismembered by Saudi Arabian officials inside the nation’s consulate in Istanbul on October 2.

The initial draft of the CAP’s statement condemned the killing and Saudi Arabia’s role in it, calling for specific consequences. Brian Katulis, a Gulf expert at CAP, objected to the specific consequences proposed in an email exchange with other national security staffers, according to sources who described the contents of the thread to The Intercept. 

The UAE, Saudi Arabia’s closest ally, is one of the top donors to the think tank. Katulis is close with the UAE’s ambassador in Washington, Yousef Al Otaiba.

 Katulis is CAP’s link to Otaiba. As The Intercept has previously reported, Katulis worked with the diplomat to help organize UAE-sponsored trips to the wealthy Gulf country for American think tank experts, according to emails purloined from Otaiba’s Hotmail inbox.

The Center for American Progress (CAP) has experienced lots of drama the past couple years.  In April, the think tank was bashed for its response to sexual harassment claims. 

Pay-to-Play Scheme Rocks UK Think Tank IEA

Here is more from The Guardian about the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA), a UK-based think tank established in 1955 by admirers of the free-market economist Friedrich Hayek:

A rightwing thinktank has been offering potential US donors access to government ministers and civil servants as it raises cash for research to support the free-trade deals demanded by hardline Brexiters, according to an investigation.

The director of the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) was secretly recorded telling an undercover reporter that funders could get to know ministers on first-name terms and that his organisation was in “the Brexit influencing game”.

Mark Littlewood claimed the IEA could make introductions to ministers and said the thinktank’s trade expert knew Boris Johnson, Michael Gove, David Davis and Liam Fox well.

The IEA chief was also recorded suggesting potential US donors could fund and shape “substantial content” of research commissioned by the thinktank and that its findings would always support the argument for free-trade deals.

The investigation, undertaken in May and June, also revealed the thinktank had already provided access to a minister for a US organisation.

Here is more coverage from various sources:

• Think tank faces double investigation after 'cash for access' claims (The Guardian).
• Institute of Economic Affairs think tank 'offered access to ministers' (The Times).
• A hard Brexit think tank told a potential donor it could influence its research reports in exchange for funding (Unearthed). 
• Labor demands investigation into right-wing think tank over accusations it offered 'access to ministers' (Independent)
• Revealed: BP and gambling interests fund secretive free market think tank (Ecologist).
• Revealed: How the Uk's powerful right-wing think tanks and Conservative MP's work together (openDemocracy UK) 
• Revealed: IEA think tank bosses' £4.6 million for Tories (The Red Roar). 
• Casino owners donated to IEA after think tank's pro-gambling report (The Guardian).
• The IEA's "Brexit-influencing game" shows think tanks are open to abuse (NewStatesman). 
• IEA think tank faces registration as a lobbyist as government tsar opens investigation (Third Sector).
• Jersey Finance paid for IEA report rubbishing 'hotbeds of tax evasion' claims (The Guardian). 
• Channel Island banks fund IEA research defending tax havens (Unearthed).
• IEA think tank unveils pro-gambling report after being funded by casino industry players (Casino Guardian).
• Institute of Economic Affairs says it has 'no apology' to make over newspaper claims (Third Sector).
• Institute of Economic Affairs defends 'cash for access' (BBC)
• The Daily Devil's Dictionary: Think Tanks Provide "Access" (Fair Observer). 
• Why it's time for the Institute of Economic Affairs to be pulled off air (Left Foot Forward).

Here you can watch the undercover video that exposed all of this.

Here is IEA's formal response, via Mark Littlewood.

Here is a Twitter thread where IEA's news editor Kate Andrews defends her think tank.

The IEA example is one of numerous pay-to-play schemes at think tanks that has come to light over the past several years.

Stay tuned for more updates soon...

Think Tank Bashed for Response to Sexual Harassment Claims

Here is what BuzzFeed is reporting about the liberal think tank Center for American Progress (CAP):

One of Washington's leading liberal institutions grappled with a divisive internal battle over sexual harassment during and in the aftermath of the 2016 election, according to documents obtained by BuzzFeed News and interviews with 19 current and former staffers.

The Center for American Progress, the politics and policy hub for the Democratic establishment, has put out four different policy proposal papers on handling sexual harassment in the workplace, as well as data on how pervasive the issue is “across all industries.”

But only an hour after the Access Hollywood tape was made public, top officials at CAP received an exit memo from a young woman who'd just quit detailing the sexual harassment she experienced from Benton Strong, a manager on her team — harassment, she wrote, that management already knew about — and how she faced retaliation for reporting it.

In the email, the junior staffer, who asked that BuzzFeed News refer her to as Mary, which is part of the woman’s formal name, wrote that “on several occasions, myself and others on the team felt as if reporting had been a mistake and that the retaliation, worsening of already tenuous team dynamics, and treatment by supervisors outweighed the seemingly positive act of reporting sexual harassment in the workplace.”

Documents obtained by BuzzFeed News and interviews with 19 current and former staffers describe a chaotic internal culture in which, according to a July 2016 memo written by CAP’s employee union, there were “several incidents of sexual harassment against several members of our unit.” The documents and interviews pull back the curtain on a culture in which young staffers felt there was a gap between the organization’s mission and its everyday realities.

Sexual harassment within the think tank world is extremely common, and a number of incidents have come to light in the wake of the #MeToo movement.  Here is our recent piece on a sex scandal at the libertarian Cato Institute.

Update: BuzzFeed in now reporting that CAP President Neera Tanden named the anonymous harassment victim in an all-staff meeting.  Here is more from ThinkProgress.

Wave of Sexual Misconduct Allegations Hits Think Tank Land

The national dialogue on sexual harassment and sexual assault in the workplace is inching closer to think tank land, as a new movement surfaces to document harassment in academia.  Here is more from Metroland Media Group:

They may not be as well known as Harvey Weinstein or Matt Lauer, but across North America there are hundreds of men accused of sexual harassment and assault holding great power over the women in their academic fields.

Women often didn't report the misconduct because they were worried it would end their career in an insulated, precarious industry where they depend on the recommendations of powerful men to get to the next step.

The stories of these women, ranging from grad students to professors, are now collected in a database started by Oregon-based Karen Kelsky, a former tenured professor who now runs an academic consulting business.

She started a survey on Friday and at press time had already received more than 1,000 responses, including a handful that name the University of Toronto and York University.

The hashtag #MeTooPhD is being used to document various stories of harassment and sexual assault in academia.

Think Tank Watch has heard a number of stories over the years about sexual harassment at think tanks, and it would not be surprising if you start seeing prominent think tankers getting fired.

Quartz has recently reported that think tankers are among those in the national security field that have signed a letter saying they have been harassed at work.

In fact, former Portland mayor Sam Adams has just left his job as director of the World Resources Institute (WRI) after allegations that he made sexually inappropriate comments in the workplace.

Also, Jefferson Smith recently resigned less than two weeks after being chosen as executive director of the left-leaning state-level think tank Oregon Center for Public Policy.  The resignation came after the think tank received a letter calling his hiring "damaging and destructive to women."

In related news, The Washington Post recently reported about sexual harassment at TED talks.

In the Chronicle of Higher Education, Becca Rothfeld asks if sexual predators can be good scholars.

Here is a think tankers take on sexual violence from Tally Helfont and Samuel Helmont of the Foreign Policy Research Institute (FPRI).

Shady Pharma Lobbyist Had Dirty Think Tank Dealings

The Wall Street Journal has a new piece entitled "The Rise and Fall of a K Street Renegade" which details the scandalous activities of a top lobbyist for pharmaceutical giant Roche/Genentech, including shady activities related to think tank land.

Here is an excerpt:

In one example, Mr. [Evan] Morris hired Mr. Courtovich’s Sphere Consulting in 2012 for $880,000 to do policy work with think tanks, according to documents viewed by the Journal. Genentech paid Sphere two payments of $440,000 each on Nov. 1 and Dec. 1.

On Dec. 10, Mr. Courtovich’s firm sent a payment of $448,986.22 to Mr. Morris’s personal bank account.

Eric Lewis, a lawyer for Mr. Courtovich and Sphere Consulting, said the payment was to reimburse Mr. Morris for personal funds that he said he used for an event with the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington think tank. Mr. Lewis provided the Journal with an AEI invoice for $448,986.22 that Mr. Morris gave Sphere.

An AEI spokeswoman said the invoice was falsified.

Here is a picture of the fake AEI invoice.  While it is unclear if AEI ever got any money from Roche/Genentech, Think Tank Watch does know that the company did pay other think tanks, including the Brookings Institution, which received between $500,000 to $999,999 in 2014 from the company.

The pharmaceutical industry's donations to think tanks - both Republican and Democratic - have been well-documented (also here and here and here) and numerous of pharmaceutical companies give generous donations to a number of think tanks in both the US and elsewhere.