Freedom of Expression Foundation

From SourceWatch
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This stub is a work-in-progress by the ScienceCorruption.com journalists's group. We are indexing the millions of documents stored at the San Francisco Uni's Legacy Tobacco Archive [1] With some entries you'll need to go to this site and type into the Search panel a (multi-digit) Bates number. You can search on names for other documents also.     Send any corrections or additions to editor@sciencecorruption.com

Tobaccospin.jpg

This article is part of the Tobacco portal on Sourcewatch funded from 2006 - 2009 by the American Legacy Foundation.

The Freedom of Expression Foundation (with its Institute, etc) was a 501(c)3 not-for-profit operation run by Dr Craig R Smith. It had a sister phantom organization called the Institute for Freedom of Communication. Smith was the aide to Senator Robert Packwood and this collection of institutes, foundations etc. was originally set up with the backing of some media companies [2] to fight against the Fairness Doctrine (giving activists the right to radio time and TV space to make their claims.

The Freedom of Expression Foundation evolved into a broader Freedom-to-advertise organisation, which has all the appearance of a scam that works two ways:

1. Senator Packwood was threatening the economics of the tobacco industry by floating the Packwood tax plan. This was an attempt by the Republican Senator to save the budget of the Reagan Administration without increasing income tax. He was proposing to raise excises on such non-necessities as cigarettes.
This forced the cigarette industry to fall in behind Packwood's Freedom of Expression Foundation (FEF), and commit to major funding of the entity.
2. In return for funding, the Freedom of Expression Foundation would specifically target attempts to ban cigarette advertising using the "free speech rights" argument" -- extended from humans to corporate advertising. This 'right' was stretched to the limit, becoming the "Freedom to Advertise any legally sold product" mantra. A series of media organisations were enlisted under the Freedom to Advertise Coalition banner to help the industry do battle along these lines and the FEF was loosely attached to this coalition.

This operation ran very well -- and to everyone's satisfaction for a couple of years.

In mid 1988 Craig Smith was given a sinecure at the California State University, Long Beach -- but only because this privately funded and controlled foundation endowed the University with enough cash to give him the title of "Professor". He moved the Freedom of Expression foundation from Washington to California, but continued to operate it in support of the tobacco industry.

See the Packwood's claim of founder: [3] Note that there are a number of separate Freedom of Expression operations. See side panel.

RELATED ENTRIES
Freedom of Expression Foundation
Packwood tax plan
Sen. Robert Packwood   &   Craig R Smith
UNRELATED ENTRIES
Freedom of Expression Institute
Freedom of Expression Project

Documents & Timeline

1936 A voluntary ban on advertising distilled spirits on radio was implemented just before the beginning of World War II.

1948 A voluntary ban on distilled spirits advertising on American TV (under threat of more drastic measures)

1975 The first major judgement giving commercial speech parity with other forms of protected speech.

1980 According to Barry Lynn of the ACLU, the Supreme Court in the Central Hudson case set up a test that advertising bans needed to pass to be lawful:

  1. Is it misleading, or does it propose unlawful transactions?
  2. Does it directly advance a substantial government interest?
  3. Is it more extensive than necessary to serve that interest?

[4]

[Note that this test destroys the concept that the First Amendment had created the so-called "Commercial Free Speech" as a Constitutional right. If it was a Constitutional right then this test is not applicable]

1982 (2nd Session of Congress) Hearings Before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation on Freedom of Expression.

1983 Craig R Smith maintains that he established the Freedom of Expression Foundation as a Tax-free 501(c)3 organisation during the first Reagan Administration (the Congress at this time was Democrat). In fact it was established -- along with the Freedom of Expression Institute -- by Senator Robert Packwood. Craig R Smith was Packwood's aide who became the President of the FEF.

1983 The 2nd Session of Congress conducted hearings on a Freedom of Expression Act. Craig Smith as President of the FEF gave evidence at the Hearings before the Senate Committee on Commerce Science and Transportation.

1984 About this time Craig Smith sent the Tobacco Institute his CV. He is residing in Alexandria, Virginia and is a rabid Republican apparatchik.

The Foundation has:

  • participated in new Hearings Before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation"
  • published John C. Armor, "Substance and Shadows, The Original Meaning of Freedom of the Press", (Washington, D.C.:- Freedom of Expression Foundation,1984)

1984 Sep 5 Notice of Inquiry in Gen. Docket No. 84-282, FCC 84-140, 49 Fed. Reg. 20317 (Comments of the Freedom of Expression Foundation).

1985 Mar 20 Anne Duffin at the Tobacco Institute has been investigating Senator Packwood's foundation and is reporting to the head of PR, Bill Kloepfer. They are looking for a front organisation in their battle over the threat of advertising-bans -- and clearly they don't know Craig R Smith at this time.

[A handnote suggests they have a discussion with him the next day -- so, he must have made an approach to them for funding]

This could be the coalition that Terry Maguire of ANPA [American Newspapers Publishers Assn.] mentioned when we discussed the proposed beer and wine broadcast advertising ban -- although I don't see Media General on the list of supporters, and' chances are the Freedom of Expression Foundation could not legally participate in lobbying.
The Foundation and the Institute for Freedom of Communication are one and the same. The latter was formed because many early supporters of the foundation, formed by Sen. Packwood to work for elimination of the Fairness doctrine, felt they could not give money to a Packwood-sparked group.
I'm asking the library for copies of several of the cigarette-related references in the Craig Smith testimony... [5]

1985 Apr 9 Anne Duffin reports that she has conducted a further review:

[That would probably have been with Tom Luhnow]

1985 May 5 The Tobacco Industry report to its Executive Commitee says:

Freedom of Expression Foundation, a group originally established to challenge the FCC's "equal time provisions", which have the effect of limiting commercial speech. Dr. Craig Smith, director of the Foundation and a candidate for Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, has provided support via academic lectures, statements and position papers. [7]

1986 Mar 4 Joel Bolstein of the FEF is signing letters to Fred Panzer the Tobacco Institute. His position is Research Director, and he is sending them a listing of the Freedom of Expression Foundation's Board of Directors and its Policy Advisory Board.

In addition, I have included that of our sister organization, the Institute for Freedom of Communication. Both were started by Senator Bob Packwood in 1983 and have been in the forefront of efforts to defend commercial speech (please see enclosed excerpts from Dr. Smith's testimony at Senator Hawkins hearings on banning beer and wine advertising). [W]e do NOT represent a single industry association or lobbying group. Instead, we are a non-profit research organization with an enormously broad base that brings much more credibility to our testimony before Congress than any other group. [8]

[This is the letter which establishes the TI's formal relationship with the Foundation.]

1985 June/1986 March-July The Cash for Comments Economists Network was commissioned by the Tobacco Institute to write economic opinion pieces opposing excise taxes on cigarettes in mid-year-1985. This propaganda requirment resurfaced as a major project for the economist in the peak of the Tobacco Industry's PR campaign against the Packwood tax plan (although the threat was obviously still a possibility until the end of 1986r).

The Tobacco institute (much later) put together a package of commissioned economics reports (see front section of document), followed by about thirty op-eds and composite pieces which were generated by the Tollison/Savarese Cash for Comments Economists Network in this 1985-86 time frame. It illustrates the propaganda value of this network -- and shows what it can accomplish in a very short time for just a few thousand dollars in academic bribes.

These op-eds attacking the Packwood tax plan were all published in local newspaper across the USA. (Copies needed to be sent in for payment to be made.) A few are from July 1985 and the rest appeared in local newspapers during March-July 1986. These spontaneous independent expressions of expert opinion all miraculously come from Professors of Economics attached to the Center for Study of Public Choice ...

Joseph M Jadlow, Oklahoma State Uni. (He had two op-eds in different papers.);   William C Mitchell Uni of Oregon, Eugene;   Lee G Anderson, Uni of Delaware;   John S Howe Uni of Kansas, Lawrence;   D. Allen Dalton, Boise State University;   Thomas F Pogue, Uni of Iowa, Iowa City (He had two.);   Scott Atkinson, Uni of Wyoming. (He had two in different papers.);   S. Charles Maurice, Texas A&M Uni;   Todd Sandler, Uni of Wyoming;   Michael A Crew, Rutgers Uni, Newark;   Robert B Ekelund Jr., Auburn Uni (He had two.) ;   Ann Harper-Fender, Gettysburg College;   Lee Alston, Williams College;   Paul L Menchik, Michigan State Uni;   Henry N Butler, Texas A&M Uni;   Burton A Abrams, Uni of Delaware;   Ryan C Amacher, Clemson Uni (He had two.);   Dominick T Armentano, Uni of Hartford;   Fred McChesney, Emory Uni;   and a think-tanker David Wilhelm (Citizens for Tax Justice);

Also short extract pieces and letters-to-the-editor from A James Heins, Uni of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana;   William J Hunter, Marquette Uni, Milwaukee;   Dennis E Logue, Dartmouth College;   William F Shughart, George Mason Uni;   Harold Hochman, Baruch College, City Uni of New York;

Also uncredited overviews in the Newport Daily News, the Times-Review in Texas, Herald PA, etc. which expresses the encapsulated wisdom of most of the above with the addition of Thomas Borcherding (Claremont Graduate School, Calif);   K. Celeste Gaspari, Uni of Vermont, Birmingham;   David N Laband, Uni of Maryland;   Dean Tipps (Service Employees Intl. Union);   Allen M Parkman, Uni of New Mexico, Alburquerque, NM;   Richard K Vedder, Ohio Uni, Athens;   Roger L Faith, Arizona State Uni, Tempe;   Lee Alston, Williams College Mass;   and William J Hunter, Marquette Uni, Wisc.; (Some sections were published in multiple papers). [9]
This was a massive amount of propaganda coverage for a payment of less than $1000 each to these Professors at that time.

1986 Mar 5 The Freedom of Expression Foundation has all the appearance of a dual-purpose organization. On one hand, it appears to be a right-wing think-tank run by a Republican zealot. On the other hand, it seem to be a front for Senator Packwood to receive 'campaign donations' via the backdoor, as quid-pro-quo for his support of the tobacco industry - or as a bribe not to pursue his earlier idea of raising cigarette excises.

Senator Packwood had recently promoted a plan to raise cigarette excise taxes (and make advertising non-deductable) as a way for the Republican Administration to raise funds without increasing income taxes. He held this threat over the tobacco industry for a couple of years.

Lorillard appears to have been the cigarette company chosen to channel some of these funds to the Senator (along with the Tobacco Institute itself).

1986 Mar 13 Anne Duffin at the Tobacco Institute to her superior, Peter Sparber on a recent report on Smoking and Advertising.

She is providing background on their involvement in the promotion of the "Helping Youth Decided" (HYD) program which they have now extended to Hispanic communities (via LULAC and other). This document lists their involvement in CASE (sports sponsorship lobby); the NASBE and consultant Jolly Ann Davidson; education consultant James Peterson; and the Australian children researcher Glen Smith.

It also lists a range of strategies:

Strategy III:'
Develop and focus public support of First Amendment rights and freedom of choice.
Goals and Tactics:

  1. Cosponsor a symposium on the First Amendment and Commercial Speech, for second quarter 1987.
          To be implemented gradually as liaison with advertising and publishing trade groups, ACLU, etc., develops in connection with AMA ad ban and tax deduction denial fights.
  2. Spin off new Freedom of Speech Foundation, from symposium's national advisory and steering committees, to make national print, broadcast awards.
          No action contemplated presently. See above.
  3. Maintain Freedom of Expression Foundation contact.
          Support enrolled by [Fred] Panzer for both ad issues.

[10]

1986 Mar 13 A weekly Report from Walter Woodson at the Tobacco Institute first mentions the new tax plan by Senator Packwood.

Weeklong checking on budget reconciliation situation,..and early work on Packwood tax plan, [11]

They react by planning a public opinion poll designed to politically attack the plan. [12]

1986 Apr 3 CONFIDENTIAL report on the Packwood Tax Plan being circulated within the Tobacco Institute. [mainly scuttlebutt]

Wyoming counsel Bill Thomson reports that his White House sources say [President] Reagan is getting "bad advice" on tax reform ... Thomson says Reagan has been persuaded to sign 'anything' from the senate that has the tax reform label ... idea is that White House can then say Reagan has made the most sweeping tax changes since JFK. Packwood met with Peter Rupp, Chairman of trucking outfit Freightliner ... Packwood told him that this entire tax package was a 'trial balloon' he had launched at the White House's request ... Packwood added that he 'didn't give a damn about [keeping] the ad valorem' tax in the bill ... that same message was relayed to representatives of the Oregon Truckers Assn. and a Anheiser-Busch rep...Graham believes these comments were made in large measure because of contacts generated thus far. [13]

One informant appears to be Packwood's aide Frank Cannell.

1986 Apr 11 Sparber receives a report from Anne Duffin about their plans for The Freedom of Expression Foundation. It says:

Goals and Tactics:

  1. Cosponsor a symposium on the First Amendment and Commercial Speech, for second quarter 1987.
          To be implemented gradually as liaison with advertising and publishing trade groups, ACLU, etc., develops in connection with AMA ad ban and tax deduction denial fights.
          Plan to discuss with Craig Smith of Freedom of Information Foundation on his return to Washington mid-April.
    He may have had the name wrong -- or this was a projected new think-tank.
  2. . Spin off new Freedom of Speech Foundation , from symposium's national advisory and steering committees, to make national print, broadcast awards.
          No action contemplated presently. See above.
  3. Maintain Freedom of Expression Foundation contact.

    4. Renewed contact with director Craig Smith and plan lunch meeting after April 15 . See Tactic 1, above.

    Support enrolled by Panzer for both ad issues.[14]

1986 May 21 Craig Smith now has Congressman Packwood acting as a direct recruiter for the Foundation. Packwood is writing a personal letter to the CEO's of the tobacco companies [Here Robert Ave of Lorillard - which itself is an implied threat ... should they choose not to take his advice and join]

Dr. Smith urged your company to join our coalition. Let me take this opportunity to endorse his request for Lorillard's support of the Foundation.

If you would like to earmark a contribution for a specific project, please consider the Foundation's videotaped lecture series on the First Amendment. I am enclosing a 20 minute VHS tape which includes introductions to this lecture series that Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw, Tom Jarriel, Daniel Schorr and I have provided. Once you've had time to view that tape, you'll have a good idea of what the Foundation proposes to make available to campuses across the nation during the bicentennial of the Constitution.

Philip Morris has generously supported the work of the Foundation with a $15,000 contribution and it's my understanding that RJ Reynolds is in the process of making a similar tax-exempt contribution. Lorillard's support for this project would mean a lot to me .... [15]

[The $30,000 may have helped stall the Packwood Tax Plan for a while.]

1986 Jun 9 This Press Release gives an outline of the Freedom of Expression Foundation, saying that it is "a non-profit, research organization, [which] has consistently opposed restricting the advertising of legal products." In this release, Smith calls upon the spirit of the Revolution to endorse his position:

Clearly, any attempt to tax free speech would have to meet the strict tests the Supreme Court has set for it. The Congress would be wise to remember that this nation was founded in protests over illegal taxes, imposed by a foreign government. Patrick Henry's first court test came in a case involving the British taxation of tobacco."The seedbed of the revolution was cultivated in 1765 when the British imposed a Stamp Tax on the colonies in America- Patrick Henry's eloquent call for resistence led to the formation of a revolutionary corps. The., tea tax of 1775 led to the'incidents in Boston Harbor that united the colonists against their oppressors." [16]

1986 Jun 11 Fred Panzer at the Tobacco Institute is circulating Freedom of Expression Foundation press release to the in-house executive lawyers (here Arthur Stevens at Lorillard)

Following up on our conversation today, I am enclosing a press release issued by the Freedom of Expression Foundation.

The statement attacks anti-tobacco advertising bills ranging from ad bans to ad taxes. The Bradley and Stark bills are specifically cited. The statement was timed for release the same day the Synar bill was introduced. TI and member company government relations staff are using it on the Hill.

Anne Duffin plans to provide some funding to the Foundation for Craig Smith's lectures. [17]

She sent them a $2,000 check to "support the Videotaped Lecture seies on the First Amendment - as per attached letter from Senator Packwood." [18] On the same day, Lorillard also sent them $2,000. [19] [20] Then also advised Packwood that they had done what he commanded. [21]

[Note the blind carbon copy sent to Peter J Marzullo who was the Director of Accounting at the Tobacco Institute. The only reason for bccing him, was if Lorillard was laundering political payments to Packwaood for the Tobacco Institute, and Marzullo needed to maintain the accounts. It is possible/probable that they other tobacco companies were also sending $2000 checks on this day.]

1986 Jun 18 Smith has written to Henry Waxman at the House asking to testify at his hearings on the AMA/Synar (advertising of tobacco) legislation. He fails to mention his associations with the tobacco industry.

The Freedom of Expression Foundation, is a non-profit research organization dedicated to informing the public about its First Amendment rights. Aside from the many research publications we have made available, and my lectures on more than 35 campuses, we have entered several law suits as friends of the court to uphold the First Amendment rights of broadcasters. Our broad based coalition extends from the Motion Picture Association to several unions to major corporations across America. [22]

1986 Jun 24 Sam Chilcote advises the Tobacco Institute's Executive Committee that

Chairman Henry Waxman of the House Health and Environment Subcommittee has scheduled oversight hearings July 21 on tobacco advertising and promotional practices.

The tactics he proposes to counter Waxman include the use of:

  • Advertising Industry. Over the past year, our strategy has been to encourage the advertising industry to take the visible lead on this issue.
  • Members of Congress. We are now attempting to recruit Members willing to testify. As with all other friendly witnesses, we will offer assistance in drafting testimony.
  • Constitutional law expert. Prof. Burton Neuborne, New York University.
  • Prof. Jean Boddewyn, Baruch College, City University of New York; who recently edited two studies for the International Advertising Association. (IAA).
  • Sports Promotion. Two years ago, with assistance from staff at RJ Reynolds, we helped form the Coalition for Affordable Sports and Entertainment (CASE). This organization is prepared to testify and assist in lobbying.
  • Both the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Freedom of Expression Foundation have already asked to testify and the latter will urge its members to contact the Subcommittee.

[23]

CASE was put together and controlled by RJ Reynolds.   Barry Lynn of the ACLU was a paid lobbyist.
Packwood was able to use his think-tank to lever cash donations out of the tobacco companies without putting his own name out in front.

1986 Jun 25 Fred Panzer is circulating the copy of Craig Smith's Freedom of Expression Foundation (FEF) letter to Henry Waxman. He suggests to Sam Chilcote that

You may want to share this letter with the AAF/ANA/AAAA at the meeting tomorrow.

[The three main advertising trade associations]

You may also want to send a copy to Frank Resnick, Paul Bergson, and Arthur Stevens [Respectively Philip Morris, RJ Reynolds and Lorillard] whose companies have an interest in the FEF. [ http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/amq97b00/pdf]

[Craig Smith was actively lobbying the Magazine Publishers Association and the American Newspaper Publishers Association to testify.]

1986 Jun 30 /E The tactics and strategies paper for Advertising Restrictions produced by the Tobacco Institute, specifies:

Strategy IV:
Continue efforts to focus public attention on First Amendment rights and freedom of choice.

Increase the cigarette industry's credibility in defense of commercial speech by encouraging others to become involved in the whole issue.

Goals and Tactics:
1. Seek broad-based corporate cooperation with the cigarette industry in funding a symposium, The First Amendment and Commercial Speech, to be sponsored in summer 1987 by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Freedom of Expression Foundation (produced by the latter).

Include discussion of the effects of ad restrictions on competition, free access to consumer information, freedom of choice, etc. [24]

1986 Jul 1 The US Supreme Court handed down its decision against an appeal which had been won by the Posadas (Puerto Rico) casino's against the Games of Chance Act of 1948. This Act made it a condition of their licenses that

"[N]o gambling room shall be permitted to advertise or otherwise offer their facilities to the public of Puerto Rico." [... for tourists only]

Implementing regulations prohibited the advertising of gambling parlors to the public in Puerto Rico, but permited restricted advertising through publicity media outside Puerto Rico. [25]

[This 'Posadas' decision confirmed that advertising could be legally restricted by governments (even local authorities) without breaching the First Amendment.]

1986 Aug Craig Smith is on the Witness List for the House Health and Environment Subcommittee hearing. He is listed as the possible spokesman for the American Newspaper Publishers Association as well as his Foundation. [26]

1986 Aug 1 The testimony of Dr Craig R Smith of Freedom of Expression Foundation explains that FEF is a ...

a broad-based non-profit research organization supported by contributions from over 200 individuals, unions, associations and corporations

He goes on to credential himself as an entirely independent expert, by claiming

"As a non-smoker, with no financial interests in tobacco companies, I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the proposed legislation to ban the advertising of legal products." [27]

[This 'non-smoker' who had no 'financial interest in tobacco companies' was receiving substantial donations (c $38,000) from Philip Morris, RJ Reynolds, Lorillard and the Tobacco Institute for speaking on their behalf.] See page 461 of 490

1986 Aug 13 Anne Duffin advises Peter Sparber that a

"July 1, Supreme Court decision on casino advertising restriction in Puerto Rico complicated any claim of First Amendment protection for cigarette brand advertising and promotional activities."

[The Supreme Court had upheld the right of governments to restrict the advertising of the casino.]

She noted that the preparations for the Waxman hearings were not going well

  • ANPA and MPA enlisted through [Fred] Panzer efforts, joining AAAA, AAF, ANA, outdoor advertisers, ACLU and Freedom of Expression Foundation (FEF). Most testimony shared in advance.
  • FEF (which was) refused time to testify, urged its membership to contact the subcommittee in opposition to proposed restrictions.
  • Request by CASE [sports sponsorship front] to testify Aug. 1 not honored by subcommittee with even a negative reply. [[28]]

Waxman and his associates were now obviously wise to the Tobacco Institute tactics. However, Craig Smith did send along his written testament for the record.

1986 Aug 20 Craig Smith wrote to Anne Duffin expressing his appreciation for the further $5,000 donation from the Tobacco Institute. He is now on first-name terms with "Anne" and agrees with the Institute's request for donation anonymity:

As you specifically requested, Anne, we will not list The Tobacco Institute as one of those whose generosity made possible the distribution of our program to broadcast departments all across the country, but never the less, we won't forget your assistance to our efforts! [29]

[He also ccs Senator Bob Packwood to ensure that he is aware of the TI's financial generousity (now totalling $43,000), and adds a hand-note "P.S. See enclosed article -- That will teach them to try to keep me off a panel."]

1986 Aug 29 Anne Duffin at the Tobacco Institute reports to her boss, Peter Sparber.

The last of two days of congressional hearings on cigarette advertising and promotional practices completed, planning was begun for round two.

With 1987 hearings in mind, the Institute began work with Policy Economics Group to design research on the economic impact of a ban on cigarette advertising and promotion.
Strategy III: Develop and focus public support of First Amendment rights and freedom of choice.

    Goals: 1. Identify contractor, sponsors and cofunders for 1987 First Amendment event in celebration of Bicentennial of the US Constitution.
          Preliminary okay on two out of three. See Tactic 1 below.
    Tactics:
    1. Cosponsor a symposium on the First Amendment and Commercial Speech, for second quarter 1987.
            Craig Smith of Freedom of Expression Foundation selected tentatively to run the symposium on contract.
            Barry Lynn is sanguine ACLU would serve as co-sponsor.
            Must explore other private sector funding and research appropriate 1987 date.
    2. Spin off new Freedom of Speech Foundation, from symposium's national advisory and steering committees, to make national print, broadcast awards.
            Less costly concept is evolving, per 1987 issue plan to develop an annual award, to be given at symposium, for outstanding devotion to traditional protections of the First Amendment.
    3. Strengthen Freedom of Expression Foundation contact.
            TI this month sent a small grant for FEF's taped lecture series on the First Amendment, joining three member companies.
    4. Explore First Amendment opportunity with news media professional and trade unions.
            Need to discuss with Scott Stapf.

[30]

[Note that Philip Morris and RJ Reynolds, as well as Lorillard and the Tobacco Institute, each must have donated $2,000 or more -- making their payment for services at the Waxman hearings at least $8,000].

1986 Oct 26 Craig Smith has told Anne Duffin at the Tobacco Institute that Senator Packwood plans to-send a printed version of this new Freedom of Expression Foundation monograph, "All Speech is Created Equal," to Members of the Senate with a Dear Colleague letter. "He asks if we know of anyone in the House who might do the same."

Briefly, Smith discusses here these categories of speech — commercial and non-commercial, broadcast and print — and, not surprisingly, makes these recommendations:

  1. Repeal the Fairness Doctrine
  2. Protect corporate speech and
  3. Reestablish one First Amendment Standard for all communicators

She asks: "What suggestions can. we pass on to Craig Smith? "[31]

1986 Dec The Foundation and Institute now have staff members Thomas Luhnow (Exec Director) and Joel Bolstein (Research Director). Luhnow came from the Institute for Freedom of Communications.

1986 Dec 1 Anne Duffin reports to the Tobacco Institute on their readiness for handling the 1987 Waxman Committee hearings into tobacco advertising bans. [Truncated quotes from report]

  • Both the American Civil Liberties Union and the Freedom of Expression Foundation (Packwood and Criag Smith) will be witnesses for TI.
  • The TI is working through Covington & Burling with the advertising umbrella groups [Inter-Agency Council task force]
  • Statement (or first person testimony) by constitutional lawyer Mario Obledo of the Hispanic League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) He is a past president. LULAC will enlist the aid of the Hispanic Caucus on what First Amendment protections mean to a naturalized American citizen.
  • Placement of op-ed page articles and letters to editor by law-oriented professors of business in target cities and states, with judicious distribution of reprints.
Status: Twenty-plus such professionals have been identified and ready to start. Awaiting ammunition on all-text regulation from Covington and draft copy from Ogilvy & Mather, due Dec 15.
[They are now claiming to have more than twenty members in the cash-for-comment network of academic lawyers.]
  • (Jean Boddewyn is also working on another possible op ed piece and [David] Remes (C&B) will investigate editing down Blackwell and/or Ward Aug. 1 testimony for other articles.)
  • Prof. Jean Boddewyn will edit a study now in progress by the Children's Research Unit investigating the role of advertising in juvenile smoking
Glen Smith ran the phantom Children's Research Unit (CRU). He moved around the world doing polling studies which always showed that cigarette advertising had no effect on juvenile smoking recruitment. He was paid generously for his polling and witness services, and he worked closely with Boddewyn who favored the same line.
Status: Final draft of CRU research report due here Jan. 15 for editing and production in booklet form with International-Advertising Assn. imprimatur. Prof Boddewyn has agreed to testify as needed, if necessary on unpublished results.
  • Expanding the Helping Youth Decide (HYD) programs with Jolly Ann Davidson and the NASBE. Helping Youth Say No (HYS) booklet due Jan 30 1987. [32]
  • Refutation of July 7, 1986, Congressional Research Service analysis of the Posadas decision.
Status: CRS refused TI request for a copy; asked Federal Relations Sept. 29 to obtain a copy through a Congressional office.
If published, reprint of University of Chicago Prof Philip Kurland's law journal article appended to Aug. 1, 19B6, testimony of Bert Neuborne — plus any other scholarly articles that have appeared since the June 30 Posadas decision.
Status: Dr. Beatson, identified by INFOTAB at TI request, has told Bryan Simpson (Sec.Gen of INFOTAB Brussels) he is willing to appear for the Institute. John O'Toole of AAAA is especially interested in Europe's all-text advertising. 4As or one of the other ad trade groups may be interested in presenting Dr. Beatson as a witness.
  • University of Texas Marketing Prof. Gary Wilcox is studying quarterly patterns of cigarette advertising and cigarettes sales, 1964-1985.
Status: Wilcox began on his own, but with TI moral support and sales data, last summer. I have not proposed he testify on his data.
[Ed] Battison says Wilcox's methodology is legitimate. One of the ad or media trade groups might be persuaded to present him. All are familiar with Wilcox's earlier study on alcohol, soon to be published, finding no correlation between advertising levels and aggregate sales.
Status: First draft of PEG report is due at TI by Dec. 5.
  • The Committee for Affordable Sports and Entertainment (CASE) was willing last summer to try for a name auto racer, and can be approached again. Philip Morris' special events director believes appearance by a top woman tennis star is not impossible, maybe even [Martina] Navratilova, if the player were allowed a statement of personal disapproval of smoking.
  • Jolly Ann Davidson, past president of the National Association of State Boards of Education (NASBE), reporting on the "Helping Youth Decide" (HYD) community program in Michigan and release of the second Tl-funded NASBE parent guidebook "Helping Youth Say No" (HYS) [33]

1986 Dec 8 The Packwood tax plan was dead but at the end of the year Sam Chilcote is summing up the Tobacco Institute's role in fighting this move. Their main tactics were:

  • A major study done for the TI by Policy Economics Group
  • Another commissioned from DeSeve Economics for the Coalition Against Regressive Taxation (CART) [...which was a front organisation, funded by tobacco to provide 'grassroots' cover.]
  • A paper on the "Burden of Tobacco Taxes on Selected Demographic Groups" [To prove that the burden fell most on those who could afford smoking (and health care) the least.]
  • Some booklet trying to rabble-rouse the Hispanic and Black communities and make them believe Packwood is attacking them racially [Using the 'disadvantaged' and regressive tax arguments].
  • A Citizens for Tax Justice 'poll' on attitudes. and a Coalition Against Regressive Taxation document. [Both general front groups for the cigarette and alcohol]
  • Many op-eds commissioned from a network of cash-for-comment academic economists.[34]

1987 Feb 3 The Tobacco Institute reports that:

Craig Smith, Freedom of Expression Foundation, is a stalwart opponent of advertising bans. Several foundation materials are available:

  • Brochure on the right to advertise, entitled "All Speech is Created Equal," It has been sent to all Senators via a Dear Collegue letter from Sen. Packwood.
  • A video tape lecture series to be donated to colleges and universities. TI and member companies helped fund this project last year. [35]

1987 Feb 12 A CONFIDENTIAL Tobacco Institute memo discusses

the proposed organization, budget, and activities of the Freedom to Advertise Coalition, Inc.
The Coalition would be composed of four principal members — AAAA, AAF, ANA, and MPA [All advertising trade umbrella organizations] — and additional associate members, such as the Tobacco Institute, the Smokeless Tobacco Council,DISCUS [Distilled Spirits lobby], and other trade associations and companies that share the Coalition's concerns about the enactment of legislation that would restrict the advertising of lawful products.

Groups, such as the National Association of Broadcasters and the ACLU, will be encouraged to assist the Coalition in its efforts, even though they will not join formally as principal or associate members.

Patton, Boggs & Blow ultimately will be responsible for coordinating the lobbying and public relations efforts of the group [and be paid] up to a maximum of $200,000 per session of Congress. [36]

[The Freedom of Expression Foundation, ACLU, CASE, CATO Institute and Washington Legal Foundation are all listed as "Additional Supporters.]
It is obvious that the FAC enlisted the same backers as the FEF and was designed to attack the same problem. However the distinction between these two organisations is that the FAC was not controlled by Senator Packwood, and could therefore be portrayed as non-partisan. The FAC was controlled in equal measure (theoretically) by the tobacco industry and the advertising trade groups -- the two industries with the most to lose. It was also not as narrowly focused as FEF on the First Amendment, and this line had already been discounted in importance by the Supreme Court's Puerto Rico decision. FAC also enlisted a wider circle of industry coalitions and trade associations. From this time on, the Tobacco Institute states in its memos that Craig R Smith was a Candidate for Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission. Packwood was obviously seen at that time by President Reagan as an important ally, and Smith must have expected to win some of the credits or benefits.

1987 Mar 16 Senators Packwood and Proxmire were threatening to filibuster to force abandonment of a Bill to codifiy the fairness doctrine into law. [37]

1987 May 1 Sam Chilcote tells his Executive Committee that the threat to cigarette advertising does not look good:

Our resources fall into three categories. Coalitions

  • Freedom to Advertise Coalition (FAC), consisting of major advertising and magazine publishing trade associations (AAAA, AAF, ANA, MPA) plus the active assistance of the newspaper publishers (ANPA) as well as representatives of industries at risk.
  • American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), American Bar Association (ABA), and other First Amendment groups,
  • Freedom of Expression Foundation, a group originally established to challenge the FCC's "equal time provisions" which have the effect of limiting commercial speech.

[38]

1987 May 4 In a memo to his Executive Committee, the President of the Tobacco Institute, Sam Chilcote outlines their allies in the fight to preserve advertising of cigarettes.

The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize the legislative situation, our strategies and resources.

One of these allies is:

• Freedom of Expression Foundation, a group originally established to challenge the FCC's "equal time provisions", which have the effect of limiting commercial speech. Dr. Craig Smith, director of the Foundation and a candidate for Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, has provided support via academic lectures, statements and position papers. [39]

1987 May 5 Sam Chilcote (head of Tobacco Institute) memo to the Executive Committee re. tobacco advertising ban in Canada and the US

Strategies and Programs:

  • Freedom to Advertise Coalition (FAC) , consisting of major, advertising and magazine publishing trade associations (AAAA, AAF, ANA, MPA), plus the active assistance of the newspaper publishers (ANPA), as well as representatives of industries at risk.
  • The Committee for Affordable Sports and Entertainment (CASE) consists of executives f'rom sports sponsored by the industry and is prepared to testify at hearings on cigarette promotion. [Actually a Philip Morris astroturf]
  • American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) , American Bar Association (ABA), and other First Amendment groups including the Reporters' Committee for Freedom, of the Press,
  • Freedom of Expression Foundation, a group originally established to challenge the FCC's "equal time provisions" which have the effect of limiting, commercial speech. Dr. Craig Smith, director of the Foundation and a candidate for Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, has provided support via academic lectures, statements and position papers. [This was a tobacco industry's anti-Banzhaf/Fairness Doctrine project] [40]

1987 Jun 11 Senator Packwood is leaning again on Lorillard to donate to his Freedom of Expression Foundation.

Last year Lorillard was good enough to contribute $2,000 to the Freedom of Expression Foundation's videotaped lecture series. This year I hope you become a member of the Foundation, as have RJR/Nabisco and Philip Morris (their contributions average $10,000 a year). That program was so successful that more than 200 campuses received and are now using those lectures in subjects ranging from journalism and mass communication to advertising and law studies.

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/wpx50e00/pdf

However, Lorillard, to its credit, only coughed up $2,000. http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/brr50e00/pdf [But they still sent it to Packwood, not the FEF, and they also still bccd the accountant at the Tobacco Institute, Peter J Marzullo -- who would only need to know if this check was a subset of a larger agreed industry donation.] [41]

1987 Jul Charles O Whitley, an ex Congressman and now a tobacco industry lobbyist, appeared before the House Committee on Ways and Means as a representative of the Tobacco Institute. He is opposing any increase in excise taxes [42]

1987 Sep 30 Craig Smith writes to Fred Panzer at the Tobacco Institute asking for money once again. [43]

[He still ccs Senator Bob Packwood -- and shows this on his letter to the Tobacco Institute to remind them of the political value of their donation.]

1987 Oct /E The emphasis of the anti-smoking lobby has shifted from outright banning of all advertising, to restricting the way in which cigarettes can be advertised -- ie limiting ads to "Tombstones" (packets) only.

Because these appear to do virtually no damage to the First Amendment, our opponents are encouraged to believe that the industry would lose its support from the legal scholars and the American Civil Liberties Union. Because advertising -- and industry ad spending -- would continue, the anti-smokers suspect that the opposition of the advertising and publishing industries would diminish. Thus, the seemingly more moderate proposals represent a significant threat to the industry.

In order to counter this change in emphasis the Tobacco institute plans to:

Expand Alliance with the Freedom of Expression Foundation
Closer ties appear possible on the counter-advertising issue with this organization whose membership lobbied for the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine. For example, broadcasters objected to the FCC regulation on Constitutional speech grounds, because it mandated airing "fairness" ads or comments -- conceptually very similar.to counter-advertising.

Newspaper and magazine publishers would be similarly threatened by counter-advertising, and unlikely to be any more amenable to providing space.

The Tobacco Institute and some of its member companies already support the Freedom of Expression Foundation. Craig Smith, Ph.D., the director, might make a good witness.

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ktx02f00/pdf

1988 Tobacco Institute document "Advertising Resources" lists

Resources:
1. Freedom to Advertise Coalition, directed by Jim O'Hara of Patton, Boggs, Blow.
2. Inter-Association Council of the Advertising Industry
3. Freedom of Expression Foundation.
4. Washington Legal Foundation, large conservative think tank. [44]

1988 Mar 2 Representative Ted Weiss of New York has introduced a bill which would deny tax deductibility to tobacco advertisers who failed to contribute 5% of their ad budget to a fund for health awareness messages. The Tobacco Industry's counter-measures included the news that...:

We would also expand our reach to include the Freedom of Expression Foundation. This organization's membership lobbied for the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine because it mandated airing "fairness" ads or comments -- conceptually very similar to counter-advertising -- we may make some gains with newspaper and magazine publishers who would be similarly threatened by counter-advertising proposals.

Craig Smith, Ph.D., the director, would make a good witness.

Status: Smith will review the Weiss bill and the general concept of counter-advertising; after which we will decide on op-ed pieces or pamphlets -- or both. [45]

1988 Jun 20 Senator Packwood writes again to Lorillard asking for funds and enclosing the ''"preface and opening chapter from a book the Foundation plans to publish this fall" [Intimating that donors will be able to provide some direction to the contents]

Like no other organization I know, the Freedom of Expression Foundation has been able to combine historic research with new public policy initiatives. Without it, I firmly believe we would still have a host of regulations that impede the free marketplace of ideas.

For example, without their efforts at the FCC and in the courts, I believe we'd still have the fairness doctrine operating.

Your contribution would help the Foundation distribute the book to its extensive network, including many colleges and universities across the country. It would be great if you could provide a $10,000 contribution to the Foundation's tax-exempt Education & Research Fund . [46]

Lorillard gives him another $2,000 and sends the normal bcc to the accountant at the Tobacco Institute. [47]

1988 Jun 20 Senator Packwood writes again to Lorillard asking for funds and enclosing the ''"preface and opening chapter from a book the Foundation plans to publish this fall." [Which could be construed as implying that donors will determine the direction to the contents.]

Like no other organization I know, the Freedom of Expression Foundation has been able to combine historic research with new public policy initiatives. Without it, I firmly believe we would still have a host of regulations that impede the free marketplace of ideas.

For example, without their efforts at the FCC and in the courts, I believe we'd still have the fairness doctrine operating.

Your contribution would help the Foundation distribute the book to its extensive network, including many colleges and universities across the country. It would be great if you could provide a $10,000 contribution to the Foundation's tax-exempt Education & Research Fund .

[48] Lorillard gives another $2,000 and sends the normal bcc to the accountant at the Tobacco Institute. But this time the check is sent to Craig Smith, not to Packwood. [49]

The address given for Smith is his home/office in Washington DC. This suggests that the transfer of the Freedom of Expression Foundation to California was unexpectedly abrupt. [See below]
1988 July Craig Smith relocate his Freedom of Expression Foundation to California, but still continued to work with the Tobacco Institute.

1988 Jul Lawyer Denise Bode of the firm Gold & Liebengood [Howard Liebengood was a trusted long-term employee and lobbyist of the Tobacco Institute] is charging the Tobacco Institute for a "Telephone conversation with Frank Cantrell (Finance)" Cantrell was at this time the chief aide to Senator Packwood. [50]

1988 Jul 30 Fred Panzer reported on the TI's "Advertising Issue".

July ended with yet another hearing on the advertising issue, bringing the total to four in 1988 and eight for the entire 100th Congress. The latest session was convened July 29 by Chairman Waxman for oversight purposes. As usual, it was held on the last Friday of the Month.

The general thrust of the opposition attack suggests a legislative push to reduce the alleged advertising, marketing and sales to youth. Their primary goal appears to be putting tobacco products under FDA control.

In what seemed like a pre-emptive publicity strike, Chairman Luken publicly announced the third version of his advertising bill on the eve of the Waxman hearings.

Their goals in countering these moves were:

To organize a First Amendment cadre of ad agencies, ad clubs, ad media in each of these 20 key locations [The districts of member of Congress on the main committees]

Now that Luken has revived the Synar total ad ban proposal, this activity has a new lease on life.

In addition, the Freedom of Expression Foundation has moved from to Washington, D.C. to California. Craig Smith has received fresh support from member companies, some due to our recommendation. At our request, he is looking into seeding such groups on the West Coast. He is also exploring a symposium perhaps one jointly sponsored by the Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions. [51]

[The Center or the Study of Democratic institutions (CSDI) was run by Nobel Prize winner Linus Pauling in Santa Barbara, Calif.]

1988 Oct 24: At the Califonia State University, the Center for First Amendment Studies website says

The Center was established on October 24, 1988 and has initiated two courses in the University's curriculum: Communication Studies 441, Freedom of Expression and Conscience, and Communication Studies 442, Campaign Persuasion. Both courses are interdisciplinary "capstone" classes on the campus.

[Note it doesn't say when the Center and Smith were integrated into the University's academia.]

1989 Powerpoint presentation lists as Legal Witnesses (lobbyists prepared to appear before Congressional committees):

  • Burt Neuborne, NYU/ACLU
  • Philip Kurland, Univ of Chicago
  • Martin Redish, Northwestern Univ.
  • Barry Lynn, ACLU
  • Morton Halperin, ACLU
  • Dan Popeo, Washington Legal Foundation
  • Craig Smith, Freedom of Expression Foundation
  • Richard Wiley, Former FCC Chairman. [52]

1989 Dec 7 The Tobacco Institute's Public Affairs Division report for the Board of Directors. This document has a section labled Advertising Issues: Resources and Allies:

  • American Civil Liberties Union
  • Washington Legal Foundation
  • Legal Scholars
  • Network of 20 political scientists - Bert Neuborne - Scott Ward - Philip Kurland - Barry Lynn
  • Freedom to Advertise Coalition
    • Advertising trade groups
    • State and local ad clubs
  • Freedom of Expression Foundation
  • Leadership Council on Advertising Issues
  • Council for Commercial Freedom [53]

1990 "All Speech is Created Equal" By Craig R. Smith President, The Freedom of Expression Foundation He is now also the Director, of the Center for First Amendment Studies, California State Univ

Moreover, businesses have a keen interest in protecting their right to convey information to consumers regarding their lawful products and services. In a democratic society like ours, paternalistic restrictions on this flow of information harms consumers and the businesses that serve their needs. Protections that have been extended to commercial speech should be strengthened, not cut back, and all efforts to ban or suppress advertising of legal products should be fought. [54]

1990 Jun 12 Friends of Commercial Speech, Inc (512 Eleventh Street, SE Washington --- Fax (202) 544 0966) are circulating to the Tobacco Institute a computerized form letter trying to promote to 1. Professional athletic organizations 2. Olympic sports 3. Amatuer sports organization on the idea that they are under attack from Al Gore and Joseph P Kennedy II.

This operation is run by

1992 Oct 1 Arthur Stevens of Lorillard writes to Smith, expressing the industry's gratitude for his actions on behalf of advertisers. [56]

1992 Nov The Washington Post carried a story which detailed claims against Senator Packwood for sexual abuse and assault by ten women, chiefly former staffers and lobbyists.[1]

1992 Dec Packwood defeated Democrat Les AuCoin in the elections. Publication of the Washington Post sex-abuse story has been delayed; Packwood had denied the allegations. and the Post had not gathered enough of the story at the time.

As the situation developed, Packwood's diary became an issue. Wrangling over whether the diary could be subpoenaed and whether it was protected by the Fifth Amendment's protection against self-incrimination ensued.

He did turn over 5000 pages to the Senate Ethics Committee but balked when a further 3200 pages were demanded by the committee. It was discovered that he had edited the diary, removing what were allegedly references to sexual encounters and the sexual abuse allegations made against him.

Packwood then made what some of his colleagues interpreted as a threat to expose wrongdoing by other members of Congress.

The diary allegedly detailed some of his abusive behavior toward women and, according to a press statement made by former Nevada Senator Richard Bryan, "raised questions about possible violations of one or more laws, including criminal laws." [2]

1995 Mar 3 Arthur Stevens of Lorillard sending Craig Smith a check for $2,000 representing Lorillard's

"1995 contribution to the Freedom of Expression Foundation ... for your efforts in support of First Amendment and related commercial free speech and advertising matters." [57]

[Note this has ben ccd to The Honorable Robert Packwood , US Senate. They needed to let him know they were still paying his bribe.]

1995 Sep 7 Senator Packwood has finally announced his resignation from the Senate after the Senate Ethics Committee unanimously recommended that he be expelled for ethical misconduct. Soon after leaving the Senate, Packwood founded the lobbying firm Sunrise Research Corporation. The former senator used his expertise in taxes and trade and his status as a former Senate Finance Committee chairman to land lucrative contracts with numerous clients, among them Northwest Airlines, Freightliner Corp. and Marriott International Inc

1995 Nov 1 Josh Slavitt of Philip Morris is memoing his group over a San Francisco adverting ban they were fighting. He lists the allies that can be recruited to support their defense:

    • From the ad expert side, Michelle Wolfe is in the Marketing Department at University of California, San Francisco campus — she testified in Contra Costa and I understand did a good job. I will see if she is free. If not, her former PhD professor, Tim Meyer, has also appeared at similar hearings in other states.
    • Craig Smith - Freedom of Expression Foundation - is located in California (310-598-3444). He also teaches First Amendment Rights at University of Southern California. His organization can testify and he is more than willing to help out.
    • American Advertising Federation's Western Region office is also Headquartered in Los Angeles. I'll call them and ask that they get in touch with you. Their Executive Director should also be called on to testify.

1996 Philip Morris's Budget for Ellen Merlo's unit has

Tobacco Issues Mgt,:
$500,000 (includes continued support of law enforcement, fire prevention and public policy groups such as Atlas Economic Research Institute, Media Institute, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, and The Freedom of Expression Foundation).

Additional Shared Public Policy Group Grants:
$500,000 (includes continued joint support of the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, The Tax Foundation, Americans for Tax Reform, Alexis de Tocqueville Institute, Capitol Research Center, Heritage Foundation, American Policy Foundation, Citizens for a Sound Economy Foundation and other 501(c)(3) public policy organizations. [59]

1996 Feb 26 Writing a "Dear Arthur" thank-you-for-funds letter to Arthur Stevens at Lorillard. Craig Smith lists the accomplishments gained with these tobacco industry funds as:

  • our amicus filings before the Supreme Court.
  • my scholarly study of commercial speech decisions appeared as the lead article in the Free Speech Yearbook.
  • [this] served as a basis for our comments before the Food and Drug Administratiom
  • [made] educational studies possible here at California State University, Long Beach.
  • [publication of] our monograph series examining the relationship between the First Amendment and new technology.
  • [and] our book Silencing the Opposition: Govemment Strategies of Suppression will be published by the State University of New York later this year.
  • Our latest whitepaper examines the alleged causal relationship between violence on television and in society exposing the weakness of many social scientific studies
  • [also to] update our study on academic freedom which has been used on several campuses to combat "speech codes" and served as the primer for a national teleconference orginating. on our campus.

He also says he addressed the Annual Meeting of the Speech Communications Association, and spoke at Western States Communications Association meeting in Los Angeles. [60]

1996 May 20 The Supreme Court remanded Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. Schmoke which had upheld a ban on outdoor advertising of liquor in Baltimore. This beer company was one of the FEF's primary backers.

1997 Freedom of Expression Foundation Payments from Philip Morris USA to Policy Institutes. They received $20,000 through Tom Borelli [61]

1997 Nov

1997 Philip Morris annual grants to helpful tax-free 501(c)3 institutes.
Payments controlled by Tom Borelli, Scientific Affairs
Org. Amount Reason
Freedom of Expression Foundation $ 20,000 [Run by Craig Smith for Senator Packwood]
American Enterprise Institute $100,000 [Money from Worldwide Regulatory Affairs budget]
Cato Institute $175,000
Competitive Enterprise Institute $125,000
ETV of South Carolina $300,000
Free Congress Foundation $300,000 [Paul Weyrich - Coors]
Defenders of Property Rights $ 45,000 [Wise-use]
The Advancement of Sound
Science Coalition (TASSC) 		$200,000 [Whist contibuted $50k]
Small Business Survival
Committee and Foundation 		$100,000 via the Issues Management budget
American Spectator mag.
and Foundation 		$ 50,000 via the Issues Management budget
Policy Research and Education Project $ 25,000
Annapolis Center $ 25,000
Education Research Institute $ 60,000
Tom Borrelli was Scientific Issues Manager at this time. http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/qwi82c00/pdf http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/fah53a00/pdf
Despite these all being registered as non-profit/non-political organisations, Borrelli was dealing out $1.525m a year, with $900K being allocated to the international Board Allocation Contribution (BAC) account: $715K to the Policy & Civic budget: $185K to the domestic USA BAC; and $625K to various Administrative budgets (for pseudo organizions run by their own staff) http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/fah53a00/pdf

  Craig Smith was given a sinecure at the University of Southern California where he taught First Amendment Studies. He remained a President of the Freedom of Expression Foundation, and simultaneously became the Director of the Center for First Amendment One quote:

"All Speech is Created Equal" By Craig R. Smith President, The Freedom of Expression Foundation (and) Director, The Center for First Amendment.

    (The constitutional rights that have)... been extended to commercial speech should be strengthened, not cut back, and all efforts to ban or suppress advertising of legal products should be fought."[62]

  MISCELLANEOUS QUOTE BELOW on the First Amendment Center SOURCE UNKNOWN

an operating program of the ]]Freedom Forum]] and is associated with the Newseum and the Diversity Institute. Its offices on the Vanderbilt campus are located in the John Seigenthaler Center; and in Washington, at the Newseum. The center's programs provide education and information to the public and groups including First Amendment scholars and experts, educators, government policy makers, legal experts and students. The center is nonpartisan and does not lobby or litigate.

The Freedom Forum, based in Washington, D.C., is a nonpartisan foundation that champions the First Amendment as a cornerstone of democracy.

The Freedom Forum is the main funder of the operations of the Newseum in Washington, D.C., the First Amendment Center and the Diversity Institute. The First Amendment Center and the Diversity Institute are housed in the John Seigenthaler Center at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn. The First Amendment Center also has offices in Washington and the Diversity Institute has offices and programs at the University of South Dakota in Vermillion. [63]

Craig Smith has the only biog at the First Amendment Center site, but Press contacts are given as Gene Policinski: gpolicinski@fac.org 615/727-1600 and David L. Hudson Jr.: dhudson@fac.org


  1. ↑ Robert Packwood in Wikipedia
  2. ↑ See Robert Packwood in Wikipedia
Retrieved from "https://dev.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Freedom_of_Expression_Foundation&oldid=703817"