Independent Institute oakland

Not to be confused with the Independence Institute, a conservative think-tank based in Golden, Colorado.

or independent in DENVER co jon c

KOCH JAMES BUCH GMU CASH FOR ECON CTR STUD PUBLIC CHOICE MORISS IHS VEDDER TOLLISON GILDER aier AUSTRIAN

JULIAN SIMON ~ EHRLICH

EXXON

WILLIE SOON

THIEL

TOBACCO

===

NAS CONF 2020

Dark-Moneyed Denialists Are Running 'Fixing Science' Symposium of Doubt - DeSmog

nepo prez?

mary-theroux-1629a713

Independent Institute | LinkedIn

Sat, Apr 25, 2026, 8:30 AM

California’s Decline: A Warning to America

Independent Institute 2 attendees

pr 20, 2026, 10:00 AM

Cuba’s Path to Freedom: A Blueprint for a Post-Communist Transition

Independent Institute 1 attendee

CHRIS COYNE

ODDLY NO PPL

Pages people also viewed

[Pacific Research Institute Think Tanks

1,093 followers](https://www.linkedin.com/company/pacific-research-institute/)

[Cato Institute Think Tanks

66,126 followers](https://www.linkedin.com/company/cato-institute/)

[Mises Institute Book and Periodical Publishing

10,944 followers](https://www.linkedin.com/company/mises/)

[Foundation for Economic Education Think Tanks

26,828 followers](https://www.linkedin.com/company/feeonline/)

[American Institute for Economic Research - AIER Research Services

15,321 followers](https://www.linkedin.com/company/aierdotorg/)

[Reason Foundation Think Tanks

7,539 followers](https://www.linkedin.com/company/reason-foundation/)

[Free the People Think Tanks

1,995 followers](https://www.linkedin.com/company/freethepeople/)

[Young Voices Public Relations and Communications Services

2,711 followers](https://www.linkedin.com/company/youngvoicesorg/)

[

Tate & 1 other school alum work here](http://www.linkedin.com/search/results/people/?origin=COMPANY_PAGE_CANNED_SEARCH&currentCompany=%5B%223282990%22%5D&schoolFilter=%5B%224373%22%5D)

[Institute for Humane Studies Non-profit Organizations

6,600 followers](https://www.linkedin.com/company/instituteforhumanestudies/)

[Hoover Institution, Stanford University Think Tanks

49,363 followers](https://www.linkedin.com/company/hoover-institution-at-stanford-university/)

[

Kathleen follows this page](http://www.linkedin.com/in/caffreyka)

[The Heritage Foundation Think Tanks

113,285 followers](https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-heritage-foundation/)

[IREF Research

1,131 followers](https://www.linkedin.com/company/iref/)

[Freedom Conservatism Public Policy Offices

1,982 followers](https://www.linkedin.com/company/freedom-conservatism/)

[Competitive Enterprise Institute Think Tanks

1,890 followers](https://www.linkedin.com/company/competitive-enterprise-institute/)

[Young Americans for Liberty Political Organizations

5,838 followers](https://www.linkedin.com/company/young-americans-for-liberty/)

[Charles Koch Institute Philanthropic Fundraising Services

10,996 followers](https://www.linkedin.com/company/charles-koch-institute/)

[Goldwater Institute Public Policy

5,861 followers](https://www.linkedin.com/company/goldwater-institute/)

[State Policy Network Think Tanks

4,186 followers](https://www.linkedin.com/company/state-policy-network/)

[Acton Institute Think Tanks

7,920 followers](https://www.linkedin.com/company/actoninstitute/)

[National Review Book and Periodical Publishing

9,809 followers](https://www.linkedin.com/company/national-review/)

william-shughart-b33b2a20

willie soon 3 yrs ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zrejG-WI3U

Trump divide among American conservative professors - PMC

...

There are interesting contrasts in clusters of affiliations. The Trumpists tend to cluster around a few think tanks. There are 35 think tanks with 2 or more Trumpists, 19 with 4 or more, and 5 with 8 or more. The clustering tends to occur around ideologically oriented right-wing centers, such as the Claremont Institute (16), the Heritage Foundation (9), the Federalist Society (8), the Heartland Institute (8), the Independent institute (12), the League of the South (5), and the Abbeville Institute (4) (see Table 1) .30

---

Independent Institute

Attn: Development

100 Swan Way, Suite 200

Oakland, CA 94621

2/21

Mr. Whitehouse has led the call to pursue fossil fuel companies and their allies on accusations of federal racketeering. Critics of the effort have decried it as a violation of free speech.

Two weeks ago, Mr. Walker agreed to pull a subpoena that named more than 100 academics, universities and think tanks as part of his probe of Exxon Mobil. The list has since become something of a badge of honor for free market groups.

Jon Caldara, president of the Independence Institute in Denver, said he was offended to have been left off the subpoena, which he attributed to confusion with the Independent Institute in Oakland, California.

“AGs! Here I am! I’ve been subpoenaed many times,” Mr. Caldara said on his Colorado Public Broadcasting show “Devil’s Advocate.” “Bring it on!”

Mr. Walker said in a statement that the Exxon litigation had become a distraction. He also has pulled two subpoenas against the Competitive Enterprise Institute, which now is suing him for sanctions.

phase 4 run by

very long

https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Cash_for_Comments_Economists_Network

The Cash for Comments network of 127 (in total over ten years) American Professors of Economics (with a few law and business professors), was one of the most successful, and long-lasting of all the scams run by the tobacco industry. It was the brain-child of Professor Robert D. Tollison at George Mason University's libertarian think-tank, the Center for the Study of Public Choice (CSPC), and James M Savarese of Ogilvy & Mather Public Relations.

Savarese later took the lobbying operation out of O&M and ran it through his own private lobbying company James Savarese & Associates with a skeleton staff -- and in partnership with Tollison and his wife Anna Tollison. Later Savarese turned up, once again, as a key lobbyist with Ogilvy Adams & Rinehart, so clearly this had always been a surreptitious O&M operation - kept at arms length and legally separated from that large company - probably for legal reasons.

Essentially, Savarese and Tollison recruited as network members at least one Professor of Economics in each State University (they were poorly paid and welcomed the chance to make money on the side). He used his list of members and associates within the Center for Study of Public Choice and the Public Choice Society which he jointly controlled with Gordon Tullock and James Buchanan at George Mason University.

The foundation document of this network was a memo "Excise Tax Speaking Forums" sent by Ogilvy & Mather to FredPanzer at the Tobacco Instituteon the 20th November 1984 [2]. It refers to a forum sponsored by the Public Choice Society to be held in New Orleans (Feb 21-23 1985) which had four core-group network speakers on a major panel, which was being organised for the tobacco industry by Tollison and Savarese. This early manifestation came to be called the Committee on Taxation & Economic Growth.

Public Choice Libertarian ideology

'Public Choice Economics' in the context of the day, was a catch-phrase meaning "free-markets, less government, reduced regulation" of goods and services. It was the ultra-libertarian economic ideology of UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher which was followed (as much as he was capable of understanding it) by President Ronald Reagan in the USA. It's main emphasis was on deregulation of industries -- even those with poisoning and polluting proplems - and in Reagan's case it led to major scandals with the forced retirement of over 20 top staff from the EPA, and the hurried exit ofThorne Auchter as head of the Occupational Safety & Health Administration and his (later) lobbying partner James J Tozzias the administration's "Deregulation Czar" (Office of Information & Regulatory Affairs - OIRA/OMB).

Payment system

The tobacco industry paid no retainer fees to the general Cash-for-Comment network members. However they did retain some of the core network and paid higher fees to a half-dozen of the Society economist recruited as part of the Committee on Taxation & Economic Growth. Network members were employed purely on pay-for-service transactions, and expected to also make some extra cash from the newspapers which accepted their op-eds.

RELATED ENTRIES
Com. on Tax & Economic Growth
Economists' network
Robert Tollison & James Savarese
C4C Network Documents
C4C Network Members

Savarese and Tollison would put out a request to each network member, specifying the subject to be covered and including a few of the key themes to be promoted, together with any essential statistics. The professor-member was then expected to:

write an op-ed piece following the theme and guidelines provided (usually 1000-1500 words), but in layman's language.
send the article to the editor of a local city newspaper (specified by the minders). It was probably assumed that some would be paid a token freelance writer's fee by the newspaper. ($100-$250 at this time)
if the article was published (and many were since they were essentially free) then photocopies of the article were to be sent to two local Representatives or Congressmen (specified by the tobacco staff)
copies of the published piece would then be returned to Savarese for payment.

The professors would then be paid between$600 and $3000 for their efforts by way of the Center for the Study of Public Choice at George Mason University; the amount varied over time.

The articles were commissioned via Savarese's staff, and the draft article was expected to be returned to the Institute for checking. They would make any necessary changes, and pass it through one or more of their major outside law firms for vetting. Sometimes Savarese or his staff might make changes also. Newspapers were designated in each region, so two or more articles didn't conflict.If the article was published (and sometimes even if they weren't) copies were to a designated Representative or Senator, with a note bringing the economist's 'independent opinion' to the Congressman's notice.

They were also paid to write letters-to-the-editor whenever the opportunity arose to promote the cigarette industry's line. For a period in 1987-88 the network was extended to also include Professors of Law and Business.

https://www.desmogblog.com/2020/02/07/dark-moneyed-denialists-fixing-science-symposium-doubt

The “Fixing Science” symposium, which is hosted by the National Association of Scholars and kicks off today in Oakland, California, includes credible speakers who want to improve some areas of science hurt by the use of poor statistical methods or making irreproducible claims.

Unfortunately, they are outnumbered by people who have often cast doubt on mainstream climate, environmental, and health sciences. For starters, who thinks that long-time fossil fuel–funded Patrick Michaels, a senior fellow with the climate science–denying Competitive Enterprise Institute, will “fix science”? UPDATE 02/10/20: NAS Brochure at Symposium.

I was first tipped off to the swarm of climate science deniers at this meeting by Lenny Teytelman on Twitter, who said he found seven climate deniers (an undercount), and by Oxford professor Dorothy Bishopin her January 12 blog post, “Should I stay or should I go?…” about this meeting and whether scientists should engage with those with dissenting views in a situation like this.

Both provided useful insight and information, which I've consolidated with other research here.

Professor Bishop summarized well:

“But, I reiterate, the main point is not whether NatAsSchlols is left- or right-wing. It's the weird structuring of the meeting, which juxtaposes a set of experts in the 'reproducibility crisis' with a set of individuals who promote scientific views that are far from mainstream … You know your arguments would not survive scrutiny by experts familiar with evidence in the area, so you don't invite those (and to be fair, it's unlikely that they'd come anyway, as there are diminishing returns in engaging with those whose minds are fixed). But what you can do is to cast doubt on all scientific evidence by inviting along those who are questioning the solidity and credibility of current scientific practices. That's what is happening here.” [emphasis added]

Many speakers at this meeting have been affiliated with groups known for anti-science efforts, either ideologically or financially, funded mostly by dark money. When their funding sources are accessible, they include the usual companies (fossil fuels, tobacco, and chemical) and private conservative foundations, which lines up with 2013 research by sociologist Robert Brulle, summarized in my post “Study Details Dark Money Flowing to Climate Science Denial.”

A few other speakers have often worked in “product defense,” an area covered well by David Michaels in Triumph of Doubt(2020) (review). I'm compiling here a list of the speakers and organizations who are more often denying science than trying to fix it. People should be very wary of those listed in red, and I've included links to more information for those who want to do their own research.

The Fixing Science symposium sponsors are the National Association of Scholars (NAS, which should not be confused with the reputable U.S. National Academy of Sciences, which also goes by NAS) and The Independent Institute (TII). The former is led by Peter Wood and the latter by David Theroux, both vocal (but non-technical) climate science deniers.

Anti-science Groups

I've scoured IRS Form 990 data (line 8) for the four organizations affiliated with the most symposium speakers, a search that yielded total grants received each year from 2003-2017, shown in Table A. But such 501(c)(3) “public charities” need not report the sources of those grants. Using the candid.org website, I've compiled the information in the spreadsheet, “Grants To Think Tanks,whose two sheets each contain a Table 1 that lists all 1,528 grants, and a Table 2 that summarizes them.

The first sheet sorts by Recipient-Donor-Year, the second by Donor-Recipient-Year. Donor Advised Funds (DAFs) like Donors Trust and Donors Capital Funddo report grants they make, but their legal structure makes it impossible to know the original sources of the funding. Perhaps that was not dark enough for some donors. The huge Fidelity Charitable DAF started making grants to the same four organizations in 2015. It is impossible to know who got the idea first, but by 2016, Charles Koch was routing millions of dollars through that DAF.

In Table A, the Miss % is the fraction of total grant money given directly by corporations or others, so not reported on 990PF forms, and therefore, invisible to the public. Adding DAF% and Miss % yields Dark %, which shows the extent of dark money. The Heartland Institute's DAF% is high, as it receives roughly a third of its money (32%) via Donors Trust/Capital Fund.

In the tables below, CD indicates promotion of Climate Denial and TD shows persistent Tobacco Defense, with lower case implying a lesser degree. Appearing in red shows clear, well-documented anti-science behavior, generally to create doubt about science that conflicts with business interests.

DeSmog readers are likely familiar with many of the better known groups, or can click on the profiles, so this section will focus on lesser known groups...much more charts, ...

01. David Theroux founded and runs TII, which has promoted anti-climate science efforts for decades and ran Big Tobacco's Cash for Economists Network starting in 1996. Nicotine addiction really only works for most people during adolescent brain development (roughly 10-24) and youth are especially deterred by higher prices, so this was an effort to help Big Tobacco addict adolescents and kill them slowly. An Industry Documents Library search for “David Theroux” returns 13 hits, such as this letter, from Philip Morris to Theroux in 1994:

“On behalf of Philip Morris USA, I am pleased to enclose a check in the amount of $5,000 to officially maintain our company as a patron sponsor of the Institute ($1,000) for 1995 and to support the Institute's research activities ($4,000)….”

William F. Shughart II wrote a 1995 book against “sin taxes” like those on cigarettes:

“Hence, when David Theroux of the Independent Institute contacted me to ask whether I might be interested in putting together a volume that would explore the purposes and effects of tax policy in regulating consumption choices, I eagerly accepted. Let me here acknowledge the Independent Institute's financial sponsorship and David Theroux' encouragement along the way.”

02. Peter Wood got a PhD in anthropology, but seems to have published little if any peer-reviewed research. He has written several books via Encounter Books, which has published three books for Roy Spencer (DeSmog). Do they publish science?...

lucas $

https://blog.independent.org/2020/05/27/the-stand-at-paxton-county-puts-leftist-activism-at-center-of-corruption-drama/

:{ Stand at Paxton County:(style="box-sizing:border-box"):}:, an independently produced drama now streaming on Netflix, has a surprisingly straightforward message: Our freedoms and property rights are at risk when dogmatic special interests use the legislative process to achieve their goals. Moreover, poorly designed legislation opens the door to corruption.

The movie, produced by Forrest Films (founded by entrepreneurs :{Forrest and Charlotte Lucas:(style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;font-style:inherit;font-variant:inherit;font-stretch:inherit;vertical-align:baseline"):}:), does something else unusual for contemporary films: It raises awareness and makes relevant the plight of ranchers and farmers under a gun from political activists. Many of these advocates know little, or don’t seem to care, about this industry, its culture, and its values.

While a few think tanks and other nonprofits work on these issues—the :{Mountain States Legal Foundation:(style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;font-style:inherit;font-variant:inherit;font-stretch:inherit;vertical-align:baseline"):}: and :{Property and Environment Research Center:(style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;font-style:inherit;font-variant:inherit;font-stretch:inherit;vertical-align:baseline"):}: (PERC), to name two—contemporary filmmakers largely ignore the political threats to the modern small farm. As a result, even well-meaning activists tend to misinterpret, or misunderstand, the nature of agricultural businesses and family-owned enterprises that work on or beyond the urban fringe.

The story underlying The Stand, inspired by a real event, centers on a family’s attempt to save its farm from corrupt public officials in South Dakota. Dell Connelly (Michael O’Neill, Messiah, Scandal), an aging and ailing ranch owner, is coming out of a particularly brutal winter. His horses and livestock are the bread and butter of his operations. His horses are skinny and, to the naked eye, look malnourished. Connelly and other ranchers know that this condition is cyclical and that their horses will soon return to a healthy weight.

A new state law, however, allows anyone to claim animal abuse, triggering an investigation by a local veterinarian (Marwa Bernstein). Connelly’s livelihood, and the family farm, are threatened when the vet declares his horses unfit and abused, and the local sheriff (Christopher McDonald, Ballers, Real Bros of Simi Valley) seizes his livestock.

All of this is suspicious to Connelly’s estranged daughter Janna (Jacqueline Toboni, The L Word, Grimm), an army combat medic summoned home when her father becomes gravely ill. She sees that the ranch has fallen into disrepair despite her father’s hiring of a full-time ranch hand. Nevertheless, the horses, including her favorite, seem healthy if a bit thin from the winter. She begins to investigate. Soon, Janna suspects the long-time sheriff is hiding something, and may be in collusion with a local veterinarian.

The Stand is surprisingly engaging despite its use of well-trodden themes. Corrupt law enforcement figures, particularly sheriffs, :{are a staple of the traditional westerns and modern thrillers:(style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;font-style:inherit;font-variant:inherit;font-stretch:inherit;vertical-align:baseline"):}: (e.g., Unforgiven, Rambo: First Blood, Young Guns, just to name a few). The estranged child returning to find their roots is also so familiar it’s cliché. But Toboni’s portrayal of the daughter, pushed away then reluctantly pulled back by family obligations, is convincing.

The twist that The Standbrings to the screen is its explicit tie-on to state level politics and the local corruption it engenders. Fortunately, the plot follows a more conventional thriller line, bringing the audience along as Janna unearths clues to the corruption even as it puts her life at risk. Thus, the audience engages through the drama rather than a lecture on politics. While the plot and the climax are predictable, the twists and setting are sufficiently different that audiences are likely to stay focused and in the story.

The sheriff and the veterinarian are not nuanced characters, but given the genre and film tradition, most audiences won’t stumble on these tropes. Janna’s journey from estranged child driven away by a difficult father to later appreciate the values, hard work, and simplicity of ranch life is well scripted and convincing. The movie also wrestles effectively with the tension between a population increasingly distant from its agrarian legacy, and largely ignorant of its practices, and those who remain committed to the lifestyle and business.

The Standis most likely to lose its audience when it fails to give dimension to the animal rights activists. The advocates are caricatures, equating them to the greed of the sheriff and vet. The failure to give these characters more complexity limits the movie’s ability to elevate the story and broaden its appeal to general audiences.

Nevertheless, The Stand at Paxton County is entertaining and a welcome entry into an emerging genre (now dominated by progressives) of films crafted to entertain and raise awareness about social-justice issues. In this case, the injustice is meted out against ranchers and farmers. The movie and Forrest Films deserves praise for addressing this little understood or recognized problem in rural America even if it might stumble in reaching a truly broad audience.

Samuel R. Staley is a Research Fellow at the Independent Institute and Director of the DeVoe L. Moore Center in the College of Social Sciences and Public Policy at Florida State University. He is a contributing author to the Independent books, *Property Rights* and *Housing America*.

Beacon Posts by Samuel R. Staley | Full Biography and Publications

julian simon

http://www.:{sourcewatch:(style="background-color:#ffff66;"):}:.org/index.php/Independent_Institute

-ce:

The Independence Institute has recently launched the Patient Power website to address US healthcare reform issues.^{[4]^}(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_Institute#cite_note-PatientPower-3)

They have also created Mothers Against Debt, a site criticizing the US national debt.^{[5]^}(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_Institute#cite_note-MothersAgainstDebt-4)

[] Controversy

The Institute holds an annual Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) party, to promote drinking, smoking, and shooting as a "fundamental right". Independent Institute President Jon Caldara is quoted as saying: “Now remember, a year from now President [Barack] Obama might make all three activities of smoking, drinking and shooting completely illegal. This might be our very, very last opportunity.” In 2008, the event drew a crowd of around 200 supporters.^{[6]^}(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_Institute#cite_note-ColoradoIndependent-5)

The Institute has been accused of promoting misinformation on global warming by Media Matters for America. The Institute provided several media platforms to James Taylor of the Heartland Institute. Taylor's claims about global warming were disputed by Media Matters, including that there is No scientific consensus on man-made global warming. The article also notes donations of $561,500 from 1998 to 2005 to Taylor's Heartland Institute.^{[7]^}(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_Institute#cite_note-MMClimate-6)

Independent Institute	Independent Institute
Established	1986
President	David J. Theroux
Location	:{Oakland, California:(style="background-color:#ffff66;"):}:
Address	100 Swan Way, Oakland, CA 94621-1428
Website	www.independent.org

The Independent Institute is a libertarian^{[^^1]^}(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Independent_Institute#cite_note-0) think tank based in Oakland, California. Founded in 1986 by David J. Theroux [5], the Institute sponsors studies of major political, social, economic, legal, environmental and foreign policy issues. It has more than 140 research fellows. The Institute was originally established in San Francisco, and was re-located in 1989 to Oakland. In 2006 the Institute opened an office in Washington, D.C. Its symbol is a lighthouse, chosen because of its symbolism of how services commonly regarded as public goods can be privately owned and operated.^{[^^2]^}(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Independent_Institute#cite_note-1)

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Independent_Institute

Independent Institute

From SourceWatch

Jump to: navigation, search

This article is part of the Tobacco portal on Sourcewatch funded from 2006 - 2009 by the American Legacy Foundation. Help expose the truth about the tobacco industry.

The Independent Institute (TII) is a think tank that was founded in 1986 by David J. Theroux, who is also the president of the think tank.

TII has been a vocal opponent of the "war on drugs", immigration restrictions, corporate welfare, censorship, the neoconservative ("Bush Doctrine") of pre-emptive war, restrictions on reproductive rights, and the death penalty. Some of their analysts oppose the dominant view of scientists of the need for urgent action to curb greenhouse gas emissions.

Contents[hide]

TII, Microsoft Money and Oracle's Private Investigators

In May 1999 The Independent Institute published the book Winners, Losers and Microsoft: Competition and Antitrust in High Technology by Stan J. Liebowitz and Stephen E. Margolis. A media release promoting the book stated that the book "makes a compelling case that the real danger to American high technology leadership is a too powerful, too intrusive government which believes it knows consumer preferences and needs better than they do." [1]

On June 2, 1999 The Independent Institute "sponsored" full-page advertisements - titled Open Letter on Antitrust Protectionism - in the Washington Post and the New York Times. The ads were signed by 240 academic economists and claimed "headline-grabbing cases against Microsoft, Intel, Cisco Systems, Visa and MasterCard, along with a flurry of merger investigations now under way, would appear to demonstrate the need for a vigorously enforced antitrust policy that will create checks and balances to eliminate consumer harm. However, consumers did not ask for these antitrust actions — rival business firms did. [2] (Pdf) (See accompanying media release). The advertisement also promoted Winners, Losers and Microsoft: Competition and Antitrust in High Technology. The same day, TII held a media conference in Washington D.C. unveiling the advertisements as well, co-inciding with the resumption of the anti-trust trial involving Microsoft.

A little over three months later New York Times reporter Joel Brinkley revealed that the advertisements had been paid for by Microsoft. Public relations manager for the company, Greg Shaw, told Brinkley that "we thought this was an important, substantive letter, and we were interested in contributing to making it visible. In our view, the letter speaks for itself." [3] Based on internal TII documents "provided to The New York Times by a Microsoft adversary associated with the computer industry who refused to be further identified", Brinkley revealed that Microsoft "has secretly served as the institute's largest outside financial benefactor in the last year." [4]

Brinkley reported that while TII's Theroux had "long acknowledged" Microsoft as a funder of the think tank, he downplayed the company's role as being "just one of 2,000 members" which had paid an annual membership fee of roughly $10,000 a year. Theroux told Brinkley that all Microsoft gained was "free copies of our publications, discounted tickets to our events" and denied that Microsoft had any role with the newspaper ads which he said were "were paid for out of our general funds." [5]

However, TII internal documents revealed that Microsoft had contributed $203,217 for the year to that June, making it the single largest contributor. Brinkley calculated that Microsoft's contribution amounted to approximately 20% of the funds in that year from external sources, excluding $304,725 that Theroux contributed to his own foundation. [6]

One of the documents provided to Brinkley was a bill for $153,868.67 covering the cost of the ads plus Theroux's travel expenses from San Francisco to Washington for the news conference. The bill was sent to Microsoft's John Kelly. When asked by Brinkley about the bill Theroux confirmed that Microsoft had paid for the ads but claimed it made no difference. "The academic process we use is independent of sources of revenue," he said. [7]

When contacting the academics to sign on to their advertisement, TII did not disclose Microsoft's funding. One of the At least one academic who signed the ad disagreed. Simon Hakim, an economist at Temple University told Brinkley "He should have told us. I would not have participated if I had known. It's not right to use people as a vehicle for special interests," he said. [8] Nor did Stan Liebowitz, one of the co-authors of the TII published book Winners, Losers and Microsoft, know of the company's funding though he stated "it doesn't matter to me." [9]

The day after Brinkley's article appeared, Theroux issued a media release focussing on the origin of the documents from a Microsoft adversary and claiming they had been "stolen". However, Theroux did not dispute the specific funding amounts referred to. He stated that "our final year-end records do not agree with the numbers he had been provided by his source" and claimed that at the media conference he had stated that the Microsoft funding amounted only to 7%. "It now appears the final figure is about 8%, a statistically insignificant difference, and far less than the 20% figure Mr. Brinkley claimed in his article," Theroux claimed. [10]

In June 2000 the Wall Street Journal was revealed that the TII funding documents had been obtained by by staff of Investigative Group International, a private investigation firm hired by Microsoft's rival Oracle. The WSJ reported that while Theroux suspected they had been stolen, those familiar with the operation hinted that they were obtaibed by rifling through the think tank's office trash. [11]

Environmental Issues

Much of the Anti-Global Warming rhetoric published by The Independent Institute is the work of a few persons, and one stands out, both in quantity of releases, as well as notoriety, S. Fred Singer. Some of the other analysts of The Independent Institute agree that the environment is a pressing concern, including the issue of greenhouse gas emissions. Where they dissent from current environmental theory is in the proper methodologies for remediation, and they propose strong private property and free market solutions, a libertarian model for environmentalism.

Tobacco Industry

Robert D. Tollison, Richard E. Wagner and Thomas Gale Moore are members of the Board of Advisors at TII, Gary Anderson, Robert Ekelund, Dwight R. Lee, Mark Thornton and S. Fred Singer are Research Fellows at TII and Richard Vedder is Senior Fellow at TII. Most of them have a long history of working for the Tobacco Institute (TI) and/or Philip Morris and all nine were also members of the 'Academic Advisory Board' for the pro-tobacco junk science report 'Science, Economics, and Environmental Policy: A Critical Examination' published by the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution (AdTI) on August 11, 1994. AdTI received money from both TI and Philip Morris. (See: AdTI-Funding)

Funding

On its website TII states that it "receives no government funding. Instead, it draws its support from a diverse range of foundations, businesses and individuals, and the sale of its publications and other services." [12] The Institute does not list its contributors on its website, stating their rationale for this is in compliance with the Donor's Bill of Rights. However, the Donor's Bill of Rights does not require secrecy.

However, some funders of the Institute have been identified. These include:

Philip Morris contributed a donation of $10,000 in 1997 [13] and a donation of $25,000 in 1998. [14]
Exxon donated $10,000 in 1998 [15]; $5,000 in 2000 and 2001, $10,000 as Exxon Mobil in 2002 [16]; $10,000 in 2003 and $30,000 in 2005. [17]
The San Francisco Foundation contributed $10,000 in fiscal year 2000 (July 1, 1999-June 30, 2000) ([18])

According to Media Transparency, TII has received $718,000 (unadjusted for inflation) between 1995 and 2005. [19] Grants have included those from:

The John M. Olin Foundation gave in 1996 to The Independent Institute $40,000 for "The promotion of two books: The Diversity Myth, by David O. Sacks and Peter a Thiel; and The Melting Pot, by Richard K. Vedder and Lowell E. Gallaway" and in 1998 another $25,000 for "The Institute's book program".
The David H. Koch Charitable Foundation gave in 1995 - 2001 in total $160,000 for "General Operating Support".
The Earhart Foundation gave in 1998 - 2001 in total $46,095 to support editor Dr. Robert Higgs.
The Castle Rock Foundation gave in 2002 for "General operating support" $25,000.

Personnel

The number of personnel involved in the Independent Institute as Directors, Senior Fellows, Research Fellows and others is so extensive that it has been posted to a separate page. See The Independent Institute/Personnel

Contact info

:{The Independent Institute

100 Swan Way, Oakland, CA 94621-142}:8

Orders: 1-800-927-8733 1-800-927-8733

Phone: (510) 632-1366 (510) 632-1366

Fax: (510) 568-6040

web site: http://www.independent.org

Related Links

Funding

Independent Institute, Oakland, CA, Media Transparency, 2002
Charity Navigator rating of The Independent Institute, August 28, 2006

TII, Microsoft and Anti-Trust Law

Dominick T. Armentano, *Antitrust and Monopoly*, The Independent Institute, 199. ISBN 0-945999-62-3
Stan Liebowitz and Stephen Margolis, *Winners, Losers, & Microsoft: Competition and Antitrust in High Technology*, The Independent Institute, 1999. ISBN 0-945999-80-1 (Hardback); ISBN 0-945999-84-4 (Softback).
The Independent Institute, "Open Letter on Antitrust Protectionism", June 2, 1999
Joel Brinkley, "'Unbiased' Ads for Microsoft Came at a Price", New York Times, September 18, 1999.
David J. Theroux, "Winners, Losers & Microsoft - Strikes a Sensitive Nerve, Response to New York Times Article", The Independent Institute, September 19, 1999.
David Callahan, "The Think Tank As Flack, How Microsoft and other corporations use conservative policy groups", Washington Monthly, September 1999.
Uriel Wittenberg, The Independent Institute", Uriel Wittenberg, 1999.
Jacob Sullum, "Flack Catcher", ReasonOnline, November 3, 1999.
Uriel Wittenberg, "Flack Journalist’s Defense Confirms Flackhood", Uriel Wittenberg, May 27, 2000.
Declan McCullagh, "MS Espionage: Cash for Trash", Wired News, June, 15, 2000.
Declan McCullagh, "Who's Digging Up MS Dirt?", Wired News, June 16, 2000.
Ted Bridis, and Mylene Mangalindan, "Oracle-MS flap -- how it happened", ZDNet News, June 28, 2000. (This was originally published in the Wall Street Journal).
Ted Bridis, and Mylene Mangalindan, "Oracle-MS flap -- how it happened Part ii", ZDNet News, June 28, 2000. (This was originally published in the Wall Street Journal).
The Independent Institute, "Statement from The Independent Institute on Oracle’s Sponsorship of Smear Campaign: Facts Refute Oracle CEO’s Wild Claims that Institute is a 'Front Group' that Received 'Secret Funding' from Microsoft", Media Release, June 28, 2000.
Declan McCullagh, ""'Twas Oracle That Spied on MS" Wired News - , June 28, 2000.
"Larry Meets Terry", Wall Street Journal Online, June 29, 2000.
David Theroux, ""A Challenge to Oracle", Letter to the Editor, Wall Street Journal, June 29, 2000.
The Independent Institute, "Institute Responds to 'Trust Us, We're Experts' Authors' Fantasy", Media Release, February 7, 2001.
John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton, "Us, We're Anti-Antitrust", Media Channel, February 14, 2001.

TII Reports on Environmental Issues

Roger E.Meiners, Bruce Yandle, "The Common Law Solution to Water Pollution - The Path Not Taken", The Independent Institute, Research Report, April 1, 1992
David J. Theroux, "Property Rights v. Environmental Ruin", Independent Institute, Research Report, August 1, 1994
Randy T. Simmons, "Markets Key to Saving Our Endangered Species", Independent Institute, Research Report, January 1, 1995
Jane S. Shaw, "Private Property Rights, Not Ideologies, Are the Crux"(PDF), The Independent Review, Volume 7 Number 1, Summer 2002
Tracy Wates, "Banking in Endangered Species", Independent Institute Commentary, September 23, 2002
Jeffrey R. Clark and Dwight R. Lee, "Global Warming and Its Dangers"(PDF), The Independent Review, Volume 8 Number 4, Spring 2004
Franklin Lopez, "Sustainable Development and Institutional Failure: The Case of Ecuador"(PDF), The Independent Review, Volume 9 Number 3, Winter 2005
Mark Pennington, "Liberty, Markets, and Environmental Values: A Hayekian Defense of Free-Market Environmentalism"(PDF), The Independent Review, Volume 10 Number 1, Summer 2005

books etc

http://www**.independent.org**/issues/search.asp?subID=23

http://www.independent.org/aboutus/advisors.asp

100 Swan Way Oakland, CA 94621

Phone: 510-632-1366 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 510-632-1366 end_of_the_skype_highlighting

Fax: 510-568-6040

Founded in 1985, The conservative Independent Institute is "a non-profit, non-politicized, scholarly research and educational organization which sponsors comprehensive studies of major economic, social and environmental problems."

The Institute has sponsored climate skeptic Fred Singer and has been a member of the Cooler Heads Coalition. The Institute's Web site quotes praise from many luminaries, including Ronald Reagan, Edwin Meese, and William Niskanen of the Cato Institute. In 1999, the Independent Institute came under fire for being not so independent. A 18 September New York Times piece outlined how the Independent Institute put out full paged newspaper ads bank-rolled by Microsoft. The ads supported Microsoft's claim of innocence in the face of federal anti-trust charges. According to The New York Times, Microsoft paid for the ads and was also the largest individual donor to the organization that year (David Callahan, "The Think Tank as Flack," Washington Monthly, November 1999).

QUOTES

10 November, 2003

"Thus, human-induced climate warming, although expected from greenhouse theory, is difficult to demonstrate and likely to remain insignificant in comparison to natural climate variations."

Source: S. Fred Singer Article 11/10/03

KEY DEEDS

28 July, 2003

Released a report entitled "New Changes in Climate Science: What the EPA Isn't Telling Us". Written by a panel of climate change skeptics, the report argued that scientific models that predict global warming are based on faulty science and that if warming occurred, it would not adversely impact humans.

Source: Independent Institute Press Release 7/28/03

FUNDING

Independent Institute has received $85,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998.

1998

$10,000 ExxonMobil Corporate Giving

Source: Exxon Education Foundation Dimensions 1998 report

2000

$5,000 ExxonMobil Foundation

general support

Source: ExxonMobil Foundation 2000 IRS 990

2001

$5,000 ExxonMobil Foundation

Source: ExxonMobil 2001 Worldwide Giving Report

2002

$10,000 ExxonMobil Foundation

Source: ExxonMobil 2002 Worldwide Giving Report

2003

$10,000 ExxonMobil Foundation

Source: ExxonMobil 2003 Worldwide Giving Report

2005

$30,000 ExxonMobil Foundation

Source: ExxonMobil 2005 Worldwide Giving Report

2007

$15,000 ExxonMobil Foundation

Source: ExxonMobil 2007 Worldwide Giving Report

KEY PEOPLE

**Thomas Gale Moore**

board of advisors

Source: Independent Institute website 4/04

**David R. Legates**

former Research Fellow

Source: Independent Institute website 4/04

**Frederick Seitz**

Research Fellow

Source: Independent Institute website 4/04

**S. Fred Singer**

Research Fellow

Source: Independent Institute website 4/04

**John Christy**

Panel on Global Warming

Source: Independent Institute Press Release 7/28/03

**Robert E. Davis**

Panel on Global Warming

Source: Independent Institute Press Release 7/28/03

PEOPLE

**Martin Anderson**

Board of Advisors

Source: Independent Institute Website 3/04

**Charles Murray**

Board of Advisors member

Source: Independent Institute Website 3/04

**William A. Niskanen**

Board of Advisors member

Source: Independent Institute Website 3/04

**Michael Novak**

Board of Advisors member

Source: Independent Institute Website 3/04

**Gordon Tullock**

Board of Advisors member

Source: Independent Institute Website 3/04

**Walter Williams**

Board of Advisors member

Source: Independent Institute Website 3/04

**David J. Theroux**

Founder, President & CEO

Source: Independent Institute website 4/04

**Robert Higgs**

Senior Fellow in Political Economy

Source: Independent Institute website 4/04

**Richard Vedder**

Senior Fellow

Source: Independent Institute website 4/04

**Daniel K. Benjamin**

Research Fellow

Source: Independent Institute website 4/04

**Donald J. Boudreaux**

Research Fellow

Source: Independent Institute website 4/04

**Thomas diLorenzo**

Research Fellow

Source: Independent Institute website 4/04

**Richard A. Epstein**

Research Fellow

Source: Independent Institute website 4/04

**Peter Huber**

Research Fellow

Source: Independent Institute website 4/04

**Roger E. Meiners**

Research Fellow

Source: Independent Institute website 4/04

**Paul Craig Roberts**

Research Fellow

Source: Independent Institute website 4/04

**Richard L. Stroup**

Research Fellow

Source: Independent Institute website 4/04

**Bruce Yandle**

Research Fellow

Source: Independent Institute website 4/04

**Martin Anderson**

Advisor

Source: Independent Institute website 4/04

**Wendy M. Novicoff**

Panel on Global Warming

Source: Independent Institute Press Release 7/28/03

SOURCES

ExxonMobil 2001 Worldwide Giving Report

Public Information and Policy Research

http://research.greenpeaceusa.org/?a=view&d=4388

ExxonMobil 2002 Worldwide Giving Report

Public Information and Policy Research

http://research.greenpeaceusa.org/?a=view&d=4386

ExxonMobil Foundation 2000 IRS 990

ExxonMobil Foundation 2000 IRS 990

http://research.greenpeaceusa.org/?a=view&d=4390

Exxon Education Foundation Dimensions 1998 report

Exxon Dimensions report 1998- Public Information and Policy Research

http://research.greenpeaceusa.org/?a=view&d=4385

Independent Institute Website 3/04

http://www.independent.org

Independent Institute website 4/04

http://www.independent.org/

Independent Institute Press Release 7/28/03

http://www.independent.org/tii/content/press_rel/press_030728.html

ExxonMobil 2003 Worldwide Giving Report

Public Information and Policy Research

http://research.greenpeaceusa.org/?a=view&d=4389

S. Fred Singer Article 11/10/03

http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1234

ExxonMobil 2005 Worldwide Giving Report

Public Information and Policy Research

http://research.greenpeaceusa.org/?a=view&d=4387

ExxonMobil 2007 Worldwide Giving Report

http://research.greenpeaceusa.org/?a=download&d=4586

COMMON CORE

[### Independent Institute Research Vindicates DeSantis Ed Reform

Independent Institute

https://blog.independent.org › 2022/12/28 › impactful-...](https://blog.independent.org/2022/12/28/impactful-education-research/)

Dec 28, 2022 — ... Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, praised ... math standards are now the ... Milgram is Professor Emeritus of Mathematics at Stanford University.

[### Better than Common Core

Independent Institute

https://www.independent.org › publications › article](https://www.independent.org/publications/article.asp?id=13176)

Math Standards. R. James Milgram, Professor Emeritus of Mathematics, Stanford University. Let us start our evaluation of the new Florida mathematics standards ...

[### Ed. Companies in Limbo as Florida Delays Curriculum ...

Education Week

https://marketbrief.edweek.org › marketplace-k-12 › ed...](https://marketbrief.edweek.org/marketplace-k-12/ed-companies-limbo-florida-delays-curriculum-adoption-amid-standards-overhaul/)

Feb 14, 2019 — Florida officials are delaying the adoption of a wave of new instructional materials in math and English/language arts in the wake of Gov.

Independent Institute oakland

Pages people also viewed

Public Choice Libertarian ideology

Payment system

Anti-science Groups

[] Controversy

Independent Institute

From SourceWatch

TII, Microsoft Money and Oracle's Private Investigators

Environmental Issues

Tobacco Industry

Funding

Personnel

Contact info

Related Links

Funding

TII, Microsoft and Anti-Trust Law

TII Reports on Environmental Issues

QUOTES

KEY DEEDS

FUNDING

KEY PEOPLE

PEOPLE

SOURCES

Attachments