Holt, Tom C R C

<h2><span class="mw-headline">SLAPPed Into Submission</span></h2>

<p>Corporate libel lawsuits bring the formidable powers of government

and industry together for the purpose of suppressing the views of people

with complaints against the system. Ironically, the PR industry is

eagerly hyping these lawsuits as populist solutions to the problem of

too much government.

Tom Holt, a Washington policy wonk whose life reflects in microcosm

the pattern of collusion that unites government and industry interests,

epitomizes the contradictions and hypocrisy inherent in this position.

Holt began his career after receiving training at the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Morton_Blackwell_Leadership_Institute" title="Morton Blackwell Leadership Institute" class="mw-redirect">Morton Blackwell Leadership Institute</a>,

a corporate-funded school which teaches conservative college students

how to start their own campus newspapers to compete against perceived

liberal bias in schools' official newspapers. Following a brief stint

with the Richmond, <i>Virginia Times-Dispatch</i>, he became "research director" for the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Commonwealth_Foundation&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Commonwealth Foundation (page does not exist)">Commonwealth Foundation</a>, helping churn out a study which argued that lawsuits against the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tobacco_industry" title="Tobacco industry">tobacco industry</a> did more harm than good, creating a "litigation superhighway where lawyers are the ones who will make the most money."

After serving as a speechwriter for two US secretaries of

transportation, Holt went to work as a public-relations staffer for the

right-wing <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Heritage_Foundation" title="Heritage Foundation">Heritage Foundation</a> before signing on at another right-wing Washington think-tank called the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Capital_Research_Center" title="Capital Research Center">Capital Research Center</a>. As a CRC "visiting fellow," he authored a book titled <i>The Rise of the Nanny State: How Consumer Advocates Try to Run Our Lives</i>,

which accused the consumer movement of "capitalizing on the public's

ignorance of science and the media's eagerness for calamity."

According to Holt, reforms are necessary to make it harder to sue

corporations because "the consumer movement has imposed significant

costs on industry--costs ultimately passed on to consumers--and has

violated individual freedoms in a futile effort to protect us from our

own actions and judgment."

In order to restore those freedoms, Holt is now calling for new laws

so that corporations can use the nanny state more effectively to sue,

chastise and punish their enemies. "Could lawsuits be the cure for <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Junk_science" title="Junk science">junk science</a>?" he asked in a 1995 issue of <i>Priorities</i>, the monthly publication of <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Elizabeth_Whelan" title="Elizabeth Whelan">Elizabeth Whelan</a>'s corporate-funded right-wing advocacy group, the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Council_on_Science_and_Health" title="American Council on Science and Health">American Council on Science and Health</a>.

<h2><span class="mw-headline">Power to the Plaintiffs</span></h2>

<p>Holt complained that current libel law "has been a major stumbling

block to the progress of a lawsuit brought by the Washington Apple

Growers against the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Resources_Defense_Council" title="National Resources Defense Council" class="mw-redirect">National Resources Defense Council</a>,

perpetrators of the Alar scare. The growers initially filed suit in

Yakima County (WA) Superior Court; but . . . the growers lost their

case." (See our related story about the Alar case on page 10.)

Fortunately, he added, "agribusiness is now fighting back, shepherding

what are known as 'agricultural product disparagement laws' through

state legislatures. . . . On the national level, the National

Association of State Departments of Agriculture wants similar provisions

to be included in the 1995 farm bill."

The drive has been spearheaded by the nonprofit, tax-exempt <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Animal_Industry_Foundation&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Animal Industry Foundation (page does not exist)">Animal Industry Foundation</a>

(AIF), which calls itself "animal agriculture's collective voice on

food animal production, its effect on diet and environment, and its

contributions to our quality of life."

AIF's corporate funders include the powerhouse <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Burson-Marsteller" title="Burson-Marsteller">Burson-Marsteller</a> and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Hill%26_Knowlton" title="Hill & Knowlton">Hill & Knowlton</a> PR firms. Its trustees include a who's-who list of meat industry lobby and trade associations: the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Farm_Bureau_Federation" title="American Farm Bureau Federation">American Farm Bureau Federation</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Feed_Industry_Association" title="American Feed Industry Association">American Feed Industry Association</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Sheep_Industry&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="American Sheep Industry (page does not exist)">American Sheep Industry</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Society_of_Animal_Science&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="American Society of Animal Science (page does not exist)">American Society of Animal Science</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Veal_Association&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="American Veal Association (page does not exist)">American Veal Association</a>., <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Broiler_Council&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="National Broiler Council (page does not exist)">National Broiler Council</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Cattlemen%27s_Beef_Association" title="National Cattlemen's Beef Association">National Cattlemen's Beef Association</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Milk_Producers_Federation&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="National Milk Producers Federation (page does not exist)">National Milk Producers Federation</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Pork_Producers_Council" title="National Pork Producers Council">National Pork Producers Council</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Turkey_Federation&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="National Turkey Federation (page does not exist)">National Turkey Federation</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Southeastern_Poultry%26_Egg_Association&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Southeastern Poultry & Egg Association (page does not exist)">Southeastern Poultry & Egg Association</a> and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=United_Egg_Producers&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="United Egg Producers (page does not exist)">United Egg Producers</a>.

"The model for these statutes was developed by the American Feed

Industry Association," boasts an AIF newsletter. "If you'd like a copy

of the model state legislation, please contact in writing Steve Kopperud

at AFIA." AIF in fact shares the same address, phone and staff as

AFIA--the American Feed Industry Association, a "national trade

association representing the manufacturers of more than 70 percent of

the primary formula livestock and poultry feed sold annually."

In a letter to <i>Consumer Reports</i>, Kopperud has defended the

industry's rationale behind food disparagement laws, claiming that they

"do not repress free speech, but rather compel a speaker to think twice

about opportunistic or false statements and the damage such rhetoric can

do. . . . Food disparagement laws, as tools to make more honest our

national discussion of food safety, are the ultimate consumer

protection."

The AIF speaks more bluntly in literature aimed at farmers: "Animal

rights activists . . . threaten the survival of today's farmers and

ranchers. . . . It's time to fight back! . . . through advertising,

elementary school programs, publications and videos, news media outreach

and public opinion research."

Rather than push for legislation at the national level, the food

industry has worked quietly state-by-state while avoiding a

controversial national debate. So far, thirteen state legislatures have

approved product disparagement laws--Alabama, Arizona, Colorado,

Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Dakota, Ohio,

Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Texas. Other states are considering similar

measures.