Foreign Funding Of Think Tanks In America
Foreign Fundingof Think Tanksin AmericaBenFreemanForeign InfluenceTransparency Initiative
January 2020The Center for International PolicyThe Center for International Policy (CIP) is an independent nonprofit center for research,public education and advocacy on U.S. foreign policy. CIP works to make a peaceful, just andsustainable world the central pursuit of U.S. foreign policy. CIP was founded in 1975 in thewake of the Vietnam War by former diplomats and peace activists who sought to reorientU.S. foreign policy to advance international cooperation as the primary vehicle for solvingglobal challenges and promoting human rights. Today, we bring diverse voices to bear onkey foreign policy decisions and make the evidence-based case for why and how the UnitedStates must redefine the concept of national security in the 21st century.The Foreign Influence Transparency InitiativeWhile investigations into Russian influence in the 2016 election regularly garner front-pageheadlines, there is a half-billion-dollar foreign influence industry working to shape U.S.foreign policy every single day that remains largely unknown to the public. The ForeignInfluence Transparency Initiative is working to change that anonymity through transparencypromotion, investigative research, and public education.AcknowledgementsThis report would not have been possible without the hard work and support of a number ofpeople at the Center for International Policy. First, James Allen began collecting data on thinktank funding a year before this report was published. Several other FITI staff assisted withdata collection and validation, including Cassandra Stimpson, Nia Harris, and Ryan Summers.Morgan Palumbo provided additional assistance with data validation along with valuableedits and design assistance. Christina Arabia and Lauren Billet completed the design andformatting of the report. Salih Booker, Sunjeev Bery, and William Hartung provided edits tothe report and important insights at critical junctures.This report also benefitted immensely from many individuals outside the Center forInternational Policy, most notably from off-the-record conversations with current and formeremployees at a number of think tanks mentioned in this report. They helped to fill in someof the gaps in our data and provided anecdotes of foreign funding’s impact. This report alsorelied heavily on insights from exemplary work on foreign funding at think tanks conductedby a number of organizations, including The Intercept, The New York Times, and the ProjectOn Government Oversight.Finally, this report was made possible by the financial support provided to the ForeignInfluence Transparency Initiative by the Open Society Foundation and the Arca Foundation.All of the Center for International Policy’s funders can be found on our website.Cover Photo: Bills from various parts of the world, including Singapore, Thailand, the US, Sweden andHong Kong. Credit: www.Japanexperterna.se.Foreign Influence Transparency InitiativeCenter For International Policy1
January 2020Executive SummaryMost Americans outside the Washington establishment have little, if any, understandingof what a think tank is or does. Yet, despite largely flying under the public’s radar, thinktanks have long played a critical role in shaping U.S. public policy. Think tanks conductin-depth research on public policy, help write laws, testify before Congress, are a goto source for media on the political issue of the day, serve as springboards for futuregovernment officials, and are a home for former government officials.Think tanks vary considerably in terms of their objectives and organization, but manythink tanks in Washington D.C. share a common trait—they receive substantial financialsupport from foreign governments. While these are often democracies with interestsclosely aligned with those of the U.S., a significant number of these foreign donors areundemocratic, authoritarian regimes whose aims often diverge significantly from U.S.interests. In a variety of instances, the public has learned that this foreign funding cansignificantly influence think tanks’ work. It can lead to a think tank producing reportsfavorable to a foreign power,1 think tank experts offering Congressional testimony insupport of a foreign powers’ interests,2 or its scholars working closely with a foreignfunders’ registered lobbyists.3Yet, we only have anecdotal examples of the impact foreign funding has on think tanksfor a simple reason: think tanks are not required to publicly disclose their funding.Without a legal requirement for disclosure many think tanks are reluctant to reveal thefull scope of their foreign funding. They rarely mention any potential conflicts of interestin their published reports or commentary, and think tank experts often fail to reportfinancial ties to foreign governments when testifying before Congress. Hiding thesepotential conflicts of interest leaves the public and policymakers with the impressionthat they’re hearing from a truly objective expert, when in fact they may be listening tosomeone that is, at least de facto, on the payroll of a foreign power.In an effort to move towards greater transparency of think tank funding in America, thisreport analyzes foreign funding at the top fifty think tanks in America, as ranked by theUniversity of Pennsylvania’s Global Go To Think Tank Index, based on criteria like thequality and reputation of the think tanks research and the reach of its publications.4 Theanalysis includes all foreign funding received by these think tanks from 2014-2018. 2014was chosen as the starting point for analysis because that was the year The New YorkTimes published the expose “Foreign Powers Buy Influence at Think Tanks.”5 The hopehere is to increase the scope of that analysis to even more think tanks and expand it fiveadditional years. The data collected for this analysis comes primarily from think tanks’publicly available information, supplemented by media reports of funding not publiclydisclosed by think tanks themselves and through voluntary disclosures by think tanksafter requests from the Foreign Influence Transparency Initiative (FITI). From this analysiswe found:Foreign Influence Transparency InitiativeCenter For International Policy2
January 2020 More than 174 million in foreign funding went to these top think tanks;ȈThe top recipients of foreign funding were the World Resources Institute, theCenter for Global Development, and the Brookings Institution; Nearly 900 different foreign donations were given to these think tanks; Donations to these think tanks came from more than 80 different countries andinternational organizations;Ȉ The top donor countries were Norway, United Kingdom, and the United ArabEmirates;There were widely varying levels of transparency about funding sources at topthink tanks, ranging from full disclosure of all funders and exact amounts donated,to think tanks that disclose absolutely no information about foreign or domesticfunding sources.This analysis points towards a simple policy recommendation: think tanks should berequired, by law, to publicly disclose funding from foreign powers. This is essential for thepublic, the media, and policymakers to better identify potential conflicts of interest whenconsuming information provided by think tanks.Foreign Influence Transparency InitiativeCenter For International Policy3
January 2020IntroductionThink tanks serve a specialized niche in the American political system. In theory, they’rea bridge between academia and government. In practice, they can literally write ournation’s laws and fill positions within the federal government. They’re the political expertyou see on TV and the author of that op-ed in your favorite paper. They are the driverof political discourse in America. Yet, despite this immense influence on governmentand policy debates in the U.S., think tanks are largely unknown to most Americans. Thisintroduction seeks to remedy that by providing a brief explanation of what think tanksare and do, how that work is driven by their funders, and thus why it’s critical for thepublic to have unfettered access to information about a think tanks’ funders.The Role of Think Tanks in the U.S. Political SystemMost Americans outside D.C. have little, if any, understanding of what a think tank is. Theidea that there are organizations who pay people to “think” is, in fact, an absurd conceptto many. In attempting to explain their profession, think tank scholars can face vexingquestions from friends and relatives outside D.C. akin to, “Wait, you get paid to just sitthere and think?” While think tank scholars do more than just think—they also write andspeak about all that thinking—the fact remains that outside of Washington few realizewhat an extraordinary impact think tanks have on the American political system.Despite largely flying under the public’s radar, think tanks have long played a criticalrole in shaping U.S. public policy. When Ronald Reagan was elected President of theUnited States in 1980 the prominent conservative think tank, the Heritage Foundation,provided the president-elect’s transition team with a more than 1,000 page set ofrecommendations called the “Mandate for Leadership” covering everything from taxesto national defense.6 By Heritage’s counting, the Reagan administration ultimatelyadopted or attempted fully two-thirds of Heritage’s recommendations.7 On the otherside of the aisle, after serving as Chief of Staff to President Bill Clinton, John Podestafounded perhaps the most prominent liberal think tank in Washington D.C., theCenter for American Progress (CAP), in 2003. CAP has since worked extremely closelywith Democratic Members of Congress, the Obama administration, and presidentialcandidates. Podesta himself was Chairman of the 2016 Hillary Clinton Presidentialcampaign.Just as think tanks can directly shape public policy and elections, they play a large rolein shaping the public narrative about U.S. government policies. Many of the expertsdiscussing the most pressing political issues of the day on TV networks, like CNN and FoxNews, work at think tanks. The op-ed pages of The New York Times and The WashingtonPost are filled with the musings of think tank scholars. Most of the astute political analystsyou hear on National Public Radio and other radio outlets also work at think tanks. Inshort, think tanks are the engine driving public debate about public policy.Foreign Influence Transparency InitiativeCenter For International Policy4
January 2020In a different sense, think tanks are directly connected to the federal government, inthat they’re filled with former and future government officials. Many think tanks pridethemselves on employing former government officials, including former Senators,Representatives, and their staff, as well as former Executive branch employees. Theoldest think tank in D.C., the Brookings Institution, for example, is headed by retired fourstar General John Allen and amongst its more than 300 experts are two former Chairs ofthe Federal Reserve—Janet Yellen and Ben Bernanke.8Just as importantly, think tanks are filled with future government officials. In this role,think tanks serve as incubators for scholars and bureaucrats looking to make the leapinto public service. Think tanks, particularly those with an ideological leaning, are alsofertile ground for new presidential administrations looking to fill political appointmentsin the Executive Branch. They also can serve as something of a holding tank whereprominent officials go to work when an administration of the opposing party comesto power, waiting to rejoin a future administration more in line with their ideologicalleaning.In short, while think tanks may not be widely understood, they play an enormous role inshaping the U.S. government and public policy in America.Perhaps because of this extraordinary influence, we are living in something of a heydayfor think tanks in America. The Think Tanks and Civil Societies Program at the Universityof Pennsylvania, which tracks and ranks think tanks annually, found that there are now1,872 think tanks in America, more than double the number of think tanks in existence in1980 when the Heritage Foundation provided its recommendations to Ronald Reagan.9And, no two think tanks are identical. They focus on different issues, have differingobjectives, are organized differently, and, most importantly for this analysis, havediffering funding streams.Those working at think tanks often argue that funding doesn’t impact their work andthat their scholars’ “Independence is sacred,” as the president of the prominent MiddleEast Institute (MEI) has publicly proclaimed.10 But, it’s naïve, to say the least, to actuallybelieve that funding sources have no impact on the work a think tank does. Most fundingcomes with explicit strings attached, like writing research reports or hosting public eventsabout specific topics. While we may or may not agree with funders’ objectives, they placeconstraints on what a think tank can and cannot do, nonetheless.At a very basic level funders are unlikely to continue funding an organization thatadvocates for positions they oppose. In this case, funders give money to organizationsthey are already in ideological alignment with. Think tanks that don’t compromise theirpositions and simply have more resources to advance those positions. This avenue ofinfluence need not be explicit and is often simply a Darwinian process—think tanks doingwork counter to a funder’s interests shouldn’t expect that funding stream to survive long.But collectively, this gives the positions of the largest funders of think tanks a larger voicein Washington.Funders directing what think tanks do is an obvious form of influence, but funders canForeign Influence Transparency InitiativeCenter For International Policy5
January 2020also wield considerable power by paying for what think tanks don’t do. In fact, one ofthe most valuable commodities funders buy is a think tank/s silence. This was readilyapparent after the brutal murder of Jamal Khashoggi at the Saudi consulate in Turkey.Think tanks with financial connections to the Saudis or their close allies, the United ArabEmirates, were slow to condemn the Saudis heinous act and remained largely silent asthe Senate passed a resolution to punish the Saudi’s and end U.S. support for their warin Yemen.11 The Center for American Progress also significantly watered down its publicstatement chastising the Saudis for murdering Jamal Khashoggi at the request of ascholar with close ties to the Emiratis.12The Importance of Transparency in Think Tank FundingThink tanks have an immense impact on the U.S. political process and funders haveconsiderable sway in determining what think tanks do (or don’t do). This extraordinaryinfluence on the U.S. political system is coupled with an extraordinary lack oftransparency of think tank funding. In fact, think tanks, like most non-profit organizations,aren’t required to disclose any of their donors, be they foreign or domestic. For mostthink tanks, this information is included in IRS forms called Schedule B’s, which are notmade publicly available. The result is that think tanks can keep their funding sourcessecret.Some think tanks do publicly provide information about their funders, but U.S.law doesn’t require them to. Amongst those that disclose funding sources, there isconsiderable variation in what information they provide to the public. This ranges fromthink tanks that simply provide the names of some funders to think tanks that providethe names of all funders and the precise amounts of their donations to the think tank.Most think tanks that do disclose information fall somewhere in between, typicallyproviding the names of funders and listing them in rather broad ranges of financialsupport.Unfortunately, most consumers of think tank expertise aren’t afforded the opportunityto understand how a think tank’s funding might bias the information they’re receiving.It’s incredibly rare for media outlets quoting or interviewing think tank experts to bringup their potential conflicts of interest. Even more troubling, think tank experts testifyingbefore Congress often fail to disclose potential conflicts of interest even when the lawrequires this of testimony in the House (though not for Senate testimony).13The RoadmapIn an effort to move towards greater transparency of think tank funding in America, theremainder of this report analyzes foreign funding at the top fifty think tanks in America,as ranked by the University of Pennsylvania’s Global Go To Think Tank Index, based oncriteria like the quality and reputation of the think tanks research and the reach of itspublications.14 The analysis includes all foreign funding received by these think tanksForeign Influence Transparency InitiativeCenter For International Policy6
January 2020from 2014-2018. 2014 was chosen as the starting point for analysis because that was theyear The New York Times published the expose “Foreign Powers Buy Influence at ThinkTanks.”15 The hope here is to increase the scope of that analysis to even more think tanksand expand it five additional years. The data collected for this analysis comes primarilyfrom think tanks’ publicly available information, supplemented by media reportsof funding not publicly disclosed by think tanks themselves and through voluntarydisclosures by think tanks after requests from the Foreign Influence TransparencyInitiative. This analysis found: More than 174 million in foreign funding going to these top think tanks;ȈThe top recipients of foreign funding were the World Resources Institute, theCenter for Global Development, and the Brookings Institution; Nearly 900 different foreign donations given to these think tanks; Donations to these think tanks came from more than 80 different countries andinternational organizations;Ȉ The top donor countries were Norway, United Kingdom, and the United ArabEmirates;Widely varying levels of transparency about funding sources at top think tanks,ranging from full disclosure of all funders and exact amounts donated, to thinktanks that disclose absolutely no information about foreign or domestic fundingsources.This analysis points towards policy recommendations that could help improvetransparency of foreign funding at think tanks and allow the public and policymakers tobetter identify potential conflicts of interest when consuming information provided bythink tanks. These recommendations are outlined in the report’s conclusion.Foreign Influence Transparency InitiativeCenter For International Policy7
January 2020Foreign Funding at the Top 50 Think Tanksin AmericaThis section lays out the findings from an analysis of foreign funding at the top 50 thinktanks in America from 2014 to 2018. It first discusses the methodology we used toacquire the nearly 900 different instances of foreign donations to think tanks that we’vetracked from 2014 to 2018, and then lays out the results of that analysis—highlighting thetop recipients of foreign money and the most generous foreign donors.While this was a labor intensive effort that yielded an expansive database of think tankfunding, we have no illusions that this is the entire universe of foreign money thesethink tanks received during this time period. This is true for at least two reasons. First,as discussed in much greater detail in the next section, think tanks aren’t required todisclose their foreign donors and many don’t. Intrepid journalists have been able to fill insome of these blind-spots, but there undoubtedly remains a sizeable amount of foreignfunding that hasn’t been publicly disclosed or reported. Second, most think tanks thatdisclose foreign funders don’t list the amount of funding received or list the amountsin ranges, from, say, 25,000 to 100,000. Because we can’t determine the preciseamount of these contributions, we report only t
for think tanks in America. The Think Tanks and Civil Societies Program at the University of Pennsylvania, which tracks and ranks think tanks annually, found that there are now 1,872 think tanks in America, more than double the number of think tanks in existence in 1980 when the Heritage F
TANK & EQUIPMENT CO. Stationary Tanks Farm Tanks UL 142 Horizontal & Vertical Tanks API 650 Tanks UL 142 Double Wall Tanks UL 2085 “Protected“ Tanks UL 2245 At/Below Grade Tanks Insulated & Jacketed Storage Tanks Chemical Storage & Blending Tanks P.O. Box 2014 Tyler,
premier tank manufacturers. Double Wall Tanks, Round Bottom Tanks, Frac Tanks, Wier Tanks, Gas Buster Tanks, Mini Tanks and Mixer Tanks are just a few of the standard product lines along with custom tanks for specific configurations. Oil and Gas, Construction and Waste Water
unified approach for seismic design of tanks is highlighted. DOI: 10.1193/1.2428341 INTRODUCTION Liquid-containing tanks are used in water distribution systems and in industries for storing toxic and flammable liquids. These tanks are mainly of two types: ground-supported tanks and elevated tanks. Ground-supported tanks are generally of .
Small, AWWA D-100 constructed welded steel tanks V/S Light gauge welded steel tanks. There are too many manufacturers to name here. Small, AWWA D-103 constructed tanks V/S light gauge, riveted, corrugated steel tanks manufactured by American Tank, or older tanks by B.H. Tank Works/BlueScope Water, and flat panel tanks by Tim
The scorecard reviews think tanks along four main axes: (1) percentage of women that lead the think tanks; (2) percentage of women experts in the think tank’s foreign policy and national and international security programs; (3) percentage of women in the governing bodies of the think tanks. (4) number of
Annex L : API Standard 650 Storage Tank Data Sheet Annex M : Requirements for Tanks Operating at Elevated Temperatures Annex P : Allowable External Loads on Tank Shell Openings Annex S : Austenitic Stainless Steel Storage Tanks Annex V : Design of Storage Tanks for External Pressure Hossein Sadeghi WELDED TANKS FOR OIL STORAGE (Rev. 0) 12 STANDARD INTRODUCTION. Hossein Sadeghi WELDED TANKS FOR .
domestic potable hot water expansion tanks quick sizing domestic hot water expansion tanks page 17 non-asme t – fixed diaphragm tanks page 18 tx– removable bladder tanks page 18 asme tta – fixed diaphragm tanks page 19 txa– removable bladder tanks page 19 txa – smart tank series
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN STANDARDS These ARC Guidelines or Architectural Design Standards are intended as an overview of the design and construction process to be followed at Gran Paradiso. Other architectural requirements and restrictions on the use of your Lot are contained in the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for Gran Paradiso, recorded in the public records of Sarasota .
