Bill Buzenberg stories from The Center for Public Integrity

Without better laws, "dark money" groups will prosper in 2014 state races

2013-05-17T06:09:01-04:00

Campaign spending is flooding all levels of government in the post-Citizens-United era. What is worse than the millions flowing freely, however, is that much of this is so-called “dark money”—the sources of this spending are hidden. The public has no idea who is behind the deluge of ads that can swamp a campaign in the final weeks of an election.

The Center for Public Integrity’s latest report on independent money spent on state-level races shows that state disclosure laws are weak or nonexistent in more than half of all states. You can find out about your state by clicking here.

Produced in collaboration with the National Institute on Money in State Politics, we show clearly that in 30 states it is impossible to calculate how much money is being spent on campaigns by outside groups like “social welfare” nonprofits — information that is mostly available when it comes to federal contests.

And in 35 states, disclosure laws are less stringent than federal election laws, meaning shadowy nonprofit groups and big-spending super PACs are able to do business virtually undetected in many races.

This is important because a majority of states will elect their governors, legislatures and other major statewide officers in 2014. But the public will not know how much money will be spent to influence the outcome of most of those races. This 50-state analysis of state laws graded the states from A to F on disclosure requirements for super PACs, nonprofits and other outside spending groups.

A fresh example from Montana shows how last-minute “dark money” can swing an election. We report that a candidate for the state Supreme Court was clobbered with misleading mailers and radio ads. The ads were paid for by a nonprofit group called the Montana Growth Network, a largely unknown organization. Under Montana’s laws, the group is not required to report its spending nor disclose the sources of its funds.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision in 2010 added about $1 billion in spending to federal races in the 2012 election cycle and led to unlimited spending by individuals, corporations and unions.

But the decision also impacted the states. It is a near certainty that more money than ever before will be pouring into state races in 2014, but without better laws in many states, the sources of these funds will never be known.

One hundred years ago, in an article in Harper’s Weekly, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis wrote that "sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants." To paraphrase the justice, transparency and full accountability for campaign spending can be the best disinfectant for democracy, and an antidote to dark money.

Until next week,

Bill

ICIJ tax havens investigation pushes countries to launch investigations

2013-05-10T14:55:11-04:00

It appears our international investigation of offshore tax havens may have prompted government tax authorities to go public with their own data digging operations in pursuit of international tax evasion.

On Thursday, the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, along with British and Australian tax authorities, jointly announced that the three nations “have each acquired a substantial amount of data revealing extensive use of such entities [tax havens] organized in a number of jurisdictions including Singapore, the British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands and the Cook Islands.” These are roughly the same jurisdictions being investigated using a similar amount of leaked data by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), the international arm of The Center for Public Integrity.

As the Guardian reported in a page one story on Friday, more than 100 of Britain's richest people have been caught hiding billions of pounds in secretive offshore havens, sparking an unprecedented global tax evasion investigation. George Osborne, the British chancellor, warned the alleged tax evaders, and a further 200 accountants and advisers accused of helping them cheat the taxman: "The message is simple: if you evade tax, we're coming after you." The IRS said in a statement, "Our cooperative work with the United Kingdom and Australia reflects a bigger goal of leaving no safe haven for people trying to illegally evade taxes.”

Drawing from a leaked trove of 2.5 million digital files, ICIJ led what may be the largest cross border journalism collaboration in history, publishing more than 30 reports in dozens of countries. The ICIJ investigation into tax havens has become a major political issue in Europe, and the results of our investigation have been cited more than 9,000 times by media organizations worldwide.

ICIJ’s investigation opens the secrets of more than 120,000 offshore companies and trusts and nearly 130,000 individuals and agents, exposing hidden dealings of politicians, con artists, and the mega-rich in more than 170 countries. Secrecy for Sale: Inside the Global Offshore Money Maze is ICIJ’s largest investigative reporting project in its 15-year history.

Including the Guardian and the BBC in the U.K., ICIJ has worked with 86 investigative journalists from 46 countries and used data mining software and old fashioned shoe leather reporting to unveil the previously hidden but thriving world of fraud, tax dodging and political corruption. To analyze the documents, ICIJ collaborated with journalists from Le Monde in France, Süddeutsche Zeitung and Norddeutscher Rundfunk in Germany, The Washington Post, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) and 31 other media partners around the world.

Since publishing our tax haven reports, various federal agencies and foreign governments, including the IRS, have asked The Center for Public Integrity to give them the ICIJ leaked data. In each case, based on our long-standing policy, we have declined to turn over such material. “The ICIJ is not an arm of law enforcement and is not an agent of the government. We are an independent reporting organization, served by and serving our members, the global investigative journalism community and the public.”

According to the Guardian, U.K. tax authorities have had the offshore data for 3-4 years. It was leaked to authorities by a whistleblower in 2009. No reason was given for the delay in announcing their investigation of that data until now, only after ICIJ started publishing its own investigative reporting.

We expect our international investigation to continue through the next year.

Until next week,

Bill

More impact from our watchdog work

2013-05-03T16:00:19-04:00

Our brand of watchdog investigative journalism generates impact again and again, as demonstrated by the examples that come across my desk nearly every day at the Center for Public Integrity. Each time, I am reminded that we don’t spend months investigating environmental crises or secret money laundering just to call attention to problems. We publish our detailed, fact-filled investigative reports in order to have an impact, to contribute to solutions, eventually fixing myriad problems.

Let me cite some of our impact from just this last week:

The Environmental Protection Agency announced Friday that it has revamped its conflict of interest process to prevent conflicts and bias from tainting its science, including efforts to assess the dangers of toxic chemicals. The reforms target EPA scientific review panels that are selected by outside contractors. Today’s announcement follows a Center for Public Integrity-PBS NewsHour examination revealing ties between scientists and the chemical industry on a panel reviewing hexavalent chromium, a compound commonly found in drinking water that may cause cancer. This is a critical issue because as our Toxic Clout series has reported, more than 80,000 chemicals are on the market in the United States, with hundreds added each year. The EPA is supposed to protect the public from contaminants in the air, water and in consumer products that can cause cancer and other illnesses. But the chemical industry's sway over science and policy is powerful. Our series has explored how the chemical industry's actions create uncertainty and delay, threatening public health.
Our massive international investigative series into offshore tax havens — which draws from a cache of 2.5 million secret records — continues to generate official action. Most recently, European finance ministers said that when they meet next week they may reach an agreement to eradicate tax havens. Meanwhile, our latest report on JP Morgan raises concerns about our largest bank’s commitment to fighting the flow of dirty money around the world. The investigation is being conducted by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, or ICIJ, a project of The Center for Public Integrity. The work is ongoing and has already drawn 9,000 media citations worldwide in just the last month.
Over the past two years, the Center for Public Integrity has examined how a rare and mysterious type of chronic kidney disease is killing tens of thousands of agricultural workers along Central America’s Pacific Coast, as well as in Sri Lanka and India. Scientists have yet to definitively uncover the cause of this deadly illness, although emerging evidence points to toxic heavy metals contained in pesticides as a potential culprit. Following years of official inaction in the U.S. and beyond, a new Central American declaration last week — for the first time — formally recognized the disease and its unique characteristics. Central America’s health ministries signed the declaration on Friday citing the ailment as a top public health priority and committing to a series of steps to combat its reach.
Florida became the latest state to make changes in its ethics laws after our State Integrity Investigation gave the Sunshine State an “F” in ethics enforcement. Republican Gov. Rick Scott signed a package of reform bills Wednesday night, marking the first major overhaul of the state’s ethics laws in more than three decades. The two bills give significant new powers to the state’s ethics commission, extend a ban on lobbying for lawmakers after they leave office and rework the state’s campaign finance limits. The new ethics legislation will address at least some of the weaknesses responsible for Florida’s overall grade of C- from the State Integrity Investigation, a state-by-state ranking of ethics and accountability released last year by the Center for Public Integrity, and our partners, Global Integrity and Public Radio International.

Ultimately, I believe our work is contributing to solutions of all kinds, and a more accountable and transparent world.

Until Next Week,

Bill

EU continues to seek action after ICIJ 'Secrecy for Sale' investigation

2013-04-26T13:43:43-04:00

Our reporting on secret tax havens continues to ignite reaction from around the globe and appears to be having a major impact in Europe. The investigative series on offshore secrecy by The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), the Center for Public Integrity’s international project, draws from a cache of 2.5 million secret records. The work has prompted governments to launch investigations, and politicians and journalists to debate the implications of the records and the reporting.

Among the latest developments:

The European Commissioner on Taxation Algirdas Šemeta and Irish Finance Minister Michael Noonan sent a letter to all EU Finance Ministers, setting out seven key areas for immediate action in improving the fight against tax fraud, evasion and avoidance. Member States were asked to agree on these actions at a conference in May. The letter credits the offshore leaks investigation with "sharpening the focus" on tax fraud, and says it will ask ICIJ to supply names and details of European citizens from its data.
Finance ministers and central bankers at the G20 meeting in Washington said in a communiqué that automatic exchange of tax-relevant bank information should be adopted as the global standard for overcoming international tax evasion. Skeptical European leaders reportedly "became more enthusiastic" after the public outcry over ICIJ's offshore leaks revelations.
Transparency advocates, such as Global Financial Integrity, are hailing the recent announcement by British Prime Minister David Cameron, who called for members of the G-8 and the European Union to abolish so-called phantom firms. Cameron has also endorsed public registries of company ownership to “break through the walls of corporate secrecy” that facilitate tax dodging, money laundering and corruption. Battling tax evasion and avoidance is said to be a priority for the G-8 summit that the British Prime Minister will host in June.

The Center’s ICIJ investigative reporting on tax havens will continue throughout the year.

Center environment team at White House Correspondents' Association dinner

Three excellent Center for Public Integrity environmental reporters will be in black tie Saturday night for the gala awards dinner of the White House Correspondents Association. Jim Morris, Ronnie Greene and Chris Hamby will be picking up one of the Association’s three distinguished awards for their investigative series on Hard Labor — the many threats to America’s workers, and the fragile federal net that protects them.

Each year, some 4,500 American workers die on the job — that’s 13 workers per day on average — and 50,000 perish from occupational diseases. Millions more are hurt and sickened at workplaces, and many others are cheated of wages and abused. Under the banner Hard Labor, The Center for Public Integrity publishes stories exploring threats to workers — and the corporate and regulatory failings that endanger them.

This is the first time The Center for Public Integrity has won a WHCA award, and one of the very first ever digital winners. Here is what the Judges had to say about our selection:

"With deft story-telling and precise data, 'Hard Labor' compellingly shows the government has failed to keep its promise to protect workers from injury and death on the job. Drawing on years of data and on-the-ground reporting in eight states and Canada, the authors demonstrate how corporate corner-cutting, government inability or unwillingness to impose meaningful penalties, and bureaucratic pressure to make caseload quotas have stymied real regulation. They tell the workers' stories in a manner that evokes Studs Terkel, excellently weaving human interest with deep-data scrutiny and using numbers sparingly but with powerful effect. 'Hard Labor' clearly meets the … standard of 'excellence in news coverage of subjects and events of significant national or regional importance to the American people.'"

Congratulations to Jim, Ronnie and Chris and to all of the Center’s top notch investigative reporters and editors, who earn readers and recognition every day for their important work.

Until Next Week,

Bill

Why strong regulatory agencies matter

2013-04-19T14:07:57-04:00

I have always believed that if we are doing our job right at the Center for Public Integrity, then our investigations should anticipate the news. That was the case on Wednesday. The Center posted an important story early that morning about the U.S. Chemical Safety Board’s failure to complete its investigations into chemical accidents in a timely manner. Further, we reported that a former member of the board believed the agency was being “grossly mismanaged.”

Later that same day, an explosion tore through a fertilizer plant north of Waco in Central Texas, killing more than a dozen people and injuring more than 150, authorities say. The horrific accident was similar to other deadly industrial accidents described in our piece — accidents requiring Chemical Safety Board investigations that have dragged on, in some cases for years. Sluggish and incomplete investigations are important because finished reports often contain recommendations that can save lives going forward. Delay has a human cost.

Each year there are some 200 serious industrial accidents like the fertilizer plant explosion that are deemed to be of “high consequence.” Yet the Chemical Safety Board — modeled after the National Transportation Safety Board — is able to investigate only a handful, and then often takes years more to issue a report.

To be fair, the Board says it is stretched thin with a budget of only $10.5 million. And as the number of such serious accidents rise, the Board’s budget has remained flat. Congress has been unwilling to come up with more resources, the Board says.

Meanwhile, according to the New York Times, it was 28 years ago that the fertilizer plant in Waco was last inspected by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). There were “serious” violations reported at that time. The truth is the powerful chemical industry as a whole is quietly in favor of a weak and ineffective regulatory regime.

Today it is difficult — if not impossible — to track exactly how many chemical accidents occur in the U.S. Chemical plants are required to report accidental releases of many substances to the National Response Center, but this data, maintained by the U.S. Coast Guard for some reason, is, to put it bluntly, a mess.

In 2009, the Chemical Safety Board issued its intent to propose a rule that would require companies to report accidental chemical releases. The proposal received support from many organizations focused on chemical safety which have long advocated for a more complete reporting system that would help identify trends and prevent future accidents. However, industry groups, such as the American Chemistry Council, and major companies, such as Dow Chemical, pushed back, trying to narrow the scope of the rule or block it entirely. And so the rule appears to have stalled.

If plants are reporting releases whenever they occur, then a regulatory body, the press and the public could all more easily tell what plants were prone to trouble and might be in danger of exploding. Such information would be critical to know in advance, because smaller incidents are often precursors to larger disasters, like the one in Waco. Transparency and accountability in this area are fundamental to public safety.

Until Next Week,

Bill

Continuing our investigation into the trillion-dollar world of offshore tax havens

2013-04-12T14:57:01-04:00

Our reporting of previously secret off-shore companies and trusts from the British Virgin Islands to Singapore will continue throughout this year. The exact value of wealth held offshore in tax havens is hard to come by, but it is estimated to encompass $21-32 trillion in private financial assets.

So far, the work by the Center’s International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) has been republished or cited some 6,500 times by news organizations worldwide. Media in France, Spain and other places have given front-page play to stories about ICIJ’s reports, which have become known in shorthand on Twitter and in many news outlets simply as “Offshore Leaks.” The reaction has been positive, in almost all cases.

A reporter for the Financial Times tweeted that “the leak of 260GB of data on offshore companies - this could be the biggest story of the year.”
A Belgian news website called this “Probably the most significant journalistic collaboration in history.”
However, a Wall Street Journal columnist called it an “offshore witch hunt.”

Already we can see the impact the stories are having, especially in Europe, where governments have been moving toward more transparency:

French President François Hollande called for "eradication" of the world's tax havens and told French banks they must declare all of their subsidiaries. He also announced the creation of a special prosecutor to pursue cases of corruption and tax fraud. The New York Times suggested Hollande’s bold move was motivated by a domestic political scandal, an ailing economy and “angry public reaction” to ICIJ’s reports.
Luxembourg's Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker announced his country plans to lift bank secrecy rules for European Union citizens who have savings based in the country, ending decades of bank secrecy in Luxembourg. "We are following a global movement," Juncker told parliament in a state-of-the-nation address.
Russian Deputy Prime Minister Igor Shuvalov is moving his offshore assets back to Russia after ICIJ's revelations that Shuvalov's wife Olga Shuvalova was either a shareholder or owner of several secretive offshore entities.
The Philippine Presidential Commission on Good Government investigation into the disclosure that Maria Imelda Marcos Manotoc, the eldest daughter of the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos, was a beneficiary of a secret offshore trust in the British Virgin Islands, will be released within two weeks.
Athens’ district attorney Panayota Fakou has started a preliminary probe to find out if Greeks who own offshore companies unearthed by the ICIJ investigation have evaded taxes or laundered money.
And the European Commissioner for Taxation, Algirdas Šemeta, called for an automatic exchange of information between countries and a "tough common stance." "Recent developments, fueled by the outcome of the Offshore Leaks, confirms the urgency for more and better action against tax evasion ... Now it is time to put words into action."

Meanwhile, requests that we turn over the leaked off-shore data to authorities are continuing to come in from various governments, including the U.S., France, Canada, Greece, the Philippines and others. French budget minister Bernard Cazeneuve, for example, joined the clamor from governments around the globe in urging ICIJ and its media partners to release the offshore tax haven files to them, to "aid justice and help them do their job."

So far, ICIJ and its worldwide media partners have declined such requests and have chosen not to simply release raw mountains of data. ICIJ is continuing its responsible investigations in country after country, focusing on the public interest—public figures, banking and business leaders, as well as the crooks and fraudsters, who make use the off-shore industry to hide their money.

As we are seeing with the initial release of previously secret tax haven information, transparency and accountability can be powerful motivators for changed behavior and demands for more scrutiny.

Until next week,

Bill

Secret documents expose offshore’s global impact

2013-04-05T16:02:17-04:00

The Center for Public Integrity’s international team has just launched the largest investigative reporting project in its 15 year history.

Drawing on a leaked cache of 2.5 million files, ICIJ has cracked open the secrets of more than 120,000 offshore companies and trusts and about 130,000 individuals and agents, exposing hidden dealings of politicians, con men and the mega-rich in more than 170 countries and territories all over the world.

ICIJ stands for the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, an elite group of 160 investigative reporters in 60 countries that is a long-standing initiative of The Center for Public Integrity. The offshore tax haven project has so far involved some 89 journalists in 46 countries, and growing.

This leaked offshore information totaled more than 260 gigabytes of data — about the same amount of information as would be found in half a million books. I believe this may be the largest amount of leaked data ever gathered and analyzed by journalists. ICIJ’s research involved using high-tech data crunching and shoe-leather reporting to sift through corporate documents, emails, account ledgers and other files covering nearly 30 years. Alongside perfectly legal transactions, the secrecy and lax oversight offered by the offshore world allows fraud, tax dodging and political corruption to thrive.

To analyze the documents, ICIJ collaborated with journalists from The Guardian and the BBC in the U.K., Le Monde in France, Süddeutsche Zeitung and Norddeutscher Rundfunk in Germany, The Washington Post, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) and 31 other media partners around the world.

If you want to understand why the trillions of dollars in offshore accounts are such a critical issue for every country and the global economy, read this investigation — the most transparent and illuminating look ever into the secret world of tax havens and the people who make use of them.

How much do you value longform watchdog journalism?

2013-04-03T06:00:01-04:00

Being a reader and a supporter of the Center for Public Integrity, you see the headlines from us every week about the effects of money’s influence on government power.

Just last week, for example, the Center examined the funding sources and top sponsors behind expense-paid seminars for all federal judges. Our investigation revealed that some of the world’s largest oil and pharmaceutical companies, including ExxonMobil, Pfizer and BP, and other special interest groups, such as the Koch Foundation, were paying for this judicial travel. In potential conflicts of interest, the report also found instances where judges later ruled in favor of the sponsors of seminars they had attended.

As the tweets, comments and posts came pouring in, it was clear that thousands of readers like you feel strongly that no branch or level of government now seems immune from the influence of money. Here’s a selection of what some of you had to say on Twitter:

Sometimes our independent judiciary doesn't look so independent bit.ly/10kGv3x
— Public Campaign (@publicampaign) March 28, 2013

It's a conflict of interest when federal judges attend corporate sponsored seminars publicintegrity.org/2013/03/28/123… #occupy #occupyusa #p2
— Dave (@Merlyn43) March 28, 2013

Corruption. Justice 4 profit is not justice. RT Corporations, pro-business nonprofits foot bill for judicial seminars publicintegrity.org/2013/03/28/123…
— DrLearnALot (@DrLearnALot) March 28, 2013

CME isn't just for doctors. Pharma companies also pay for events to train judges as well, reports CPI: ow.ly/jxIDU
— Alexander Gaffney (@AlecGaffney) March 28, 2013

DEMOCRACY? Bought and paid! Corporations, pro-business nonprofits foot bill for judicial seminars zite.to/11QzCw1 via @zite
— linksteroh (@linksteroh) March 28, 2013

It took a team of eight reporters and editors many months and numerous Freedom of Information Act requests to report this story of corporate influence at the highest levels of the federal judiciary. The Center is dedicated to digging below the surface to produce significant reports like these in the public interest. As you might imagine, it takes considerable resources to review and analyze tens of thousands of documents and volumes of data, conduct scores of interviews and contact more than 40 trip sponsors as well as the judges named in the investigation.

Deep investigative reporting like this requires exceptional support.

Please help keep The Center for Public Integrity’s robust investigative work moving forward. The Center does not accept contributions from governments or anonymous sources. We count on support from readers — citizens like you — to maintain our no-stone-unturned style of accountability and transparency reporting. Our reporting reaches nearly 300,000 people every month on our website, in our emails, and on social media, and millions more on our media partner websites and in publications across the country and around the world.

We are dedicated to seeking the truth on your behalf. Our mission is to serve democracy by revealing abuses of power, corruption and betrayal of public trust by powerful public and private institutions, using the tools of investigative journalism.

Help us to continue to be your watchdog in the corridors of power. Please take a moment to support the Center today!

Thank you,

William E. Buzenberg
Executive Director

Educational seminars or judicial junkets?

2013-04-01T14:19:19-04:00

Does it matter that giant oil companies and drug makers are the most frequent sponsors of all-expense-paid seminars for federal judges?

Does it matter that more than 100 of these judicial seminars have an acknowledged bias toward presenting a conservative, free-market ideology?

Is this a real or only an imagined problem? No matter how any citizen answers these questions, there can be no argument that full transparency and accountability for such judicial travel are required—and that’s what The Center for Public Integrity provides with this week’s new investigative report and interactive database.

The perception of corporations buying influence exists, whether or not these educational retreats really do impact judicial decision-making.

After all, the Center found instances where judges traveled to seminars paid for by oil companies, the American Petroleum Institute, or the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and later issued rulings favoring some of those same sponsors.

Certainly, there is a First Amendment right for any federal judge to travel to Sedona, Ariz., Chicago, or Washington, D.C., to attend a conservative-leaning conference. And, there is nothing illegal about having the trip paid for by corporations who in some cases are also litigants before the federal courts.

But if all that is just fine, as judges insist it is, then it is critical to make sure all of this information is publicly available and searchable. And it should be clear how much sponsors are paying for these seminars— that information is not required to be reported under current rules, which should be of grave concern to anyone who cares about an untainted judiciary.

In addition, the biggest conference organizer, located at George Mason University’s law school, is no longer listing sponsors, which is also troubling.

The public will be able weigh in on the perception of bias, and judge the judges on the substance of their actions and rulings that follow only when full disclosure of these events is required and the rules are enforced.

Until next week,

Bill

Remembering a great of investigative journalism

2013-03-21T13:01:58-04:00

A truly great journalist died this past week, although you may never have known much about him. His name was Murrey Marder. He was 93.

Marder was “one of the most significant journalists of our time,” as Charles Lewis, founder of The Center for Public Integrity, wrote recently in an eloquent tribute to Marder’s life and work.

“He was utterly tenacious about the truth,” Lewis wrote. “Not only did it outrage him when those in power lied, but it also especially gnawed away at him when the national news media would just stenographically report, and thus repeat, those lies.”

Lewis has created a superb oral history project and website about the role of journalism in American history called Investigating Power. One of the featured moments of truth recounted by Lewis concerns Marder, as a reporter for the Washington Post in the early 1950s. He may have done more than anyone else to bring down the demagogic reign of Sen. Joseph McCarthy, according to Lewis. Marder essentially chronicled and scrutinized McCarthy’s every major utterance and official action for four full years.

In 1953, when Sen. McCarthy was at the height of his power, Marder wrote a series of stories in the Post about McCarthy’s reckless charges portraying an Army Signal Corps Center at Fort Monmouth, NJ, as a “nest of spies.” Marder made it clear this was empty rhetoric. “Nothing that can be independently ascertained from information available here or in Washington indicates that there is any known evidence to support such a conclusion .”

And as an interactive timeline makes clear, Marder’s important investigative work was followed four months later by Edward R. Murrow’s famous “See It Now” program on McCarthy. (Murrow’s CBS program was featured in the 2005 movie “Good Night, and Good Luck.”) And, a month after Murrow weighed in, in April 1954, the Army-McCarthy hearings began to be televised live, leading to McCarthy’s condemnation by the Senate later that year — and his eventual demise.

Although Marder went on to help cover the Pentagon Papers in 1971 and conduct other investigations, it is the downfall of Sen. McCarthy for which he will be best remembered. It all started with Murrey Marder’s work. He stood up to lies with courage, facts and the truth.

Tackling the powerful chemical industry

2013-03-15T11:46:16-04:00

Tens of millions of Americans drink water contaminated with chromium (VI), a toxic compound the Environmental Protection Agency was poised in 2011 to conclude likely causes cancer. That finding would normally set the stage for setting stricter drinking-water standards. So far, the new standards have not been set.

If you want to know the story behind the delay, read our two-part investigation, Toxic Clout, including the latest report this week on how chemical industry scientists are able to stall action on a known carcinogen. Or, watch the excellent two-part PBS NewsHour series that documents how an industry uses its resources to raise questions, pay for studies and otherwise effectively block government agencies from taking action.

In some of our key findings, the Center for Public Integrity reported that the EPA’s delay was caused in part by waiting for new studies paid for by the American Chemistry Council, the chemical industry’s main trade group and lobbyist. And, some of the same industry-paid scientists involved in past efforts to stall government action on chromium worked on the studies delaying the EPA.

Chromium (VI), you may recall, is the same chemical compound featured in the movie Erin Brockovich. That Oscar-winning film did much to raise awareness of chromium pollution in drinking water. Because of that pollution, the company involved, Pacific Gas & Electric Co., paid $333 million to the people of Hinkley, Calif. But, as I’ve noted before, this story does not end with the Hollywood version of events. The EPA has still not acted.

The good news, however, is that after the Center for Public Integrity and the PBS NewsHour started asking questions about the delay, the EPA revised its timetable for completing its chromium (VI) assessment. Instead of waiting until 2015, the EPA now says it will move up its assessment by two years, to 2013. And EPA also plans to correct the problems with conflicts of interests that we exposed. Glacial but timely progress.

Until next week,

Bill

Weekly Watchdog: Counting impact and awards

2013-03-08T13:30:00-05:00

It is always gratifying when the Center for Public Integrity’s investigative projects have a major impact AND win major award recognition. That’s been happening a lot lately.

Most recently, our State Integrity Investigation—a corruption risk index for all 50 states—was named a finalist for the distinguished Goldsmith Prize for Investigative Reporting by the Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government. This massive project has contributed to ethics reform efforts in 16 states so far, with more coming during this year’s legislative sessions.

The Goldsmith judges described the State Integrity project as "a wonderful blueprint for reporters all over the country to do enterprising stories on government." Produced in collaboration with Global Integrity and Public Radio International, this work has been written about in 1,500 other publications and been cited in more than 75 editorials. According to the Goldsmith Prize judges, the results of the State Integrity Investigation “include accelerated reform in government and an increase in disclosure requirements in many states.”

Meanwhile, the Center’s on-going Medicare project, “Cracking the Codes”, has just been recognized by Investigative Reporters and Editors with the singular 2012 Phillip Meyer Award for Precision Journalism. Phil Meyer is considered the godfather of Computer Assisted Reporting, or CAR. Our 21-month investigation examining nearly two terabytes of data unveiled for the first time how some medical professionals have billed Medicare at sharply higher rates and collected $11 billion in additional, questionable fees as a result. In the week after publication, the Justice Department and the Department of Health and Human Services issued new warnings to the medical profession and launched new federal investigations.

I could go on to discuss two new awards from the Society of American Business Editors and Writers who have recognized the Center for Public Integrity as double winners of its 18th Best in Business competition, which honors excellence in business journalism across all news platforms. Their recognition went to “Skin & Bone: The Shadowy Trade in Human Body Parts” and “Fraud and Folly: The Untold Story of General Electric’s Subprime Debacle” which is part of our series on the Great Mortgage Cover-Up.

But you get the idea. Congratulations to all the Center reporters and editors engaged in this award-winning work.

Until Next Week,

Bill Buzenberg
Executive Director

Toxic clout: how Washington works (badly)

2013-02-28T13:20:31-05:00

More than 80,000 chemicals are on the market in the United States, with hundreds added each year. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other regulators are supposed to protect the public from chemical contaminants in air, water and consumer products that can cause cancer and other illnesses. But the chemical industry's sway over science and policy is extremely powerful. Much like the clout of the NRA, the American Chemistry Council (ACC) is an industry trade association that often acts to create uncertainty and delay, actions that ultimately threaten the public health.

In a new series of stories called Toxic Clout, The Center for Public Integrity is exploring how the chemical industry operates behind the scenes. We want to shed light on how a cancer-causing chemical compound could escape regulation that EPA scientists say is necessary. Please tune in to the PBS NewsHour next Wednesday, March 6th, to see a special report produced in partnership with The Center for Public Integrity.

This report features a chemical compound that more than 70 million Americans drink traces of every day. Since 2010, EPA scientists have concluded that even small amounts of this compound may cause cancer.

The chemical compound is called hexavalent chromium, which gained infamy in the Oscar-winning film Erin Brockovich. The film ends in Hollywood fashion, with the corporate polluter paying $333 million to people suffering from illnesses. But in real life, that is not the end of the story.

As the Center for Public Integrity has reported, the EPA was poised to cite evidence of cancer risks in hexavalent chromium in 2011 — likely presaging stricter drinking water standards. Yet a special EPA panel urged the agency to delay action — citing, among other issues, pending research by the American Chemistry Council. The EPA agreed to put off action. The EPA was unaware that three of the panelists urging delay had in fact worked on behalf of industry in Hinkley, California — site of the Brockovich legal fight.

This is type of conflict of interest is precisely why the Center is focusing on Toxic Clout.

Until Next Week,

Bill

Crowd-funding our watchdog reporting

2013-02-12T16:55:32-05:00

The Center for Public Integrity can benefit from the Freedom of the Press Foundation’s latest crowd-funding campaign in support of “aggressive, public-interest journalism focused on exposing mismanagement, corruption and law-breaking in government.” A donation to this fund over the next two weeks will be matched up to $10,000 by actor and Foundation board member John Cusack.

The Freedom of the Press Foundation has already raised about $200,000 for a select handful of organizations, from the National Security Archive to WikiLeaks.

Foundation support for the Center will go toward our National Security reporting on Pentagon spending. We’ll examine what makes up the biggest defense budget in the world. We’ll detail what’s gone wrong in some of the Defense Department's most troubled and costly projects like the F-35 fighter jet and the Navy’s Littoral Combat Ships. We’ll look at the explosion of military entitlements, and map how top defense contractors in Washington regularly finance the election campaigns of the lawmakers who oversee or control their budgets.

Crowd-funding by the Freedom of the Press Foundation is built on the recognition that “this kind of transparency journalism — from publishing the Pentagon Papers and exposing Watergate, to uncovering the NSA’s warrantless wiretapping program and CIA secret prisons — doesn’t just happen. It requires dogged work by journalists, and often, the courage of whistleblowers and others who work to ensure that the public actually learns what it has a right to know.”

As the Foundation acknowledges, increasingly it is the non-profit media and transparency organizations like The Center for Public Integrity that are emerging as a critical component of the journalism landscape. “Leveraging the power of the Internet, these organizations are helping to reinvent and reimagine independent watchdog reporting.”

I couldn’t have said it better.

Until next week,

Bill Buzenberg
Executive Director

Weekly Watchdog: Our new blog sheds light on secret spenders

2013-04-29T14:42:20-04:00

Last year, the Center for Public Integrity’s investigative work was cited nearly 15,000 times by other media organizations. I expect that number will grow this year. That’s in part because of a new Center project launched this week called Primary Source.

Primary Source will publish daily original reports on all things influence-related: examinations and analyses of primary source documents pertaining to political contributions, spending, lobbying and other forms of special interest influence. Primary Source is part of the Center for Public Integrity's larger Consider the Source project that focuses on developments in the post-Citizens United world of money and politics.

The 2012 campaign may be over, but the money and influence game continues apace. We want to show where the money comes from. For example, Primary Source reported that a brand new conservative group, American for a Strong Defense, just popped up two weeks ago and started buying hundreds of thousands of dollars in ads against the Senate confirmation of former Senator Chuck Hagel as Defense Secretary.

Meanwhile, Sara Palin’s super PAC (Sara PAC) still has $1.15 million in the bank and remains a political force, even if its namesake has dropped her Fox TV contract. And there is a new super PAC for Hillary Clinton, a group called "Ready for Hillary" registered Friday with the Federal Election Commission.

These and other influence updates will find their way to Primary Source with an eye on naming those who seek to manipulate public opinion and elected officials for political gain. Please bookmark Primary Source here, subscribe to its RSS feed here, follow daily updates on Twitter at @PublicI and "like" us on Facebook. Also be sure to send in your tips, hints and suggestions to tips@publicintegrity.org.

Consider the Source: Your personal election guide

2013-04-29T14:42:20-04:00

With less than two months to go before the Nov. 6th election, nearly $3 billion has been raised by all the presidential and congressional candidates, along with the parties and super PACs, a staggering figure.

Here is a rough tally at this moment in time, with help from OpenSecrets.org:

All super PACs have raised about $350 million so far this cycle, with conservative groups bringing in the major share.
All House candidates have raised about $784 million.
All Senate candidates have raised about $445 million.
And all presidential candidates have raised about $700 million. This figure includes $350 million by President Barack Obama and $194 million by Mitt Romney.
In addition, the Democratic National Committee has raised $242 million and the Republican National Committee has raised $265 million. All these fundraising numbers are here on OpenSecrets.org.

And, each of these numbers will grow substantially in the next 54 days. The financial arms race at the presidential level is likely to be something of a draw by the time the final figures are counted, but the Republicans to date are at a distinct advantage with well-funded outside spending groups, which have blanketed the airwaves with mostly negative ads.

The 2012 presidential election will end up being the most expensive and least transparent presidential campaign of the modern era. Our year-long ‘Consider the Source’ project seeks to ‘out’ shadowy political organizations that have flourished in the wake of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling. Turn to us through Election Day and beyond for the narrative behind the massive flow of money at federal and state levels.

Bookmark these tools and resources:

The Daily Disclosure: From Federal Election Commission reports to YouTube postings and press releases, the Daily Disclosure provides an insider-look into super PACs’ and nonprofits’ reported campaign spending. Each day, we comb through the data to identify ads paid for by free-spending special interest groups.

Super PAC profiles: We’ve profiled 22 super PACs so far this election cycle. Each identifies the principals behind the PAC with brief bios, ideologies, money raised so far, and how it is being spent – mostly on attack ads as it turns out.

Nonprofit donor profiles: Nonprofits can spend the same as super PACs but are not required to reveal their donors. Our investigations have revealed details on 10 of these groups so far, including principals, ideology and finances wherever possible.

Super donor profiles: Learn about the top 10 donors to super PACs and what they hope to get in return. Be sure to check out the trading-card versions of these all-stars here.

Citizens United – the back story: Need a primer on how we got here? In 2010, the courts reversed decades of legal precedent when they said it was OK for corporations and unions to spend as much as they want to put their favorite candidates in office. Our citizen’s guide explains what the courts ruled and why it matters.

Our new name has a familiar ring to it

2013-04-29T14:42:20-04:00

The Center for Public Integrity is, once again, The Center for Public Integrity.

Actually, we always have been. But in April 2011, as part of a new business plan that included a top-to-bottom redesign of our website, we also gave ourselves a new digital address — www.iwatchnews.org — to go along with our new look.

It sounded good at the time and looked good on paper, but it never fit quite right. And frankly, it led to some confusion about who we are — which is and always has been The Center for Public Integrity, one of the country’s oldest and largest nonpartisan, nonprofit investigative news organizations.

Granted, the name we were born with doesn’t sound like your typical journalistic organization. But we’re not typical and we’re proud of it. Since former 60 Minutes producer Charles Lewis started The Center for Public Integrity from his home in 1989 — when the first George Bush had just taken over the White House from Ronald Reagan and the Clintons were still living in Little Rock — we have published thousands of hard-hitting, in-depth stories that have appeared in thousands of print and online publications and TV and radio programs around the world.

And we’ve had impact. Many of our investigations not only have won some of the most prestigious awards in journalism, they have also produced concrete results:

Just last year we helped spur the U.S. Department of Education to change rules on how colleges address sexual assault.
Our reporting on the failed undercover gun program “Fast and Furious” led to the reassignment of the acting director of the Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives department and the resignation of the Arizona U.S. attorney.
Our Looting the Seas series on global overfishing has helped tighten controls for the Atlantic blue fin tuna trade, started government investigations in Europe and called attention to rampant over fishing of the lowly jack mackerel in the Southern Pacific.
And just a few weeks ago, federal regulators assembled a team of lawyers and experts to figure out how to bolster coal mine dust enforcement given the systemic weakness revealed by our investigation into the resurgence of black lung.

In the last year, we’ve broadened the scope of our reporting to include shorter, daily accountability stories to complement our trademark long-form investigative reports. That will continue.

And we are constantly interacting with communities on Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, Google+ and Pinterest. We continue to build distribution partnerships with media outlets all over the world that ensure our most important information finds its way to the audience where it can have the greatest impact.

What we learned in the last year is that our website isn’t a product of The Center for Public Integrity — it is The Center for Public Integrity. That’s why we have decided to reclaim our name and be known by a single identity. By embracing our given name, we’re taking the confusion out of who we are and reaffirming what we stand for.

We will continue to do our work on a not-for-profit basis through grants from foundations and donations from individuals who share our passion for journalism in the public interest that shines a light on the failures of institutions and people in positions of power. We want to share that passion daily with you, and we think we can do that best as www.publicintegrity.org.

That’s not a publication. It’s an institution.

State Integrity Investigation turning heads

2013-01-23T13:02:44-05:00

In just its first two days, our State Integrity Investigation — a corruption-risk grade card for every state — has been quoted, praised, assailed or otherwise cited by more than 100 media organizations. The investigation has been featured in outlets such as The Washington Post, the Atlanta Journal Constitution, The Miami Herald and the Chicago Tribune, as well as the Bangor Daily News, the Tucson Sentinel, The Bellingham Herald, NPR and The Huffington Post, just to name a few.

The idea of measuring accountability and transparency in state government seems to have touched a reformist nerve. Our state-by-state comparison, produced with partners Global Integrity and Public Radio International, has illuminated the often obscure, closed-door politics of state governments — from the budget process to pension management, from ethics enforcement to public access to information. State officials who have previously talked about openness and accountability are, in fact, often overseeing backroom bastions with little public scrutiny.

I am pleased to see The New York Times Editorial Board weighed in on Tuesday, leading their page with the headline, “The States Get a Poor Report Card.” As the Times reported, so little has changed in most state capitals: “Budgeting is still done behind closed doors, and spending decisions are revealed to the public at the last minute. Ethics panels do not bother to meet, or never enforce the conflict-of-interest laws that are on the books. Lobbyists have free access to elected officials, plying them with gifts or big campaign contributions. Open-records acts are shot through with loopholes.”

There is nothing like a failing grade, however, to prompt states to push for reform, and that is starting to happen, too. We’ll be reporting on where states are going right as well as wrong in weeks and months to come.

The weekly watchdog: Dec. 12 - Dec. 16

2011-12-17T06:00:01-05:00

Thousands of sugarcane workers die while authorities stall

In most of the world, chronic kidney disease — CKD — is a manageable illness that primarily affects the elderly. But in Central America the condition is instead devastating whole communities, according to a new investigation by the Center for Public Integrity’s International Consortium of Investigative Journalists. Between 2005 and 2009, about 2,800 people died each year — mostly manual laborers in harsh sugarcane fields of El Salvador, Nicaragua and Costa Rica. As the death toll rises, those in a position to fight the disease — the region's sugar industry, wealthier nations such as the U.S., and international development agencies — have largely resisted pleas to take action. Our reporters visit the “Island of the Widows.”

An epidemic of expulsions

K-12 school suspension and expulsion policies are disproportionately targeting minorities and putting many students on a fast track to failure, according to a new investigation by the Center for Public Integrity. California’s Kern County is at the leading edge of the debate over where to draw the line in school discipline. The county is home to just 3 percent of California students, but last year was responsible for 14 percent of state expulsions. Those numbers hide a troubling racial element. In the county’s public schools, Latino students represent 55 percent of district enrollment but 60 percent of those expelled over a five-year period. White students represent 32 percent of enrollment and 22 percent of the expelled; blacks were less than 8 percent of enrollment but about 15 percent of expelled pupils.

Countrywide’s culture was top-down, fearful, intimidating

The Countrywide Financial postmortem continues — and the story just gets more sordid. Whistleblower Cynder Niemela was hired by the subprime lender in 2007 to help improve the astounding 45 percent turnover of the company’s mortgage sales force. She found a culture of top-down fear and intimidation, starting with CEO Angelo Mozilo and including most VP-level officers of the company. And the top brass didn’t like bad news. Niemela alleges that higher-ups revised and distorted one of her PowerPoint presentations in an effort to obscure the company’s problems with employee dissatisfaction. She also urged Countrywide executives to open a full-scale investigation of fraud within the company. “They just shut the whole thing down. They didn’t want to hear that,” she said. Niemela was ultimately fired.

Center website wins National Press Foundation award

The Center for Public Integrity’s iWatchnews.org website received the Excellence in Online Journalism Award from the National Press Foundation. NPF said the site “effectively uses the capabilities of digital journalism in support of its investigative mission.” It’s the third major award for the Center in almost as many weeks. Late last month, the nonpartisan news organization won two 2011 EPPY awards from Editor & Publisher. The winning categories: Best Enterprise Feature on a Website and Best Investigative Website with Under 250,000 Monthly Visitors.

Until next week,

Bill Buzenberg

Executive Director

The weekly watchdog: Dec. 5 - Dec. 9

2011-12-10T06:03:01-05:00

GOP, Chamber Push to Weaken Consumer Protection Bureau

Senate Republicans this week blocked the nomination of Richard Cordray to lead the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Five months after its formation, the new federal agency tasked with safeguarding the financial interests of ordinary people is still without a director. Republicans, led by Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., want a board of commissioners rather than a single director to oversee the agency – a move that would weaken the organization, consumer advocates say. The GOP position on the agency closely matches that of Washington’s most powerful lobbying force, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which is pushing a House bill that would also replace the director with a five-member commission. A total of 34 industry groups list the bill as a lobbying priority, according to a Center analysis of federal records, representing 183 industry lobbyists. At least 79 of these lobbyists once worked for the government.

Health Insurers Don’t Want Clearer Policy Information

Health insurers bank on poorly informed consumers, writes Senior Analyst Wendell Potter. He says the industry and its allies are lobbying the Obama administration to ignore the new health law’s requirement for clearer policy information, arguing that to comply will cost millions of dollars that insurers would have to pass on to consumers. “The companies insist that providing understandable information allowing us to compare plans serves no purpose that would justify the additional cost.” It’s the same bogus argument the food industry floated to fight clearer ingredients labeling legislation in the early 1990s. That law passed, and the republic survived.

Newt Races for Cash and Support

The 2012 presidential campaign money chase continues. As Newt Gingrich resurrects his once moribund campaign, his fundraisers and outside allies are moving aggressively to rake in millions of dollars and win backing from the evangelical and Tea Party communities, iWatch News reports. To achieve these daunting goals, three long-time allies of Gingrich — Florida fundraiser Gay Gaines, former spokesman and conservative Christian activist Rick Tyler, and Las Vegas billionaire Sheldon Adelson — are shaping up as important players. Gingrich’s political fortunes in the upcoming Iowa caucuses and the early primaries in New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Florida hinge heavily on getting his message out to potential supporters through TV ads and outside organizations that will require millions of dollars, fast.

Center Wins Two EPPY Awards

The Center was recently honored with two 2011 EPPY awards from Editor & Publisher. The winning categories: Best Enterprise Feature on a Website and Best Investigative Website with Under 250,000 Monthly Visitors. The feature singled out for accolades is Dangers in the Dust: Inside the Global Asbestos Trade, produced by the Center's International Consortium of Investigative Journalists. The multimedia series published in July 2010 and included a BBC World TV documentary, a dozen radio stories on BBC World Service and seven online stories by ICIJ. The project reached tens of millions of people in more than 150 countries, receiving coverage by some 400 news outlets, blogs and websites in at least 20 languages. The Website prize honors our new digital front door, iwatchnews.org.

Until next week,

Bill Buzenberg
Executive Director