Acknowledgments This report was written by Taylor Lincoln, Research Director for the Congress Watch division of Public Citizen, and edited by Susan Harley, Deputy Director of Congress Watch. Public Citizen Regulatory Policy Analyst Amit Narang, Vice President of Legislative Affairs Lisa Gilbert and President Robert Weissman provided expert insights. UnKoch My Campus provided valuable data and insights. Cover art by Bret Thompson. About Public Citizen Public Citizen is a national non-profit organization with more than 500,000 members and supporters. We represent consumer interests through lobbying, litigation, administrative advocacy, research, and public education on a broad range of issues including consumer rights in the marketplace, product safety, financial regulation, worker safety, safe and affordable health care, campaign finance reform and government ethics, fair trade, climate change, and corporate and government accountability. A KEY COG IN CHARLES KOCH’S MASTER PLAN: THE GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY REGULATORY STUDIES CENTER CONTENTS CONTENTS KEY FINDINGS ............................................................................................................................................................. 6 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................................... 7 I. BIAS: THE REGULATORY STUDIES CENTER’S PUBLIC COMMENTS AND OTHER WRITINGS OVERWHELMINGLY OPPOSE REGULATION ................................................................................................... 10 A. THE RSC’S PUBLIC COMMENTS OVERWHELMINGLY WEIGH AGAINST REGULATION ............................................................................ 10 Evaluation of the RSC’s public comments concerning regulatory policy...................................................................................... 11 B. RSC WORKING PAPERS OFTEN DISPUTE THE BENEFITS OF AIR QUALITY RULES AND RECOMMEND INCREASED STEPS TO MAKE RULES............... 12 C. THE REGULATORY STUDIES CENTER HAS PRESENTED DECEPTIVE INFORMATION .............................................................................. 13 The RSC has presented deceptive and inaccurate information on the number of federal regulations ........................................ 14 The RSC has imparted deceptive analysis on the growth of regulatory spending ....................................................................... 15 RSC researchers have promoted discredited studies on the overall costs of regulations ............................................................ 17 D. THE RSC IGNORES FACTS AND FINDINGS THAT CONTRADICT ITS ANTIREGULATORY OUTLOOK ........................................................... 19 The RSC’s writings do not contemplate that actual compliance costs are typically lower than government forecasts ............... 19 The RSC’s attacks on efficiency standards ignore the big picture ................................................................................................ 20 The RSC’s writings rarely acknowledge the benefits of regulations ............................................................................................ 21 The RSC’s writings do not examine the potential of regulations to spur innovation ................................................................... 21 The RSC’s writings do not explore areas in which the U.S. may be under-regulated ................................................................... 22 II. THE SCHOLARS: PEOPLE WITH PAST OR PRESENT TIES TO KOCH-FUNDED ENTITIES PRODUCE THE BULK OF THE REGULATORY STUDIES CENTER’S WORK ............................................. 23 A. THE MAJORITY OF PUBLIC COMMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE RSC HAVE BEEN WRITTEN BY AUTHORS WITH TIES TO KOCH-FUNDED ENTITIES ...... 23 B. SUMMARY OF KOCH-FUNDED ORGANIZATIONS WITH WHICH RSC AUTHORS HAVE BEEN AFFILIATED ..................................................... 24 III. THE FUNDERS: KOCH FOUNDATION AND OTHER OPPONENTS OF REGULATION DOMINATE KNOWN DONORS TO THE RSC ............................................................................................................................. 26 A. CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE REGULATORY STUDIES CENTER REPORTED BY FOUNDATIONS ....................................................................... 26 Searle Freedom Trust .................................................................................................................................................................. 26 Charles Koch Foundation ............................................................................................................................................................ 27 ExxonMobil ................................................................................................................................................................................. 28 Sarah Scaife Foundation ............................................................................................................................................................. 29 DonorsTrust ................................................................................................................................................................................ 29 U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation ..................................................................................................................................... 30 B. DONORS REPORTED BY GWU TRACHTENBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION ............................................ 30 IV. A CENTER OF INFLUENCE: THE RSC APPEARS TO PLAY A SIGNIFICANT ROLE IN SHAPING DEREGULATORY AGENDA .................................................................................................................................... 32 A. THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION HAS EMBRACED THE RSC’S CALL TO REDUCE THE COST THAT REGULATORS ATTRIBUTE TO CARBON EMISSIONS . 33 B. THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION HAS ACTED ON THE RSC’S CALL TO MINIMIZE “CO-BENEFITS” AS JUSTIFICATIONS TO REGULATE .................... 34 C. THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION HAS FOLLOWED THE RSC’S RECOMMENDATION TO CHANGE THE PROCESS FOR SETTING EFFICIENCY STANDARDS34 D. THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION HAS APPOINTED A RSC SCHOLAR TO KEY SCIENCE PANELS ................................................................... 35 E. THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION ENACTED THE RSC’S CALL FOR A “REGULATORY BUDGET” ................................................................... 36 V. SHROUDED: THE RSC KEEPS DETAILS OF ITS FUNDING SECRET ....................................................... 37 A. THE REGULATORY STUDIES CENTER’S DISCLOSURE OF ITS FUNDING IS SPORADIC AND CRYPTIC ............................................................. 37 B. EMPIRICAL AND ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE SHOWS A CORRELATION BETWEEN FUNDING AND RESEARCH OUTCOMES ...................................... 37 C. PROTOCOLS IN THE ECONOMICS PROFESSION CALL FOR INCREASED DISCLOSURE ............................................................................... 38 D. THE ECONOMICS PROFESSION’S PROTOCOLS ARE RELEVANT TO THE REGULATORY STUDIES CENTER ...................................................... 39 E. THE ECONOMICS PROFESSION’S PROTOCOLS ON DISCLOSING INSTITUTIONAL CONFLICTS ARE UNCLEAR ................................................... 39 F. UNIVERSITIES’ DISCLOSURE PRACTICES REMAIN SPOTTY, AT BEST ................................................................................................... 40 PUBLIC CITIZEN • JUNE 3, 2019 3 A KEY COG IN CHARLES KOCH’S MASTER PLAN: THE GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY REGULATORY STUDIES CENTER CONTENTS G. THE KOCH NETWORK SAYS IT HAS EMBRACED DISCLOSURE BUT ITS POLICY IS RIDDEN WITH LOOPHOLES ................................................. 40 H. THE UTILITY OF DISCLOSURE IS LIMITED .................................................................................................................................. 41 VI. ETHICS POLICY GAPS: GW UNIVERSITY DOES NOT APPEAR TO HAVE SUFFICIENT SAFEGUARDS TO PREVENT CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ............................................................................... 42 A. THE REGULATORY STUDIES CENTER’S POLICY ON RESEARCH INTEGRITY IS VAGUE .............................................................................. 42 B. GWU’S POLICY ON CONFLICTS OF INTEREST DOES NOT APPEAR TO ADDRESS INSTITUTIONAL CONFLICTS ................................................. 42 C. GUIDES EXIST FOR LIMITING RISKS POSED BY POTENTIAL INSTITUTIONAL CONFLICTS ........................................................................... 42 VII. “FULLY INTEGRATED”: HOW THE KOCH UNIVERSITY INITIATIVE OPERATES ......................... 43 A. THE KOCH UNIVERSITY INITIATIVE IS ENORMOUS, GROWING, AND FITS INTO AN EVEN MORE STAGGERING POLITICAL UNIVERSE ................... 43 B. THE UNIVERSITY CENTERS ARE KEY COGS IN THE KOCH NETWORK’S “INTEGRATED STRUCTURE OF PRODUCTION FOR SOCIAL CHANGE” ........... 45 C. “TRAINING THE NEXT GENERATION OF THE FREEDOM MOVEMENT”: USING COLLEGE CAMPUSES AS RECRUITING GROUNDS ........................ 47 D. USING THEIR OWN PUBLICATIONS TO BOOST THE LIBERTARIANS’ CAREERS ...................................................................................... 49 E. KOCH-FUNDED PROGRAMS TRAIN JUDGES AND ATTORNEYS GENERAL............................................................................................. 50 F. THE KOCH NETWORK SEEKS TO PLACE STUDENTS IN THE GOVERNMENT .........................................................................................