MARK KARLIN, EDITOR OF BUZZFLASH AT TRUTHOUT

Elizabeth Warren took on a corporate-funded study by a Brookings think tank fellow and won. (Photo: AFGE)

Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) continues to pierce the veil of how the DC professional class of "experts" is frequently corrupted by financial gain. In this case, a fellow for the Brookings Institution received $40,000 from an investment firm to write a study that was critical of a proposal supported by Warren and the White House.

The regulation in question would simply compel transparency by financial advisors, requiring them to disclose to investors if they or their firms would monetarily benefit from advice given to clients.

According to a September 29 article in Boston.com, Warren tenaciously pursued the exposure of a financially compromised report co-author by writing a letter to Brookings:

On Tuesday morning, the Washington Post reported that Sen. Elizabeth Warren wrote a letter to the Brookings Institution, a prestigious Washington think tank, over a study that criticized a proposed Labor Department regulation on financial advisors.

Warren wrote that the report’s co-author Robert Litan—who was commissioned nearly $40,000 by an investment firm that also reviewed the report—was “highly compensated and editorially compromised work on behalf of an industry player seeking a specific conclusion.”

On Tuesday afternoon, The Hill reported that Litan, Brookings’ nonresident senior economic fellow, will resign....

It [the study] was also funded by the Capital Group, a investment firm that manages $1.4 trillion in American funds and had “made opposition to Labor’s rule one of its top priorities,” according to the Post.

Brookings is often described by the corporate mass media as a “liberal” think tank. However, in reality, Brookings is not particularly "liberal." It would be better described as a centrist and highly influential establishment think tank – whose analysis and research staff is composed primarily of careerists and academics - that is only "liberal" in contrast to the sharply right wing think tanks, such as the Heritage Foundation. Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), a leftist media watch dog organization, years ago described Brookings as more conservative than liberal. FAIR writer Sam Husseini stated back then that "in fact, much of Brookings’ top brass has come from Republican administrations."

The above background on Brookings is offered to provide context to the impact that occurs when one of its fellows issues a study, is quoted by the media or testifies before Congress (or as in the case of Litan, all of the above). The expert in question is generally perceived on the Hill and in the establishment media as representing a "liberal" think tank, when it is really an institution that is, in many ways, the epitome of the status quo.

It is safe to assume that Litan is not the only fellow/consultant in DC (many think tank fellows, including those of Brookings have outside income and careers – and Litan was a “nonresident” fellow) accepting money for conducting analyses whose conclusions favor the interests of the funders. More significantly, there is even a larger issue of who funds think tanks in DC, including Brookings.

A 2014 article in The Washington Post described how Brookings has become "more reliant on outside donors, including corporations, foreign governments and wealthy individuals." Litan's impropriety takes place within a city where think tanks, such as Brookings, are frequently beholden to big money and institutions with an interest in preserving and implementing DC policies that benefit them. A look through the board of trustees of Brookings reveals that it is primarily composed of elite Wall Street and corporate present or past CEOs, top executives or corporate board chairpersons.

The board of trustees is the body that is legally responsible for Brookings. Obviously, the oligarchical composition of the Brookings board casts a shadow over the work of the entire institution, particularly given that “prestigious” board members are often expected to give a minimal level of donations in return for their board seat. In turn, Brookings becomes, in part, dependent upon the funding from the trustees and the companies that they are or have been affiliated with.

Salon reports that "a spokesman for Brookings [said] that the research in question was carried out in Litan’s 'private capacity, not connected with Brookings in any way.'" That's a rather disingenuous statement considering that many fellows at Brookings conduct "studies" and identify themselves as Brookings fellows, even if the reports are not directly funded by Brookings. It just so happens that Elizabeth Warren nailed Litan because he was making the astounding claim that requiring financial advisors to disclose conflicts of interest to clients would be costly to investors. Litan testified to a Senate subcommittee that "In fact, during a future market downturn, we estimate the rule could cost investors as much as $80 billion."

Brookings can try to distance itself from Litan, but it can't dispute that the think tank as a whole is compromised by its board of trustees - and major donors - who represent financial firms and corporations among the who's who of vested interests in maintaing public policies that benefit the plutocracy.

Once again, Elizabeth Warren has challenged the accepted practices of the ruling elite in Washington, DC. However, it will require continued vigilance and exposure to transform a major think tank whose governance currently represents a rogue's gallery of corporations and wealth in the US. Furthermore, the daunting challenge remains of dispelling the notion that think tanks and their fellows in DC conduct research uninfluenced by outside money.

Not to be reposted without permission of Truthout.