Speaker 1: Hey, everybody. Josh here and for this week's Select I've
Speaker 1: chosen our episode on think tanks from September twenty eighteen.
Speaker 1: It's a common misconception that our elected officials in Washington
Speaker 1: and the state capitals and everywhere else make the laws
Speaker 1: and the policy that they introduce. In most cases, they
Speaker 1: do not do that. That's up to special interest groups.
Speaker 1: And once upon a time, think tanks were one of
Speaker 1: those groups. And even accounting for political bent, the policy
Speaker 1: they suggested lawmakers was sound and unbiased. It was good stuff,
Speaker 1: in other words. But that's not the case any longer.
Speaker 1: As we learned in this episode, think tanks are open
Speaker 1: for business and the US is far the worse off
Speaker 1: for it. Hope you enjoy this episode. Hope it opens
Speaker 1: your eyes.
Speaker 2: Welcome to Stuff you Should Know, a production of iHeartRadio.
Speaker 1: Hey, and welcome to the podcast. I'm Josh Clark, Charles
Speaker 1: w Chuck Bryant, and Jerry's over there actually sitting in today,
Speaker 1: and this is stuff you should know about think tanks,
Speaker 1: the thinking this kind of tanks. There are fish tanks.
Speaker 1: They don't think at all, well, they barely think. They think.
Speaker 1: This water feels a little warm for me, and then
Speaker 1: they think what's water, what's being wet? And then that's
Speaker 1: about it.
Speaker 2: And then they're like, how about some of those tasty flakes?
Speaker 1: Yeah, give me some, and that's its. Think tanks. There's
Speaker 1: a lot more thinking going on in these.
Speaker 2: Kind of tanks, more like stink tanks.
Speaker 1: It depends on your opinion, and that's everybody's opinion. So yes,
Speaker 1: I guess they are more like stink tanks these days.
Speaker 2: This is one of those weird ones where I for
Speaker 2: forty seven years, I've just sort of had this. I
Speaker 2: never dug in on what a think tank was. I
Speaker 2: hear it, and now I kind of assumed I knew
Speaker 2: what it was.
Speaker 1: I was kind of right, yeah, yeah, yeah, it's good.
Speaker 1: It's a good term for something.
Speaker 2: Yeah. I was like with this, is this like a
Speaker 2: bunch of smart people sitting around thinking about smart stuff?
Speaker 1: Exactly? That's kind of right, That's exactly what it is.
Speaker 1: It's ideally, it's like a place where people sit around
Speaker 1: and think about things that eventually hopefully affects public policy
Speaker 1: in a positive way, is what you're ultimately hoping for.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and by think we don't mean if you went
Speaker 2: by a think tank, they would all just be sitting
Speaker 2: around going hmmm.
Speaker 1: I think it depends on the day of the week
Speaker 1: or if it's right after lunch.
Speaker 2: Like, there's a ton of research and study. Oh, I
Speaker 2: see it, stuff like that.
Speaker 1: They're not just pulling stuff out of thin air.
Speaker 2: No.
Speaker 1: No, that's the point of think tanks is they are
Speaker 1: groups of people, nonprofit organizations. In the US we should say.
Speaker 2: Yeah, which we'll get to the finer points of that.
Speaker 1: Who say, you know what, we see this problem in
Speaker 1: America and or the world or wherever. Great Britain has
Speaker 1: plenty of China has a bunch, and they say, how
Speaker 1: can we solve this problem? Let's get too. We're going
Speaker 1: to take this problem on and figure it out through
Speaker 1: pragmatic science and evidence based research. We're going to come
Speaker 1: up with a solution to this problem. And then the
Speaker 1: next step is to get it out there to the public,
Speaker 1: to policymakers, to get people talking about it. And then
Speaker 1: once enough people talk about it and there's a public
Speaker 1: debate over it, ideally, if it's a good idea, it
Speaker 1: will be adopted as public policy and that problem will
Speaker 1: be solved in a good way.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And that's the ideal function of an ideal think tank,
Speaker 2: which is to say, it is nonpartisan, it is fact based,
Speaker 2: and it doesn't have an agenda necessarily. But things have
Speaker 2: changed over the years, as we will see.
Speaker 1: Fairly recently, Chuck seems like.
Speaker 2: And think tanks can be very much slanted. But we'll
Speaker 2: get into all that. That's just sort of a long
Speaker 2: winded setup.
Speaker 1: Okay, that was a good man.
Speaker 2: Should we go back and check on our buddy Plato?
Speaker 1: So great?
Speaker 2: Yeah, so Plato his academy. The Academy was some people
Speaker 2: say it was sort of the world's first think tank,
Speaker 2: which makes sense. Yeah. He would get dudes and they
Speaker 2: would sit around in the garden and I would imagine
Speaker 2: drink wine and talk smarts and philosophy and kind of
Speaker 2: you know, like it was high minded stuff for the day,
Speaker 2: to sit around and think about sort of what was
Speaker 2: going on around them and how they could impact change.
Speaker 1: Yeah, or thinking about the nature of reality or existence.
Speaker 1: They once decided that knowledge was uncertain and life is
Speaker 1: essentially a craps game based on probability rather than absolute truth.
Speaker 1: If you step back and think about it, that is
Speaker 1: the basis of quantum mechanics.
Speaker 2: Could you imagine if they had access to LSD back then.
Speaker 1: I know, I don't think it would have been too
Speaker 1: terribly different.
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, they were sort of traveling down that road anyway.
Speaker 1: But that was I mean, that's pretty impressive some of
Speaker 1: the stuff they came up with. This is again, you know,
Speaker 1: we did a skeptics episode, skepticism episode or no, I'm sorry,
Speaker 1: not skepticism, stoicism and remember this is oh yeah, this
Speaker 1: is where this stuff was. All these different philosophies were
Speaker 1: all like kind of grew from this academy. So yeah,
Speaker 1: you can make a pretty good case that it was
Speaker 1: the world's first think tank. Yeah, it's a little it's
Speaker 1: not the first modern think tank, but it qualifies in
Speaker 1: a lot of ways.
Speaker 2: No, there was one. In eighteen thirty one in Great Britain,
Speaker 2: the Duke of Wellington established what was called the Royal
Speaker 2: United Services Institution.
Speaker 1: Which studied like military science.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and then here in the US in nineteen ten
Speaker 2: the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Speaker 1: Which studied the results of military science.
Speaker 2: Right, and that's still around Carnegie, man, I mean, they
Speaker 2: still have endowed many things.
Speaker 1: They're well in doubt, they are very well doubt.
Speaker 2: And then of course the Brookings Institution which may be
Speaker 2: the most famous modern American think tank to this day.
Speaker 2: This is one you probably hear about the most. It
Speaker 2: was founded by Robert Brookings in nineteen sixteen, and they
Speaker 2: had a lot of I mean, they still have a
Speaker 2: lot of influence, but they had a great deal of
Speaker 2: influence kind of post depression with FDR's New Deal, helped
Speaker 2: construct the New Deal, helped construct the Marshall Plan after
Speaker 2: World War Two.
Speaker 1: That was huge.
Speaker 2: Yoh, very huge. So like both were for sure.
Speaker 1: The New Deal definitely was. But the Marshall Plan is
Speaker 1: there was a survey done of I think like four
Speaker 1: hundred and fifty historians and the number one most important
Speaker 1: thing that any government has done since World War Two,
Speaker 1: between World War Two and the twenty first century was
Speaker 1: the Marshall Plan. Like it not only like brought Europe
Speaker 1: back from World War Two, it set Europe on a
Speaker 1: path away from communism. Yeah, where if you're not into communism,
Speaker 1: that was a great positive benefit, right Yeah. And the
Speaker 1: way it did that was in two years, based on
Speaker 1: this economic plan. In two years, it got Europe war
Speaker 1: ravaged World War two ravaged Europe back to production levels
Speaker 1: twenty five percent higher than the production levels it was
Speaker 1: at before World War Two in two years, so it
Speaker 1: just went back to normal plus twenty five percent better,
Speaker 1: and Europe said, I kind of like this capitalism thing,
Speaker 1: and Western Europe went that way.
Speaker 2: I was kind of curious because Brookings, the Brookings Institution
Speaker 2: gets a lot of like left leaning criticism today, so
Speaker 2: I kind of wonder where that all came from. And
Speaker 2: the article I read said that is a victory of
Speaker 2: the conservative side to have Brookings labeled liberal just from
Speaker 2: kind of pounding it the press, even though it's history
Speaker 2: and its member board throughout the history has not been
Speaker 2: liberal at all, and it has been filled from the
Speaker 2: top down over the years with rank and file Republicans
Speaker 2: and conservatives from like the Reagan era on through Bush
Speaker 2: one and two.
Speaker 1: Oh okay, so they've gotten it across as liberal so
Speaker 1: that liberals will swallow the stuff that Brookings is putting
Speaker 1: out there. No, I know what they undermine their own
Speaker 1: think tank.
Speaker 2: Well, I don't think it's not their own think tank.
Speaker 2: It's not a conservative think tank.
Speaker 1: Well, it's centric. It's like almost right down the middle for.
Speaker 2: Me, right, But I think they want to advance their
Speaker 2: own with their conservative thing tanks. They want to advance them,
Speaker 2: so they label Brookings as super liberal.
Speaker 1: I got you, So anything centrist is liberal.
Speaker 2: I think I got the way it's going down.
Speaker 1: That's what it is.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: I can't remember who scored it, but somebody has a
Speaker 1: liberal score between zero and one hundred for think tanks,
Speaker 1: and Brookings scored like a fifty three, right down the middle. Like, apparently,
Speaker 1: as far as think tanks go, it's about as centrist
Speaker 1: as you possibly can get.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and they've been around for a long time. Yeah,
Speaker 2: makes a lot of sense.
Speaker 1: Yep, So not just Brookings. Brookings is definitely one of
Speaker 1: the most famous around the world and has done quite
Speaker 1: a bit of stuff, but there's plenty of others. There's
Speaker 1: the Rand Corporation is a very famous think tank, which
Speaker 1: did you know. Rand is actually a I don't know
Speaker 1: what you'd call it, but it's supposed to. It started
Speaker 1: out as R and D Research and Development RAND Corporation,
Speaker 1: and from what I understand, they've come up with the
Speaker 1: ideas for computers, the Internet, spy satellites, the Space program,
Speaker 1: all that stuff that America did in the mid twentieth century. Technologically, yes, yeah,
Speaker 1: the RAND Corporation, like thinkers, were the ones who came
Speaker 1: up with this stuff.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think I knew some of that, and I
Speaker 2: don't think it fully hit home that they were a
Speaker 2: think tank. Yeah, with the name like the Rancore Right
Speaker 2: sounds like just a corporation.
Speaker 1: But they're they're like a think tank that's really specifically
Speaker 1: or was specifically zoned into America's technology progression. I guess.
Speaker 2: Yeah. I mean a lot of think tanks can be
Speaker 2: specialized like that, Like some are very very much just
Speaker 2: concentrate on economics, some concentrate on social issues in that
Speaker 2: case technology, and then I think some like Brookings are
Speaker 2: sort of a little more broad. Yeah, they'll they'll take.
Speaker 1: Any case, right, they'll take all comer.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: So after World War Two, like there were think tanks before,
Speaker 1: like you said, Brookings, Carnegie, the Royal United Services Institute
Speaker 1: in the UK, there were, like there were think tanks
Speaker 1: prior to World War Two, but after World War Two
Speaker 1: they really proliferated. And the reason they started was government
Speaker 1: was just kind of government it was in the in
Speaker 1: the early twentieth century. It was just just this. It
Speaker 1: was It wasn't anything like you see it now. It
Speaker 1: wasn't this monolithic behemoth that has its tendrils in every
Speaker 1: aspect of people's lives or anything. It was a little
Speaker 1: too far the other way where it didn't quite know
Speaker 1: what it was doing. So some of those early philanthropists
Speaker 1: like Carnegie and Brookings, they endowed these think tanks to
Speaker 1: kind of help government out, to basically be like the
Speaker 1: research arm for government to help direct the best way
Speaker 1: for America to go. And that's how it started out.
Speaker 1: And then after World War Two, when America had like
Speaker 1: all this cash and all this forward momentum, think tanks
Speaker 1: really popped up and there were all these kind of
Speaker 1: competing and then sometimes harmonious voices from these think tanks
Speaker 1: to say go this way, go this way, let's go
Speaker 1: this way. But they all had something in common, and
Speaker 1: that was that they were staffed by very smart people
Speaker 1: who did very deliberate, very good research, who produced policy
Speaker 1: pusicians that lawmakers could then take themselves and go out
Speaker 1: to the people and say, see, this is what I'm
Speaker 1: talking about, here's the data, here's a SoundBite for you
Speaker 1: to make you all understand it. That's what things tanks did,
Speaker 1: and in a way they very much were along the
Speaker 1: same track as lobby lobbyists which we did an episode
Speaker 1: on that that was pretty good too. But think tanks
Speaker 1: stopped short of lobbying allegedly.
Speaker 2: Yeah, because they kind of had to. Starting in nineteen thirteen,
Speaker 2: they were granted tax exempt status, which is a very
Speaker 2: big deal because there's a lot of money involved in
Speaker 2: many of these.
Speaker 1: I've been trying to get that for myself for years, Sax,
Speaker 1: and you're right, it is a very big deal.
Speaker 2: The Church of Josh just get it going.
Speaker 1: That's so I'm wearing this robe right now.
Speaker 2: In the nineteen fifties, though, is when Congress really kind
Speaker 2: of because they were tax exempt, had to get involved
Speaker 2: and say, hey, listen, you got to walk a line here.
Speaker 2: You politically, you can't if you want to keep this
Speaker 2: tax exemption. Now, yeah, we for sure do. They said,
Speaker 2: you can't be partisan, it's got to be good information.
Speaker 2: You can't slant things a certain way or support officially
Speaker 2: support or endorsed candidates. You are here to educate with
Speaker 2: your objective work. And that went along for a while,
Speaker 2: and then we started getting think tanks that set out
Speaker 2: to do just that, which they are called advocacy think
Speaker 2: tanks now, which I'm not sure how they managed to
Speaker 2: skirt unless they change the rules, skirt those rules and
Speaker 2: say hey, we're going to be a conservative think tank
Speaker 2: or liberal think tank and still be tax exempt.
Speaker 1: The do you know, The only thing that I can
Speaker 1: tell is that they're still technically producing a public good,
Speaker 1: or if they believe that they're producing a public good,
Speaker 1: even if they have conservative alignment or a liberal alignment.
Speaker 1: They're trying to move society along in a way that
Speaker 1: they think is good or for the betterment of society.
Speaker 2: That's what stuff you should know is, dude, That's what
Speaker 2: I've been telling I mean, could we be a think tank?
Speaker 3: No?
Speaker 1: Absolutely not. I mean think about it, like I mean,
Speaker 1: I guess we could. I think that there's a I don't. Okay,
Speaker 1: let me take that back. No, we absolutely couldn't because we.
Speaker 2: Can't be brought to you by.
Speaker 1: We don't have we don't have time. I don't know,
Speaker 1: that's a good question, but we don't have. Yeah, you
Speaker 1: couldn't advertise and have like you couldn't get advertiser money
Speaker 1: and be tax exempt.
Speaker 2: That's just yeah. Like I doubt if the Brookings institutions
Speaker 2: papers have like Burger King coupons on them.
Speaker 1: You never know they should So we'll get to why
Speaker 1: we can't be later on. Okay, But one of the
Speaker 1: things about about think tanks is they're they're the reason
Speaker 1: they have a tax exempt status is what they're doing
Speaker 1: is producing work that furthers the public good. Yeah, that's
Speaker 1: why they're supposed to have tax exempt status. What you're
Speaker 1: pointing out is a really good thing to point out.
Speaker 1: Wait a minute, there's a lot of stuff here that
Speaker 1: they could lose their tax exempt status for. And if
Speaker 1: we fast forward to three or five years from now,
Speaker 1: I think we're going to start seeing them lose tax
Speaker 1: exempt status. They just haven't yet, I think, is what
Speaker 1: it is.
Speaker 2: Yeah, because some of them flat out like it's so
Speaker 2: obvious when they come around, Like when the Democrats were
Speaker 2: beaten in two thousand, they got together and they started
Speaker 2: left leaning thinkers got together and started the Center for
Speaker 2: American Progress, which is an economic organization. It says this nonpartisan,
Speaker 2: but it literally says as a quote, their goal is
Speaker 2: to develop new policy ideas, critique the policy that stems
Speaker 2: from conservative values, challenges the media to cover the issues
Speaker 2: that truly matter and shape the national debate. So it's
Speaker 2: they're kind of flat out saying like we're out to
Speaker 2: prove not just have an opinion about maybe that's a distinction,
Speaker 2: out to prove that conservative economic values are bad for
Speaker 2: the country. Basically, Yeah, is that the difference. Maybe here's
Speaker 2: our data.
Speaker 1: I honestly don't know, dude.
Speaker 2: It's not a bunch of op eds thrown together.
Speaker 1: It's so No, it's not supposed to just be op eds.
Speaker 1: It's supposed to be backed by data. Yeah, but I
Speaker 1: mean like Center for American Progress or like the Heritage Foundation,
Speaker 1: or like ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council, like these
Speaker 1: are like and we're going to do a whole episode
Speaker 1: just on ALEC one day. Okay, seriously, Yeah, but they're
Speaker 1: like little They're like Kareem abdul Jabbar, like karate training
Speaker 1: islands for liberals or for conservatives or for rich billionaire followers,
Speaker 1: like it doesn't matter, Like that's what they are. They
Speaker 1: come up with new ideas to push their agenda, and
Speaker 1: then they train activists to go out and get that
Speaker 1: message out, to change people's minds, to get themselves on
Speaker 1: CNN or Fox News or whatever, right, and to shape
Speaker 1: the public discussion on something. It has a lot of
Speaker 1: the contours of what think tanks used to have.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but there's this whole.
Speaker 1: Other layer of like like seeing you and gristle there
Speaker 1: that think tanks aren't supposed to have.
Speaker 2: Should we take a break? Sure, all right, we'll take
Speaker 2: a break and we'll talk a little bit more about
Speaker 2: the Heritage Foundation right after this. All right, nineteen eighties,
Speaker 2: the Heritage Foundation, which you briefly mentored, mentored.
Speaker 1: Sure, that's the new mentioned before.
Speaker 2: Before we broke. They came about and we broke a
Speaker 2: long time ago. They said, all right, teen eighties, we
Speaker 2: got Ronald Reagan in there. He is watching movies or
Speaker 2: asleep most of the time, so we have a good opportunity.
Speaker 2: That's how they want you to think he has a
Speaker 2: good Did you see the numbers about his movie watching?
Speaker 1: No?
Speaker 2: Oh man, it's great. What like a movie fan? It's great?
Speaker 1: How many movies did he watch? Your day?
Speaker 2: He watched a lot of movies.
Speaker 1: And this is like back when they just had like reels, right, films, trips.
Speaker 2: I guess they probably just you know, cued the projector
Speaker 2: when he and Nancy wanted to watch a good old
Speaker 2: fashioned western. Oh that was a good starring me.
Speaker 1: Can you do the rest of the episode as.
Speaker 2: No, So they came along and they said, all right,
Speaker 2: Reagan's in office, here are our recommendations. What UPI would
Speaker 2: call a blueprint for grabbing the government by its frayed
Speaker 2: New Deal lapels and shaking out forty eight years of
Speaker 2: liberal policy. And it came by way of two thousand,
Speaker 2: more than two thousand recommendations.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and they tried to institute about two thirds of them.
Speaker 2: Yeah, was like, great, here's my thanks for the outline
Speaker 2: for what I should do.
Speaker 1: Right my plans.
Speaker 2: Yeah, so two thirds, like he said during his two terms,
Speaker 2: is what he tried to implement. And then, of course
Speaker 2: when Bill Clinton gets in there, the Progressive Policy Institute,
Speaker 2: I don't know if it was two thousand plus, but
Speaker 2: they offered similar recommendations. And that's how it goes with
Speaker 2: think tanks right now.
Speaker 1: Yeah, because if you're a lawmaker, and again we said
Speaker 1: this in the Lobbying episode two, you're not necessarily like
Speaker 1: some smart whip crack sharp person.
Speaker 2: No, I think we've seen that played out.
Speaker 1: You can just like get people to vote for you, Yeah,
Speaker 1: on both sides of the aisle. Just a crack at
Speaker 1: like you know Trump or anything.
Speaker 2: Oh no, no, no, I mean all up and down the
Speaker 2: House and Senate.
Speaker 3: Right.
Speaker 2: You don't like to think they're all geniuses, but they're not.
Speaker 1: They're not. No, And you don't have to be smart
Speaker 1: to hold office. You just have to get people to
Speaker 1: vote for you. Again, which is why think tanks have
Speaker 1: flourished for so long while lobbyists have flourished for so long,
Speaker 1: because they're the ones who do the research and write
Speaker 1: the policy and say, yeah, here you go, you want
Speaker 1: to go look smart, here you go, buddy. We even
Speaker 1: like highlighted some sound bites for you to go say
Speaker 1: to people and get the get into the twenty four
Speaker 1: hour news cycle.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: And that's one of the big roles that think tanks
Speaker 1: play today is by and have you know, especially since
Speaker 1: World War Two, is by going to policymakers and being like,
Speaker 1: here's your agenda, take your leave as much as you want.
Speaker 1: But all of this is back by data, like it
Speaker 1: dovetails with what you want to do with the country,
Speaker 1: and it is just gangbusters stuff. Yeah, high quality, well
Speaker 1: researched stuff.
Speaker 2: Yeah. It's really interesting because I think there are still
Speaker 2: think tanks that only craft, only do research and present
Speaker 2: it and say do what you will with it, but
Speaker 2: those seem to be more and more gone by the wayside.
Speaker 1: Yeah, twenty ten was a real watershed year. It feels
Speaker 1: like for think tanks.
Speaker 2: Yeah, like you mentioned ALEX, which are going to cover
Speaker 2: in full, but I mean they are a bill writing organization.
Speaker 2: They call them model bills. But I mean when when
Speaker 2: you hear a senator or something said, you know, we
Speaker 2: crafted this legislation, well, that probably means is an organization
Speaker 2: like ALEC handed them the legislation and said here, you know,
Speaker 2: here it is if you want to use it, right,
Speaker 2: and you probably should want to use it.
Speaker 1: That's so. That is so ALEC, I think does in
Speaker 1: many ways qualify as a think tank. They're not one
Speaker 1: hundred percent standard think tank, but actually writing the law. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and for the lawmaker to go and go into Congress
Speaker 1: and introduce it as their own bill, right, that's a
Speaker 1: little beyond what think tanks to think tanks more like
Speaker 1: write a paper that says, here's this problem in America,
Speaker 1: here are some ideas to solve it. Here's this research
Speaker 1: to back up those ideas, go write a law based
Speaker 1: on it. What things like ALEC does is take it
Speaker 1: a step further. But ALEX still qualifies as a think tank,
Speaker 1: and ALEC is part of something called the State Policy Network, Yeah,
Speaker 1: which apparently there's one in every state and Puerto Rico.
Speaker 1: And they're like a confederation of think tanks that basically
Speaker 1: sit around and figure out ways to sue local, state
Speaker 1: and federal lawmakers over laws, to try to get laws overturned.
Speaker 1: Like they use the courts rather than the legislation, but
Speaker 1: it's still the stated goal is to affect public policy
Speaker 1: and turn it in one direction or another.
Speaker 2: Yeah, what was what was the website that you sent
Speaker 2: that watch? Yeah? Sourcewatch called them called ALEC a corporate
Speaker 2: to Bill mill, right, So they are just churning out
Speaker 2: hundreds of bills a year. Not all of them get used,
Speaker 2: but many of them do. And it's just I don't know,
Speaker 2: I don't think a lot of Americans realize that a
Speaker 2: lot of actual legislative policy is being written by McDonald's. Yeah, exactly.
Speaker 2: It's crazy.
Speaker 1: I can't wait to do the ALQ one. We're both
Speaker 1: going to be well, our cars are going to blow
Speaker 1: up right after, but by god, we're going to get
Speaker 1: that episode.
Speaker 2: Maybe we should make that our like last episode in
Speaker 2: the year. Whatever. What's twenty years.
Speaker 1: From now two thousand.
Speaker 2: No, that was eighteen years ago. Okay, I used to
Speaker 2: love that bit though. Yeah, all right, so we got
Speaker 2: to talk about money here, got because this they are
Speaker 2: not the independent most times these days they are not
Speaker 2: the independent organizations that you think they are. Uh. They
Speaker 2: used to be funded by these endowments, and more and
Speaker 2: more it's it's corporations, large businesses. Sometimes private individuals of
Speaker 2: course will give. And sometimes it's a great workaround for
Speaker 2: campaign finance laws. Instead of directing you know, you know,
Speaker 2: tens of millions of dollars like you can't do to
Speaker 2: a campaign, you can throw it in a think tank
Speaker 2: that will probably get a better result anyway.
Speaker 1: That's new the time was. It used to be like
Speaker 1: in my day, right, a rich philanthropist would say, I
Speaker 1: hate poverty and the effects it has on Americans. Go
Speaker 1: figure this out. I'm going to fund a think tank,
Speaker 1: and that's what you're dedicated to. I like, just go
Speaker 1: make that happen. And that's what think tanks were originally
Speaker 1: born from. And that's largely the only kind of oversight
Speaker 1: they worked under is they were trying to end poverty
Speaker 1: or they were trying to work against communism, like these
Speaker 1: huge haughty goals. Yeah, now they're being micromanaged. That's one
Speaker 1: thing that's happening to them.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And the idea that these think tanks are not
Speaker 2: swayed or influence or affected by their donors is not true.
Speaker 2: And the sort of the biggest problem going is that
Speaker 2: now you have legislation being drawn up by think tanks
Speaker 2: because corporations are paying money to get research that looks
Speaker 2: like it's in their favor.
Speaker 1: Yeah. So one of the problems is the like, there's
Speaker 1: not as many philanthropists who are just endowing think tanks
Speaker 1: with no strings attached anymore. There are plenty of philanthropists
Speaker 1: out there still that are funding think tanks, but their
Speaker 1: donations are directed, their results oriented. They're very technocratic, right,
Speaker 1: they want to see bang for their buck. Whereas before
Speaker 1: it was just like to make America a better place
Speaker 1: and that was it. There wasn't a lot.
Speaker 2: Of like.
Speaker 1: Nobody's feet were being held to the fire, you know.
Speaker 1: Now it's like, we want you to further this specific agenda,
Speaker 1: which is we want to make sure that Saint Louis's
Speaker 1: children there's not a single one malnourished any longer, which
Speaker 1: is great. It's a great goal. There's nothing wrong with
Speaker 1: that goal, but it's just so very narrowed and tay
Speaker 1: and there's ways that you can hold the think tank accountable,
Speaker 1: which is good in one hand, but it's also basically
Speaker 1: the introduction of like a corporate management to think tanks,
Speaker 1: which that's not really how they were originally formed, and
Speaker 1: it's having a weird effect on them. So think tanks
Speaker 1: are starting to say, all right, thank you for this money,
Speaker 1: We'll go save the children of Saint Louis. And by
Speaker 1: the way, shout out to Saint Louis. That was a
Speaker 1: great show.
Speaker 2: That what a cool down.
Speaker 1: So again, saving the children of Saint Louis good stuff,
Speaker 1: But we've got all this other stuff we want to
Speaker 1: do too, So to keep that going, we're going to
Speaker 1: have to also go find sources elsewhere, right, and again
Speaker 1: you can find them from other people, but one of
Speaker 1: the places they're finding them from his corporations, and that
Speaker 1: is having a big negative impact on think tanks right now.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and it goes both ways. In the past, you know,
Speaker 2: eight or ten years, conservative billionaires of says that here
Speaker 2: they funneled one hundred and twenty million dollars to about
Speaker 2: one hundred grew and think tanks to do things like
Speaker 2: discredit climate change science, which I mean, dude, I know.
Speaker 1: The Koch Brothers and Exon Mobile specifically funded a couple
Speaker 1: of think tanks called Atlas Economic Research Foundation and the
Speaker 1: International Policy Network to basically to basically question the science
Speaker 1: behind climate change to further fossil fuel interests, which is,
Speaker 1: see you guys in hell for that one. Like that,
Speaker 1: What a crummy legacy to leave on Earth just to
Speaker 1: make a few extra bucks. Forget future generations they can
Speaker 1: all burn. Forget all the endangered species that are on
Speaker 1: the brink of extinction that are oh wait no, they're
Speaker 1: now extinct. It doesn't matter because we made a few
Speaker 1: extra billion dollars. Yeah, that's that's despicable.
Speaker 2: Well, what it's funny. I just watched the movie Chinatown
Speaker 2: for a movie crush episode and there's that. You ever
Speaker 2: seen that?
Speaker 1: Yeah?
Speaker 2: You know a lot of that movie is about It
Speaker 2: was originally titled Water and Power, you know, because it's about,
Speaker 2: you know, this weird political situation in Los Angeles in
Speaker 2: nineteen thirties where they were diverting water to the valley
Speaker 2: which was a desert and all these rich fat cats
Speaker 2: that were getting the water diverted. There were buying up
Speaker 2: land in the valley like hundreds of thousands of acres
Speaker 2: because they knew it was going to be a lush
Speaker 2: green valley soon. So all that really happened in La
Speaker 2: Chinatown was based on that. But there's that great scene
Speaker 2: when Jack Nicholson is Jake Gettis, confronts John Houston about
Speaker 2: you know, he's the big bad guy Noah Cross and
Speaker 2: he says, you know, how much money do you need?
Speaker 2: How much how many more things can you buy? Or
Speaker 2: this or that? And he says, what are you trying
Speaker 2: to secure? And he looked at him and he said,
Speaker 2: the future, mister Gettis, And that's what it is. They're
Speaker 2: not after more billions to buy more plain in a
Speaker 2: bigger house, right, They're trying to leave that they that's
Speaker 2: what they want out of their legacy. Is they're trying
Speaker 2: to affect the future and in their own specific way, right.
Speaker 1: But they're affecting the future in the worst way.
Speaker 2: Possible according to us. And the problem is not according
Speaker 2: to them, sure, you know, but if.
Speaker 1: You if you pull enough people and just ask them plainly,
Speaker 1: if you took money and billionaires in power and sure
Speaker 1: and all that out of it. Do you want a
Speaker 1: better future for humanity and for earth? Yeah, one hundred
Speaker 1: years from now, I would guess the majority of people
Speaker 1: would say yes. And if you can say, well, these
Speaker 1: guys are actually doing the opposite of ensuring that right
Speaker 1: right now, how do you feel about that? Most people
Speaker 1: would say I don't feel so great about that.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: The problem is is most people would also follow up with,
Speaker 1: but what can we do?
Speaker 2: Right?
Speaker 1: They're rich, and that's a great point. Let me what
Speaker 1: can you do?
Speaker 2: Let me hop back on Facebook and find a goat video.
Speaker 1: Right. That's when the hopelessness sets in. And that's what's
Speaker 1: causing the paralysis in our world right now, is hopelessness.
Speaker 1: That's not grim at all of it. By the way, everybody,
Speaker 1: be sure to listen to my new podcast, The End
Speaker 1: of the World with Josh Clark.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: It's a really.
Speaker 2: Uplifting coming very soon.
Speaker 1: Yeah, coming this fall sometime eventually.
Speaker 2: Just stuck up on your happy bills. So. In twenty thirteen, however,
Speaker 2: on the other side, left leaning weekly magazine The Nation
Speaker 2: revealed the positions of the left leaning Center for American
Speaker 2: Progress and other thing tanks in DC are shaped by
Speaker 2: interest of their donors. So it happens on both sides
Speaker 2: of the aisle for sure.
Speaker 1: Yeah oh yeah, yeah, No, it's an equal opportunity screwing
Speaker 1: that the world is getting from lobbying from think tanks
Speaker 1: from wealthy interests. Like, it's it's both both sides.
Speaker 2: Yeah. So they're effectively unregistered lobbyist organizations now to a
Speaker 2: large degree, because they're tax exempt, they're not obligated to
Speaker 2: release financial statements or reveal their donors. So I'm surprised
Speaker 2: it took that long for people to be like, wait
Speaker 2: a minute, we can really take advantage here.
Speaker 1: So let's take another break and then we'll get well, it
Speaker 1: will spell out what the advantages are of hiring a
Speaker 1: think tank. All right, Chuck, we're back. I'm a little
Speaker 1: warm under the collar.
Speaker 2: I feel like we should mention this thing with the
Speaker 2: Walton Family Foundation quickly, because that's interesting.
Speaker 1: I think this is a great example of what a
Speaker 1: think tank can do these days.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's obviously the Sam Walton family of walm aren't fame.
Speaker 2: They fund a lot of conservative think tanks. I think
Speaker 2: most people know that. But then they also fund funded
Speaker 2: one and think tanks backed by Barack Obama when it
Speaker 2: came to the Affordable health Care Act, and you're like,
Speaker 2: wait a minute, why would they do something like that
Speaker 2: if they're a conservative family supporting conservative causes. Then you
Speaker 2: do a little poking around and it turns out that
Speaker 2: critics would say that the healthcare bill that forced employers
Speaker 2: to pay for their employees healthcare tax. Walmart was like,
Speaker 2: this is great because we can afford to do this,
Speaker 2: but our mom and pop competitors can't. So we're actually
Speaker 2: going to try and get this push through. Even though
Speaker 2: at its face it doesn't quite make a lot of sense,
Speaker 2: it makes sense to them, like why would Walmart take
Speaker 2: on the cost of their employees' healthcare because they know
Speaker 2: that they.
Speaker 3: Can go back to sleep. Everybody, Yeah, stop asking quests.
Speaker 3: Really interesting, it is, it's fascinating. But that's one thing
Speaker 3: you can do is donate to a think tank that's
Speaker 3: furthering your agenda. And because think tanks are now largely
Speaker 3: agenda driven, there's a lot of think tanks out there
Speaker 3: that can help you out. And there's a new thing
Speaker 3: that's happening with think tanks these days is they're starting
Speaker 3: to solicit corporate donations. And one of the saddest stories
Speaker 3: is the story of the Brookings Institution, the most centrist
Speaker 3: think tank that has put out the Marshall Plan that
Speaker 3: helped figure out the New Deal and how it addressed
Speaker 3: the depression, like has done all this amazing stuff. Is
Speaker 3: now they hired a lobbyist for their strategic development chief
Speaker 3: and they're now soliciting corporate donations left and right, and
Speaker 3: they're basically this is what you can get, Like if
Speaker 3: you hire a think tanker, I'm sorry, you're not supposed
Speaker 3: to say higher. If you enter into a part ownership
Speaker 3: or donate to a think tank and your corporation, we're
Speaker 3: a very wealthy person. What the think tank will do
Speaker 3: is they will basically get your ideas out there.
Speaker 1: They will deploy. So first of all, let's say there's
Speaker 1: this really great New York Times article about the what
Speaker 1: was the name of that company, the Lenar Corporation. Okay,
Speaker 1: they wanted to build in San Francisco. They wanted to
Speaker 1: redevelop the site in San Francisco, which whatever, apparently there
Speaker 1: was pushback on it or they were getting some sort
Speaker 1: of pushback from the residents of San Francisco. So I
Speaker 1: guess the Brookings Institution went to them and said, hey,
Speaker 1: we've got some ideas for you. We can support this
Speaker 1: as basically like a great idea for cities of the future,
Speaker 1: and we're going to lend the credibility of our experts
Speaker 1: in our think tank to your project. Yeah, and make
Speaker 1: it like a champion kind of thing, like a blue
Speaker 1: type and archetype for how to further cities in America
Speaker 1: your development problem.
Speaker 2: It's it.
Speaker 1: They're home builders, but with Brookings Institution behind it, there
Speaker 1: was a veneer of something bigger than building homes, bigger
Speaker 1: than redeveloping, something about the future and progress, and Brookings
Speaker 1: like went to them and in exchange for four hundred
Speaker 1: grand Brookings added this credibility to it, got talking heads
Speaker 1: out there on the news to talk up this development
Speaker 1: and like what it meant for the future. And one
Speaker 1: of the other things they did and can do is
Speaker 1: they can set up summits conferences on cities of the
Speaker 1: future and get the home builders and lawmakers into the
Speaker 1: same room to hang out together. And so that's lobbying. Sure,
Speaker 1: there's no other way to put it. That is lobbying.
Speaker 1: And they were doing it on behalf of a specific corporation,
Speaker 1: there should be no tax exemption whatsoever any longer. It
Speaker 1: doesn't matter what side of the aisle you're on. If
Speaker 1: you're a taxpayer, you are funding that by by through
Speaker 1: these tax exemptions, because we put the bill for tax deduction. Sure,
Speaker 1: so if a single corporation's interests are being served, even
Speaker 1: if society in general is benefiting in some way, that's
Speaker 1: too much of a slippery slope that breaks the tax
Speaker 1: exemption status. And then that that should go away. And that,
Speaker 1: sadly is apparently where Brookings the direction Brookings is going. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and others too, I should.
Speaker 2: Say, oh sure, sure, even the ones that aren't maybe
Speaker 2: as outright are aren't as bald faced about this stuff.
Speaker 2: Like a lot of scholars say that you know, bought
Speaker 2: and paid for research is sort of the exception. Still,
Speaker 2: But even even so, there's still places where you know,
Speaker 2: you may not you may not push out certain research
Speaker 2: if you think you're might piss off your boss.
Speaker 1: Yeah, which is the same thing.
Speaker 2: Or sort of self censor yourself if you think, like,
Speaker 2: oh man, I don't know, like we're getting donations now,
Speaker 2: like this might not ease them.
Speaker 1: It might make them look bad. So I probably should
Speaker 1: just avoid this conclusion.
Speaker 2: Yeah, so maybe not of like completely inventing a study
Speaker 2: or something, but being very selective in what you choose
Speaker 2: to research or how you research it or what you release.
Speaker 2: Sure is, you know, it's another version of the same thing.
Speaker 1: It totally is. And one of the other things that
Speaker 1: they've been found to do a lot of think tanks,
Speaker 1: or one of the new things that think tanks do,
Speaker 1: is they will circulate drafts before there's a final draft
Speaker 1: two donors like what do you think about this? And
Speaker 1: sometimes their opinions will be incorporated into the final draft.
Speaker 1: That is the antithesis of the spirit of think tanks
Speaker 1: and what they were originally meant to do. They were
Speaker 1: supposed to be like, here's the facts, here's the research
Speaker 1: to back it up. It is what it is. We
Speaker 1: think you can apply it to make the world better
Speaker 1: in this way, not what you know, What do you
Speaker 1: guys think does this jibe with the kind of sinks
Speaker 1: you've selected for this redevelopment, because we can change this
Speaker 1: part to jibe with the sinks you you know, that's
Speaker 1: just not what it's supposed to be. And the reason
Speaker 1: that think tanks are doing this is they are in
Speaker 1: existential danger through the death of expertise that I remember
Speaker 1: I talked about in the Elimination Diet episode.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: The problem is, it's not like America just said, we're
Speaker 1: sick of expertise. We're tired of you experts, like you're
Speaker 1: always right, and we're tired of hearing you're always right.
Speaker 1: People got tired of being lied to and misled and
Speaker 1: misinformed and manipulated, and they finally said, you know what, experts,
Speaker 1: that's enough. Enough of you are full of it. Enough
Speaker 1: of you have let your credibility be co opted. We're
Speaker 1: just not going to listen to any of you anymore
Speaker 1: because we don't know who to trust. And the experts
Speaker 1: brought about the death of expertise themselves in large parts.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and there's another Uh. There was this article from
Speaker 2: the Washington Post called or think tanks Obsolete, which sort
Speaker 2: of argues along those lines about and also incorporates the
Speaker 2: Internet and the length of like a research cycle, like
Speaker 2: with the Internet and Twitter and Facebook and things like
Speaker 2: ted Talks. There's a guy, Donald Abelson, a professor at
Speaker 2: University of Western Ontario, wrote a book called The Thing
Speaker 2: Tanks Matter, where his conclusion basically is that the marketplace
Speaker 2: of ideas he says has become congested and you don't
Speaker 2: have time anymore to do a twelve month research proposal
Speaker 2: to come to the following conclusions when one hundred ted
Speaker 2: talks over that twelve months will be published. Not picking
Speaker 2: on ted talks are great.
Speaker 1: No, it's a good example though.
Speaker 2: But you can push out of ted talk. You can
Speaker 2: push out a Facebook live video as an economist and
Speaker 2: have a lot of sway. They mentioned in here in
Speaker 2: the article about vaccines, for instance, as far as it
Speaker 2: goes with the vaccines, the Rank Corporation, one of the
Speaker 2: largest thing tanks that we already mentioned, they did like
Speaker 2: a very thorough deep dive in research debunking the notion
Speaker 2: that vaccines cause autism, and it took a long time.
Speaker 2: But you can get on Facebook and go to a
Speaker 2: group called Educate before you vaccinate and watch videos by
Speaker 2: non experts, and people are swayed these days by this stuff. Yeah,
Speaker 2: like why wait, you know, the news cycle is so
Speaker 2: shortened you can't wait for a long, deep dive research
Speaker 2: paper to come out with some abstract summary that no
Speaker 2: one reads anyway, And apparently now they're you know, they're
Speaker 2: written in such a way where they will just say,
Speaker 2: abstract summary, this stinks, we shouldn't do it. You know,
Speaker 2: they've become so opinionated. I don't know, man, It's just
Speaker 2: it's depressing to think that Facebook and Twitter have outsized
Speaker 2: a think tank as far as they definitely have influence.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and YouTube and basically anything that gives a voice
Speaker 1: to the average person, which on the one hand is
Speaker 1: really cool and great.
Speaker 2: Sort of democratizes it in a way, but in the
Speaker 2: worst way at times.
Speaker 1: But it's tied into this death of expertise in a
Speaker 1: really toxic manner, you know what I'm saying, Like the
Speaker 1: two that democratization of like giving everybody like a mouthpiece,
Speaker 1: is not in and of itself like a bad thing,
Speaker 1: but when since it coincided with a loss and trust
Speaker 1: and experts and expertise, that's where the problem came from.
Speaker 1: And that was the reason why we couldn't be a
Speaker 1: think tank. Sadly, we could be a think tank now,
Speaker 1: but we couldn't be a bonafide think tank because, Chuck,
Speaker 1: we don't have enough time in any given week to
Speaker 1: do so much thorough primary source research into stuff. If
Speaker 1: we release one of these every couple of months. Sure
Speaker 1: we could be like a real think tank, but it
Speaker 1: wouldn't be nearly fun.
Speaker 2: Six episodes a year. People would love.
Speaker 1: That, Yeah, they'd love it. You got anything else?
Speaker 2: Nope, I guess either.
Speaker 1: Sorry for going off everybody, Thanks for listening. I'm sure
Speaker 1: I'll get some email, but what evs It is worth it.
Speaker 1: If you want to know more about think tanks, well,
Speaker 1: I don't know, go on the internet and look up
Speaker 1: some think tanks and see if there's any that you
Speaker 1: agree with. A lot of them have like daily interpretations
Speaker 1: of news that kind of go through their lens. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's a way to keep up with things. Sure, and
Speaker 1: you can also read this article on how stuff works,
Speaker 1: just not a think tank called how think tanks work.
Speaker 1: And since I said that it's time for listener mail.
Speaker 2: I'm going to call this a Ballpoint pen addiction or
Speaker 2: just pin addiction. Hey guys, been listening for a couple
Speaker 2: of months or so, New listener, You were my first
Speaker 2: foray into podcasts. I just really enjoy listening to you too.
Speaker 1: Welcome.
Speaker 2: I saw the Ballpoint Pin podcast and I could not
Speaker 2: pass it up. I have a bit of a pin problem,
Speaker 2: you see. I own many mini pins, especially the gel
Speaker 2: type inc roller ballpins. Way to Go, you got taken
Speaker 2: a task a few people who were just like Josh Clark,
Speaker 2: heresy gel pins. Yeah, there are a lot of I
Speaker 2: guess traditionalists to boo poo.
Speaker 1: That I think they're great. I got a lot of
Speaker 1: support for that one.
Speaker 2: Too, agreed, We got a lot of pin recommendations. It
Speaker 2: was good to see. Yeah, and here's another one. I
Speaker 2: own many many pins, especially the gel ink rollerball pins.
Speaker 2: I also own a collection of sharpiees and various tip
Speaker 2: withs and colors. I probably have a couple of gallon
Speaker 2: sized ziploc Bagsworth. You mentioned the way certain pins ride
Speaker 2: on certain types of paper. I think it's probably the
Speaker 2: rollerball gel pins that were best on the thermal paper
Speaker 2: that they use in most restaurants. Remember I was talking
Speaker 2: about signing the check. I think it's what she's talking.
Speaker 1: We still never found out what that thing's called.
Speaker 2: Thermal paper.
Speaker 1: No, No, the thing that the check comes out in
Speaker 1: the little portfolio.
Speaker 2: The clamshell. Someone actually said, did you see that? Yeah,
Speaker 2: this great couple send in a picture of a clamshell
Speaker 2: check delivery system. What are they called?
Speaker 1: I don't know.
Speaker 2: Check cat.
Speaker 1: We're gonna we're gonna name them clamshells now all right,
Speaker 1: that's the new name for him.
Speaker 2: So I have a favorite pin, though, guys. I buy
Speaker 2: them by the box. It's the Pilot V ball B
Speaker 2: green pin, the point five millimeter. Okay. I love the
Speaker 2: way they feel when they write. I can't go back
Speaker 2: to ballpoint pins. I use them at work. I carry
Speaker 2: at least three in my bag and I draw on
Speaker 2: doodle with them. Using them on a newsprint pad is
Speaker 2: my favorite thing when doing word art.
Speaker 3: Nice.
Speaker 2: Sorry for the ramble, guys, have a great day. That
Speaker 2: is from Davini M. Barry, Davini Berry, Davini M Berry,
Speaker 2: M Berry. I wasn't going okay.
Speaker 1: Well, I didn't know if Davini's middle initial was M,
Speaker 1: or if I was miss hearing you in Davini and Barry.
Speaker 2: It's actually Divina, excuse me, Divina M Berry. If I
Speaker 2: would have said Divina M Berry, that would have been
Speaker 2: much more clear. Or Mberry, it might be Divina Mbury.
Speaker 2: Was it say Divina or Davina?
Speaker 1: Oh God? How about d E? Thanks d E.
Speaker 2: It's d I.
Speaker 1: At any rate, we're glad that you started listening to us.
Speaker 1: We appreciate it. Thanks for taking the time to let
Speaker 1: us know about your pen addiction. Totally fine with us.
Speaker 1: If you want to let us know about something you're
Speaker 1: super into, you can hang out with us on social meds.
Speaker 1: You can go to stuff youshould Know dot com and
Speaker 1: find all of our social media links. You can also
Speaker 1: send us an email to stuff podcast at HowStuffWorks dot com.
Speaker 1: Stuff you Should Know is a production of iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2: For more podcasts my heart Radio, visit the iHeartRadio app,
Speaker 2: Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.