Executive Director Dan Epstein on Radio America discusses the CPPW report.
Archives for 2013
Cronies Putting Politics to Work
The Communities Putting Prevention to Work (CPPW) program is a grant program administered by the CDC for education on tobacco use and obesity prevention. All grant recipients are notified that it is illegal to use the funds for lobbying, but a CoA investigation has uncovered seven new instances where your federal tax dollars were used to push for higher taxes and new ordinances. Our investigation shows how the CDC failed to conduct proper oversight of the CPPW program. While the CDC was made aware of the Florence County, SC violation, CoA uncovered seven additional communities in risk of violating federal law and HHS guidelines.
Read more in our Press Release or see the full report here.
Florence County, SC
$6 million for tobacco control
Illegal Lobbying
- The South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC) and the Smoke Free Florence (SFF) coalition used the grant money to lobby in support of a smoke-free ordinance.
- This email from a DHEC employee describes lobbying two members of the county commission (Glynn and Buddy):
Cover-up
- CPPW staff at DHEC attempted to cover-up the lobbying by altering the meeting minutes.
- “DHEC would like to go through the past meeting minutes to “massage” them and take out the details.”
- “He said that it is not unethical because they are not looking to “twist” things that were written, just remove the details.”
Pima County, AZ
$15.8 million for obesity prevention
- The Pima County Health Department (PCHD) used taxpayer dollars to contract with the University of Arizona to lead policy workshops and develop neighborhood plans in support of zoning codes, regulations, and ordinances.
Out in the Open
- The sub-contract for the University of Arizona College Of Architecture clearly states that the grantee will be “engaging public officials.”
Jefferson County, AL
$13.3 million for tobacco control and obesity prevention
- CPPW funds paid 80% of the salary for a “Director of Advocacy” with the following duties and responsibilities:
Miami-Dade County, FL
$14.7 million for obesity prevention
- The Miami-Dade County Health Department (MDCHD) used taxpayer funds to hire the Health Council of South Florida to provide a legislative agenda for CPPW-funded policy work.
Mobile County, AL
$2.4 million for obesity prevention
- CPPW funds paid the salary of an “outreach coordinator” who worked with the TFMC to “educate decision makers about the benefit of 100% percent smoke-free policy, increasing the unit price of tobacco products, and reducing tobacco advertising.
Los Angeles County, CA
$32.1 million for tobacco control and obesity prevention
- LA Public Health used CPPW funds to hire a “Legislated Policy Project Coordinator” who managed teams of policy liaisons, community organizers and community representatives
Santa Clara County, CA
$6.9 million for tobacco control
- The Santa Clara County Public Health Department (Santa Clara Health) used tax dollars to hire a tobacco retail license coordinator to lobby for a workplace smoking ordinance and also used CPPW funds to support a state-wide tobacco tax increase.
DeKalb County, GA
$3.2 million for tobacco control and obesity prevention
- The DeKalb County Board of Health (DCBH) used CPPW funds to support the adoption of a strengthened county CIAO and partnered with the Georgia Alliance for Tobacco Prevention (GA Alliance) to train coalition partners and finance a media campaign in support of state cigarette tax increase.
Cause of Action Report Finds Millions in Federal Tax Dollars Used for Lobbying
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
APRIL 16, 2013
Cause of Action Report Finds Millions in Federal Tax Dollars Used for Lobbying
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Communities Putting Prevention to Work Program Became a Front for Cronyism, Propaganda, Lobbying, and Big Government
WASHINGTON – Cause of Action (CoA), a government accountability organization, today released “CPPW: Putting Politics to Work”, an investigative report exposing the endemic lack of oversight and accountability within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and its Centers for Disease Control (CDC), which led to the misuse of millions of taxpayer dollars by eight recipients of grants from the Communities Putting Prevention to Work (CPPW) program. Appropriated with $373 million under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), the CPPW program was intended for job creation and public education on tobacco use and obesity prevention. $94.4 million of the CPPW funds were allocated to grantees included in this report.
CoA’s nineteen-month long investigation revealed that CPPW money supported lobbyists and public relations companies who used taxpayer dollars to push laws and agendas that would lead to tax increases on tobacco and sugar sweetened products—violating federal law as well as HHS and Office of Management and Budget guidelines.
Cause of Action’s Executive Director Dan Epstein explained the consequences of these findings:
“Cause of Action has uncovered that the Department of Health and Human Services, the largest grant-issuing agency in the federal government, by failing to conduct effective oversight of the CPPW program, allowed taxpayer dollars to be misused, in some cases violating federal statute. With a program whose funding is expected to grow into the billions, how much more lobbying will the taxpayers be on the hook for before Kathleen Sebelius decides that it’s time to be accountable?”
Upon learning that the HHS Office of Inspector General (OIG) had issued a report in June 2012 on the alleged misconduct of CPPW grantees in Florence County, South Carolina, CoA expanded its own investigation. CoA is the first organization to report findings of federal money being dedicated for lobbying in these seven other communities:
- Pima County, AZ
- Mobile County, AL
- Jefferson County, AL
- Miami-Dade County, FL
- DeKalb County, GA
- Los Angeles County, CA
- Santa Clara County, CA
$2 billion in annual funding is currently scheduled for disbursement under the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’s Community Transformation Grants program to fight obesity use at the local, state, and federal level.
Click here to read a copy of the full report.
REPORT: CPPW: Putting Politics to Work
I. Executive Summary
Since 2009, Congress has appropriated $373 million to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for the Communities Putting Prevention to Work (CPPW) program. The goal of CPPW is to educate the public about obesity prevention and the dangers of tobacco use. Despite this noble goal, Cause of Action’s (CoA) nineteen month-long investigation shows that at least seven communities that received CPPW funds violated federal law, as well as CDC guidelines, by using taxpayer dollars to lobby for higher taxes and new local laws.
Although Congress conducted hearings in 2011 to question the CDC’s oversight of the program and followed up with letters to Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius in 2012, these questions only addressed one potential violation in one community in South Carolina. CoA found seven other potential violations of the CPPW program that have not been public until now, and learned that the CDC’s one recorded violation was worse than disclosed.
The CPPW program was intended for public education and job creation as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). CoA’s investigation revealed that CPPW money went to support lobbyists and public relations companies who used taxpayer dollars to push laws and agendas that would lead to tax increases on tobacco and high calorie products – essentially transforming the CPPW program into a conduit for lobbying for higher taxes and bans on otherwise legal consumer products.
CoA uncovered evidence of seven different communities around the country using CPPW money to lobby in violation of federal law and CDC policy. These warrant investigation, review, and accountability, especially in light of the $2 billion in annual funding scheduled for disbursement in 2015 under the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’s Community Transformation Grants program to fight obesity and tobacco use at the local, state, and federal level. The HHS, the federal agency that oversees the CDC, is also the largest grant-issuing agency in the federal government.
The following report reveals how the CDC permitted and even encouraged CPPW grantees in Arizona, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and California to violate federal law and use CPPW funds to lobby state and local governments. Internal emails, applications to the CDC outlining plans for the funds, and meeting notes blatantly show systemic corruption and use of taxpayer dollars for lobbying.
CoA found that lobbying by CPPW grant recipients violates the following four laws and guidelines:
- The Anti-Lobbying Act prohibits the use of money appropriated by Congress to influence, “an official of any government, to favor, adopt, or oppose, by vote or otherwise, any legislation, law, ratification, policy, or appropriation.”
- The CDC issued additional guidance prohibiting CPPW funds from lobbying use. Known as Additional Requirement 12 (AR-12) in the CDC’s guidelines, this rule “specifically [applies] to lobbying related to any proposed, pending, or future Federal, state, or local tax increase, or any proposed, pending, or future requirement or restriction on any legal consumer product.”
- In 2012, Congress included language in an appropriations bill to clarify that CPPW funds were prohibited from “any activity to advocate or promote any proposed, pending, or future Federal, State, or local tax increase, or any proposed, pending, or future requirement or restriction on any legal consumer product.”
- Office of Management and Budget Circular A-122 prohibits the use of federal funds to attempt to influence federal or state legislation through “communication with any member or employee of the Congress or State legislature” or “by preparing, distributing, or using publicity or propaganda, or by urging members of the general public or any segment thereof to contribute to or participate in any mass demonstration, march, rally, fundraising drive, lobbying campaign, or letter writing or telephone campaign.”
South Carolina: A Case Study in Corruption
In addition to the previously mentioned five states, the CPPW pattern of corruption can most easily be traced through the example of South Carolina.
Direct use of federal funds to lobby
As revealed by communications between local officials and the CDC, funds from a CPPW grant to the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC) were used to illegally lobby city council members in support of a pending local smoke-free ordinance, proof of direct illegal lobbying with CPPW funds.
Stealth lobbying by coalitions to avoid legal oversight
The Smoke Free Florence (SFF) coalition is a group of like-minded organizations that formed to lobby for the causes outlined in DHEC’s CPPW grant application, and yet, by design, the SFF evades regulations that apply to lobbyists. Known as stealth lobbying, this approach is one way to avoid lobbying rules but still, in effect, conduct lobbying while receiving federal dollars.
CDC failure to properly oversee the use of grant funds
In its review of South Carolina’s grant application from Florence County, which includes a proposal to hire a coordinator “to promote comprehensive smoke-free policies/ordinances throughout the county,” the CDC failed to prohibit lobbying activity, and in fact sent a CDC grants officer to local community meetings where this officer announced that securing a comprehensive smoke-free ordinance was “the number one priority with the [SFF] initiative and 100% adoption will be the determining factor” of success. While the CDC later reprimanded the South Carolina recipients for their misuse of funds, they largely ignored that meeting minutes were scrubbed to change the appearance of impropriety, raising other potential legal issues outside of improper lobbying.
This report evidences a complete failure of an HHS grant program to adhere to the law, use taxpayer dollars responsibly, or secure jobs it was intended to create. What follows are numerous examples of counties and states across the country advocating, planning, and supporting legislation in direct violation of federal law and CDC guidelines. The clock is ticking toward 2015, when $2 billion more will be allocated to similar programs. This report only begins to document the extent of waste, fraud, and abuse within CPPW, as CoA is still awaiting copious amounts of documents from both the CDC and HHS Office of Inspector General. The systemic pattern of misfeasance among grantees will end only when the CDC acts responsibly on behalf of the American taxpayers who have become the biggest losers in the government’s campaign to end obesity.
Amber Abbasi: The Curious Case of Trent Arsenault: Questioning FDA Regulatory Authority Over Private Sperm Donation
Amber Abbasi, chief counsel for regulatory affairs at Cause of Action, wrote an article for the Annals of Health Law, the Health Policy and Law Review of Loyola University of Chicago School of Law:
The Curious Case of Trent Arsenault: Questioning FDA Regulatory Authority Over Private Sperm Donation
Cause of Action Statement on Senate’s confirmation of Sally Jewell for Secretary of the Interior
Cause of Action on the Senate’s Confirmation of Sally Jewell for Secretary of the Interior
Yesterday, the Senate voted to confirm the nomination of Sally Jewell for Secretary of the Interior.
Executive Director Dan Epstein:
“As the new Secretary of the Interior, we expect Sally Jewell to bring the accountability, transparency and oversight the Department of Interior desperately needs. We have seen the overreaching effects from Secretary Salazar’s decision to shut down the Drakes Bay Oyster Company and we ask that Secretary Jewell re-evaluate the future of this sustainable, family-run business. The Department of Interior cannot continue a pattern of corruption and abuse of power and we hope Secretary Jewell can hold this agency accountable going forward.”
For more information on Drakes Bay Oyster Company and their lawsuit against Secretary Salazar, the National Parks Service, and the Department of the Interior, click here.
New York Times: Oyster Farm Caught Up in Pipeline Politics
Oyster Farm Caught Up in Pipeline Politics
By NORIMITSU ONISHI
POINT REYES NATIONAL SEASHORE, Calif. — Seen from a nearby hilltop, the Drakes Bay Oyster Company is a cluster of shacks with faded white walls. One patched roof appears at risk of being blown away by the next Pacific squall. A dozen workers on a small weather-beaten dock were busy handling a batch of oysters harvested on a recent morning, separating the mollusks on a single rusty conveyor belt.
But this modest, family-run business just north of San Francisco lies at the center of an increasingly convoluted battle pitting longtime allies against one another and uniting traditional foes. Its fate — whether Drakes Bay will be allowed to remain on public land here or forced to close, as demanded by the federal government — has drawn the attention of a little-known, well-financed watchdog group in Washington, a United States senator from Louisiana, Tea Party supporters, environmentalists, sustainable-food proponents and celebrity chefs.
Ken Salazar, the secretary of the interior, decided against extending the oyster farm’s lease in November, and gave the Lunnys, the owners, 90 days to shut down. The Lunnys and their supporters sued, eventually winning a reprieve from a federal appeals court to continue operating until mid-May; the court is expected to decide then whether the lawsuit can move forward.
With the deadline looming, the battle has only intensified. On Friday, Representative Doc Hastings, a Washington State Republican who is chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, addressed a letter to Mr. Salazar requesting documents related to his decision and questioning its basis. A couple of weeks earlier, Alice Waters, the owner of Chez Panisse in Berkeley, Calif., and the pioneer of the locavore movement, led a food group in filing an amicus brief urging the court to allow the farm to stay in business.
Patricia Unterman, co-owner of the Hayes Street Grill in San Francisco, a restaurant that serves local seafood and endorsed the brief, said the oyster farm was “such a rare and beautiful use of land and water” in an area with a long history of agriculture.
Ms. Unterman said she and other proponents of sustainable food had long enjoyed good relations with environmentalists, another powerful group in Northern California. “That’s why I was so astounded by what seemed to me a very doctrinaire and unnuanced approach to the Drakes Bay Oyster Company,” she said of the environmental groups’ opposition to the oyster farm.
Neal Desai, an associate director of the National Parks Conservation Association, a longtime opponent of the oyster farm, said he did not object to ranching in the park, which the government allows. But the oyster farm has no legal standing, he said, adding, “There are rules, there are policies and there are contracts.”
The Lunnys have kept on farming, though they have slowed down production because of the uncertainty and reduced their work force to 21 from 30. As a busload of visitors descended on the oyster shack, Kevin Lunny, who owns the farm with his siblings, said he had been taken aback by developments in the case, particularly the recent inclusion of his farm in a Republican energy bill in Congress.
Under the bill, the Energy Production and Project Delivery Act of 2013, permits for the nearly 2,000-mile Keystone XL pipeline would be expedited, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska would be opened for gas and oil development, more offshore drilling would be allowed — and the oyster farm’s operating permit would be extended for at least 10 years.
“Now people are saying we’re connected to right-wing groups, that we’ll have offshore drilling and it’ll be Drakes Bay Oyster’s fault that the Keystone pipeline gets built,” Mr. Lunny said. “And we’re saying: ‘Where does this come from? Oh, my gosh.’ Other groups that we may or may not agree with have taken up the cause.”
Mr. Lunny’s grandparents moved to Point Reyes in the 1940s to start a cattle ranch business that the family still runs, two decades before a national park was created here. Then in 1972, as Congress mandated that parts of the park be designated as wilderness, the federal government paid the oyster farm’s previous owners $79,200 for their property; they were allowed to continue farming for 40 more years, until last November, after which the area would become the first marine wilderness on the West Coast.
The Lunnys bought the oyster farm in 2004 and soon began lobbying to have the lease extended beyond 2012. Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, a Democrat, championed their cause, writing a bill in 2009 that gave the interior secretary the authority to extend the farm’s permit for 10 years.
Scientists at the National Park Service criticized the Lunnys’ environmental record, particularly in a 2007 report that indicated that the farm had harmed a nearby colony of harbor seals. But the Park Service backpedaled after outside scientists pointed out flaws in its research.
Cause of Action, a government watchdog group in Washington, quickly became the main supporter of the Lunnys’ lawsuit to reverse the interior secretary’s decision. Dan Epstein, the organization’s executive director, said he had been drawn to the case because of the Park Service’s problematic science, and decided to lead the lawsuit as a matter of government overreach and accountability.
“Oftentimes, the regulatory state has impacts that affect small businesses potentially more than big businesses,” he said. “The Drakes Bay Oyster Company, they’re not like a big company that can just afford to hire lawyers when dealing with government decision-making.”
Opponents of the farm, however, dismiss any talk of the little guy versus the state. Cause of Action, they say, is a stalking horse for big business interests, pointing out that Mr. Epstein once briefly worked for a charitable foundation run by Charles G. Koch, one of the two billionaire brothers who have financed many conservative causes.
Mr. Epstein said the donors to Cause of Action, which was founded in 2011 and recognized as a nonprofit in May, “choose to remain anonymous.” The organization does not receive money directly or indirectly from the Koch brothers, he said.
To opponents, suspicions of a broader agenda were fueled when a provision to save the oyster farm was included in the Republican energy bill. Senator David Vitter of Louisiana, who introduced the bill, became interested in the oyster company because of his background in investigating the Interior Department’s scientific conclusions on offshore drilling, said a spokesman, Luke Bolar.
Amy Trainer, executive director of the Environmental Action Committee of West Marin, a local group, said the farm’s inclusion in this “drill, baby, drill piece of legislation” was very “telling.”
As for Mr. Lunny, some of his new allies, especially the big-government opponents and Tea Party supporters drawn to his fight against the federal government, make him uncomfortable. He was surprised, he said, when his oyster farm ended up in an energy bill promoting the Keystone XL pipeline.
“We realize that’s not really in our best interest,” he said.
Photo Credit: Jim Wilson/New York Times