Late Breaking News
from America's
Progressive Community

Latest News Releases
NewsCenter

An article in The Baltimore Sun has raised sharp questions about the failure of an influential American think tank to disclose that it received major funding from the South Korean government while repeatedly testifying on Capitol Hill about U.S.-Korean relations.

Witnesses from the Heritage Foundation have presented Congressional testimony on U.S. policies toward North Korea and South Korea on several occasions in recent years, the Aug. 2 article says,but the think tank did not inform House committee members that it had received $1 million from the South Korean government. The testimony occurred during and after the three-year period when the funds flowed from a conduit for the Seoul government to the Washington-based Heritage Foundation, the article noted.

Ironically, in 1995 -- while it was still receiving funds from the South Korean government -- the Heritage Foundation launched a campaign to require that all recipients of grants from the U.S. government disclose federal funding when they testify on Capitol Hill, the article says. Last month, Heritage issued a report card that graded compliance with a "Truth in Testimony" rule adopted by the House of Representatives in January 1997.

Sunday's article in The Baltimore Sun was written by Norman Solomon, executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy.The institute, based in Washington and San Francisco, is a national consortium of policy researchers.

"The nation's capital, of course, is a place where double standards are routine," the article said. "But consider this recent feat of ultra-hypocrisy: A few weeks ago, on July 14, the Heritage Foundation issued a report condemning lax compliance with a congressional rule that requires witnesses to disclose funding from the U.S. government.

"The `Truth in Testimony' rule -- first proposed by Heritage in May 1995 and adopted by the House of Representatives in January 1997 -- seems intended to stigmatize grants from the public sector. Heritage hails this as a `significant victory' because the rule `helps expose potential conflicts of interest:witnesses who testify for greater federal spending on programs that provide them with income.'

"Eager to tighten the rule," the article continued, "Heritage has even issued report cards that grade enforcement by House committees and single out non-disclosing groups. Among the culprits fingered by the Heritage Foundation are witnesses from such outfit as the United Brotherhood of Carpenters (federal grant: $33,611), the Wildlife Society ($25,000), the Passaic River Coalition ($24,000) and the American Dental Association ($3,592,256).

"But what happens when an American organization pockets $1 million from a foreign government -- and testifies repeatedly in front of Congress about what U.S. policy should be toward that government --without disclosing the financial ties involved? Hey, no problem."

Making the irony more acute is the fact that the "Truth in Testimony" rule championed by Heritage requires that witnesses who appear before House committees disclose federal grants received not only during the current fiscal year but also during the previous two fiscal years. According to the article, "if the words `foreign-government grants' were substituted for `federal grants,'then Heritage would have been in repeated violation of the rule during the past few years."

Institute for Public Accuracy, 202-347-0020 915 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 E-mail: ipa@accuracy.org Web site: http://www.accuracy.org

-0-