Home > Uncategorized > More projection from the right: CEPR is not well-funded

More projection from the right: CEPR is not well-funded

from Dean Baker

I was happy to see the New York Post take note of the work of the Revolving Door Project (RDP) at the Center for Economic and Policy Research. RDP has been very aggressive in vetting potential appointees in the Biden administration. It tries to prevent people with clear conflicts of interest from getting top-level jobs.

The immediate basis for the Post’s ire was the fact that Alex Oh was forced to step down from a top position at the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Before getting the position at the SEC, Oh had worked at a major corporate law firm where she represented several of the country’s largest companies. One of these was Exxon-Mobil, which she defended in a suit claiming that claimed it was responsible for rape, torture, and murder committed by the Indonesian military in the vicinity of one of the company’s oil drilling operations. A judge in the case considered Oh’s conduct sufficiently egregious that he asked her to produce evidence that she should not be subject to sanctions. (Those interested in a fuller account of RDP’s case against Oh can read it here.)

The fact the Post did not agree with RDP’s position is not surprising, but what was striking was its description of the Center for Economic and Policy Research as a “well-funded and influential left-wing think tank.” While I like to think that CEPR is influential, as a co-founder and co-director for 18 years, I strongly dispute the claim that we are well-funded. My guess is that most senior Wall Street lawyers have annual salaries that exceed CEPR’s entire budget. Our office has a leaky roof, failing air conditioning and heating systems, and rodents.

The reality is that the people at CEPR do the work we do because we think it is important. We don’t get big bucks. People on the right may use politics as a path to personal enrichment, but that is not the way things work on our corner on the left. The Post is welcome to disagree with our work, but the idea that we are doing it for the money is a flat-out lie.

  1. Patrick Newman
    May 8, 2021 at 9:56 am

    No doubt you are transparent about the sources of your meagre funding which cannot be said for the sinister propaganda groups that like to call themselves institutes like the Institute for Economic Affairs or the Adam Smith Institute!

  2. Ken Zimmerman
    May 8, 2021 at 11:02 am

    I know it will bother some on the right that I make my point this way but here goes. The culture (subculture) of the USA political right is distinctive and different from the majority culture (subculture) of the USA. The Post’s approach to and understanding of the CEPR is an example of those differences. Asking the Post to change that is like asking it to be something it is not.

  3. May 8, 2021 at 1:13 pm

    Thank you. Times are turning difficult for everyone not rich. Thans.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.