Committee for Economic Development

From Judgepedia

The Committee for Economic Development (CED) is an independent, nonpartisan organization consisting of business and ecucation leaders working on economic and social issues through policy research. CED believes itself to be:

"Common ground for some of the best minds in business and academia--from the United States and throughout the world, an organization to which government, policy, and media leaders turn for reliable, nonpartisan policy guidance; a catalyst for community action; a respected business voice on national and international issues; and a resource for the business community's own policy-oriented activities."^[1]

History

The Committee for Economic Development was founded in 1942 by a group of business leaders led by Paul G. Hoffman, President of Studebaker Corporation; William Benton, co-founder of Benton & Bowles advertising firm; and Marion B. Folsom, treasurer of Eastman Kodak Company. Their first mission was to help the U.S. economy transition from war-time prosperity into peace-time prosperity. The CED counts as one of its accomplishments that they played a key role in garnering support in the American business community for the Marshall Plan. The group also influenced the Bretton Woods Agreement.

In the 1980s, CED became the first national business organization to become actively involved in education policy. CED has also played a critical role in the campaign finance reform debate. As the only national business group to actively support the soft money ban, CED played a decisive role in building support among the business community for passge of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002. Concerned about the enormous and ballooning federal budget deficit and its affect on long-term economic growth and standard of living, CED has worked to arrest this movement.^[2]

Organization

The Committee's current president is Charles Kolb. The current co-chairs of CED are W. Bowman Cutter, Managing Director, Warburg Pincus LLC; and Roderick M. Hills, Partner, Hills, Stern & Morley LLP.

CED is led by its 200 member Board of Trustees. CED's Executive Committee is the organization's primary executive body. The Research and Policy Committee (R&P) directs the research agenda at CED.

Once the R&P approves of a research project, a subcommittee of Trustees is formed to direct the research and formulation of policy recommendations. CED's staff, often assisted by outside experts, conducts the research and prepares drafts for review by the subcommittee. Once the subcommittee is satisfied with the findings and recommendations, they are submitted for final approval. A majority of members of the R&P and the applicable subcommittee must approve of the work in order for it to be approved as an official "policy statement." CED's policy statements are its flagship publications, constituting the official policy positions of CED.^[3]

Trustees and Research Advisory Board

The Committee for Economic Development is a Trustee-led organization. The Committee's Trustees are chairmen, presidents, and senior executives of major American corporations as well as university presidents. It is the Trustees that set CED's research agenda, develop policy recommendations, and speak to implement these recommendations.^[4]

Funding and Donorship

The Committee for Economic Development has a full listing of all the donors that contribute to the grants.^[5] Among those are the Project Funders:

Carnegie Corporation of New York The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation Knight Foundation

MetLife Foundation Open Society Institute Stuart Family Foundation

The Buffett Early Childhood Fund The Pew Charitable Trusts W.K. Kellogg Foundation

Issues

The issues or projects that the Committee for Economic Development is focusing on include, Basic Research, Campaign Finance Reform, Corporate Governance, Digital Economy, Education and Early Learning, Energy and Climage Change, Federal Budget, Health Care, Improving Government Performance, Immigration and International Policy, Judicial selection, Legal Reform, Making Washington Work, Metropolitan Agenda, Older Workers, Science, Mathematics, and Engineering, Social Security, Welfare Reform.^[6] For the links for each of these issues, please visit Committee for Economic Development: Projects and Issues.

Spending on Judicial Elections Soaring

A new report compiled by Justice at Stake, shows that business interests spend twice as much money on state high-court elections as all other groups combined, including lawyers. At the same time, a poll of business leaders shows many feel uneasy about the trend.

Documenting the increasing influence of money in judicial elections, the report shows fundraising by state supreme court candidates rose in 2006, with the median being close to $250,000 per candidate. The high-water mark came in Alabama, where the total price tag for the race for chief justice was $8.2 million. "What we are seeing now is the beginning of a very serious arms race," said Charles Kolb, president of the Committee for Economic Development, a business group that is part of Justice at Stake.

An example cited is that of Georgia. The race for the state supreme court there cost $38,000 in 2000. In 2006 the National Association of Manufacturers targeted Justice Carol W. Hunstein, through its affiliate group, the American Justice Partnership, with $1.3 million in contributions. "Justice Hunstein was very, very unpredictable," said Dan Pero, president of the American Justice Partnership, offering an explanation for why the group targeted her. Hunstein was a judge that the partnership thought they could not rely on to correctly interpret the law. Ironically, Hunstein's record was considerably more conservative than her other colleagues up for re-election. A statistical analysis of Georgia supreme court criminal case rulings done by the Fulton County Daily Report concluded that in cases decided by a divided vote, Hunstein sided with the prosecution 39 percent more often than did the court as a whole. Hunstein raised over $1 million herself and won. Some of her supporters claimed the campaign was meant to send a message to others on the court that they too could face a business-financed challenge.

But the trend bothers Ohio Chief Justice Thomas J. Moyer, a Republican, who is the nation's longest serving current chief justice. "Human nature is that we help people if they help us," Moyer said. "And that's the problem with this system."^[7]

Pew Continues Support for CED

The Pew Charitable Trusts announced renewed support for groups researching campaign finance reform. The grants given for the year 2006 are as follows:

• The Campaign Legal Center, $2.2 million over two years for general operating support.
• The Center for Responsive Politics (CRP), $900,000 over two years for general operating support.
• Committee for Economic Development (CED), $500,000 over one year to help business leaders educate their colleagues about the need for effective implementation of campaign finance reform.
• Democracy 21 Education Fund (D21EF) $700,000 over two years to monitor and ensure that campaign finance laws at the federal level are effectively implemented and for public education.

When the Trusts began its investment in this area in 1996, Americans were concerned about the health and legitimacy of the U.S. democratic process. A 1997 NBC/Wall Street Journal poll found 77 percent of respondents thought campaign finance reform was needed. From the Press Release, "moreover, millions of dollars worth of campaign advertisements of unknown origin, placed with undisclosed funding, streamed onto U.S. television and radio."

This statement is in stark contrast to Ryan Sager's New York Post article exposing the video tape of Sean Treglia, formerly with Pew Charitable Trusts, explaining the groups' strategy on paying for a group of "experts" with foundation money, and creating fake business, minority, and religious groups to "pound the table for reform." To support this effort, almost $140 million was spent between 1994 and 2004 to lobby for changes to campaign-finance laws. And all of this was to be done "quietly," without mention of Pew's contributions. For the complete article, go to Judgepedia: Carnegie Corporation.

Based in Philadelphia, with an office in Washington, D.C., the Trusts will invest $204 million in fiscal year 2006 to provide organizations and citizens with "fact-based research and practical solutions for challenging issues."^[8]

See also

• Carnegie Corporation
• The Campaign Legal Center
• Justice at Stake

External links

References