Venezuela, the Venezuelan Information Office, and Mark Weisbrot (Part II)

Recap - Part I looked at Mark Weisbrot educational background, publications, and the founding of CEPR. In part II we will look at Weisbrot's influence and activism in Latin American affairs, in particular Venezuela.

CEPR - economics or activism?

The Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) in Washington D.C. has two co-Directors Mark Weisbrot and Dean Baker, therefore it is safe to say that these two individuals are the ones responsible for the day to day running of CEPR. It is apparent that the CEPR co-directors have divided their time among two passions: economics and activism, where the former seems to be handled by Dean Baker and the later by Weisbrot. This is evident by a simple google search, and any reader of CNN.com Money would realize that Baker is often quoted, whereas Weisbrot is often quoted on matters dealing with Latin America and policy.

The Latin American Activist

Mark Weisbrots interest in Latin America dates back to the time of his PhD thesis, as was discussed in Part I. Now that he has his PhD in "economics" he has taken his degree and activism to the media to pontificate the new "revolutionary" economic and social changes that are occurring in Latin America and how US hegemony is trying to undermine it. Weisbrot has appeared on PBS's Newshour to discuss Venezuela and Bolivia and here. He has also appered on a number of other forms of media to express his "expert" opinion, a complete listing of articles and papers authored by Weisbrot can he seen on his website.

Weisbrot - "...an american advisor to Chavez..."

This quote was taken from a far left wing website whose author attended the Sixth World Social Forum (WSF) in Caracas along with Mark Weisbrot. Whether Weisbrot introduced himself as an advisor to Chavez or the author assumed it is somewhat irrelevant, the main point being is it shows how close Weisbrot and the CEPR are to the Chavez government:

"Economist Mark Weisbrot, an American adviser to Chavez, told me as we spoke in his room at the Hilton overlooking the hotel swimming pool, that the government’s policies are 'gradualist reform.' ".

Weisbrot's other trips to Venezuela include: his interview of Chavez in 2003, his trip to Venezuela during the two month strike, and the above mentioned WSF trip, among others.

Any person somewhat knowledgeable on Venezuela can tell you that Weisbrot has a lack of knowledge not only on the current state and direction of Venezuela but also it's past. Both of which Weisbrot has publicly demonstrated, with his unawareness of major political parities such with Movimiento al Socialism (MAS). Claiming that PDVSA's finances were a "black box" and that PeMex provided the Mexican government greater revenues than PDVSA, of course ignoring the heavy investment required on Venezuelan crude, also claiming that PDVSA was a state within a state therefore it justified Chavez taking over the company. Most shocking is how Weisbrot seems to ignore and make light of the fact that Chavez led a coup in 1992, of course immediately stating that it really wasn't a coup and that it was justified. In addition, Weisbrot has acknowledged that he routinely speaks and is in contact with Venezuelan government news agencies and they are a great source of his information, of course never saying they are government run to his american audience. Consequently, Weisbrots publication, speeches, and interviews are simply paraphrases of the Venezuelan government statements including his testimony before the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations on June 24, 2004 .

Venezuelan Information Office (VIO)

I would like to start off by stating that Vcrisis has excellent coverage on the Venezuelan government run VIO in Washington D.C. Those of you interested in the VIO files and more in-depth information on this topic should click here where you will find tons of information. I also highly recommend reading this article published by "The Center for Public Integrity", that caused quite a stir among Weisbrot, Dean Baker, and other Venezuelan government activists, most notably Eva Golinger, and Bill Fletcher, which led them to write a joint reply:

"The article seems to imply that several individuals and organizations were influenced either by the Venezuelan Information Office (VIO) or something worse to take the side of an oil-rich government. But there is no evidence for this: all of these people had written about or taken action regarding Venezuela before the VIO existed, and in fact before any of the lobbying efforts described in the article occurred."

So are they being influenced? I would argue that yes they are! As an example the VIO contacted the above mentioned individuals including Mark Weisbort "requesting response to inaccurate editorial" written in the LA Times published on 12/18/04 that painted the Venezuelan government in an unfavorable light. So I ask can anyone explain why a government run office would contact someone "request[ing] a response" to an unfavorable article, unless you knew that person would write something favorable or something you wanted. Of course this is not an isolated incident, they routinely contact Weisbrot and approximately 30 others individuals and organizations "requesting a response" to an unfavorable article towards the Venezuelan government.



In 2004 alone, the Center for Economic Policy was contacted 9 seperate times, and Mark Wiesbrot was contacted 5 of those times. Other contacts at CEPR have been with Dan Beeton, and Debi Car, and Todd Tucker. Topics included phone calls to "develop a strategy for Venezuela abroad" (1/16/04) to writing responses to unfavorable editorials towards Venezuela. In addition to, asking for the CEPR to participate on panals about venezuela (9/7/04), along with the VIO organizing radio shows and to cosponsor activites with other activiest groups like Transafrica, IPS, and EPICA. Again all of these organizations have been very sympathetic and have defended the Venezuelan government over the years.

Here is a list of known contacts that have taken place between the VIO and CEPR over about a year and a half time period.


10/27/03 - Todd Tucker, via email to duscuss benefit and screening and becoming a cosponsor - along with Transafrica, IPS, EPICA
12/9/03 - Todd Tucker, email about benefit and screening about being on a radio show
12/20/04 - Mark Weisbrot, email, requesting response to inaccurate reporting on 12/18 LA editorial
1/13/04 - Mark Weisbrot, email about writing Opeds, and Todd Tucker email about activists
1/16/04 - Mary Mumy, via phone to discuss and help shape strategy
1/20/04 - Shelly Mescouhz
1/21/04 - Mary Mumy Dievr
9/7/04 - Mark Weisbrot, via email discussed post-referendum panel and asked to attend panel discussion
9/13/04 - Debi Car, via email discussed post-referendum and asked to attend panel discussion
9/22/04 - Debi Kar, via email discuss referendum report and asked for its distribution
9/22/04 - Mark Weisbrot, via phone to discuss his participation in a press interview on the referendum
1/26/05 - Mark Weisbrot, via email to attend breakfast with Vice minister Hernandez
2/15/05 - Dan Beeton, contact in person to discuss Venezuelan democracy and attend panel discussion
6/9/2005 - Dan Beeton, via phone to discuss Telesur and to participate on information session in washington

One example that I find very interesting took place soon after the recall referendum in 2004. On 9/22/04 the VIO contacted Debi Kar at CEPR via email sharing with them the referendum report and asked them to distribute the infromation. On the same day Mark Weisbrot was also contacted by the VIO by telephone where they discussed and asked for Wesibrots participation in a press interview on the referendum outcome in Venezuela. Then the following day 9/23/04 the VIO sent out an email to the "Venezuelan News and Action subscriber list" to share with everyone the CEPR report on the referendum. Is there not something strange about this? is this the report the VIO shared originally with the CEPR and now the CEPR is distributing it?



Most recent pro-government activism
This past week Mark Weisbrot and the CEPR decided to release a report on Poverty in Venezuela titled "Poverty Rates In Venezuela: Getting The Numbers Right". While I won't disagree with Weisbrot that poverty has likely decreased since the oil strike, actually it would be ironic if it hadn't. I, as do many others, do question the governments change in methodology of which Weisbrot seems to have full confidence in and is willing to rely on and defend. Of course within a couple days of CEPR publishing the article the Venezuelan government news agency Venezuelanalysis and of course the Venezuelan Information Office have prominently displayed the article up on their website to show that government numbers are accurate and reliable.

Whether poverty is decreasing or not in Venezuela, is not so much up for debate the main argument is simply that based on the amount of oil income during these past 5 years one would expect a more significant decrease in poverty levels as was argued in The Economist. Those interested can read more about the poverty statistics in an article by VenEconomy.

Concluding remarks
In Part I it was established that Mark Weisbrot's economic philosophy isn't your typical mainstream economics, instead it seems heavily influenced in the failed Marxist economic model. When it comes to matters of policy, in particular Venezuela, it is quite clear that Weisbrot's lack of knowledge on the history and culture of Venezuela and his reliance on government media for his information severely compromises any coherent policy towards Venezuela and Latin America. Moreover, his influence with the Venezuelan Information Office, his personal meeting with Chavez, and frequent visits to Venezuela cast a great deal of doubt on his impartiality. For this reason Weisbrot's influence in the media and Washington in dealing with policy towards Venezuela and Latin America as whole should be of concern. Since Washington politicians and lawmakers can only create good and sound foreign policy if they receive accurate and unbiased information.

Addendum
After reviewing the recent VIO FARA fillings, which were obtained by Vcrisis, Mark Weisbrot was asked by the VIO (hence the Venezuelan government) on 1/18/06 to speak at a briefing on the Hill in Washington regarding Venezuela.

Some big accusations today in Venezuela

Shit has hit the fan in Venezuela today, with one of the key Chavez Supreme Court Justices (Luis Velasquez Alvaray) being removed from office, you can read more here. So today he came on Tv to make al sorts of declarations even going as far as accusing the Vice-President (Jose Vicente Rangel, Diosdado Cabello, among others) of plotting for Chavismo without Chavez. He also accused the Vice President of knowing who killed Daniel Anderson, and even suggesting that JVR was in on the plot.

However, what is really interesting to me is that Alvaray mentions that "Julio Macaren" as illegally enriching themselves with state money and also helping to finance chavismo without Chavez. Some of you may remember but a few months ago it was revealed that Julio Makaran has ties to the North American Opinion Research" (NAOR) polling company and heads the Venezuelan company "Petrotulsa" among others. Just to refresh you mind, NAOR is a polling comapny that seems to always release very favorable numbers for Chavez and accurately predicts the out come of voting. Despite all other opinion polls showing the opposite. You can read more about NAOR here.

In short the pieces of the puzzle are slowly coming together and todays announcement further supports previous claims that NAOR is a front polling company to give fake Chavez approval numbers, at the same time Macaren is getting rich by having an oil company (Petrotulsa) having contracts with PDVSA, and now seems to be conspiring with some very powerful people (among the Vice president) to get rid of Chavez.

So warm up the popcorn because things this election year are bound to get interesting.

Venezuela, the Venezuelan Information Office, and Mark Weisbrot (Part I)

Over the years many of us have become familiar with the international supporters of Chavez and his government. Some of these individuals claim to be lawyers then writers, some claim to defend the poor and marginalized and Venezuelans of African and Indian ancestry, while others just go along for the revolutionary ride with the intent to gain some fame and bolster their image at home. However, there is one individual that deserves particular attention, simply because of his influence in Washington and in the media. This person has not only professed the wonders of Chavez but also of other populists in Latin America and is routinely introduced as an expert on Latin America. The person I am referring to is Mark Alan Weisbrot, Co-Director of the Center for Economic Policy and Research (CEPR) in Washington D.C. Part I will look at the early life of Weisbrot, then in Part II we will look at the connections between him and the Venezuelan government.

Mark A. Weisbrot - a short biography:
In 1971 Mark Alan Weisbrot moved from Chicago, IL to the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) to start his first year as an undergraduate in the Collage of Engineering. The following year Weisbrot transferred from engineering to the collage of Literature, Arts and the Sciences (LAS) where he obtained his degree in 1975. Then In 1979/80 he was a graduate student teaching assistant (TA) in the department of economics at UIUC, which lasted for one year.

After leaving UIUC, Weisbrot went to the University of Michigan Ann Arbor to attend graduate school in economics, where he obtained his PhD in 1993. His PhD thesis titled "Ideology and Method in the History of Development Economics" had as committee members Dr. W.H Locke Anderson (committee chair), Dr. Daniel R. Fusfeld, Dr. Terrence J. McDonald, Dr. Thomas E. Weisskopf.

The summary of his thesis can be read by clicking here.

Below are small bits of information that I have found that give a small perspective on Weisbrots committee members and their views, which may explain Weisbrot's views on economics.

Dr. W. H. Locke Anderson
"Locke Anderson’s academic career was distinguished by any measure. But as time went by, Locke found himself increasingly critical of U.S. domestic and foreign policies and of the academy as it supported and colluded with these policies. As a consequence he became increasingly estranged from the tradition of neoclassical economics in which he had been trained. Like many of his contemporaries in the 1960s, he turned to the left; and, like a smaller number of them, he came to understand that only Marxism provides the intellectual equipment needed to understand the reality of a modern capitalist society. While at Michigan, Locke joined with colleagues from all over the country to organize what became the Union of Radical Political Economists."

Dr. Thomas E. Weisskopf
"In the late 1970s, his research interests shifted to the macroeconomic problems of advanced capitalist economies; among other things, he undertook studies of trends in productivity growth and profitability from a neo-Marxian political-economic perspective."

Dr. Weisskopf is also director of the Residential College (RC) at U of M Ann Arbor. For those of you unfamiliar with the RC it is well known for its very liberal/marxist leanings.

Dr. Daniel R. Fusfeld
From the literature searched Dr. Fusfeld seems to be the only individual with more mainstream economic views.

Dr. Terrence J. McDonald
Dr. Mc Donald's background appears to be Modern American History, political, urban, histography.

Thesis Notes
Weisbrot's thesis centered on Latin America and the role the US played (including the CIA) in the region during the 1950's to 1980's and how economic ideologies were shaped. Curiously, the thesis contains no formulas, figures, graphs, equations, or tables that one may expect to see in an economics thesis. Moreover, there are only a couple of references to the GDP and import and export numbers for a couple of Central American countries. Weisbrot's unconventional economic views may have been shaped by some of his thesis committee members who appear to be proponents of marxist economics theories, thus more on ideology than numbers and statistics. In addition, Weisbrot unconventional economic views may have been shaped by his apparent background in left wing groups while at U of M as a graduate student.

Post-Graduate publications
Since obtaining his PhD in 1993 Mark Weisbrot and fellow CEPR co-director Dean Baker co-authored a paper titled "The Logic of Contested Exchange in 1994 in the Journal of Economic Issues. Then in 2003 he published in the journal Investigacion Economica a paper titled "The Relative Impact of Trade Liberalization on Developing Countries". Most recently he and Dean Baker published a book titled "Social Security: The phony crisis", which is a rather unconventional and not widely shared view of the state of social security in the United States. Jared Bernstein in 2001 wrote a review in the Journal of Economic Literature and had this to say:

"The authors are well-versed in neoclassical economic thought, but they clearly view the debate over Social Security as taking place in a highly politicized context..."

"It is herein that the authors' tone becomes too strident. Their attack of the crisis myth is sometimes too passionate, and they confuse those who may be twisting the facts for their own gains, such as vested interests that would benefit from privatized accounts, with economists and policy makers who genuinely believe a crisis is afoot."

(click here to read the full review)

Origin of the CEPR
It was apparently at the University of Michigan where Weisbrot meet Dean Baker, as indicated in Weisbrots' thesis acknowledgments. Then in 1999 they both decided to start their own progressive think tank, the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR). Do note that this is not the same nor related to the larger and more prestigious, Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR) based in London, UK.

Having established some background on Mark Weisbrot and the origin of the CEPR, in Part II we will look at his activities with the Venezuelan Information Office in Washington D.C. and the Venezuelan government.

Some small updates to the blog

Some of you may or may not have noticed but I have made a few updates on my blog. I have made two categories, one is a section with a few links and newspaper articles about the 1992 coup lead by Chavez. One of the articles is an interview of Chavez by now Vice president Jose Vicente Rangel. The other article is about the events on Feb 4th 1992. The second category contains a few links about April 11th, 2002 the "coup" against Chavez and a link to the lies from the movie "The revolution will not be televised". I hope people will find this informative and useful. People are welcome to share and use the articles but if you could link it to my blog I would appreciate it, otherwise feel free to leave a comment.

gracias morochas por los articulos

I'll be back soon

I apologize for my absence from my blogging duties but I have been very busy as of late, but I promise to return within the next week or so.