SCARC DAILY BULLETIN - Wednesday - December 11, 1996

JUSTICE DEPT DROPS CASE AGAINST HBI

Federal prosecutors have ended their investigation of the consulting firm Healthy Buildings International (HBI), citing lack of evidence in their decision not to bring criminal charges against the firm. The Justice Department was investigating whether HBI falsified data about the effects of secondhand smoke and misled government officials about its connections to the tobacco industry. HBI has given frequent testimony in support of tobacco industry positions before Congress and other government groups. The Justice Department's investigation of HBI was part of an ongoing fraud probe of tobacco companies' possible misrepresention of nicotine's addictiveness to both government agencies and to the public. A civil suit filed by a former executive against HBI for defrauding federal agencies to deflect concern about secondhand smoke is still pending.

Source: Richard B. Schmitt, "U.S. Won't Charge Firm In Smoking Case," WALL STREET JOURNAL, December 11, 1996, p. B10. (sdb 12/11/96)

KEEPING THE HBI `INVESTIGATION' ALIVE

The Justice Department has completed its investigation of the firm Healthy Buildings International (HBI) without filing any charges against the company or its executives (see News Summary). According to recent news reports, the Tobacco Institute hired HBI, "an indoor environmental consulting firm," to divert public attention away from the need to ban smoking indoors by arguing that the real problem behind unhealthy indoor air was one of poor ventilation. HBI executives frequently testified before legislative bodies, including Congress, as an independent organization. (For more information about HBI, see the article by Morton Mintz in the March 24, 1996 issue of the WASHINGTON POST MAGAZINE and the Advocacy Institute Action Alert, "`Environmental Group' Found To Be Tobacco Industry Front," July 31, 1992.)

The Justice Department's decision to close the case without filing charges is certainly disappointing. Prosecution of the firm by the Justice Department would have drawn attention to the tobacco industry's fraud and deception, as well as sent a strong message to the tobacco industry and its consultants that such deception will not go unpunished. However, tobacco control advocates, armed with a wealth of data about the HBI and tobacco industry connection, should continue to draw attention to this story, as it is a textbook case of the tobacco industry's strategy of buying favorable science to divert or dampen public concerns about the dangers of tobacco. Advocates should draw attention to the fact that HBI's political maneuvering and deception comes with a cost. In this case, thousands of office buildings may have decided not to go smokefree, as management was trying to cure the mysterious "sick building" syndrome instead.

It is possible that the Justice Department will choose to use evidence from HBI against the tobacco companies, a move that would appropriately shift the focus from HBI to the tobacco companies. For it was the tobacco industry who gained from its hidden connection to HBI, and the tobacco companies should be held responsible.

GLOBALink Information and Communication in Tobacco-Control