Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Studies of group participation in the policymaking process often focus on the activities of groups at discrete points in the policy process such as lobbying Congress (Baumgartner and Leech 2000; Hojnacki and Kimball 2001), or participating in the activities of federal advisory committees (FACs) at the rule-making or policy implementation stage (Balla and Wright 2000; Petracca 1986). The policymaking process, however, encompasses multiple stages in which issues are defined, agendas are set and policies are implemented (see Anderson 1994, 280-287); yet there are no studies that examine group participation throughout all facets of this process. Any normative conclusions regarding the impact of group politics on representative democracy depend on whether or not groups that participate at one stage are also major players in other stages of the policy process. We report findings from a case study of a transportation policy FAC and preliminary analysis of membership in a sample of FACs in health, agriculture and science policy domains in 2000. Interest group participation in FACs does not appear to be biased in favor of business interests.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The U.S. government often creates ad hoc advisory commissions on national security issues. Recent examples include the 9/11 Commission and Iraq Study Group. Yet few scholars have examined the impact of commissions. I argue that commissions can help increase support for a presidential, congressional, or partisan agenda, and can help policymakers overcome collective action problems by providing a focal point for debate. I test hypotheses about the sources of commission influence with an original data set of 39 national security commissions that reported between 1981 and 2005. I find that commissions are likely to have greater impact when they are established after a national security disaster or scandal—a finding that challenges the conventional view that such commissions only perform symbolic damage control. I also find that the recommendations of presidential commissions are adopted more often than those of agency or statutory commissions, and that, absent a crisis, commissions addressing highly salient issues are not more likely than those addressing less salient issues to influence policy.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: While the Constitution outlines how Congress and the president will interact, no structure was established for either body to seek the advice of others. As American democracy has evolved, presidents and members of Congress have increasingly sought advice from individuals outside the government—namely, those never elected to office. Often, the justifications for seeking this outside counsel stem from the reality that government decision making has grown increasingly more complex and wide-reaching, requiring a level of knowledge in such a variety of areas that it is impossible for any single government official to become effective. Advisory commissions have helped to fill this gap by providing a mechanism for conducting research and providing recommendations to elected officials. This paper introduces a new dataset of presidential commissions created through early 2005, then investigates the extent to which divided government and issue salience explain presidential commission formation.

Publication Type: Traditional Presentation
Abstract: Learn how the Minnesota Project WET board was established, how it’s worked, and where it plans to lead the program in the future. If you're running a program with little budget or staff, come learn if an advisory board may help.

Publication Type: Traditional Presentation
Abstract: Council meeting; members only.