Congress' Own Think Tank recaps the OTA experience?it's creation, operation, and circumstances of its closure? and that of organizations attempting to fill the gap since OTA's closure as well as a number of new forces shaping the current context for science and technology issues facing the Congress.

It is often assumed that think tanks carry enormous weight with lawmakers. In Do Think Tanks Matter? Donald Abelson argues that the basic question of how think tanks have evolved and under what conditions they can and do have an effect is consistently ignored. Think tank directors often credit their institutes with influencing major policy debates and government legislation and many journalists and scholars believe the explosion of think tanks in the latter part of the twentieth century indicates their growing importance in the policy-making process. Abelson goes beyond assumptions, identifying the influence and relevance of public policy institutes in today's political arena in the United States, where they've become an integral feature of the political landscape, and in Canada, where, despite recent growth in numbers, they enjoy less prominence than their US counterparts. By focusing on the policy cycle, issue articulation, policy formation, and implementation, Abelson argues that individual think tanks have sometimes played an important role in shaping the political dialogue and the policy preferences and choices of decision-makers but often in different ways and at different stages of the policy cycle. This revised and updated edition of the book includes up-to-date data (2000-08) on the growing visibility and policy relevance of think tanks in Canada and the United States.

The Fifth Estate: Think Tanks, Public Policy, and Governance is a comprehensive look at think tanks and the important role they play in shaping public policy and public discourse in the United States. Author James G. McGann illustrates the lasting impact of think tanks in today’s civil society. A survey that McGann conducted among all the leading think tanks in the United States highlights the progress that think tanks in the United States have made and the challenges they have yet to face. McGann clarifies the correlation between think tank research and the policies enacted by the past three presidential administrations by looking at case studies in both foreign and domestic policy. He also describes a phenomenon known as “the revolving door,” where think tanks provide former government officials an opportunity to share insights from public service, remain involved in policy debates, and continue to provide advice and commentary. Based on the history and the level of involvement seen today, the influence of think tanks is unlikely to diminish in the coming years.

Think tanks and research organizations set out to influence policy ideas and decisions—a goal that is key to the very fabric of these organizations. And yet, the ways that they actually achieve impact or measure progress along these lines remains fuzzy and underexplored. What Should Think Tanks Do? A Strategic Guide for Policy Impact is the first practical guide that is specifically tailored to think tanks, policy research, and advocacy organizations. Author Andrew Selee draws on extensive interviews with members of leading think tanks, as well as cutting-edge thinking in business and non-profit management, to provide concrete strategies for setting policy-oriented goals and shaping public opinion. Concise and practically-minded, What Should Think Tanks Do? helps those with an interest in think tanks to envision a well-oiled machine, while giving leaders in these organizations tools and tangible metrics to drive and evaluate success.

Murray Weidenbaum has been a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a speaker at meetings at the Brookings Institution, the Cato Institute, and the Heritage Foundation and has also written for their publications, and served as a reviewer of ongoing studies. In The Competition of Ideas, Weidenbaum examines the political economy of these vital institutions, drawing heavily on several decades of involvement in their activities. He is uniquely able to see their accomplishments as well as their shortcomings. Because of the importance of the activities of their organizations, and their tax-exempt status, think tanks are held to a high standard. Weidenbaum shows that sometimes think tanks are more tank than think—major think tanks are often predictable in the positions they take on public issues and are far better at analyzing the shortcomings of other elements of society than of their own operations. The overarching issue of quality control, Weidenbaum holds, deserves more attention than it has attained in the think tank world. This book presents a careful, balanced account of where think tanks have been and where they are now headed. Given the high levels of professionalism in many think tanks, a fundamental change in the attitude of their management is important. The compelling need is less for the wielder of policy than for the lucid synthesizer of relevant research and analysis. Likewise, society needs sensitivity to the long-term concerns of the citizenry more urgently than rapid response to the opportunities of the moment. Future competition, particularly among the major think tanks, could well be centered, not on achieving greater visibility, but on developing responses to economic, environmental, and national security problems that are likely to be adopted and carried out.

While the number of think tanks active in American politics has more than quadrupled since the 1970s, their influence has not expanded proportionally. Instead, the known ideological proclivities of many, especially newer think tanks with their aggressive efforts to obtain high profiles, have come to undermine the credibility with which experts and expertise are generally viewed by public officials. This book explains this paradox. The analysis is based on 135 in-depth interviews with officials at think tanks and those in the policy making and funding organizations that draw upon and support their work. The book reports on results from a survey of congressional staff and journalists and detailed case studies of the role of experts in health care and telecommunications reform debates in the 1990s and tax reduction in 2001.

Heritage's mission, from the beginning, has been to provide timely, credible information for policymakers (especially members of Congress) and the media about the vital issues facing America. Never content and never satisfied, Heritage has continued to transform the nation's policies. Over the last twenty-five years, the foundation has played a key role in almost every major public policy debate in Washington, including the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), enterprise zones, health care, Social Security, the flat tax, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), welfare reform, telecommunications deregulation, congressional reform, and the culture war. - Foreword.

Congress today is falling short. Fewer bills, worse oversight, and more dysfunction. But why? In a new volume of essays, the contributors investigate an underappreciated reason Congress is struggling: it doesn’t have the internal capacity to do what our constitutional system requires of it. Leading scholars chronicle the institutional decline of Congress and the decades-long neglect of its own internal investments in the knowledge and expertise necessary to perform as a first-rate legislature. Today’s legislators and congressional committees have fewer—and less expert and experienced—staff than the executive branch or K Street. This leaves them at the mercy of lobbyists and the administrative bureaucracy. The essays in Congress Overwhelmed assess Congress’s declining capacity and explore ways to upgrade it. Some provide broad historical scope. Others evaluate the current decay and investigate how Congress manages despite the obstacles. Collectively, they undertake the most comprehensive, sophisticated appraisal of congressional capacity to date, and they offer a new analytical frame for thinking about—and improving—our underperforming first branch of government.