FW: UI in UPI think tanks item

From:hms@sandlerfoundation.org To: john.podesta@gmail.com CC: ses@sandlerfoundation.org, james@sandlerfoundation.org, sdaetz@sandlerfoundation.org Date: 2014-01-24 22:00 Subject: FW: UI in UPI think tanks item

Hillary, Soros, Kirsch. Press is right on the nose as always. ----- FYI Hope you are in ME relaxing. RDR > Liberal think tank debuts > By CHRISTIAN BOURGE > UPI Think Tanks Correspondent > Jul 8, 2003 > > Democratic Party insiders are placing their hopes for increasing the > relevance of progressive thought in the Washington policy community on > a new liberal-minded think tank aimed at countering conservative > dominance of the sector. > Many in the political and think tank community are convinced the group > will operate more as a political outfit than an academically inclined > policy group due to the tank's close ties to Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y. > In addition, top staff at the tank is dominated by former political > operatives. > "It is the official Hillary Clinton think tank," a source with > knowledge of the effort told United Press International. > Former Clinton White House Chief of Staff John Podesta is leading the > group, which is scheduled to officially open its doors this fall. It > is currently functioning as the American Majority Institute, but the > name is not yet definite. > Podesta and his team have reportedly raised $10 million for the operation. > It remains unclear whether those funds represent the group's operating > budget for the first year or seed money for the operation. > Podesta and his staff did not respond to requests for interviews, but > those with knowledge of the operation told UPI that they are aiming > for a big impact. > "They have had no problem getting money," according to an official at > a prominent conservative think tank. "That ($10 million) would > immediately put them into the major think tank category." > Democrats have long bemoaned the fact that progressives have been > unable to rival the policy power of conservative, Republican > Party-centered think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation, nor that > of other prominent conservative policy groups such as the Hoover > Institution and Hudson Institute. The American Enterprise Institute, > which is dominated by neoconservatives, is generally considered to be > the tank with the most influence on the current White House, and therefore around Washington. > More academically inclined groups, such as the Urban Institute and > Brookings Institution -- which have many progressive-minded policy > analysts but remain generally non-ideological -- do play pivotal roles > in the nation's policy debates. Nevertheless, conservative think tanks > tend to dominant the think-tank sector and have proven better at > getting their ideas heard, especially by policymakers, than their liberal counterparts. > There are several liberal-minded think tanks around Washington, such > as the Economic Policy Institute, which has ties to U.S. labor unions, > and the respected Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Although > these groups receive their share of attention, they have generally > failed to have a significant impact on the policymaking community, > especially since Bill Clinton left office and the Republicans took > over control of Congress. > It is not necessarily a question of inadequate financing as EPI has an > annual budget of around $5 million. CBPP has an annual budget of > around $9 million, which places it around the same level as a smaller > conservative group like the Hudson Institute and libertarian Cato Institute. > The conservative Heritage Foundation is generally viewed as being the > best among the city's most prominent think tanks for getting its > message out, particularly to Capitol Hill. The New Democrat Institute > is expected to have a strong communications component in an effort to > counter the effective public relations operations of Heritage and > other conservative groups. > This is a tall order given the entrenched nature of these > organizations, and their immense budgets. Heritage has an annual > operating budget of around $26 million, while AEI spends about $16 > million annually to fund its activities. > Another issue for Democrats is that their political operatives do not > generally see liberal-minded think tanks as the go-to places for > Democratic Party policy needs. The agendas of these groups often do > not align well with political reality or they are seen as too > independent to be relied on. > The one progressive think tank that the new group is expected to > impact most directly is the Progressive Policy Institute, which is > affiliated with the liberal-centrist Democratic Leadership Council. > Once considered an influential outfit in Washington and thought of by > many as Bill Clinton's think tank, PPI's influence has faltered in the > period since Clinton left office. > The group has an annual budget of about $3 million and is expected to > face off directly with the new tank, in the words of one Democratic > Party operative, "for the soul of Democratic Party policy." > "This (new tank) will be a big headache for a lot of people and > definitely should be to the left of PPI," said a top official at one > prominent Washington think tank. "It means real competition for PPI." > Beyond Hillary Clinton, the effort reportedly has the support of > several top party leaders, including Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D. > Sources said that part of the reason for Podesta's fundraising success > has been the involvement of Hillary Clinton, who has emerged as a > prominent and influential player in the Democratic Party since taking > office, raising millions of dollars through her political action committee. > Sources indicated that many within Clinton's donor circle have also > given money to the new outfit. > There is also talk that the new group could become a vehicle for > unifying the party's political message, something that has become a > problem in recent years, as evidenced by the lack of coherence in the > party's message during the 2002 election. This effort could be > enhanced by a think tank able to effectively produce and promote progressive policy ideas. > The operation's close ties to Hillary Clinton have fueled speculation > that it is part of an early attempt to for the senator to separate > herself from other potential candidates in the 2008 presidential race > by positioning herself as a candidate of new ideas. A spokesman for > Clinton said that the senator is very supportive of the development of > the new think tank because she believes there is a need for such a group. > International investor and philanthropist George Soros, who is > chairman of the Open Society Institute and known for his financial > support of liberal causes, is reportedly also backing the new tank. > There is also Silicon Valley money behind the venture, with Steve > Kirsch, the founder of the Internet search engine Infoseek and > prominent Democratic Party donor, said to be involved in the start-up effort. > One issue that some think is driving the move is that it could provide > Democratic Party-aligned special interest a way to push ideas into > policy sphere without running afoul of the restrictions on campaign > finance spending that took effect last fall. The new laws, currently > on appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, have forced large party donors to > explore other potential ways in which to influence the political process. > Given the lack of prominent think tanks that would appeal to the > groups that are typical Democratic Party funding sources, such as > labor unions and trial lawyers, the new policy groups could serve as > outlet for their political action needs. > Think tank officials and political insiders alike are waiting to see > how the group will position itself and fit into the policy community. > Those with knowledge of the tank's development said that they expect > it to focus on a wide variety of issues while placing a particular > emphasis on traditional Democratic Party issues like healthcare. > Homeland security is also expected to be a big issue for the tank. > "What everyone seems to agree on in the gossip mill is that they have > the initial capacity to become a smart voice for the left," said an > executive at one prominent think tank. > That potential is already gaining the attention of small > liberal-minded tanks looking to make a greater impact in the policy > process. An official at one respected liberal tank said they are > already looking to work with Podesta's groups by providing > liberal-minded research. They see the effort as a means to get a wider audience for their work. > Democratic Party officials told UPI that they believe the party would > really benefit form the development of a high-profile, > Democrat-centered think tank. The concept is also receiving strong > support in the Democratic community as a whole. > Simon Rosenberg, president and founder of the New Democrat Network, > told UPI that the tank should be a significant part of the broader > effort to define the future of the party. > "I think what John and his team are doing is unbelievably important," > said Rosenberg. "Democrats need modern infrastructure and more tools > in our bag if we are going to build a more modern party than we have." > Nonetheless, Rosenberg stressed that the tank has a struggle ahead of > them in creating an intellectual agenda for the party. Not only will > it be difficult defining where they fall along the ideological > spectrum, but it will be a major challenge getting new ideas heard in > an already crowded marketplace. > Think tank officials also cautioned party insiders from getting too > excited just yet about the new tank. > "The fact is that most think tanks don't last past the first year, > just like restaurants," said a senior executive at one of the newer > Washington think tanks. >