According to Third Way, a centrist Democratic think tank, one of their party's significant challenges is less about policy and more about personnel. Politicians like President Joe Biden win elections by appealing to the middle of the electorate but often fill their administrations with left-leaning individuals.
"The center-left tends to win at the ballot box, but we're outgunned the other 364 days of the year," said Communications Director Kate deGruyter. "We need to invest in ensuring that popular ideas resonant with voters are actually implemented."
To address this, Third Way is making a strategic investment this month. Instead of releasing new policy proposals, they are launching a "talent bank" to supply a second Biden administration or any future Democratic government with well-vetted political hires who align with Third Way's moderate ideology.
In a growing trend among Beltway policy organizations, white papers are being overshadowed by a new approach resembling wonk fantasy football. Think tanks are establishing internal government HR departments aimed at preparing a cadre of ideologically aligned political appointees for immediate deployment.
"We're ensuring that center-left Democrats have a voice in decision-making," explained Destine Hicks-Lundy, recently appointed to lead the initiative at Third Way's Moderate Power Project. "We're actively engaging with every moderate Democrat interested in participating."'
DeGruyter added, "They may not come from Ivy League backgrounds, but they understand the importance of addressing middle-ground concerns like border security and avoiding overemphasizing EVs in clean energy pitches. These individuals grasp the necessity for Democrats to appeal broadly and would play crucial roles in advocating for our ideas and messages."
At the heart of the most prominent think tank initiative this election cycle, the Heritage Foundation's "Project 2025," lies a strategy to populate a future GOP administration with a comprehensive roster of ideologically steadfast appointees, pre-trained and prepared for immediate government service on inauguration day. This effort, launched last year and likened to a conservative LinkedIn, soon faced competition from other MAGA-aligned groups like the America First Policy Institute, which announced its own repository of potential hires devoid of RINOs.
Across the political spectrum, various initiatives echo a principle popularized in part by progressive Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren: "Personnel is policy."
Indeed, amid today's contentious political landscape, there's a shared recognition among conservatives, liberals, and centrists alike that the foot soldiers of presidential administrations — even those in minor roles among the 9,000 politically appointed federal positions listed in the 'plum book' — wield significant influence. This marks a notable departure from Washington's historical view of such appointees as mere extensions of the White House occupant.
Critics on the left have lamented that even under a liberal president like Obama, efforts to address post-financial crisis issues were hindered by appointing Wall Street veterans perceived as hindering accountability for financial elites. Conversely, the right often criticizes the Trump administration for appointing traditional GOP figures who tempered his populist instincts or inexperienced newcomers who struggled to navigate bureaucratic complexities.
During the Biden administration, disaffected centrists often lament that despite the president's mainstream instincts, government agencies and the workplaces of Democratic politicians and policy groups are heavily populated with assertive, recent college graduates who are seen as overly zealous.
Given this backdrop, it's logical that think tanks would venture into the talent-bank arena. After all, what good are extensive white papers if appointed officials lack the resolve to translate them into actionable policies?
More skeptically, a think tank's talent bank represents a modern iteration of Washington's enduring practice of networking. Successful figures in government and politics naturally cultivate lists of potential hires—proteges, allies, and trusted associates—ready to recommend to incoming administrations.
"Since its inception, part of CAP's mission has been to nurture and expand a dedicated workforce capable of supporting essential democratic functions within our government," explained Patrick Gaspard, leader of the liberal Center for American Progress.
However, while placing personnel sympathetic to your cause in key roles is one thing, assuming the role of systematic talent recruiter or ideological assessor represents a new trend within think tanks.
When a think tank formalizes political HR practices, the benefits may include broader candidate pools (such as Heritage's Project 2025, which seeks applications from the public to recommend for various government positions) and reduced susceptibility to personal biases (such as scrutinizing applicants' social media for indications of anti-Trump sentiments or disloyalty).
In an era marked by governmental gridlock, where extensive policy crafting often seems futile, being recognized as a hub for skilled personnel offers a chance for relevance, visibility, and fundraising opportunities. For Third Way, which has sometimes been overshadowed as progressives gain sway within the Democratic coalition, this initiative proves a strategic move to elevate their profile.
According to deGruyter of Third Way, the Moderate Power Project aims to raise $10 million, kickstarted by a $1 million donation from the think tank itself. Beyond establishing a talent bank, the project includes a "venture fund" to support politically aligned groups. The first recipients, announced recently, encompass a center-left Substack, a platform catering to moderate swing voters, and a program targeting young voters outside the political extremes.
However, the concept of a talent bank in a donor-funded organization raises ethical questions akin to those surrounding personal recommendations from influential figures to the president. Concerns arise over whether donors might exert influence to place less qualified individuals on lists of pre-approved appointees.
Furthermore, the trend of closer ties between private nonprofits and government, while enhancing a think tank's perceived influence, can unsettle those who consider the broader policy landscape.
Enrique Mendizabal, from On Think Tanks, warns that both left and right talent banks could foster perceptions of state capture, undermining trust in government integrity.
Hicks-Lundy, drawing from her experience in White House personnel roles, acknowledges the nascent nature of the talent bank program and emphasizes the need to navigate potential conflicts while ensuring high-quality appointments.
Navigating these challenges becomes crucial for an organization like Third Way, especially in bridging cultural divides within the Democratic spectrum. For instance, while many on the left support transitioning to electric vehicles, motivations vary widely—from environmental benefits to reducing dependence on foreign oil or cultural preferences.
DeGruyter sees these nuances as areas where Third Way can contribute by highlighting pertinent issues and sensitivities within specific policy domains.
Ultimately, the effectiveness of a think tank's talent bank hinges on whether decision-makers heed their recommendations. Despite high-profile endorsements, such as Biden's recent digital ad criticizing Project 2025, there's no guarantee that outside groups dictate hiring decisions for any candidate.
Post a Comment