The Democrats are ramping up efforts to launch a liberal think tank in September that they say will give their party the unified message it lacked in 2002 and counter the well-funded network of conservative policy shops.

John Podesta, who served as White House chief of staff during the Clinton administration, is spearheading the project and consulting with Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill.

The think tank, known for now as the American Majority Institute, will have an annual operating budget of at least $10 million, a sum that would immediately make it the largest Democratic think tank in town.

By comparison, the Progressive Policy Institute, the think tank affiliated with the centrist Democratic Leadership Council, has an annual operating budget of around $3 million.

Key Democrats attribute Republican control of the White House and both branches of Congress in part to their party’s lack of an effective mechanism for disseminating liberal ideas to the public and the media. They say such wealthy conservative groups as the Heritage Foundation and the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) have helped Republicans gain the upper hand in the battle over ideas.

“Certainly right now the conservative right does a much better job of feeding the media beast facts and arguments that make their case,” said Joe Lockhart, a Democratic consultant who served as White House spokesman in the Clinton administration. “On the progressive side of the aisle, we’ve been asleep at the wheel.”

“This will be part of the push-back effort,” he added, referring to the American Majority Institute.

Indicating the importance of the project, Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) convened a meeting of leading Senate Democrats to review and discuss it shortly before the Memorial Day recess.

“We have to begin building a structure similar to that which the Republicans have funded for many years,” said Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.), chairman of the Democratic Policy Conference. “We’re trying to begin that process, but it’s slow. We don’t have the same easy funding sources that the Republicans have had.”

The American Majority Institute moved into new offices at 15th and H Streets N.W. this week and has already filled some key slots. Podesta will serve as president; Laura Nichols, who worked as communications director for former House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt (D-Mo.), will be senior vice president; Sarah Wartell, who served as chief of staff for the National Economic Council in the Clinton administration, will be the chief operating officer; and Neera Tanden, former policy director and deputy campaign manager for Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.), will oversee domestic policy.
Organizers will spend the summer raising money and hiring more staff before the formal launch in September.

Nichols said the institute will be a think tank “with a muscular communications component to it.”

“There are a number of excellent policy think tanks on the progressive side, but what they’re lacking is a serious marketing and communications component,” she said.

Sen. Jon Corzine (D-N.J.), chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, said many in his party think liberal think tanks devoted to narrow topics need to be better organized.

“It’s not a holistic view,” he said. “There’s a belief that you need something central, you need to be able to partner with other [groups] that might do specific work and pull those things together.”

Some Democratic strategists view the new think tank as a vehicle for crafting a unified message, something the party struggled to find before last year’s election, when it lost control of the Senate and six seats in the House.

“It would serve as a communications hub for a lot of the policy ideas people have,” said a strategist familiar with the American Majority Institute. “It would be a place where people are brought together to hash out policy in a lot of different areas.”

Although some conservatives view the Brookings Institution — one of the largest policy think tanks in Washington, with an annual operating budget of around $36 billion — as left-leaning, many Democrats complain that it is too independent, academic and aloof to give their party much of a boost.

Indeed, Brookings describes itself as a “nonpartisan organization devoted to research, analysis, education and publication focused on public policy issues.”

By contrast, the Heritage Foundation, which has an annual operating budget of around $30 million, states its mission unambiguously: “To formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.”

Republicans can rely on a slew of other well-funded conservative think tanks, such as the AEI (annual expenses: about $16 million), the Hudson Institute (annual budget: about $7 million), and the Cato Institute (annual budget: about $15 million).

Democrats have fewer allies, with less money. The Center on Budget & Policy Priorities has an annual budget of around $8 million; the Economic Policy Institute has a budget close to $5 million.

The idea of creating a new Democratic think tank gained momentum when Steve Kirsch, the billionaire founder of the Internet search engine Infoseek, began pushing it.

“What happened is I started talking to various people in Washington saying, ‘We need a Heritage Foundation for the left.’” said Kirsch.

Soon after, a committee was set up to find someone to put the think tank together.“John Podesta was on virtually everybody’s shortlist,” Kirsch said.

However, Democrats say they realize it will take some time to build a policy network that can match conservative groups.

“The Heritage Foundation, the Cato Institute and other conservative think tanks have been at this for 40 years since [former Senator Barry] Goldwater [R-Ariz.] lost in 1964,” said Steve Grossman, a former chairman of the Democratic National Committee.

Grossman said conservatives have achieved “a gradual dominance of think tanks, magazines, talk radio, and TV.”

“The intellectual capital for that [dominance has been fueled by] … what think tanks have been pouring out in thoughtful pieces that have been gradually accepted by other people,” he said.

“I think this is part of the push-back.”

© 2003 The Hill

###