After spending a few days inside the Center for Strategic and International Studies, I feel as if I finally have a clear understanding of what a think tank is and what they really do. It is hard to only read about something as complex as a think tank...the experience of listening to speakers, sitting in on an event and doing a simulation we're so much more effective than reading in a book.
One of the things that impressed me most about CSIS was how up to date all of their material is. In the Seven Revolutions presentation, it seemed as if Scott had updated his information the day before he gave the presentation. I saw the same trend throughout the other presentations. I think staying up-to-date is essential for a think tank because of how quickly the facts and information changes. Having the most recent data is likely part of what gives them legitimacy with policymakers.
I really appreciated all of the speakers' willingness to answer the questions we had to the best of their ability. They each arrived very prepared to speak with us and make sure that we got the most out of the short time we had together. I was even a little surprised that some of them (Arnaud, Jim Lewis) were able to spend a full hour with us, when I am sure they had a million other things they could have been doing. And I'm sure they do that kind of thing a lot as it sounded like many student groups come through CSIS.
I also found it interesting that a good handful of the speakers we listened to made sure to explain that CSIS was a nonpartisan or bipartisan (they all said both) company. This blog talks about why our government should look to nonpartisan committees rather than bipartisan ones. I completely agree with what he has to say. I also think that CSIS ought to aim to be nonpartisan rather than bipartisan. America's political parties are so extreme and so limiting, that if policy was created without taking them into consideration, it would likely be better legislation. But then again, the likelihood of it getting passed would probably be less.
One of the things that I least liked about CSIS was what I learned in the student panel: there is essentially no room for advancement. Students come in, do the (pardon my french) bitch work for a few years and then move on to bigger and better opportunities. It is as if CSIS is only a spring board for these young professionals. With that in mind, where is the incentive to teach the younger people or on the other hand for the younger people to try their absolute best. It just seems kind of weird to take a job and spend at least two years of your life just looking for the next opportunity. But I guess that is sort of how Washington is...
I found myself being very glad that I had decided not to major in Political Science, that I had decided not to do to Washington program (in which PSU students spend a semester in DC being taught by PSU professors while completing an internship). The environment and the culture seems to rushed and too intense for me. But then again, I am from California. I was inspired, though, to continue to pursue policy making outside of the capital. In my major, Education and Public Policy, there are opportunities for policy making all over the nation (and truly all over the world).
Overall, I had a great experience at CSIS. I learned a great deal, not only about the topics we discussed but also about the organization and Washington, DC as a whole.
I will have to agree with the pace of the Capitol. While it is not surprising at all, the hours put into an average day I think adds up health-wise over time. I could go at a quick pace, but to do it for so long each day will probably wear down on other areas of life, and my studies have taught me the importance of having a balance.
ReplyDeleteThe material presented I thought was well done, and the interesting part is the time emphasis. I recall our host at CSIS commenting on how the head of CSIS will have meetings that will end the minute it is designated to stop. You could even see this with us. We went over here and there, but the overall time schedule was played to a perfect T compared to academia events which are more lax on time limits to encourage discussion.
Another aspect of the DC life that you pointed out is how everyone is looking for that next opportunity. I think the main reason they are not given much input is the lack of experience. Even on my internships, it seemed that the professionals would give you the small projects since we are still "green behind the ears". I even saw them do this with engineers that have a few years of experience. In Washington where image is everything, I highly doubt a top five think tank would want to attach the names of young twenty somethings on a publication for national policy. Whereas, we saw that lady who did the Euro presentation who was in many different positions before she arrived at her research position at CSIS. Overall, long hours and many career changes is a necessity in Washington unless you stream line to the Presidency like Obama did. He went from a community organizer to a law lecturer to senator spots to President. He is more of the exception rather than the rule though. Bush Senior inhabited spots such as head of the CIA before he was elected.
Dani, I agreed with a lot of your comments regarding the trip to the Center for Strategic and International Studies. I too was amazed at how up to date the Seven Revolutions presentation seemed to be. I’m not sure if you heard Scott mention this, but apparently they have multiple versions of that presentation depending on who is presenting. Being able to keep multiple presentations all up to data is truly amazing. As you said, keeping the presentations up to date with the most recent information legitimizes the issues that they are presenting decision makers on.
ReplyDeleteThe experiences for interns and young professional at CSIS isn’t really that different from many jobs in Washington D.C. Working in Washington D.C. is all about who you know and where they are currently working. As for the lack of room of advancement, I don’t necessarily think that it is a bad thing in the public policy community. Without working outside of CSIS, these young professionals would only be able to look at issues from the CSIS perspective. By spring boarding from CSIS to other opportunities they have the opportunity to learn and grow. I think that the speakers that CSIS brought in best reflected why this is a necessity in the public policy community. If Arnaud de Borchgrave had worked at CSIS his entire career, than he never would have had those experiences working as a journalist.
Like you were, I am definitely interested in potentially working in the field of public policy in the future. However, it is more likely that I would end up in the Washington D.C. area as the fields I’m interested in tend to all be in that area. The Washington D.C. life definitely is not for everybody. Growing up around the military I’ve seen the long hours that come from working in these types of jobs and feel that I would be prepared to handle them.
I like how you pointed out how up to date their information is. It is odd to consider how late we are used to receiving information. Normally when we read textbooks or reports, the information is already a few months or even a few years old, which wouldn’t fly in D.C. I know during our research for Mexican Drug Cartels, we would find information that was only a couple months old and begin working it into our policy recommendations. Then more recent source would pop up and completely change the basis we began our previous work on. I can’t imagine how frustrating it must be to create policy on an ever changing landscape, where one hour’s information might be different than the next.
ReplyDeleteI imagine all of the speakers were busy and I was surprised as well with their willingness to set aside time for such a small group. I don’t know how much money they receive from PSU, but it was nice of them none-the-less. The life of Arnaud de Borchgrave seems like something from the movies. I’ve read a few bios on him in particular and would definitely pick up an auto-biography by the guy. It was an invaluable experience to hear their thoughts on current events. The format of their presentations not only was informative in the general sense, but also demonstrated how they think and formulate their ideas.
As someone who is majoring in Political Science, I cannot say I am looking forward to the first few years of work. I see why so many of us get masters and doctorates afterwards, just to avoid the life for a couple more years, haha. I believe it was one of the “young professionals” who stated that nobody likes the first two years of their job in D.C. It’s almost like a hazing period. Yet, I do like the fast paced life and find the challenge exciting.