U.S. universities have professionalized their lobbying in the past two decades and highly developed. This is especially true for the top private universities, for Harvard & Co., which represented their interests very systematic in many policy areas. As this practice looks like and the lobbying is being organized, I'm in a lecture in the conference series "Science-Ethics-Politics" the ZIBI Graduate School (Max-Planck-Gesellschaft/Charité Berlin) is shown. Which complemented the Conference on German and European research policy Enno Aufderheide (Secretary General of the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, Bonn) and Jens-Peter Gaul (KoWi, Brussels).
Until the 1980s, was lobbying for most U.S. universities a sparse problem, the Washington Post called it even a "two-horse operation." The policy environment and financing have been increasingly difficult. Since the 1990s, a growing professionalization observed that in the past decade strongly developed added. Here, the universities rely no longer on their established associations, but investing in their own political resources:
- own policy bars the responsibility of the presidential administration, often divided into "Federal Relations," State Relations "and local" Community Relations " under the general label of "Public Affairs" or "government relations;
- own Relay in the state capitals and in Washington;
- active policy of alliances and participation in strategic alliances (eg Science Coalition ) and thematic ad-hoc coalitions with and parallel to lobbying by the major scientific associations;
- large expenditure contract lobbyists , ie hiring of consulting firms;
- and the extension of political communication through public relations and mobilization ("grass roots advocacy") from alumni, students, staff and as well as patients the university hospitals.
The major private universities are particularly active. This is not surprising, since de facto, the private schools of government and politics as dependent as the public. "Private universities are just public universities in disguise," writes William McMillen, chief lobbyist for the University of Toledo, In his new book, From Campus to Capitol : The Role of Government Relations in Higher Education . Private relations massive subsidies from the state, directly or indirectly (the high tuition fees are often obtained by federal grants and loans payable, and the foundations have major tax benefits) and are highly regulated and draw their legitimacy, their "license to operate", by the performance of a public contract. They also have the best universities now significant commercial interests, particularly in the marketing of patents and technology transfer.
fragmentation of the lobbying landscape
The associations policy still has an important influence - but with increasing turbulence. The elite private universities account for about half of the members of the influential Association AAU , one of the "Big Six" of the high school lobby. The AAU has only about 60 member universities, but this strong research universities produce about half of the doctorates in the United States and receive half of all research funds.
addition to the AAU to the "Big Six" are NAICU (private), and AASCU aplu (State public high schools) AACC (public community colleges) and the umbrella organization American Council on Education (ACE) . ACE also operates the Washington Higher Education Secretariat which coordinates about 50 associations. Total active in the U.S. capital some 200 associations, care about higher education and research policy.
The "Big Six" have dominated the science policy since the 1960s with an almost European-style, Korporate and consensus-oriented associations mechanics. that it was possible to require the facilities of the highly fragmented U.S. system of higher education to a "united front" against the policy is already a small miracle. It was probably above all because in the first decades much Money was available, which needed only to be distributed - and the policy in principle, the higher education system is not questioned.
Since the 1990s, the consensus is to produce more and more difficult the political, ideological and economic conflicts of interest are apparent. In fact more and more universities commit their lobbying association projects flight and seek alternative ways of individual policy strategies. The big private research universities have played a big part: you have the means and ways to enforce without the associations their goals.
The fragmentation increases. The can not surprise:
fragmentation of the lobbying landscape
The associations policy still has an important influence - but with increasing turbulence. The elite private universities account for about half of the members of the influential Association AAU , one of the "Big Six" of the high school lobby. The AAU has only about 60 member universities, but this strong research universities produce about half of the doctorates in the United States and receive half of all research funds.
addition to the AAU to the "Big Six" are NAICU (private), and AASCU aplu (State public high schools) AACC (public community colleges) and the umbrella organization American Council on Education (ACE) . ACE also operates the Washington Higher Education Secretariat which coordinates about 50 associations. Total active in the U.S. capital some 200 associations, care about higher education and research policy.
The "Big Six" have dominated the science policy since the 1960s with an almost European-style, Korporate and consensus-oriented associations mechanics. that it was possible to require the facilities of the highly fragmented U.S. system of higher education to a "united front" against the policy is already a small miracle. It was probably above all because in the first decades much Money was available, which needed only to be distributed - and the policy in principle, the higher education system is not questioned.
Since the 1990s, the consensus is to produce more and more difficult the political, ideological and economic conflicts of interest are apparent. In fact more and more universities commit their lobbying association projects flight and seek alternative ways of individual policy strategies. The big private research universities have played a big part: you have the means and ways to enforce without the associations their goals.
The fragmentation increases. The can not surprise:
is the tertiary education sector in relation to German conditions, unimaginably large. The approximately 4,400 institutions that award academic degrees enrolled, nearly 20 million students and have 3.6 million employees, the annual budgets are over $ 430 million (U.S. Census, 2011 and U.S. Department of Education, NCES, 2009 ). Around 1,600 private non-profit universities and about 1,000 private commercial facilities are somewhat in contrast with more than 1,600 public institutions. The private institutions have about 5 million students, which is significantly less than the public, under which it - like in Germany - many "Mass universities" are.
At the top research are the top private universities significantly more dominant than in teaching. In a study of "Top American Research Universities," examined the Center for Measuring University Performance at ASU which universities are for typical performance indicators pointed to research in the United States. Of the 88 universities that are in the top 25 of the United States for at least one of the indicators, at least 35 private high schools (non-profit) are. Not surprisingly, are high - even before the public universities - familiar names such as Columbia, MIT, Stanford, Harvard, Penn, Duke, Yale (MUP 2009 Annual Report).
- Among the indicators of overall spending on research and development, the share of the highly competitive federal research funding, the number of professors who are members of the national science academies, the number of prestigious research awards, the performance levels of students, the number of for doctoral degrees, the number postdoctoral job, the scope of the university endowment and donations received.
money, money, money
almost always goes to the private university lobby about money, mainly in four areas:
almost always goes to the private university lobby about money, mainly in four areas:
- funding for research, especially the federal government,
- Federal grants and loans for students (student aid),
- health policy (because of the important medical research, because of the revenue for the university hospitals, and because the universities as a great employer health insurance must pay for)
- and tax policy, because the asset management and commercial activities of the private universities are highly tax-relevant.
The private universities saw the financial and economic crisis melt her foundation's assets and break away the income from tuition fees. Obama's support package for the U.S. economy was therefore an important lobbying target for the universities. Approximately 790 billion dollars were from research and development at universities around 21 billion, as the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA, also called" stimulus "is known to stimulate the economy) was adopted in 2009, as seen on the website ScienceWorksforUS can see. The share of investment in education is at the ARRA total of more than 140 billion dollars even much larger, but goes to a great extent in the schools.
The range of policy interests in research and technology is great. Among them are
- economic interests in the intellectual property (patents and licenses, copyrights, etc.), technology transfer initiatives, regional economic development support (cluster à la Silicon Valley, North Carolina Research Triangle, Boston cluster) and Public-Private Partnerships;
- legal restrictions and regulation of science, such as in stem cell research and animal testing, the network neutrality of the Internet, privacy and reporting requirements, issues of IT security and security policy (in this case also reflects the importance of cooperation between universities, military and security agencies;
- and a variety of topics such as the immigration (visas for foreign scientists and students), medical education, anti-discrimination policy including
to lobby, in which policy areas, the private universities , can be thanks to the lobbyists register with databases such as opensecrets.org easily understood, in the detail of bill to bill. For example, the Washington office of Harvard University : education policy was for this in the required reports 2010 not the most frequently mentioned policy area, but priority research and technology, tax policy, immigration, health, arts and culture, and intellectual property; also energy policy and of course the Federal Budget . And that made the Harvard-policy professionals priority in Congress, but also with many ministries, the White House and even the SEC representations.
The budgets for direct lobbying are also largely related. Harvard were about $ 600,000 from 2009 on to his federal lobbying in the first nine months of 2010, the university announced already $ 460,000. Harvard was so far ahead of all universities, such as the Overview shows.
Einzirkelung politics: Unibüros in Washington
Einzirkelung politics: Unibüros in Washington
Harvard has also "only" a 5-person team in Washington. Large public universities - such as the high school associations from California, New York and Texas - have quite a dozen heads in the U.S. capital. Among private universities, but Harvard is at the forefront. Meanwhile, dozens of universities have their own liaison office in Washington . Hundreds leave, are also constantly or project support from political consultants on a fee basis. A glance at the map shows that the federal offices of the private universities in DC are often only a stone's throw away from the decision centers (pictured left, own chart, map base GoogleMap). Some private universities afford whole building, then where However, not only fits the political staff, but also offices for visiting scholars (who like and provides targeted as experts for hearings in Congress and public authorities), conference facilities for seminars and alumni (of which there are in Washington a lot - often in positions of influence) and even dorm rooms will be accommodated.
"Bringing home the bacon"
"Bringing home the bacon"
The private research universities have significant abdominal pain. For this type of research funding are increasingly cut off the regular funding pots of money. While the large federal budget for research funds their money is awarded only in the formal competition in addition to scientific peer review (and get the best universities it very, very much), is the "Earmarks" practically decided only political. The latter, of course, like all (public and private) universities, which in the pecking order of academic excellence are lower and have fewer opportunities in the formal, competitive research contracts. "Earmarks" are smaller and less research-intensive universities, the only way to get from the U.S. government large sums for projects and scientific positions.
resist contrast, the top research universities in years. It is part of official policy, "Earmarks" as non-scientific subsidies legitimized in principle and refuse also try not to such lobbying (see the Statemenst the Duke University and Yale University ). However, it happens that the university administration discovered that, contrary to the official line of individual institutions and professors or university outsourced companies seek just such "Earmarks" - which has shaken the credibility often.
The University of lobbyists on the Web
Almost all private universities publish their own websites on personnel, structure and policy priorities of their political staffs and liaison offices. A selected list:
- Brown University, Office of Government Relations and Community Affairs
- California Institute of Technology (CalTech), Office of Government and Community Relations
- Carnegie Mellon University, Office of Government Relations
- Case Western Reserve University, Office of Government and Community Relations ;
- Columbia University, Division of Government Affairs
- Cornell University, Office of Government and Community Relations und Blog des Washington-Büros "CU in DC"
- Drexel University, Office of Government and Community Relations
- Duke University, Office of Federal Relations (Magazinbericht DukeToday zur Eröffnung des Washingtoner Büros)
- Emory University, Office of Govermental and Community Affairs (Magazinbericht Emory Report , "Queen of the Hill" )
- George Washington University, Government Relations
- Georgetown University, Office of Federal Relations
- Harvard University, Office of Federal Relations
- Johns Hopkins University, Office of Government Affairs
- Massachussetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Government Relations und Washington Office
- New York University, Office of Government and Community Affairs
- Purdue University, Vice President for Governmental Relations
- Rice University, Government Relations
- Stanford University, Office of Government and Community Relations
- Stanford School of Medicine, Office of Government Relations
- Stanford-Kinderklinik mit Office of Government Relations and Advocacy und "Grassroots Advocacy Network"
- Syracuse University, Office of Government and Community Relations
- Tulane University, Office of Government Affairs
- University of Rochester, Office of Government and Community Relations (Unimagazin Currents dazu: The University's "eyes and ears on the ground" )
- University of Southern California (USC), Office of Federal Relations
- Vanderbilt University, Office of Federal Relations
- Yale University, Office of Federal Relations (Magazinbericht Yale News , "Meet Richard Jacob, Yale's Lobbyist" )
- Washington University St. Louis, Magazinbericht "Advocating for the University"
Literatur the background:
Althaus, M. (2007, March). The campus lobbyists - How America's universities professionally represent their interests. Public Affairs Manager 2 (3), 213-229.
Cook, CE (1998). Lobbying for Higher Education. How Colleges and Universities Influence Federal Policy. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press.
McMillen, W. (2010) From Campus to Capitol. The Role of Government Relations in Higher Education. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
0 comments:
Post a Comment