Science, Technology and Natural Resources Policy: Overcoming Congressional Gridlock

Abstract:

The current status of Science, Technology and Natural Resources (STNR) policy in the United States provides an ideal context to examine the influence of committee seniority within the public policy process. Exemplars of the Policy Entrepreneur have been individuals in leadership positions, whether executive or legislative. The role of junior committee members in shaping policy innovation is less well understood, and is frequently masked either in cross-sectional research designs or in case studies. The House Natural Resources committee seniority patterns are compared to the House of Representatives Chamber data from 1975 to 2015. This expanse of congressional time captures both the policy innovation of the Class of 1974 who helped transform the public lands by pursuing a preservation agenda, along with the contemporaneous gridlock caused by disagreements about reducing the size of the federal government, a policy agenda championed and sustained by the Class of 1994.

Several types of political actors have served as policy entrepreneurs, President Kennedy and Secretary of Interior Udall shepherding the Wilderness Act of 1964 from the Executive branch, or in the 111th Congress Committee chairmen Senator Christopher Dodd and Representative Barney Frank, having announced their retirements, spent their final Congress shaping the consensus that produced the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010.

A less studied policy phenomenon relies on “packing the committee” to outvote the leadership. This tactic can be used by the party leadership to overcome recalcitrant senior committee members, as was the case for Democrats in the House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee shift to preservation in the 1970s, or the tactic can be employed from the grassroots, as may be happening in the case of the House Natural Resources Committee in the 114th Congress.

A policy making process analog to rivers is more appropriate than a mechanistic model. As there are multiple causes for rivers reaching flood stage, there are multiple pressure points that can be applied to produce policy innovation. The better understood tactics are the orderly, polite activities of a policy monopoly. The more rough and tumble behaviors associated with gridlock may be just as important to understanding when policy innovation is likely to occur.