There’s a huge distinction between lobbying for one’s cause and espousing one’s ideals.
At least that’s what the Cato Institute’s president and founder, Edward H. Crane had to say about the importance (and differences) between think tanks and lobbyists in the most recent issue of SPN News.
Crane’s short insight into the changing world of think tanks is right on. According to Crane, think tanks are far more valuable than the lobbying firm (or what’s worse, the lobbying firm posing as a think tank). They are built on core beliefs that outlive the crests and falls of political seasons because they search to influence the mind at a point before a political decision is made. But in being “brainy”, says Crane, sometimes we lose sight of the practical argument for a certain political decision — an oversight that is costly for the think tank and may, overtime, be its downfall.
In taking the more expedient, and more practical, step towards lobbying, a think tank may think it’s having a stronger impact on society and decision making, but this comes at the cost of some future influence they could be winning at the core of society. As a think tank devolves into a lobbying firm, their creditability in the minds of the public devolves into yet another party-line voice.
In the words of Crane,
Far too many think tanks, it seems to me, have drifted from being principled idea factories to become political ‘players,’ anxious to influence the most recent legislative mark-up or ingratiate themselves to this politician or to that. In fact, too many think tanks are taking openly partisan political stances that undermine their credibility and threaten [their] tax-exempt status …
