Carnegie
Corporation
of New York
Summer 2007
Even policy veterans in Congress say the conferences expose them to new
viewpoints. For Henry Waxman, the Congressional Program changed his thinking
on NATO expansion. After many U.S.-Russia conferences, “it became
clear to me that there is a serious problem in expanding NATO right up
to the edge of Russia.” Russia views that as a hostile act. Yet
the discussion in Congress “didn’t even talk about”
this issue, Waxman says. “I formulated my opinion based on the Aspen
Institute discussion and wish that more of my colleagues were able to
hear those discussions.” Waxman is so struck by the format that
he is considering experimenting with a similar retreat for the congressional
committee he heads. “We could sit around a table as the Congressional
Program does, where we look at and listen to each other,” he says.
Senator Bennett uncovered a potentially disastrous issue through his attendance at a Congressional Program conference: Russia’s dwindling population. This is “an area I paid no attention to whatsoever. I didn’t know how much demographic trouble the Russians are really in, until I went to Aspen Institute and one of the scholars talked about how the population in Russia is going to go down by half” if things don’t change. Such realizations dovetail with a major Carnegie Corporation goal: for congressional participants to build their intellectual capital with the best experts helping to inform their decision-making. The practical implications of this type of transformative discussion are critical in the Corporation’s view.
While informed discussion may be an end in itself, moving the agenda forward is the program’s ultimate objective. One innovation aimed at achieving practical results came at the suggestion of Carnegie Corporation president Vartan Gregorian. He stipulated that the session’s last 45 minutes be limited to members of Congress discussing the policy implications of the issues at hand—which prevents lengthy discussion about a problem or phenomenon that fails to connect with applicable policy.
Aspen Institute Congressional Programs are held annually, but the policy flame they ignite is kept alight throughout the year. The conferences are supplemented by regular congressional breakfasts, which also follow the precise Clark formula of pithy presentations followed by congressional Q and A. According to Clark, the breakfasts serve as a recruiting tool to whet interest in the annual conferences. They help maintain momentum, while wielding their own legislative impact at the same time.
For example, the groundbreaking “Open World”
Russian Leadership Program was launched after a powerful senator acted
on suggestions made by Librarian of Congress James Billington, a leading
American scholar on Russian history and culture, at an Aspen Institute
breakfast presentation, Arsenian recalls. Billington advised “the
best thing the U.S. can do in terms of improving relations with Russia”
would be to bring in a group of Russians “to expose them to the
American way of thinking” she says. Senator Ted Stevens, then chairman
of the Appropriations Committee, was present at the breakfast and was
moved to sponsor legislation that set up a U.S.-Russia exchange. Since
then the United States Congress has authorized the Library of Congress
(which now runs the program in partnership with the National Peace Foundation)
to invite emerging Russian political leaders to be hosted in cities and
communities throughout the United States annually in order to gain significant
firsthand experience on how American democracy works and how American
citizens conduct their daily lives.