Brookings Named Think Tank of the Year - Again

The University of Pennsylvania's Think Tanks and Civil Societies Program (TTCSP) has just released its 2012 Global Go To Think Tanks Report ranking the world's 6,603 think tanks.  This is the sixth edition of the annual report.

Here are this year's top 10 think tanks in the world:

1. Brookings Institution (US)
2. Chatham House (UK)
3. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (US)
4. Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (Sweden)
5. Center for Strategic and International Studies (US)
6. Council on Foreign Relations (US)
7. Amnesty International (UK)
8. Bruegel (Belgium)
9. Rand Corporation (US)
10. International Institute for Strategic Studies (UK)

Interestingly, the list now has a section on best for-profit think tanks.  Examples include:

• AT Kearney Business Roundtable
• Deutsche Bank Research
• Economist Intelligence Unit
• Ernst & Young
• Eurasia Group
• Kissinger Associates
• McKinsey Global Institute
• Nomura Research Institute
• Oxford Analytica
• Statfor

Here are the changes that have been made since the previous report: 

This year’s Rankings feature a number of new or modified categories. The 2012 Global Go-To Think Tank Index includes several new categories and several categories that have been altered from the 2011 index. The new categories are: “Top Energy and Resource Policy Think Tanks”, “Top Education Policy Think Tanks”, “Best For-Profit Think Tanks”, “Best Independent Think Tanks (financially, structurally, and legally independent of government and political parties)”, “Best Advocacy Campaign” and “Best Policy Study/Report Produced by a Think Tank 2011-2012.”  “Top Think Tanks in Asia” was split into “Top Think Tanks in China, India, Japan and the Republic of Korea” and “Top Think Tanks in Asia (excluding China, India, Japan, and the Republic of Korea).”  The regional categories for the Americas were rearranged into “Top Think Tanks in South America,” “Top Think Tanks in Central America and the Caribbean” and “Top Think Tanks in Mexico and Canada.” Finally, “Best New Think Tank” is now determined by the past 24, previously 18, months.

The report has has a section on emerging issues and trends facing think tanks.  Following are the 12 trends:

 I. Dramatic Shifts in Funding Patterns: National, regional, and local governments
have cut their funding for public policy research while corporations and private
foundations have limited their grant-making to project-specific support. Foreign donors
from Asia, and the oil-rich countries of the Middle East increasingly help fill the funding
gap while baby boomers make significant resources available to non-profit institutions
through planned giving. This can be a mixed blessing since these donors often have very
specialized interests and want to be involved in the projects they support on an ongoing
basis. In addition, some private foundations and individual donors have been moving
their support away from analysis to activism and from think tanks to advocacy
organizations. The recent economic crisis continues to have a negative impact on think
tanks that are not considered as critical as social welfare programs. Many institutions are
taking a hard look at their programs and a number of think tanks are considering
merging with larger, more established institutions.

II. Increased Specialization: Specialized institutions and programs are attractive to
funders who want to target their dollars at specific problems or issues. This trend toward
increased specialization has had a direct impact on the programs, constituencies and
funding sources of multi-purpose policy organizations, thereby increasing competition
among think tanks simultaneously. It has become increasingly difficult for think tanks to
convince prospective funders that their programs are worthy of support. Moreover,
increased specialization discourages interdisciplinary responses to complex issues and
limits creativity of scholars.

III. Increased Competition: Think tanks have embraced specialization as a means of
distinguishing themselves from the competition. This branding has taken the form of
functional, political and issue specialization that helps market their institution to donors
who are increasingly providing project- specific support, to policymakers, and to the
public who is trying to make sense of the crowded marketplace of ideas and institutions.
The vast majority of the think tanks that have come into existence in the last 30 years
have been focused on a single issue or area of policy research. More recently, think
tanks have faced a new competitive threat from consulting firms, law firms, advocacy
groups and cable news networks that now directly compete with think tanks for gifts,
grants and contracts.

IV. Influence and Independence: As think tanks become more visible and influential,
some organizations appear to be losing their voice and independence along the way.
Managing the tensions associated with relevance, influence and independence is a
delicate balancing act that must be carefully managed if think tanks are to maintain their
credibility with policymakers and the public.

V. Outputs vs. Impact: Historically think tanks have placed a focus on output over
impact. How do think tanks measure their impact? For many institutions, it is limited to
the number of books and policy briefs produced rather than providing the impetus for
new legislation or changes in policy. This issue is further complicated by donors who are
increasingly interested in supporting “high impact organizations” and want think tanks
to demonstrate their impact on public policy.

VI. Phantom NGO Think Tanks: Governments are creating think tanks that are
designed to appear to be non-governmental organizations but are in fact arms of the
government. Likewise, corporations and individuals have established think tanks to
promote their special interests. This trend raises concerns about a lack of transparency
and private interest masquerading as public interest.

VII. Hybrid Organization: As think tanks have faced new challenges in the societies in
which they operate, they have adapted and created hybrid institutions. More and more
think tanks are a blend of organizational types (academic research center, consulting
group, marketing firm, and media outlet) and the roles of key staff have changed as well.
Think tank budgets and staffing patterns now place as much emphasis on policy research
as they do on promoting it and the scholars who conduct it. Today, the staff of think
tank institutions are comprised of multifaceted individuals who are part scholar,
journalist, marketing executive and policy entrepreneur.

VIII. Impact of the Internet, New Media, Social Networking and the Cloud:
Information no longer translates into power unless it is in the right form at the right time, and it is redefining how think tanks operate. Most think tanks now have websites and conduct policy debates via the Internet. The reality that more and more people get their information from the Internet, traditional and new media, and through social networking sites requires that organizations reexamine how they create, disseminate, and discuss public policy issues. This reality also requires that organizations reconsider the methods they use to reach the constituents they represent and/or the clients they serve and to produce academic-quality research that is understandable and accessible to policymakers and to the public. These dramatic changes have transformed how public policies are analyzed, debated and made and think tanks need to keep pace with these changes or be buried by them.

IX. Action vs. Ideas: Non-partisan, multi-purpose organizations are forced to abandon
traditional methods of operation, such as dialogue and debate, and consider new
methods as funders and other stakeholders in the policy process have grown impatient
with conferences, forums and seminars on public policy issues. This trend owes
significantly to the influence of donors who now prefer operational, advocacy-oriented
programs and institutions over conferences, forums, and seminars. New policy-oriented
institutions have out-marketed traditional policy research establishments that fail to
understand and respond to the fundamental changes that have taken place in
Washington and other capitals around the world.

X. Greater Emphasis on External Relations and Marketing Strategies: The rise of
special interests and a need for a quick response to complex policy problems have
created a greater demand for policy research and fostered the growth of specialized
public policy think tanks. This trend has placed greater emphasis on marketing strategies
and external relations that effectively target key constituencies and donors. Think tanks
are forced to redesign their “products” so they can be disseminated to a number of
strategically selected target audiences for the greatest impact. In this new world, pithy,
punchy policy briefs replace books, journals and white papers in order meet the time
constraints of policymakers and the demand for a quick response to policy issues and
problems. Four hundred-page books and reports now are reduced to a few pages or
words if the material is disseminated as a text message or blog. These new realities pose
immense challenges for think tanks that must adapt to these changes while not losing the
quality and integrity of their research.

XI. Going Global: Think tanks are increasingly adopting a global presence, perspective
and audience. The economist Joseph Stiglitz commented that think tanks must “scan
globally and act locally” if they are to be effective in today’s policy environment. This
trend is driven, in part, by transnational issues such as global warming, proliferation of
weapons of mass destruction, pandemics and terrorism. In recent years, a number of
global think tanks (Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and the International
Crisis Group) have emerged. They are designed to address global issues and serve a
global audience of policymakers. Numerous think tanks are trying to cultivate stronger
ties to counterpart organizations within their region and across the world. The
emergence of regional economic alliances due to global interdependence has created a
new network of regionally oriented policy institutions. But these organizations tend to be
the same ones that find it difficult to compete with the highly specialized organizations
that have a clear market niche and constituency.

XII. Leadership & Managing Tensions: An unprecedented number of think tank
executives are retiring or stepping down. Many of these leaders founded and/or led the
think tanks for many years so the impact and transitions are likely to be problematic. Key
institutions like RAND, Peterson Institute for International Economics, Urban Institute,
and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars have all seen leadership
changes in the last 12 months and others like the Heritage Foundation and the
Brookings Institute are planning for a transition to new leadership. The issue is more
severe in Africa and Eastern and Central Europe where the senior staffs are very small.
Transitions there can have a far greater impact on an organization. The successor
generations of leadership – whether of governments or other institutions – is never easy,
but nonetheless essential. One bad hire or a rocky transition can cripple an organization
for years. Even when the search for an executive is successful, the institution will face a
range of challenges that will require careful management by the governing board. New
leaders will face new challenges and will be required to deal with the continuing
challenge of managing the tensions among influence and independence, rigor and
relevance, degree of specialization, breadth and depth in the range of issues they seek to
address, between continuity and change in pursuing those issues, and ultimately, having
an impact on policy and the lives of the people in the countries in which they operate.

You can click here for the full report.  You can click here to see the Power Point presentation given by Dr. McGann during his presentation about the release of the report.

Just before the UPenn report was released, the Center for Global Development (CGD) released its own think tank rankings in which the Cato Institute was ranked #1.

Ernst & Young to Lobby for BPC

Ernst & Young has been hired by the Bipartisan Policy Center's (BPC) lobbying arm, the Bipartisan Policy Center Action Network (BPCAN), to lobby on its behalf.  Here is what Politico says:

Anne Phelps will lobby for the group on issues related to the Bipartisan Policy Center's Health Care Cost Containment Initiative, entitlement reforms in the context of the federal budget negotiations and other miscellaneous health care issues. Capitol Solutions, Dutko Worldwide and Forbes-Tate are among the firms that have previously lobbied on behalf of the group, which spent $1.3 million on lobbying in 2012.

Here is Ernst & Young's lobbying registration form for BPCAN.

Several people affiliated at BPC are connected to Ernst & Young, including Robert Rozen.  He is a Principal of the Washington Council Ernst & Young and a member of BPC's Housing Commission.  Mark Olson is a member of Ernst & Young's Global Advisory Board and is a task force member of BPC's Financial Regulatory Reform Initiative.

BPCAN, registered as a 501(c)(4), is the lobbying arm of the think tank BPC.  There are more than a dozen former Members of Congress where are affiliated with the think tank.

Here is what BPC's 2011 annual report says about BPCAN:

Bipartisan Policy Center Advocacy Network (BPCAN) works directly with Congress and the administration—translating BPC projects into workable proposals and finding common ground between the left and right.

BPCAN pairs the substantive analysis of BPC with strong advocacy efforts and ongoing strategic engagement with the legislative process. The sister organizations work as complementary efforts: BPC impacts the public dialogue and then BPCAN influences the policy outcomes. In 2011, BPCAN fully staffed up, adding legislative expertise from both congressional chambers and both sides of the aisle, creating a seasoned team of strategists with a combined nearly 40 years spent working on Capitol Hill.

The results speak for themselves: In 2011 alone, BPCAN held nearly 300 meetings with members of Congress and their staffs as well as hosting more than two dozen committee briefings, and public events on Capitol Hill. Composed of federal legislative-process experts, BPCAN provides BPC programs with political insight, advice, comprehensive advocacy strategies, and targeted materials for each of BPC’s program areas. BPCAN leaders then forge relationships with members of Congress and their staffs, serve as resources for Capitol Hill, and, of course, advocate for bipartisan solutions.

In related news, BPCAN is currently seeking a manager for energy.

Here is a previous Think Tank Watch post on the lobbying arm of think tanks, sometimes called "sisters" of think tanks.

CAP Holds Swanky Inaugural Brunch

Center for American Progress (CAP), the liberal think tank with deep connections to President Obama, held an inaugural brunch yesterday (January 20) at the National Portrait Gallery with Google and Elle magazine.

Here is what the New York Times was saying about the event:

Google is toning things down from its 2009 inaugural bash, which featured dancing, a game room and big names like Ben Affleck, John Cusack and Craig Newmark (of Craigslist). This time, the search engine (which has a big legislative agenda) is partnering with Elle and the Center for American Progress for a Leading Women in Washington brunch, toasting the record number of new congresswomen, many of whom are expected to attend. No binders full of women here, just the real thing.

Here is a photo album of the event, which was invitation-only.

On January 21, the Third Way, The Huffington Post, and White House Correspondents Insider held an inauguration viewing part at the Old Ebbitt Grill.

Think Tank Quickies #33

• Think tanks cranking out debt ceiling reports.
• CSIS says that President Obama should visit India again.
• Anne-Marie Slaughter reviews three grand strategies put out by different think tanks.
• New CGD Index ranks Cato #1.
• What is the role of intelligence services and think tanks? 
• Brookings video: Big Bets and Black Swans - foreign policy recommendations for Obama's 2nd term. 
• CAP tells Obama to reject Keystone XL pipeline. 
• ISIS says Iran will have material for at least one nuclear bomb by mid-2014. 
• BPC and Third Way are "worthy" moderate think tanks?

Chinese Think Tank Head Removed in Sex Scandal

Here is what the Associated Press is reporting:

A Marxist theoretician has been removed as head of an important, but obscure Communist Party research institute over a sex scandal as China’s new leadership moves to end the latest, embarrassing revelation of high-level sleaze.

The removal of Yi Junqing as director of the Central Compilation and Translation Bureau, which was announced Thursday, has been anticipated for weeks since the appearance online of a salacious account supposedly written by a female post-doctoral fellow at the bureau who was a former lover of Yi.

The 210-page document — which was a brief Internet sensation before it was scrubbed off the web — chronicled the illicit relationship between Yi and Chang Yan, from December 2011 to November 2012.

Chang said she bribed Yi with tens of thousands of yuan in cash and slept with him to get her fellowship turned into a permanent position only to discover he was not going to help and that he had other lovers.

The scandal is reflective of how deeply embedded corruption is in the corridors of power, even in stuffy think-tanks, and of the hypocrisy of professed communists.

Here is another article on the think tank sex scandal.

In other think tank sex news, this UK think tank has just recommended that the government lower the age of consent to 14.

CAP Alum to Become Obama's Chief of Staff

Denis McDonough, Deputy National Security Adviser, reportedly will become President Obama's next Chief of Staff.  McDonough is an alum of the liberal think tank Center for American Progress (CAP).

Here is what Politico says:

McDonough joined Obama’s presidential campaign in 2007 after serving as the chief foreign policy adviser to Sen. Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) in the Senate and during a stint Daschle spent at the Center for American Progress after losing his seat in 2004.

Foreign Policy says McDonough was a Senior Fellow at CAP focusing on foreign policy.  The Washington Post also says that he helped Daschle with research on health care policy.

Following are some examples of what Denis McDonough was involved with while at CAP:

• This January 2008 report, CAP's economic plan for the next administration, lists McDonough as a contributor as says that at the time he was a Senior Fellow focusing on energy.

• Here is a piece on the climate change debate that McDonough wrote while at CAP.

• Here is a piece on Congressional oversight of the US intelligence community that he wrote while at CAP.

• Here is a piece he wrote on promoting US business opportunities in China.

• CAP says that while he was there, McDonough was instrumental in launching Middle East Progress.

• He was a panelists at this CAP event focusing on US foreign policy.  He also participated in this CAP conference call on then President Bush's trip to the G8 Summit in 2007.

• He moderated this 2006 CAP event on Catholic progressives and their role of faith in governance.

• He was a member of a CAP task force on energy security in the 21st century.

McDonough is among dozens  of CAP folks who have gone into the Obama Administration throughout the past four years.

Truman Project & Center for National Policy "Merge"

The Truman National Security Project and the Center for National Policy (CNP) last week announced that they will be "merging."

Following is a fact sheet explaining the partnership:

**********


Why are the Truman Project and the Center for National Policy partnering? We are partnering to create a preeminent national security organization which combines the political power, community building, and leadership development strengths of the Truman Project with the policy heft and heritage of the Center for National Policy. Truman and CNP have been longtime friends and allies. As an example of that relationship, the Truman Project's first office space was actually a sublet from CNP.

Is either organization changing its issue or ideological focus? No. Truman and CNP share a set of values that drive everything we do. We are fundamentally forward-leaning, embracing the challenges of a changing world, and helping define America's role in it. We are driven to improve the national and economic security of the United States through strong alliances, a robust military, international engagement, and support for democracy, human rights, development and trade.

Who leads this new organization? As required by law, the two organizations maintain separate Boards of Directors while sharing staff. Rachel Kleinfeld remains the President of the Truman Project and Scott Bates remains President of the Center for National Policy; both serve as Senior Advisors to the sister organization. Michael Breen is Executive Director of both organizations,Sarah Bruno is COO, Michael Moschella is Chief Organizer, David Solimini is Vice President for Strategic Communications, and Robin McQueen is Vice President of External Relations. Complete staff biographies can be found at http://trumanproject.org/about/people/staff/(Truman) and http://cnponline.org/ht/d/sp/i/199/pid/199(CNP).

Legally, what happened? Is this a merger? The Truman National Security Project and the Center for National Policy are partner organizations with a shared staff, single Executive Director, and separate Presidents and Boards of Directors. Legally, The Truman Project's sister organization, the Truman Institute, merged with the Center for National Policy and adopted the name and its leadership.

Will this partnership result in any staffing consolidation or cuts? No. Because this partnership represents growth for the two organizations, our shared staff will stay on and continue to grow. New employment opportunities are available at http://trumanproject.org/about/join-the-team/employment-opportunities/.

Is Truman or CNP changing their name? No. In a setup typical to c3 and c4 sister organizations, the Truman Project and the Center for National Policy will retain their names.

What does this mean for Truman Project Members? Truman Security Fellows, Political Partners, and Veteran Leadership Academy graduates will remain Members of the Truman Project. Those programs will continue to recruit, train, and position the next generation of national security leaders.

How are Truman and CNP funded? We are funded by a wide range of individual, foundation, and corporate donors. There is no primary funder or “angel” donor for either organization.

Are Truman and CNP moving offices? We are currently exploring joint office space options. For the time being, mail can continue to be directed to Truman at 1050 17th Street NW, Washington DC 20036 and CNP at One Massachusetts Ave NW, Washington DC 20001.

Somalia Launches First Think Tank

On January 15, 2013 Somalia launched its first think tank, the Heritage Institute for Policy Studies (HIPS), which is based in Mogadishu.

HIPS says that it "aims to inform and influence public policy and practice" and will "conduct field based research, informed analysis, and innovative solutions in the form of reports, policy briefs, and public debates."

They already have a Facebook page and a Twitter account, but it looks like its website is not yet live as of writing this post.

According to the latest University of Pennsylvania think tank ratings, Africa has 550 think tanks, or 8.4% of the world's total of 6545.  Within Africa, South Africa has the largest number of think tanks, with 85.  Here is the list of countries in Africa with 10 or more think tanks:

• South Africa: 85
• Kenya: 53
• Nigeria: 46
• Ghana: 36 
• Uganda: 27
• Ethiopia: 25
• Zimbabwe: 24
• Cameroon: 21
• Burkina Faso: 16
• Senegal: 16
• Malawi: 15
• Tanzania: 15
• Benin: 14
• Namibia: 14
• Botswana: 13
• Cote d'Ivoire: 12

In related news, the President of Somalia was a guest speaker this week at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, DC.

Update: Foreign Policy writes about Somalia's "first think tanker."

Top White House Aide Headed to Brookings

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Nancy-Ann DeParle will reportedly be leaving the White House to join the Brookings Institution as a Guest Scholar in Economic Studies.  She is scheduled to join Brookings on January 28, 2013.

Before being named as Deputy Chief of Staff, DeParle served as the Director of the White House Office of Health Reform.

Here is the official Brookings announcement.

The announcement comes just a day after her boss, White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew, was nominated to head the Treasury Department.  Lew served on the Advisory Board of the Brookings Institution Hamilton Project.

Perhaps Lew got DeParle a job at Brookings?

Lew was also on the Board of Directors at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP).  Lew is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

Think Tank Quickies #32

• DC is not just the province of think tanks, tepid salmon, and boxy suits anymore.
• CAP proposes sweeping new restrictions on guns.
• Jim DeMint on how he will use the Heritage Foundation to launch a "conservative revival."
• CIGI highlights its own "growing" influence.
• New think tank launched by China to focus on marine affairs.
• A new worldwide map of climate think tanks. 
• American Action forum says White House issued $236 billion worth of new regulations in 2012. 
• Are think tanks the masters of the universe? 
• Think tanks think their word is gospel? 
• Nike co-founder Phil Knight interviewed by TMZ at Brookings event.

UPenn Annual Think Tank Index to be Released

The University of Pennsylvania is about to release its annual index of the world's top think tanks.  The release will take place January 17, 2013 at the World Bank (morning) and the United Nations University (afternoon).

The report will be released by Dr. James McGann, Assistant Director of the International Relations Program, and Director of the Think Tanks and Civil Societies Program, at the University of Pennsylvania.

Here is a flyer from the World Bank about the event.

The latest report ranks 6,500 think tanks. Here are the 2011 rankings which were released January 2012.

CFR Fellow Bashes CFR Member

The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) distanced itself from statements made by Senior Fellow Elliott Abrams calling Defense Secretary nominee Chuck Hagel an anti-Semite.

Hagel is the Chairman of the think tank Atlantic Council of the United States (ACUS). Hagel is also a member of CFR.

Here is what Laura Rozen writes in Al-Monitor:

Meantime, the Council on Foreign Relations told Al Monitor Tuesday that controversial accusations made by its senior fellow Elliott Abrams in an interview Monday did not represent the views of the institution.

Abrams, the former Bush White House Middle East advisor, called Hagel an anti Semite in an interview with NPR’s All Things Considered. The accusation was widely lambasted on social media sites after the interview aired. Asked by Al-Monitor what evidence he has to support his accusation, Abrams did not respond.

“As you may know, the Council on Foreign Relations takes no institutional position on matters of policy,” CFR’s vice president for global communications and media relations Lisa Shields told Al-Monitor by email Tuesday. “The views expressed by our more than seventy experts, who reflect a broad range of backgrounds and perspectives, are theirs only.”

Here is what the Daily Beast has to say:

Abrams's remarks about Hagel are getting noticed: the Council on Foreign Relations, as establishment as think tanks get, is facing pressure to be answerable for its fellow's baseless accusations. Remarkably, CFR pushed out Henry Siegman after "complaints from Jewish members" about his outspoken criticisms of Israel's right-wing leadership. One wonders if the group faces similar complaints about Abrams's conduct.

Here is what ThinkProgress, the blog connected to pro-Obama think tank Center for American Progress (CAP), has to say.

CFR President Richard Haass went on Meet the Press to further distance himself from Abrams' comments.

NAF Chairman Visits North Korea

Eric Schmidt, Chairman of New America Foundation's (NAF) Board of Directors, and Google, Inc. Executive Chairman, is traveling to North Korea.

He is also traveling with Jared Cohen, a former State Department official who founded Google's think tank, Google Ideas.  Mr. Cohen used to work at the Office of Policy and Planning, the State Department's internal think tank.  Mr. Cohen is also an Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

The Schmidt-Cohen think tank duo have traveled together before and have also co-authored several op-eds, including this and this.

NAF Fellow Emily Parker comments about the North Korea trip in Slate.

Fast Company notes that Schmidt may be visiting North Korea in part due to his role at NAF:

Schmidt also has a reason to visit North Korea that has little to do with Google. Apart from serving as Google's executive chairman, Schmidt chairs the New America Foundation, a prominent thinktank which publishes extensively on technology through their Open Technology Initiative.

Schmidt was appointed as Chairman of NAF's Board of Directors on February 7, 2008.

Here is a recent article that criticizing Shmidt's "role" in a recent NAF report on broadband caps.

CFR Attacked by Chinese Hackers

The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) was attacked by Chinese hackers dubbed the "Elderwood Project."

Here is what the SC Magazine had to say:

The latest zero-day was used as part of a so-called "watering hole" attack against the website for the policy think tank Council on Foreign Relations, the influential membership group that helps shape U.S. foreign policy.

About two weeks ago, the site was hijacked with malicious JavaScript to serve an Adobe Flash exploit, which in turn triggered a heap-spray attack, according to researchers at security firm FireEye. The malware was delivered to users whose operating system language was set to English, Chinese, Japanese, Korean or Russian.

The Elderwood attacks kicked off in 2010, when Google, Adobe and about 30 other high-profile companies said they were hit by sophisticated attacks believed to have been launched by Chinese adversaries looking to steal intellectual property.

Here is more on the attack by Bill Gertz of Free Beacon.

Cyber spies targeting Washington think tanks is nothing new.  Here is a previous Think Tank Watch post on this topic.

Think Tank Quickies #31

• The Century Foundation (TCF) names three new fellows to focus on economic/social inequality.
• Think tankers have more influence than Members of Congress?
• UAE orders Rand Corp. to close its Abu Dhabi office.
• Iran to host gathering of world parliaments' think tanks.
• Sudan closes think tank after protest. 
• CFR sets up Nigeria security tracker. 
• BPC says US may to default on debt between Feb. 15 and March 1. 
• Stephen Hawking joins anti-robot apocalypse think tank. 
• First annual Hero Summit held at USIP. 
• New food think tank launches.  Its site can be found here.

Think Tanker to Replace Think Tanker at NSC?

Steven Simon, formerly at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), and now President Obama's senior director at the National Security Council (NSC) for the Middle East and North Africa, is reportedly returning to IISS to be executive director of the US and Middle East offices.

Possible replacements for Simon include:

• Jon Alterman, Zbigniew Bzezinski Chair in Global Security and Geostrategy and Director, Middle East Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).
• Colin Kahl, a Senior Fellow at the Center for a New American Security (CNAS).

In other think tank personnel news, Kristin Lord, Executive Vice President and Director of Studies at CNAS, is said to be heading to the US Institute of Peace (USIP) to be Executive Vice President, taking the job once held by Tara Sonenshine, now Undersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs.

Here is the press release from USIP on Lord's new position.  She will assume her new duties on January 28, 2013.  Lord previously worked at the Brookings Institution.

Lord will be replaced by Shawn Brimley, who is currently a Senior Fellow at CNAS.  He will become Vice President and Director of Studies at CNAS as of February 1, 2013.

Tax Policy Center Named Think Tank of the Year

The Washington Post's Wonkblog has named the Tax Policy Center (TPC) the think tank of the year.

Here is more from Wonkblog:

The Tax Policy Center is the cool, nonpartisan, analytical yin to [Grover] Norquist’s hot, ideological, activist yang. The center is directed by Donald Marron, a former Bush appointee, and staffed by a who’s who of tax wonks who’ve served in both parties. They produce the best and most respected tax numbers in town, and they’re fearless while doing it. It was their analysis that showed Mitt Romney’s tax plan could not possibly fulfill all its stated objectives at the same time, and it’s been their work that has made clear the size of the tax increases embedded in the fiscal cliff. Their work has truly been essential over the last year.

TPC is a joint venture of the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution.

In Defense of Think Tanks

Dr. Nadia Schadlow, a senior program officer at the Smith Richardson Foundation, penned this piece for Foreign Policy magazine.

Here are some excerpts:

Every major government program, from Obamacare to tax reform to defense budget realignments, has benefitted from the research and analysis of analysts who work at think tanks and in academic centers. If experts on health care or on Pakistan are not reaching out to non-government experts, they are not doing their job. And since these experts need to make a living, they must raise money for the institutions in which they work; They, unlike the government, do not have a tax base upon which to draw.

Think tanks are one of the great strengths of this country. They provide a dynamic environment of intellectual inquiry that helps to refine ideas and translate academic arguments into policy-relevant recommendations. They allow individuals who have been fast-paced operational practitioners some time to sit back and consider the history or politics of a country more deeply, and then go back and work the long hours with greater context. They provide a way for younger individuals to gain knowledge and then "deploy" that knowledge once they enter government.

Unlike the British executive branch, in which senior civil servants serve at the undersecretary level and hold the collective national wisdom in their expertise, the U.S. government populates the executive as far down as the office director level with short term political appointees. In our system, the think tanks and many in the academy constitute the collective national expertise, and every administration rightly calls upon them when weighing policies and making decisions. Many of the more successful high-level government officials today came from this community.

President Obama and other White House officials recognize that think tanks and universities generate debate and that is why they choose to speak at them. That is why White House and other officials cite non-government reports and books, often. That is why even during the last series of presidential debates, both candidates identified outside studies written by individuals who sought to influence debates about tax rates and health care and Iran.

Her piece is in response to a recent Washington Post article about think tankers (namely Kimberly and Frederick Kagan) involved in the war in Afghanistan.

Anthony Cordesman, Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), also came out in defense of think tanks, penning this opinion piece for the Washington Post.

Sen. Lugar to Join GMF

Here is what Politico is reporting:

Longtime Sen. Dick Lugar (R-Ind.) will become a senior transatlantic fellow at the German Marshall Fund of the United States when he leaves office next month, the nonprofit organization said Wednesday.

As a tribute to the former two-time Senate Foreign Relations chairman, the fund will also establish the Richard G. Lugar Institute for Diplomacy, which will be headed by the group’s congressional liaison, Maia Comeau.

Here is the press release for GMF.

Think Tankers Helped Run War in Afghanistan

The Washington Post today details how the husband and wife think tank duo Kimberly and Frederick Kagan put their think tanks jobs on hold for nearly a year to work for Gen. David Petraeus when he was the top US commander in Afghanistan.

On their compensation:

Their compensation from the U.S. government for their efforts, which often involved 18-hour workdays, seven days a week and dangerous battlefield visits?  Zero dollars.  The Kagans said they continued to receive salaries from their think tanks while in Afghanistan. Kim Kagan’s institute is funded in part by large defense contractors. During Petraeus’s tenure in Kabul, she sent out a letter soliciting contributions so the organization could continue its military work, according to two people who saw the letter.

On their influence:

The Kagans used those privileges to advocate substantive changes in the U.S. war plan, including a harder-edged approach than some U.S. officers advocated in combating the Haqqani network, a Taliban faction in eastern Afghanistan.

Fred Kagan on the arrangement:

Fred Kagan, speaking in an interview with his wife, acknowledged the arrangement was “strange and uncomfortable” at times. “We were going around speaking our minds, trying to force people to think about things in different ways and not being accountable to the heads” of various departments in the headquarters, he said.

On their freedom:

As war-zone volunteers, the Kagans were not bound by stringent rules that apply to military personnel and private contractors. They could raise concerns directly with Petraeus, instead of going through subordinate officers, and were free to speak their minds without repercussion.

On the Kagan's involvement with think tanks:

Fred Kagan, who works at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, was one of the intellectual architects of President George W. Bush’s troop surge in Iraq and has sided with the Republican Party on many national security issues. Kim Kagan runs the Institute for the Study of War, which favors an aggressive U.S. foreign policy. The Kagans supported President Obama’s decision to order a surge in Afghanistan, but they later broke with the White House on the subject of troop reductions. Both argue against any significant drawdown in forces there next year.

 On Petraeus and the Institute for the Study of War:

On Aug. 8, 2011, a month after he relinquished command in Afghanistan to take over at the CIA, Petraeus spoke at the institute’s first “President’s Circle” dinner, where he accepted an award from Kim Kagan. To join the President’s Circle, individuals must contribute at least $10,000 a year. The private event, held at the Newseum in Washington, also drew executives from defense contractors who fund the institute.

 On think tankers and Afghanistan war visits:

By the time the Kagans arrived in Kabul in June 2010, it was commonplace for think-tankers and big-name columnists to make seven-to-10-day visits once or twice a year. Two analysts from the Council on Foreign Relations, Max Boot and Stephen Biddle, were in Afghanistan at the same time at the invitation of Petraeus.  Petraeus asked the four to remain for a month to six weeks. Boot and Biddle couldn’t stay that long, but the Kagans were game, even though they had packed for only a short trip.

 On their security clearances:

They were given desks in the office of the Strategic Initiatives Group, the commander’s in-house think tank, which typically is staffed with military officers and civilian government employees. The general’s staff helped upgrade their security clearances from “Secret” to “Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information,” the highest-level of U.S. government classification.  The new clearances allowed the Kagans to visit “the pit,” the high-security lower level of the Combined Joint Intelligence Operations Center on the headquarters. There, they could read transcripts of Taliban phone and radio conversations monitored by the National Security Agency.

 On Kim Kagan's hiatus and the Institute for the Study of War:

For Kim Kagan, spending so many months away from research and advocacy work in Washington could have annoyed many donors to the Institute for the Study of War. But her major backers appear to have been pleased that she cultivated such close ties with Petraeus, who went from Kabul to head the CIA before resigning this fall over his affair with Broadwell.  At the August 2011 dinner honoring Petraeus, Kagan thanked executives from two defense contractors who sit on her institute’s corporate council, DynCorp International and CACI International. The event was sponsored by General Dynamics.

 Here is a Washington Post piece which outlines what Robert Gates thinks about the Kagans' influence.

Think Tank Quickies #30

• Arab think tank conference organized by ACRPS.
• Rise and fall of Russia's economic think tanks.
• Former Bain Capital partner Edward Conrad joins AEI.
• CSIS launches "Geopolitics of the Arctic" iTunes course. 
• The Center for Strategic Studies (CSS) to organize forum on BSEC think tanks.

ACUS Chairman Hagel Likely to Become SecDef

Former Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE), Chairman of the Atlantic Council of the United States (ACUS), is likely to become the next Secretary of Defense.

Here is how Foreign Policy describes his current stint at ACUS:

Hagel became chairman of the Atlantic Council, where his duties have kept him front and center with the likes of Bono and Bill Clinton and other global dignitaries and military leaders. The group’s annual awards dinner is a who’s who of military and international affairs glitterati.

Here is a previous Think Tank Watch post on the "rise" of the Atlantic Council.

Based on the latest publicly available information, ACUS had total revenue of $7,955,033, and total assets of $6,643,988.  Hagel had no reportable compensation from ACUS.

Democrats Using Think Tanks to Groom National Security Specialists

Here is what Yochi Dreazen, contributing editor at the Atlantic and a writer in residence at the Center for a New American Security (CNAS), wrote in the Washington Post's Outlook section this weekend:

Democratic leaders, meanwhile, are hoping to use think tanks to groom a new generation of left-leaning national security specialists, but the process will take time.

The Truman National Security Project is one of the few institutions with an avowed goal of getting more young Democrats into key Pentagon and State Department positions, but it’s a small organization, and it’s unclear how many of its alumni will get plum jobs in the second Obama term. The nonpartisan Center for a New American Security — where I’m a writer in residence — has had more success sprinkling its staffers into the administration, but most are relatively junior officials who aren’t likely to be viable candidates for top positions until the next Democratic presidency.

Democrats could speed that process by steering mid-level national security hands into the two organizations so they could gain the experience and outside connections that may help them land higher-profile administration jobs in coming years.

Larry Summers to Join CAP

Larry Summers, former Treasury Secretary under the Clinton Administration and White House economic advisor under President Obama, will co-chair a new think tank project housed at the Center for American Progress (CAP) aimed at supporting President Obama's second-term goal of reviving the economy by rebuilding the middle class, reports the Washington Post.  Here is more:

The Growth and Competitiveness project will be housed at the progressive Center for American Progress, where Summers will also serve as a “distinguished senior fellow,” the center plans to announce Monday.

Summers’s co-chair will be David Miliband, a British Labor Party politician and member of Parliament and former British foreign secretary.

Summers’s appointment adds intellectual heft to the center’s ongoing efforts to provide a counterweight to Republican supply-side economic theory, which has animated the GOP for nearly four decades.

Here is the official announcement from CAP.

Limits to Tax Deductions to Impact Think Tanks

Here is what USA Today writes:

Think tanks and public policy non-profits – researchers of policy papers, creators of panels and advocates for causes ranging from a balanced budget, to lower taxes to a stronger military – share the same 501c3 charitable designation in the tax code as charities that provide social services.

Gifts to foundations could be the first casualties if the charitable deduction is lowered to 28% from 35% for individuals making more than $200,000 or couples making more than $250,000, as suggested by the White House. Other plans, including those from former Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, would cap overall deductions for top earners from $17,000 to $50,000.

Because think tanks and public policy groups rely so heavily on donor contributions instead of government grants, they would be affected "disproportionately" by any change in deductions, said Diana Aviv, president and CEO of Independent Sector, a leadership network for America's non-profits.

It's unlikely donations would stop, but they would probably be reduced as wealthy donors look for the best way to give, said Melissa Berman, president and CEO of Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors.

Think Tank Quickies #29

• New Turkey project at Brookings funded by the Turkish Industry and Business Association (TÜSİAD).
• Rep. Don Manzullo (R-IL) to become President and CEO of the Korea Economic Institute (KEI).  Don Manzullo, Gangnam-style.
• AEI releases post-ObamaCare health plan.
• CBPP: Debt ceiling is the biggest threat.
• How reliable are think tanks? 
• The end of the think tank as we know it? 
• The Hara Design Institute, a design think tank run by Kenya Hara of Muji. 
• US generals, especially those at war, creating their own "mini-think tanks" designed to make the boss shine.

Graph: Top-Paid Think Tank Executives

This is from Washington Post's Sarah Kliff.  Here is a previous Think Tank Watch post of think tank CEO/President salaries.

On Washington's Evolving Think Tank Scene

Here are some excerpts from an article that J.H. Snider, President of iSolon.org and a fellow at the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard University, wrote for Politico:

Last week’s appointment of Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) to head the Heritage Foundation illustrates an important evolutionary change, going on for more than forty years, in Washington’s think tank community. Although there are many exceptions among Washington’s hundreds of think tanks, think tanks as a rule have been evolving from a type of organization that pursues disinterested public policy research, “a university without teaching,” to one that pursues research-based advocacy, “a lobbying shop with research staff.” Launched in 1973, Heritage has been a leader in this evolution.

The change in think tank leadership reflects a larger change in think tank personnel. The proportion of full-time think tank staff with Ph.D.’s, let alone former tenure track academics, has long been in decline.

DeMint’s move to Heritage also illustrates several other important think tank developments. That one of America’s most powerful politicians is willing, for the first time in U.S. history, to give up a seat in the Senate to lead a think tank as a full-time job, is testimony to the growing influence and wealth of modern think tanks.

The degree of taxpayer support for think tank compensation is also striking. Since think tanks are funded via tax deductible charitable donations, DeMint’s compensation will continue to be largely paid for, albeit indirectly, by taxpayers. Given the large step up from his former $174,000 salary as a member of the Senate, he may now cost U.S. taxpayers more as a think tank president than a U.S. Senator.

Map: Heritage Foundation Funders

Above is a Muckety map of Heritage Foundation funders.  Laurie Bennett of Muckety says this:

America’s top think tanks have grown into multi-million-dollar operations with expensive real estate in Washington and other cities. (Heritage, headquartered on Capitol Hill, values its properties at more than $50 million.) Some organizations, including Heritage, offer seven-figure salaries to their top execs.

As our Muckety map above shows, Heritage funders include some of the most conservative wealthy families in the country.

Many of these families, such as the Kochs, the Scaifes, the Popes and the DeVoses, are also big political donors. It’s hardly coincidence that as benefactors have become more overtly political, so have the think tanks receiving their money.
DeMint will likely attract the same donors who have backed the Tea Party, a group that includes the Kochs.

The importance of money-raising in his new job is evident in the multiple roles played by Edwin Feulner, the outgoing president of Heritage. Feulner sits on the boards of two funders of Heritage - the Roe Foundation and the Sarah Scaife Foundation.

Here is a previous Think Tanks Watch post on billionaires who donate to think tanks.

Map: Congress & Think Tanks

Above is a Muckety map on Congress and its connection to think tanks.

Here is a previous Think Tank Watch post on the connections that Congress has with think tanks.

Think Tanks Compete With Super PACs for Donations

Here is what Roll Call is reporting:

The think tanks are competing for donations with a new set of players such as Priorities USA Action, a Democratic super PAC, and the conservative grass-roots Americans for Prosperity, which says it raised more than $110 million this year.

“Now [think tanks] have to promote their ideas and explicitly tell the members ‘if you don’t pay attention to those ideas were not going to rate you very favorably,’” said former Republican Rep. David M. McIntosh of Indiana. “[DeMint] will have a great understanding of the potential that Heritage has to really make a difference with the changes in the law.”

While Heritage and CAP are the only think tanks that now field registered lobbyists and have advocacy arms, nearly all of the major research institutes in Washington have a team advocating their policies on Capitol Hill. As of September, CAP Action Fund spent nearly $200,000 on lobbying Congress and Heritage Action spent $120,000, Senate reports show.

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) Resigns to Run Heritage Foundation

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) is going to resign from the Senate in order to replace Edwin Feulner as President of the Heritage Foundation, the conservative think tank he led for 36 years.

Here is a blog post from Heritage about the announcement.  Following is an excerpt:

Heritage’s Board of Trustees unanimously chose DeMint as the organization’s next leader, starting April 3. DeMint will resign from the Senate and start as president-elect in early January, so he and Feulner can ensure a smooth transition. After April, Feulner will continue serving as Chancellor of the Foundation and Chairman of our Asian Studies Center.

Here is a video from an October 2012 event in which Sen. DeMint talks about the importance of the Heritage Foundation.

Here is Ed Feulner's E-mail to members and supporters about DeMint.

Here is what the Huffington Post has to say about DeMint's move to Heritage.

Here is what Politico has to say:

Top positions at influential nonprofits such as the Heritage Foundation can come with at least six-figure salaries, and in Heritage’s case, seven-figures. Based on most recent reports filed with the Internal Revenue Service, leaders of seven conservative groups drew in average annual salaries of about $520,000 in 2010

Heritage’s outgoing president, Edwin Feulner, made $1,025,922 in 2010 and $989,634 in 2009, according to the foundation’s IRS reports.

As nonprofits and think tanks get more involved in lobbying and elections, and the gridlock on Capitol Hill continues, offers for plush jobs for members of Congress and staffers will only increase, said Peter Metzger, vice chairman of CT Partners, a lobbyist and executive headhunter outfit.

“It’s going to be a trend if not an avalanche,” Metzger said.

Craig Holman, a government affairs lobbyist for Public Citizen, a group that pushes for government transparency, also expects DeMint’s move to a think tank to become common practice for members of Congress.

“DeMint has a Rolodex that he is basically selling to Heritage,” Holman said. “I haven’t seen the revolving door abuse happen with nonprofit groups, but I do expect this to become more common as these front groups from the election like Crossroads GPS get more into lobbying activity.”

Based on Feulner’s salary and DeMint’s influence, Holman predicts he could be getting an annual salary close to $3 million from Heritage.

Here is another Politico piece on the Heritage Foundation:

Jim DeMint's surprise departure from the Senate reinvigorates the 39-year-old Heritage Foundation at a time when much of the ideas and policy output flowing from conservative think tanks has become predictable, uninspiring and often lacking in influence.

DeMint’s appointment is raising concerns among conservatives that, given his past experience on the political battlefield, the former senator will be tempted to turn Heritage into a weapon against Democrats, rather than as a fount of bold new ideas to inspire the right.

Roll Call says that Heritage's star will rise with DeMint.

WPost's Jennifer Rubin on why DeMint heading the Heritage Foundation is a "bad" move.

Another WPost article says that DeMint marks a new, sharper edge for the Heritage Foundation.

Here is some commentary by the WPost's Dana Milbank:

At first blush, there is something delightfully dada about Jim DeMint being named president of the Heritage Foundation.

The senator, a tea party hero from South Carolina, is a smart guy and a good politician. But running a think tank? It is the scholarly equivalent of appointing Michael Moore to head the Brookings Institution, or Ted Nugent to the Cato Institute, or Roseanne Barr to the Council on Foreign Relations, or perhaps Donald Trump to the American Enterprise Institute.

But think about it some more and the choice of DeMint begins to look brilliant. He is, arguably, the perfect candidate to run a post-thought think tank.

There is less thinking going on in much of the Washington think-tank world these days: Following the trend in politics generally, these idea factories have turned away from idea production in favor of promoting well-worn policy prescriptions. The task is less to come up with new solutions than to win the argument with epithets, labels and caricatures.

The trend goes beyond Heritage. The Family Research Council has joined the shift from wonks to gladiators. The liberal Center for American Progress was created as a conscious imitation of Heritage — more political and aggressive, less bookish. Indeed, researchers there have done extensive opposition research into . . . Jim DeMint.

Now Heritage appears ready to shed that veneer and dedicate itself to ideological and partisan warfare. And there’s no better warrior than Jim DeMint.

Here is the WPost's Ezra Klein on DeMint and the "death of think tanks."

People for the American Way (PFAW) blasted the Heritage Foundation for picking DeMint.

The American Conservative Union (ACU) said it looks forward to continuing to work with DeMint at Heritage.

This week, Heritage also had a shake-up in its foreign policy team.

Cool Think Tank Event of the Week: Beer

The New America Foundation (NAF) will be hosting an event on December 12 titled "Big Beer Blitzes America: Is Anheuser-Busch Too Powerful?"

Following are more details:

Two companies – Anheuser-Busch Inbev and MillerCoors – together control 90 percent of the U.S. beer market. And they still seek more — Anheuser-Busch now wants to buy out all of Mexico’s Grupo Modelo, the maker of Corona.

The effects of this consolidated power are clear. Anheuser-Busch and MillerCoors are using their control to squeeze independent beer distributors and marginalize craft beer makers, hurting both America’s drinkers and brewers. Worse, the assault on distributors threatens to break down America’s system of local alcohol control, established at the end of Prohibition to safeguard social order and promote the health of consumers.

Join the New America Foundation for a conversation on how citizens should structure a modern market for beer, wine and alcohol that balances the interests of society, responsible drinkers, brewers and distillers. The discussion will draw on a new report by the New America Foundation’s Markets, Enterprise, and Resiliency Initiative that looks at the history of the U.S. beer market, a new report by the American Antitrust Institute on Anheuser-Busch’s proposed takeover of Grupo Modelo, and a new article in the Washington Monthly on the growing alcoholism in Britain.

Agenda
Panel 1: The Market and Choice - Is Consolidation A Threat to the Consumer?
Panelists

Sam Calagione
Founder and President, Dogfish Head Brewery

Steve Higginbotham
Director, Wholesale Beer Distributors of Arkansas

Sandeep Vaheesan
Special Counsel, American Antitrust Institute

Panel 2: The Market and the Community - Is Consolidation A Threat to Social Welfare?

Panelists
Tim Heffernan
Author, “Last Call: Industry Giants Threaten to Remake America in
the Image of Booze-Soaked Britain” (November/December Issue of Washington Monthly)

Jerry Oliver
Former Chief of Police, Detroit
Former Director of the Department of Liquor License and Control, Arizona

Rev. Cynthia Abrams
United Methodist General Board of Church and Society

Moderators
Paul Glastris
Editor-in-Chief, Washington Monthly

Barry C. Lynn
Director, Markets, Enterprise, and Resiliency Initiative, New America Foundation

Think Tank Quickies #28

• CNAS responds to the Kagans' Afghan troop recommendations.
• CSIS establishes new Schlesinger Chair for Energy and Geopolitics, to be chaired by Frank Verrastro.
• Muckety: Think tanks we'd like to see in 2013. 
• BPC's guide to the debt limit. 
• Denise Grant of Russell Reynolds Associates recruited Rep. Jane Harman to head Wilson Center. 
• Murray Weidenbaum radio interview: Do think tanks really think?

CAP Releases Deficit Reduction Plan

  The liberal-leaning Center for American Progress (CAP), which has close ties to the Obama Administration, released a deficit-reduction proposal yesterday.

The 28-page report can be found here.  The introduction and summary can be found here.

Here is how the Wall Street Journal describes the plan:

The liberal-leaning Center for American Progress on Tuesday proposed a deficit-reduction package that calls for raising tax rates on higher earners, suggesting that the Obama administration in some cases should try to tax the wealthy even more.

The plan, by a group that includes former Clinton administration and Obama officials, called for returning the top individual rate to 39.6%–the same top rate being pushed by the White House. The think tank also proposed taxing dividends as ordinary income, matching a White House proposal for ending the current 15% preferential rate. On Capitol Hill, many Democrats are uncomfortable with that approach, which would result in a near-tripling of dividend tax rates for the highest earners.

In two key areas the group went beyond the Obama administration, calling for higher capital gains and estate taxes than what the White House has proposed. On capital gains, the Center for American Progress proposed a 28% rate, the amount that some liberals believe is the amount that would generate the most revenue for the U.S. Treasury.

Slate has a good summary of the report.  Here is what The Hill says.

Authors of the proposal include:

• Roger Altman
• William Daley
• John Podesta
• Robert Rubin
• Leslie Samuels
• Lawrence Summers
• Neera Tanden
• Antonia Weiss

Here is Reuters analysis of the proposal:

It is unclear what sort of impact the proposal will have on the tense negotiations. It is certain to fall flat with Republicans, who have called Obama's first offer an insult.