Problem Solving and the Demand for Expert Information in Congress

Abstract

This article examines the relationship between demand for expert information from members of the US Congress and increased issue salience in the public. As problems become salient, policymakers should seek out expert information to define problems and identify effective policy solutions to address those problems. Previous work on elite mass public representation and government problem solving has relied on public actions by elected officials to evaluate this relationship. We rely instead on new data on the policy content of privately requested reports from the Congressional Research Service (CRS) from 1997 to 2017. We find strong evidence that members consult experts when issues become salient, even when controlling for legislative agendas.

Analyzing Congressional Research Service Reports on Education: How Is Information Used at Congress’s Think Tank?

“…In particular, while the general information reports aligned with the expectations of the brokering process and the provision of context and meaning to the information provided (Meyer, 2010), similar framing was less common among legislation-focused reports. This difference may be partially attributed to CRS’s responsibility to be responsive in a timely manner to congressional requests in the production of informational reports (Fagan & McGee, 2020; Kosar, 2020; Mazanec, 2019), which are likely even more time sensitive among reports related to legislation. We include Report Type as an additional point of analysis in the remaining findings as a mechanism to further understand this distinction.…”

“…Returning to Meyer (2010), who emphasized research brokers’ roles in transforming knowledge, it is unclear if applying extant knowledge and research primarily through instrumental use can be classified as interpretation or strictly moving knowledge. Nevertheless, given that previous research has highlighted CRS’s influential role in the federal policymaking process (Dreyfus, 1976; Fagan & McGee, 2020; Gude, 1985; Kosar, 2020; Rothstein, 1990; Weiss, 1989; Wolanin, 1976), it is ultimately unclear whether its publicly facing reports offer a complete portrayal of the organization and its research capacity or role as a knowledge broker.…”

“…The current study provides initial empirical insights into CRS and the reports it produces, but there are several limitations to this study. First, because CRS is involved in other areas of information provision to congressional members and staff, such as data analysis and creation of confidential reports (Dreyfus, 1976; Fagan & McGee, 2020; Gude, 1985; Kosar, 2020; Rothstein, 1990; Weiss, 1989; Wolanin, 1976), examining its publicly available reports does not fully encapsulate everything this organization does to support and inform Congress. As such, our study should not be viewed as a complete evaluation of CRS as an organization or information provider nor can its findings be attributed outside of an analysis of its publicly available reports.…”

“…Furthermore, recent work has noted that CRS maintains a precarious relationship with the U.S. Congress due to fear of “political retribution” (Kosar, 2020, p. 139), which has resulted in ongoing internal debate around whether the organization should maintain “objectivity” versus “neutrality” in its reports and materials (Aftergood, 2006; Kosar, 2020). Despite these challenges, CRS has been recognized in research examining U.S. federal policymaking as a key actor supporting members of Congress throughout the stages of the policy process (Dreyfus, 1976; Fagan & McGee, 2020; Gude, 1985; Kosar, 2020; Rothstein, 1990; Weiss, 1989; Wolanin, 1976).…”

Gift Travel in the U.S. House of Representatives

“…When sponsors choose to send members or their staffers on trips to persuade them, they do so with two distinct motivations: (1) education or (2) preference change. Aligning with scholarship of the policy process, which emphasizes the importance of information in defining policy problems and formulating policy proposals (Baumgartner and Jones 2015; Brock 2021; Fagan and McGee 2020), our sponsors attested they sent members or staffers on trips to educate them about problems and policies related to their mission. Trips thus function as a source of high-quality information subsidy for problem or solution definition for interested members.…”