Policy Analysis in the United States brings together contributions from some of the world's leading scholars and practitioners of public policy analysis including Beryl Radin, David Weimer, Rebecca Maynard, Laurence Lynn, and Guy Peters. This volume represents an indispensable companion to other volumes in the International Library of Policy Analysis series, enabling scholars to compare cross-nationally concepts and practices of public policy analysis in the media, sub-national governments, and many more institutional settings. The volume represents an invaluable contribution to public policy analysis and can be used widely in teaching at both graduate and undergraduate levels in schools of public affairs and public policy as well as in comparative politics and policy.

While the number of think tanks active in American politics has more than quadrupled since the 1970s, their influence has not expanded proportionally. In many cases, think tanks have become more marketing than research organizations, with styles of behavior that mimic interest groups more than universities. Rather than organizations committed to objective analysis of policy problems, think tanks have become organizations that turn experts into advocates and policy information into ammunition. The book explains this paradox and elaborates on its significant implications. The analysis is based on 135 in-depth interviews with officials at think tanks and those in the policymaking and funding organizations that draw upon and support their work. The book reports on results from an original survey of congressional staff and journalists and detailed case studies of the role of experts in health care and telecommunications reform debates in the 1990s and tax reform in 2001.

While the number of think tanks active in American politics has more than quadrupled since the 1970s, their influence has not expanded proportionally. Instead, the known ideological proclivities of many, especially newer think tanks with their aggressive efforts to obtain high profiles, have come to undermine the credibility with which experts and expertise are generally viewed by public officials. This book explains this paradox. The analysis is based on 135 in-depth interviews with officials at think tanks and those in the policy making and funding organizations that draw upon and support their work. The book reports on results from a survey of congressional staff and journalists and detailed case studies of the role of experts in health care and telecommunications reform debates in the 1990s and tax reduction in 2001.