Scholars have found that, even when a crisis creates demand for reform, a focal point is often necessary to overcome obstacles to change. I argue that, with surprising frequency, U.S. blue-ribbon commissions use their bipartisan political credibility to provide this focal point and thereby catalyze postcrisis government reform. Since commission-inspired reform is often designed to integrate or centralize policy making, I further explain that commissions can be useful presidential tools for asserting power over agencies. I test my argument on an original data set that includes new measures of commission influence.
ArnoldPeri E.1998. Making the Managerial Presidency: Comprehensive Reorganization Planning, 1905–1996. 2nd ed.Lawrence: University of Kansas Press.
2.
BerinskyAdam J.2007. “Assuming the Costs of War: Events, Elites, and American Public Support for Military Conflict.” Journal of Politics69 (4): 975–97.
3.
BettsRichard K.1978. “Analysis, War, and Decision: Why Intelligence Failures Are Inevitable.” World Politics31 (1): 61–89.
4.
BinderSarah A.2003. Stalemate: Causes and Consequences of Legislative Gridlock. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
5.
BirklandThomas A.2006. Lessons of Disaster: Policy Change after Catastrophic Events. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
6.
BoinArjenMcConnellAllanHartPaul ’Teds. 2008. Governing after Crisis: The Politics of Investigation, Accountability and Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7.
CampbellColton C.2002. Discharging Congress: Government by Commission. Westport: Praeger.
8.
CheckelJeffrey T.2001. “Why Comply? Social Learning and European Identity Change.” International Organization55 (3): 553–88.
9.
DaleCatherineSerafinoNina M.TowellPat. 2008. Organizing the Government for U.S. National Security: Overview of the Interagency Reform Debates. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.
10.
DestlerI. M.1981. “Reorganization: When and How?” In Federal Reorganization: What Have We Learned? edited by SzantonP., 114–30. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House Publishers.
11.
FarsonStuartPythianMarkeds. 2011. Commissions of Inquiry and National Security: Comparative Approaches. Santa Barbara: Praeger.
12.
FiltnerDavidJr. 1986. The Politics of Presidential Commissions. Dobbs Ferry: Transaction Publishers.
13.
GrahamHugh Davis. 1985. “The Ambiguous Legacy of American Presidential Commissions.” The Public Historian7 (2): 5–25.
14.
HastedtGlenn. 2007. “Foreign Policy by Commission: Reforming the Intelligence Community.” Intelligence and National Security22 (4): 443–72.
15.
HastedtGlenn. 2011. “Investigative Oversight of the American Intelligence Community: Promise and Performance.” In Commissions of Inquiry and National Security: Comparative Approaches, edited by FarsonS.PythianM., 133–57. Santa Barbara: Praeger.
16.
JohnsonLoch K.2011. The Threat on the Horizon: An Inside Account of America’s Search for Security after the Cold War. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
17.
KaplanDavid E.WhitelawKevin2004. “Intelligence Reform—At Last.” U.S. News & World Report, December20, 31–32.
18.
KeelerJohn T. S.1993. “Opening the Window for Reform: Mandates, Crises, and Extraordinary Policy-Making.” Comparative Political Studies25 (4): 433–86.
19.
KingdonJohn W.1995. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. 2nd ed.New York: Longman.
20.
KittsKenneth. 2006. Presidential Commissions and National Security: The Politics of Damage Control. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
21.
KrehbielKeith. 1991. Information and Legislative Organization. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
22.
LewisDavid E.2003. Presidents and the Politics of Agency Design: Political Insulation in the United States Government Bureaucracy, 1946–1997. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
23.
LewisDavid E.2006. “Presidents and the Bureaucracy: Management Imperatives in a Separation of Powers System.” In The Presidency and the Political System, edited by NelsonM., 410–29. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
24.
LightPaul C.1997. The Tides of Reform: Making Government Work, 1945–1995. New Haven: Yale University Press.
25.
LightPaul C.2013. Government by Investigation: Congress, Presidents, and the Search for Answers, 1945-2012. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
26.
MarchJames G.OlsonJohan P.1983. “Organizing Political Life: What Administrative Reorganization Tells Us about Government.” American Political Science Review77 (2): 281–96.
27.
MoeTerry M.1990. “Toward a Theory of Public Bureaucracy.” In Organization Theory: From Chester Barnard to the Present and Beyond, edited by WilliamsonO. E., 116–53. New York: Oxford University Press.
28.
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States. 2004. The 9/11 Commission Report. New York: W.W. Norton.
29.
National Commission on the Public Service. 2003. Urgent Business for America: Revitalizing the Federal Government for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Commission on the Public Service.
30.
O’Keefe, Ed. 2012. “Some Eyeing a Comeback for Bipartisan Framework.” Washington Post, November27, A4.
31.
OlsonMancur. 1965. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
32.
PfiffnerJames P.1999. “Can the President Manage the Government?” In The Managerial Presidency, edited byPfiffnerJ. P., 3–20. College Station: Texas A&M University Press.
33.
PfiffnerJames P.2009. Presidential Commissions: Keys to Success. Washington, DC: Center for the Study of the Presidency.
34.
PfiffnerJames P.2011. “Organizing the Obama White House.” In Obama in Office, edited by ThurberJ. A., 75–85. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers.
35.
President’s Special Review Board. 1987. Report of the President’s Special Review Board. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
36.
RikerWilliam H.1986. The Art of Political Manipulation. New Haven: Yale University Press.
37.
SalamonLester M.1981. “The Question of Goals.” In Federal Reorganization: What Have We Learned? edited by SzantonP., 58–84. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House Publishers.
38.
SawyerKathy. 1988. “Beyond Flight, Horizon Is Cloudy.” Washington Post, September25, A01.
39.
SchellingThomas C.1960. The Strategy of Conflict. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
40.
SeidmanHarold. 1998. Politics, Position, and Power: The Dynamics of Federal Organization. 5th ed.New York: Oxford University Press.
41.
SzantonPeter. 1981. “So You Want to Reorganize the Government?” In Federal Reorganization: What Have We Learned? edited by SzantonP., 1–24. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House Publishers.
42.
TamaJordan. 2011a. Terrorism and National Security Reform: How Commissions Can Drive Change During Crises. New York: Cambridge University Press.
43.
TamaJordan. 2011b. “The Power and Limitations of Commissions: The Iraq Study Group, Bush, Obama, and Congress.” Presidential Studies Quarterly41 (1): 135–55.
44.
TolchinMartin. 1983. “Social Security: Compromise at Long Last.” New York Times, January20, B16.
45.
VerbaSidney. 1961. Small Groups and Political Behavior: A Study of Leadership. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
46.
WarnerMichaelMcDonaldJ. Kenneth. 2005. US Intelligence Community Reform Studies Since 1947. Washington, DC: Center for the Study of Intelligence.
47.
WolaninThomas R.1975. Presidential Advisory Commissions: Truman to Nixon. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
48.
ZallerJohn R.1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
49.
ZegartAmy B.2004. “Blue Ribbons, Black Boxes: Toward a Better Understanding of Presidential Commissions.” Presidential Studies Quarterly34 (2): 366–93.
50.
ZegartAmy B.2007. Spying Blind: The CIA, the FBI, and the Origins of 9/11. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
