Presidential Advisory Commissions

Report Outline
Proliferation on Panels
Debate About Their Value
The Reagan Commissions
Special Focus

Proliferation on Panels

Kissinger, Hunger: Latest in Long Line

Two advisory commissions make long-awaited reports to President Reagan this month, probably within a few days of each other. First come the Kissinger Commission's findings and recommendations on U.S. relations with Central America, followed by the report of the Task Force on Food Assistance, studying the problem of hunger in America. These commissions are typical of the dozens of “blue-ribbon” panels appointed by presidents over the years to examine contemporary issues. Some historians trace the use of commissions to George Washington's presidency. Theodore Roosevelt was the first president to use them extensively, and their prevalence and importance have grown along with the burgeoning federal government of the 20th century. The names of several commissions are familiar to most Americans; the Warren Commission on the assassination of President Kennedy and the Kerner Commission on urban unrest are examples.

Yet the usefulness of these advisory bodies is a subject of debate. Many political scientists, journalists and other citizens have a negative view of presidential commissions. They see the commission process as a way for presidents to duck or postpone action on hot issues until the public loses interest. They complain that commissions are often “packed” with supporters of the incumbent's policies. And they note that most commissions that reject those positions are either ignored or attacked by the president who appointed them.

Defenders of commissions say they enable presidents to remove issues from the heat of political debate and turn them over for dispassionate analysis by prestigious panels of experts. Commissions, this argument continues, also provide a forum for citizen participation in government and often play an educative role by placing the imprimatur of establishment approval on positions not currently popular. Commissions are credited with providing an image of presidential action and concern in crisis situations, such as during the urban and campus riots of the 1960s when no solutions were readily available. Thomas Wolanin, author of a much-quoted book on presidential advisory commissions, said in a recent interview, “My conclusion … was that these weren't any kind of panacea as government institutions but if done right, they could make a constructive contribution to policy-making and help nudge along some consensus-building…. I don't believe they are a fraud and a sham, just a way to avoid issues.”