What's the difference between the Commonweal Institute and other organizations addressing similar issues?

The Commonweal Institute is multi-issue. Most existing moderate and progressive think tanks address a single issue or a small number of related issues. More fundamentally, the Commonweal Institute is designed to create positive change in public attitudes and the public policy agenda through an aggressive communications program. Existing organizations either do not have the resources or the focus to maximize the force of their ideas in the political and public arenas, and many are trapped in a defensive mode.

As a multi-issue think tank, the Commonweal Institute will cover a wide spectrum of issues that are of public significance, ranging from energy policy to education reform to national defense. Over the long term, a number of important advantages derive from  unifying, rather than splitting, issues ö particularly the ability to communicate the consistent philosophy that underlies progressive positions. There are also interrelationships between issues (for example, education, poverty, racism, and drug use) that can best be conveyed by a multi-issue approach. As a multi-issue communication organization, the Commonweal Institute will foster strategic coordination for the wide variety of progressive or moderate causes and organizations. Additionally, being multi-issue will give the Commonweal Institute greater access to the media and elected officials, who generally prefer getting diverse information from a single source to seeking out multiple sources.

Currently, progressive and moderate think tanks tend to be academic in nature, and emphasize the development rather than the application of research and scholarship. They are not structured or funded to influence public opinion and public policy in a significant way. Some do fairly well in getting quoted in major media. However, most concentrate on communicating their findings to scholars, to government officials (particularly in Washington, D.C.), and to the progressive community through specialty publications that have limited audiences.

In recent years, many nonprofit service and advocacy organizations have been trapped in a defensive position. They spend much of their time trying to defend themselves and their consituencies against unrelenting attacks by right-wing conservatives. They do not have enough resources or energy to make forceful, wide-ranging, strategic counter moves.

By contrast, the Commonweal Institute focuses on creating positive change in public attitudes and the public policy agenda, through its emphasis on effective communication to many audiences. When fully funded, the Commonweal Institute will be able to pursue a multi-pronged approach to influencing public opinion. None of the existing moderate-to-progressive advocacy think tanks or advocacy organizations has the necessary resources or the strategic versatility needed to compete effectively with the large conservative think tanks, which have been remarkably successful in shaping public opinion.

Finally, the Commonweal Institute's commitment to advocacy distinguishes us from the larger think tanks considered to be moderate-to-progressive, such as the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, which avoid taking positions on issues and fighting for particular policies.  Those organizations put their primary effort into scholarly research, with much less emphasis on how the results will be used. This reticence may be due, at least in part, to their heavy dependence on government and corporate funding.

Back       Next