Episode 19 – Policymaking in theory and practice

[0:00:00 Speaker 0] Hello, everyone. This is Angela Evans, dean of the LBJ School, and this is another session in our policy on purpose. And I’m very pleased today to have one of our illustrious and renowned alum with us, Ah, Austin Smyth, and I have to tell you a little bit about Austin. He recently served as Speaker Paul Ryan’s policy director, and he did that for four years. And, you know, that’s a hot seat position in terms of the House of Representatives and all that was going on between 2015 and 2019. Hey, joined Ryan staff in 2007. So obviously Mr Ryan saw the talent and and brought him up as a policy director. He has served in various roles, including policy director for the House Ways and Means Committee, another very powerful committee in the House of Representatives. And he has the staff director of the House Budget Committee. So you’re seeing a pattern here in terms of looking at the budget. It’s construction, its execution and the role it plays in our in the policy deliberations of the United States Congress. He’s been described as a quote budget guru. I don’t know if he likes the title or not on Capitol Hill and is widely liked and respected. I don’t know. We’ve talked a lot of people. And when you talk about Austin and I know if you know the sauce and people just really respect you Ah, and respect your demeanor, your objectivity, your substance. So we’re so proud to have you here today. Both ISS a leader in an accomplished public servant, but also is one of our lump, so welcome.

[0:01:30 Speaker 1] Thank you. It’s great to be here.

[0:01:31 Speaker 0] Good. So let’s get started. We’re gonna be here. You’re gonna be here doing a very important trying for the LBJ school work welcoming admitted students. So these air students were admitted. Some have said they’re coming. Some have not yet made their decision. So they’re going to have an opportunity to meet one of our alum. So when you think about it, what do you think stands out to you about your time at the LBJ School that you can think about? Oh, you can go back to that time How meaningful that was to you. Your career

[0:02:00 Speaker 1] over my career, I think the most important things for the skills I’ve relied on that I think we’re really solidified when I was at the LBJ School was the ability to distill information that the Congress has to deal with very complicated topics. The budget is very complicated. Topic things were frequently done late in the process, and what staff have to do on the Hill is be able to distill that information and present it in a way that’s that’s understandable. That gives clear options and, in times a recommendation to policy makers. Um, I think also the school helped me the with my writing skills in terms of writing. It also helped me with ah with exposing me to quantitative methods in numbers. And the budget is numbers in the end, Ah, and I didn’t do a lot of sophisticated modeling over my career, but I’ve spent a lot of time being the consumer of that information that’s been terribly valuable in the last was working in teams. I think that a lot of work on the hill either involves working with with your colleagues on a staff or when you have to sit down a work, hash something out, be able to get along with people, figure out to get their assistance or to find out how to work out solutions with them. So it’s kind of a whole package of things that really helped me along the way.

[0:03:23 Speaker 0] Well, that’s you know, it’s it’s soothing, actually in some way to hear that, because some of the basic skills that you were talking about our skills that we’re still trying to instill in our students, and obviously they’re going into a, ah little different political and social environment than you did. But the idea that you’re thinking about computational skills and the big thing which you sell, but I’m very happy. You said this is the writing skills because many students really have to work very hard on honing skills so that they’re saying things very clearly and concisely because people who are consuming that if the highest levels don’t have time really to go through a lot of material, that’s not relevant. And I think students find that difficult, so I think that’s a really important thing. The other thing is, knowing data doesn’t mean you have to be able to manipulate it, but knowing where you have a good date and when you don’t have good data, it’s also very important, especially for people are making decisions that affect, you know, millions of people either here in the United States or abroad. So it’s soothing here that these air, the same skill sets that you see is really important. That what we’re still trying to do with the school. Very good. Very good. So I have to ask you this question. So you’re you’re working on Capitol Hill? Are you working in one of the most influential offices? I mean, the speaker of the house, Um, and you’re working at a time when there is a lot of discussion. There’s a lot of disagreement in terms of approaches to policy. You know, there’s a lot of data and information floating around some very good, some not so good. How did you balance in your own head? What did what were some of the tools you used Knowing that you’re gonna have to go into something and compromise, you’re gonna have to you know what your members and the leadership want to do. And you know what? The others are trying to get out. So how did you think about how did first. Well, how did you think about the concept of compromise. And then how did you try to practice it?

[0:05:15 Speaker 1] Um, I think the one thing was just talking to people talking to my counterparts. I was fortunate that I had the chance to Wouldn’t have to rush into something. We start our discussions a long time, and that’s really important in terms of developing, getting understanding where they’re coming from. But the critical thing is to develop trust if you can talk to somebody, because in developing a compromise, you need to explore various options in terms of what works for both. Both parties, like those replied, the two most valuable things was kind of, um, learning, ah, where they’re coming from learning what kind of makes them tick. And then that trusting relationship where you could have a frank discussion, explore things that would not have it leaked to the press or or used against you

[0:06:02 Speaker 0] night representing because I think that’s really an important point, and also, but they’re takes time and also the setting like you said it before. At the beginning, you have to start establishing this before you actually have a session where you have to go toe to toe. So this this is building at before you almost really need it in a setting. And so that’s one of I think that’s an important point. We shouldn’t We shouldn’t go over that point.

[0:06:24 Speaker 1] The other thing is is that, uh, the leader staff know that they understand how to get this done. They’ve been in this situation before. Frequently, you deal with somebody who’s a hard charger where they’re coming from the Republican side of the Democratic side, you could have you could have a more difficult time because they just never gone through it, you know? And they feel I came here to solve this problem this way. Eso

[0:06:48 Speaker 0] in date.

[0:06:49 Speaker 1] I was fortunate in that we had the feel sit across the table from me, had done this before and understood that when it came time to actually resolve something that everyone would have to bend a little bit to find, find something that would everyone could agree to.

[0:07:05 Speaker 0] Well, that was lucky Me at the on stage. I guess when you get to the leadership stage, you’ve got people who obviously have been professional. Been through this before. But I can see sometimes when you had to work with new stay off for new members. Like you said, hard charging, had a mandate come in and sometimes aren’t really very well versed in the governance off the House or the Senate, for that matter. You know they understand Congress from an outside perspective rather than an institutional perspective, so giving those relationships like in anything else, is obviously very important. But how did you reach across the aisle yourself in what if some of the things you did to have a presence among in this case we’re talking about the Democrats? So how did you, or even some people in the Republican Party who just didn’t see eye with what you were working on

[0:07:52 Speaker 1] the It was more so from out of necessity than, um, But I uh, it’s a two way street. My, my counterpart in Speaker Pelosi, staff policy director for Speaker Pelosi. I think you know, I come and I had one day. I’m the policy director of the Ways and Means Committee, and the next day I am the policy director for the speaker, and we’re in the middle of we have to complete the appropriations bill. We have a highway bill. We haven’t done. We’re in the middle of a mess that we have toe, and we just come in and I shouldn’t say this. We just make up, you know,

[0:08:24 Speaker 0] you have to do you have to do something, You can’t be paralyzed.

[0:08:27 Speaker 1] So, uh, and I think he reached out to me and we had a cup of coffee. So it’s a two way street, and, um, it was glad because, uh, it was a connection. I could sit down with them. We weren’t in some, you know, intractable struggle. It was just talking, talking about, you know, what we’ve done in the past and so forth. Um, but more so, uh, I probably should dunmore of it in terms of reaching on advance and reaching out to Ah, it was more so out of necessity. Ah, that where I met with them and and we and some of the the situation with through with the 2018 appropriations process, I got to know Senator Schumer’s policy directors, actually, two individuals and then I was very close to known Senator McConnell’s, which is a Republican. I known his policy director for years. So and some of the people I’ve worked with in the past and that makes it easier. You kind of know where they’re coming from, but it’s something that I think it’s critical to talk to the counterparts. And if you’re in a leadership position with divided government, where you need to cut, ultimately compromise on some things, it’s really important to have those relationships and have a trusting relationship.

[0:09:35 Speaker 0] I think that’s one of the most important things we need to help our students understand is you have to build these, you have to build them across the aisle and you have to. You have to nurture them. You have to cultivate them so that people, whether you ever come to agreement on something, at least people are gonna respect, perfect and want you in that room s so that you can contribute to that. So having that kind of approach to things is one of the other thing. We always talk about crisis, you know, like crisis management. We’re in a crisis. We have to get this done so there’s there’s a downside to that because it’s like, Oh my gosh, we have to get something done and we’re really we can’t really study it. The way you want to study it. On the other hand, you have to get something done. You can’t say. Well, excuse me. We’re not going to pass this bill until we have a five year study on X. So they had those kinds of environments draw people together and how you exploit. And I mean, they had a good word those kinds of environments where you’re brought together in a crisis, and then you hold at beyond the a crisis to go to the next. You know, the next challenge that you have. Yeah. Yeah. So

[0:10:32 Speaker 1] the other thing is, is that they’re not just across the aisle. The House Republican Conference is a diverse conference with a lot of differ views on things. And one of the speakers really wanted to do when he came in was to try to keep his team, his conference unified, and he made a point of sort of selectively. He couldn’t meet with all 241 of them all the way. Did meetings with the entire conference or heated meeting to the entire conference. He would pick out representative folks from different camps, are different views in the conference and meet with them regularly in an informal occasion and and I would attend those meetings and you learn a lot from that. And you could find out from your and again that the meetings were not too. We have to solve this problem. It was Mawr justice reform, informal discussion. What do you think? What

[0:11:18 Speaker 0] you worried about?

[0:11:19 Speaker 1] Exactly? I think those were terribly valuable and sometimes Ah ah, the A member who might be perfectly nice. Fine conversation. But they’re hard. No on the bill, even annoying work. But you get a sense. It gives you a sense of what’s going what’s going on in taking the temperature of different parts. Because these are not. These conferences are not 100% unified there people with different views and different things on different issues.

[0:11:47 Speaker 0] Well, at the highest level, two women at the highest steak level, right? So, uh, no. I know when you think about again building the networks, building people who you can talk to because even if you don’t convince people, Ah, it’s really not about converting people’s about convincing people and even if you can in a certain time, that relationship that gets bonded even in those meetings that may not have the outcome that you want. It’s all part of that. The network building in those relationship buildings and you have to do those. And that’s what our students and in our successful limbs are students are being trained to do in our successful alums accomplished. So that’s an important part of, you know, being a top levels attack in the middle of a mess. And many messes. Um, you said economics has formed the backbone of your career. How do you make this topic accessible in clear to the average voter who may not have the same understanding of economics and micro economics and macro economics? And this is really more of a generic question, one of the things that’s really important for us to do. So we have to look at new knowledge, new information, new discoveries, new research and often those Those dead information comes from settings that is loaded with jargon. You know, in this a jargon of the discipline, and we have to sit back and figure out how are we going to give that to people who normally are not in that discipline? How do we give them a clear picture talk just a little bit about how some of the challenges you faced with that and then how you tried to get around those,

[0:13:18 Speaker 1] I think, for a member of Congress or policymaker in general. Ultimately, the thing they’re looking at is the economy, how we’re their constituents doing, and and that turns out the economy, probably overwhelming factor in terms of the level of employment level of wages. In things like that, people’s ability by homes and all of those issues interest rates toe take out a mortgage. All of those factors are terribly important. The challenges is that, uh, I’m a policy guy. Ah, and will, um, will talk and total Greek two people will talk about percentage of GDP and in terms that people don’t understand on. And when you get in with the I’m not. I’m not an economist by training. And when you start talking to the Economist still talked about you have total factor productivity and stuff like that that that your average person has no idea. So the policymakers challenge and they’re always after us is on the communication side of it is how do I explain what we’re doing here toe to a constituent, so we would frequently try toe Teoh, take the analyses and find a way where there’s a way for us to translate that into the jobs that would be created or what it would do the wages or things like that. That is a huge challenge to take very, very complicated topics, because ultimately members of Congress want to be able to communicate it to the public, either in the form of going on TV or speaking at the House floor or in committee, or being back home exactly and explaining it. The one thing I thought was really interesting that my boss did he would. He had a bunch of plans that he did budget plans, we that he did and other things. Um uh, he would he would go through and do town halls regularly through his district before him speaker than speaker. Things got so and But he would do that. And what was interesting is he would learn from the questions he would learn in terms of how to talk about things and also learn about how it was received in his. So we use those sessions to both communicate to his as he said, his employers back in his district, but also learn how to talk about issues and also to see where they resonated, whether they’re addressing his constituents. Concerns

[0:15:35 Speaker 0] when you think about the skill, because that’s a skill, you know, communicating and trying to take complex, complicated information and make it simpler for people to understand without really jeopardizing the integrity of what you’re saying. You know, um, people don’t normally come in any walk of life with the a kind of skill set. So thinking about the training that you have, I mean both here at the LBJ School and beyond. But when I was on the hill, there’s not really a lot of training, a sort of trial by fire. You know, people come there, and if they don’t have that skill set, they have to learn it, and they have to be very deliberate and how they’re trying to get that. So I I didn’t see. That is something that was a sustainable kind of. We all should be achieving this. So those who did do you believe those who did then, in terms of just caucuses or their role, head a head a higher standing or the go to people because they were able to communicate this in a way that others understood.

[0:16:34 Speaker 1] Yeah, it’s It’s even more valuable in sort of the electronic age. There’s so many ways, forms of communication and and in both confident in both parties, from all spectrums are are working every possible angle because they know the value of communications in terms of ultimately motivating voters. So I think that and there’s a tremendous effort in terms of the various platforms to communicate and then meet that challenge of How do you, ah, present things that your words were integrity to integrity. Now, sometimes that gets little process, but it can come back to bite a politician to, because if you go out, say, make a promise that you’re going to do something, I’m gonna go wash in D. C. I’m gonna do X. You know, the voters could expect you actually deliver on that, and, uh, and so that’s a real challenge, I think, for policy. But for elected officials, which is to both, um, uh, get voters interested in what they’re doing, get them to support what they’re doing, and then the challenge of actually delivering it,

[0:17:42 Speaker 0] You know, just inside. I never did understand. And I understand it’s the political arena. But I never did understand how somebody could say When I go there, I’m going to do this because, you know, just by the fact of saying that doesn’t really project a reflection of what? An understanding of the body. You know, people don’t really understand Congress as a body as a governing body, uh, you know, collaboration and compromise and teamwork and set up to be very conservative, you know, in the sense of we’re just not gonna pass things unless state pass Many gauntlets of testing. I think many people don’t understand that. But when you’re elected official, that’s even more important because trying to educate folks you have to sort of, especially if their in state legislative bodies, you have to kind of break that down and say this is not a state legislative body, cause they’re all very different. This is a different acculturation. And, um, how did you see? Did you see members? I’m trying to get it. The members who campaigned on that and also think what I’m going to get in there, and I’m going to be the one is a freshman to get in there and I’m gonna do this and it’s gonna happen. And I’m gonna get a bill on. Everybody’s gonna sign up on this bill, Did you see ways and maybe haven’t been in those kinds of positions where those The lessons that they learned, uh, we’re tough lessons in terms of trying to think about where they’re going to make a difference quickly with their idea on Lee.

[0:19:09 Speaker 1] Yeah, I think that there I think they’re different paths. I think members when they first come to Congress, they don’t really fully understand how it works because you’d only really learned by living it by living it and doing it. And I think they get a better sense in terms of the challenges of getting things done. Um, the other thing is, is I think some members, um, there is, I’m oversimplifying it, but there’s sort of a route where you can try to get things done and work the process, it learn it and do the process, make the compromise and so forth or the other path. And I don’t think members necessarily choose one or the other, but there is to be is to vote no and to say this is outrageous. What the B and sometimes that’s that’s totally understandable. Remember, Congress didn’t it doesn’t support that needs to represent their their constituents. But sometimes that’s the easier path. We just go on TV and say, I’m gonna fight this. This is terrible. And to vote no, um Ah, and there could be very difficult votes for people Vote no for principled reasons, But so I I think that’s a real challenge for members in terms of finding and particularly as you’re trying to actually put together legislation for the House, which is a is an institution which can pass things with a simple majority. Right now, the Democrats have a simple majority. That’s what Republicans had before this last election. I think one of the frustrations a lot of those new members are gonna have, they’re gonna come into power. And there they just passed HR one, which deals with campaign finance so forth. Will McConnell, over in the Senate saying he’s not moving that, and they’re gonna have to kind of, Well, what do we do next? And there’s not the it may. They may not be able to free up that bill thing will be interesting to see how the new members kind of digest that and figured out they can always go back. The other options, they can go back and campaign in the next election and say, you know, Well,

[0:21:00 Speaker 0] that’s that s the issue. Is are you Are you working for the next campaign or you’re working to have some legislation passed? It’s a policy, Yes. So how do you exactly? So I think people don’t totally understand that incredible tension of people. But I think you make a really good point about saying no. If that’s your North, if that’s your option of this, you fundamentally apt I’m going in there to say no and not engage and the compromise it or the, you know, the toughness of actually coming up with something that may not be the best thing, but coming up with something, uh, the death says something about people who are then elected into those offices, you know, to govern. Yeah,

[0:21:39 Speaker 1] and I don’t want I don’t think anybody fits there somewhere. I think our job. But there’s some members who are just They may be okay and help you on one issue. But on another issue there just they’ll be clear, were hard No. One that I am not voting for it.

[0:21:51 Speaker 0] Yeah, it’s It’s very interesting. And I think from the time I was on the hill, you know, 45 years of experience what I saw was a big shift in part of it was just the time investment people could make in understanding and learning not only the house and in the Senate and their governing, but also trying to become experts in an area we just don’t give them the time. You know, there’s just too many demands on members of Congress for so many reasons that, you know, staff has become much more of a critical element in in in life. And I always again, this is just something from my own perspective. Many of members were judged in terms of their substance and their their ability to work with others to their staff. Because staff reflect the member. Eso speaks very well to speak around that you were with him. Um, I’m gonna I’m gonna ask you this question. You’re gonna talk to our students today. So after we finish this podcast are students who will have the benefit of having a session with you and today is going to call policy making in theory and practice, you know, which is in the DNA of the LBJ School. It’s like a theory. We want to give you the basic understanding and knowledge and the basic discoveries integrated. But we want you also to be able to translate it into what matters into practice. What kind of tensions do you have to manage when putting together? When you’re looking at theory and you’re trying to put it into practice,

[0:23:18 Speaker 1] I think, uh, everyone wants is called Regular order Regular orders. The bill is introduced. Theirs hearings, it gets report of the committee. It’s passed by the House or Senate. They go to a conference committee and they resolve the differences get sent to the president. He gets signed. That happens. But for a lot of the things that require bipartisan compromises, that doesn’t happen. It’s done at the last minute. The bills were thrown together out of necessity because it can’t get through that process for the vagaries of how the House and Senate operate in the where the various positions are, what the president’s position, maybe on something. So I think one of the things that that is difficult is going through that process. When Speaker Ryan was as much for regulars, anybody was determined to bring more regular order, bring MAWR, allow more amendments on the floor. But out of necessity, there are times where that that you’re not gonna get something done. If you follow that process, you’re just gonna end up sitting there with either legislation that could never pass the house or we’ll never get through the Senate or never become law. So you have to make that that trade off the bills become law that go through regular order. The farm bill that was done last year went through the entire pro process. The National Defense Authorization Act went through that process. I don’t want to say it’s for everything. Their bills that do go through that process, but frequently the process breaks down and you and you and you have to. When you have to get something accomplished, you you have to depart from that. And members were disappointed because they want they feel they’re disenfranchised when that happens, and they’re disappointed, rightfully so, that because it doesn’t give them the full participation, the process and things that of necessity or done, um, by leadership and buy a smaller group of people

[0:25:07 Speaker 0] when you’re talking about, like the regular order there you can. I can literally see logically, where information and knowledge and discovery and research and expertise is really important in the formulation stages of those kinds of policies. But the closer you get to actually coming to some kind of conclusion or some kind of compromise or some kind of like, we’ve got to do it, that’s almost too late to say, Well, oh, I’ve got something that I think will help you in this particular that they appoint It really becomes decision making that’s very, very fast. And unless you have the expertise to help help in attention driven or an immediacy driven environment, you’re not going to be able to participate. If the at time, which might be the most critical time that a decision is made size. So we’re trying to figure out how we do this. How do we intersect our inner inner intersected, a time in the policy making process where expertise is really important and valuable and useful? Uh, and keep that going. Even though things get like you say, you know they can get very difficult tensions air there and unpredictable or new things come in that you didn’t think were part of the problem

[0:26:17 Speaker 1] When we reach those stages. Not like it’s a blank slate.

[0:26:20 Speaker 0] Yeah,

[0:26:21 Speaker 1] they’re usually issues have been around for a while. I had a team of eight people. I worked with me. The each of those had a portfolio. They were sort of hardwired into their their committees, and they knew their committees. That’s where the expertise is, is in the committees of jurisdiction, and we would draw on that. But to your point, these things were done. Uh, pretty. When you’re up against a deadline, you’ve got toe. The government’s going to shut down. If you don’t get this build under, the government’s gonna default. If we don’t get the the debt limit done in those situations, there’s a scramble and, um, but it’s not like it’s a blank slate, and we would draw on both all sides. We draw on on committee staffs or the experts in their own staff to make sure that those decisions were as informed as possible you had a you had a good sense about in terms of what your degree of flexibility was on those issues sometimes gotta call inaudible with line, which is terrifying.

[0:27:14 Speaker 0] Yeah, feasibility as well. I’m not real sure Way have todo Yeah,

[0:27:19 Speaker 1] but, uh, you have a good sense and it’s not like it’s not like I keep saying a blank slate and you’re just making it up. In the end, there’s still information and on an informed process to get it done, but it it’s better when it goes through regular order process. It’s a It’s a more deliberative process. It has the committee’s MAWR jurisdiction were directly involved. That is the better way clearly to resolve legislation.

[0:27:46 Speaker 0] And I think people don’t understand this. Legislation does go through. There’s there’s plenty of legislation that goes through that. But we see what we see the public sees is all more of a chaotic, Um, last minute, you know, Duggan kind of thing, and they don’t see a lot of expertise at that level. So I’m glad you’re able to talk about that. I have a final question, and, um, it’s really about Speaker Ryan, you know? So people’s he had this. This public persona, you know, people see people, they don’t see them behind the scenes. And, ah, they don’t understand the demands placed on a particular individual in a particular office. So can you tell us a little bit about something about Speaker Ryan that we students might not know about him by just seeing him in the public?

[0:28:31 Speaker 1] Um, well, I’m very fund of Paul Ryan. I worked for over 11 years. Like I admire men so so forth. I think he always had a sense of perspective in a sense of humor, wheeling, dealing with issues. I think if you watch a TV show, it’s always all this tension, you know, and everyone is it agin because that’s drama. My experience, whether it was, was with Paula’s, we would hit, we’d be absolute dead ahead would be a wits in in terms of What are we gonna do next? And he would recite some movie from a move they liked in the eighties. He would recite a line. It was kind of pertinent. Everyone kind of laughing all of that, and it would take us off track for a little bit. But I also think it would give sort of a breath of relief. So I think he is a, um uh, he also in my mind, and I’m a huge fan, so I cannot be objective with respect to Paul Ryan. He also I think is he’s really good at dealing with people. He likes his nature’s toe, like people he wants him wants to treat people fairly. And I think that was terribly important in in meetings. He rare live, really seem, loses temper. He would. And when things are tough, you know, And he would ah, dealing with other members. So he always came across to me is a, um he’d walk into the room no matter how bad it was. And, you know, I’d be there dour, have an optimistic guy. And Paul always had a smile on his face, a spring in his step and and for for when you’re tired and you’re stressed out and you’re worried about how you’re gonna complete something, that is, that is a very positive force. Lisa was for me.

[0:30:08 Speaker 0] Well, you know, it just reflects, you know, a sense not only the sense of Hubert, but it’s perspective. You know, sometimes we get involved in things in our perspective, really narrows that were the most important. And this is the most important. And we don’t understand. No, there are other perspectives. And this is not the end of the world. And I think that sense of humor is really important because it just takes the burden off. People are freer to think through and be more energetic and creative when you’ve got the sense of humor eso this really important thing. So thank you for sharing their

[0:30:41 Speaker 1] thank you. It’s great to be here.

[0:30:42 Speaker 0] Yeah, I’m just so pleased if people can’t see me. But I’ve got a big smile on my face because I can’t wait to share you with our students. So thanks again. We really appreciate it. Austin. Thank

[0:30:52 Speaker 1] you. It’s great to be here

[0:30:53 Speaker 0] and thanks everyone for listening