In his third blog post as a 2016 Crook Fellow, Aaron Milner discusses the challenges of working on development projects in Washington, DC.

My Desk to the World

During work hours over the course of the summer I went west of DuPont Circle maybe twice, just for lunch.  I never went east of 16th street, except for one of the best sandwiches of my life, and I learned not what lie north of P street.  I attended one event on Capitol Hill.  That was the farthest I travelled during hours of operation for three months.  Ironically, I work in international development.

I move from project to project, researching, analyzing, and recommending policy for diverse corners of development around the globe.  One moment I could be writing about Rwanda, the next I could be learning about energy development in Tunisia, and then I could be researching private industry in the U.S. interested in these areas.   But I do all of this from my desk.  Most of D.C. works the same way, analyzing, recommending, then passing policy concerning global issues all within a city smaller than Austin.  We formulate policy which affects billions of people worldwide without truly understanding the goings on in the outside world.  The outside world, however, criticizes Washington for these policies without meaningfully engaging the political process.

The D.C. SnowSwampglobe

Now I realize I am an intern who will not be sent out on the road as an emissary for an organization.  I am not a congressional official with a district to travel back to, or a diplomat representing a foreign country.  Most people in this town, however, are not.  Really most people are “foreigners” to D.C., with so many transplants.  There are a few hundred thousand of us, but the world outside D.C. sees a vocal minority of government officials representing the whole D.C. policy sphere.  There is a disconnect between Washingtonian everyday operations which drive American and global policy and the real world outside the beltway.  The manifestation of the misunderstanding between the District and the outside world is most evident in low government approval rates and Donald Trump being a major party candidate.

One cool thing about D.C. is that most people are here to work in some semblance of policymaking; from actual politicking on Capitol Hill or one of the numerous agencies, to advocacy or lobbying, to us think tank-ers, industry officials, NGOs, foreign agents, etc. Despite our diverse goals, we all work to make policy better for our dynamic interests.  We may be pursuing radically different aims but we are D.C. “insiders.”  A large movement crossing party boundaries, ethnicities, state lines, and all categorizations of Americans has grown to lambast D.C. insiders.

If Hating D.C. is Cool, then I ain’t Miles Davis

For the best part of the past thirty years—really beginning with Jimmy Carter—presidential campaigns have been built off “changing Washington” and “champions from outside the beltway.”  The current sentiment coming out of the 2016 campaign is no different.  Trump is positioning himself as the least-D.C. candidate ever.  Secretary Clinton is doing her best to distance herself from forty years in D.C. by going anti-TPP.  Clinton and Trump are making globalization their whipping post despite both of them being benefactors of the rise in free trade and commerce throughout their careers.

Part of the growing perception against D.C. is that the government is not operating at the behest of average Americans; that policymakers either get nothing done, or what they do get done, benefits foreign countries more so than industries and citizens domestically. The benefits of globalization, however, seem so obvious from me from my ivory tower in D.C.  So many people criticize the current global system, with anti-globalization activists protesting at the G20 or the recent Jackson Hole Summit.  But there has been untold prosperity from the jobs created by American leadership of the new global system after World War II.

For the past seventy years the U.S. has used hard and soft tools to pursue free markets, rule of law, and good governance around the world.  Admittedly the U.S. has overstepped its bounds numerous times, but the most successful countries and our best allies all received foreign assistance us at some point.  South Korea, Germany, Japan all reconstructed their economies and countries with U.S. help to be some of the most powerful states today.  For example, almost all of the top U.S. trading partners received foreign assistance.  1 out of 5 U.S. jobs is export based.  Foreign assistance, however, is excoriated daily throughout the U.S.  But foreign assistance accounts for less than 1 percent of the $4 trillion federal budget.

The Disconnect

The misunderstanding around foreign assistance spending is one example of the disconnect between Washington and the rest of the U.S.  I get to see the advantages and successes of foreign investment and assistance every day.  I understand, however, how it is hard for an average American to defend sending billions of dollars worldwide with so many issues here at home.  The U.S. does need to desperately invest domestically, but it cannot sacrifice its leadership position at the helm of the international system to do so.  If it seems like a lot of Americans are questioning the government’s ability to run the country, even more global parties are questioning American leadership of the global institutional framework after the quagmire in Iraq and economic crisis defined by American opulence and irresponsibility.

It is hard to see what America would like if it abandoned its superpower role, but so many American industries and groups are woven into the fabric of the international system.  Our science, tech, and research industries lead global innovation; our capital markets are the gold standard (despite taking a hit from 2008); and our government is still one of the best democracies in the world.  These are all vital to American success and enabled by globalization.  Yet both American sentiment increasingly derides globalization.

All Talk, No Communication

Washington, despite all the talk emanating from our borders, has a communication issue.  The city’s institutions do not know how to communicate their goals and methods effectively to the rest of the U.S.  That may be because of the lack of unity around town.  But at the heart, it is because of isolation in the D.C. policy environment. Maybe policymakers in D.C. are too close to their issues, emotionally invested in each cause as it is their livelihood.  Either way, D.C. has a hard time understanding the outside world, and the outside world has a hard time understanding D.C.

Modern political rhetoric exacerbates the situation. The electorate hears campaigns from all spectrums saying Washington needs to change and people need to get back to work. D.C. works hard, but the because of the city’s internal industries, a lot of that work is lost on people outside the beltway.

That misunderstanding is especially present in international development. When I told some friends I was going to work for a think tank, they just thought the company was called think tank. D.C. needs to do a better job at branding, communication, and educating the public about what goes on around here. It is a two-way street, however. D.C. should better understand the overtures coming from the private sector. That means engaging more stakeholders in not only the policymaking, but policy application process. For development, I personally want to see Silicon Valley become the premier partner for U.S. development policy.

Regardless of the outcome of the election, the image of Washington and the U.S.’ role in the international system needs to be rehabilitated. The President will have a lot of symbolic power in that matter, but it will be up to decision makers from around Washington to engage new groups from diverse backgrounds and geographies. D.C. is a city full of transplants—many Texas foreigners—but once you enter the echo chamber of the Beltway, it is hard to recall your localized and diverse concerns. D.C. is going to need the help of the rest of the U.S. to reaffirm American supremacy. This starts with policymakers educating the public on what really happens here and the benefits of the direction of the global system to the U.S. So if you want to come see D.C, come on down. But I realize I need to leave my office too, and for more than just a sandwich.