Hoover Fellows and the War on Iraq:

On October 8, 2002, the Stanford Daily ran an article with the headline "Hoover fellows help make policy on Iraq." The headline refers to the 8 Hoover fellows on the influential 31-member Defense Policy Board, which meets regularly with top administrative officials such as the Secretary of Defense; the Chicago Tribune described the board as "playing an influential role in pushing the Bush administration toward an invasion of Iraq, generating support for military action as members seek to transform a controversial idea into a central pillar of U.S. foreign policy."

The 8 members on the Defense Policy Board are: Richard Allen, Martin Anderson, Gary Becker, Newt Gingrich, Henry Rowen, George P. Shultz, Kiron Skinner, and Pete Wilson.

What does this have to do with Stanford? The Hoover fellows advising the Department of Defense are scholars at the Hoover Institution, which is a part of Stanford University. The high level of cooperation between a conservative administration and Hoover fellows is not unusual. Ronald Reagan met with the Hoover's Overseers in 1981 to inform them that the Institution was "the brightest star in a small constellation of conservative think tanks", and that he called on more people from Hoover to help with his campaign than from any other institution. At a White House reception, Reagan thanked the Institute's Director for building "the knowledge base that made the changes now taking place in Washington possible."

There is, of course, nothing wrong with a Hoover fellow or any other scholar advising a government official. However, we raise the issue of Hoover fellows’ involvement in U.S. foreign policy because we feel it reflects the nature of the institution. Hoover is the only institution at Stanford that maintains an overt political bias.

Let's look at Director Raisian's comments on the participation of Hoover fellows in the Bush administration:

"One cultural aspect of the Hoover Institute is that we are suspicious of government solutions to problems. It is fair to say that when you look at these two candidates, George W. Bush is more likely to share that outlook on society." (John Raisian, Stanford Review Volume XXV, Issue 6)

Now, it's certainly incorrect to say that support for the war falls strictly along party lines. There are Republican opponents to an invasion of Iraq; there are democrat supporters of "Iraqi liberation." But to formulate policy, it seems reasonable to expect the administration to call upon those who share its general political perspective. And that, I think, explains the high degree of involvement of Hoover fellows on the defense policy board and why it is a reflection of the nature of the Hoover Institution.