Four years ago, Harvard professors flooded into Clinton's Adminstration, earning it the nickname "Harvard on the Potomac." This year, though, they return from their trips in Washington, D.C. back to familiar Harvard. Here's a look at how their stay changed their lives.

FOUR YEARS AGO, people dubbed it Harvard on the Potomac. But this year the Clinton Administration will need a new nickname.

Like soldiers marching off to battle, a troupe of bright-eyed, progressive Harvard faculty members marched down to Washington in early 1993 to join newly-elected President Bill Clinton and possibly change the course of the nation.

But few expect such a Harvard presence in Clinton's second term. In fact, the cream of the crop have already served their time in the Cabinet and are now returning to private life.

For reasons of family, exhaustion and occasionally politics, the Harvard wonks who left four years ago are wending their way back to the ivory tower of academia.

A Tough Job

When Loeb Associate Professor of the Social Sciences David M. Cutler '86 was asked to join the President's Council of Economic Advisors four years ago, he jumped at the opportunity to serve his country.

An expert on health care reform, Cutler was enticed by the opportunity to shape national policy decisions.

But after two years of life in Washington, Cutler says his optimism became a bit muted.

"There's whole lot of politics and lot less trying to deal with issues," says Cutler, who returned to Cambridge two years ago.

After a frustrating struggle to pass Clinton's highly controversial health care reform bill, Cutler says he learned that the Washington culture of compromise makes progress difficult.

"Once things become political, you can't accomplish much," Cutler says.

But Cutler's difficulties may be particular to the area of health care, which was the subject of national media scrutiny during the early part of Clinton's first term.

Other Harvard faculty members who specialized in less controversial fields found a different experience while working in Washington.

As Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy, Ashton Carter, Kennedy School professor of science and international policy, says his time at the Pentagon was a complete success.

"Fortune smiled on my particular area," Carter says. "I was able to accomplish what I wanted to accomplish because it was politically possible."

Carter focused on American policy toward the former Soviet Union in the post-Cold War era.

Unlike Cutler, who says his experience has forced him to question the strength of the American political system, Carter left Washington in September with a very positive conception of the federal government.

"I have enormous respect for the U.S. government and its ability to do things right," Carter says.

Practical Academics?

After years spent tucked away in musty Harvard offices, many academics-turned-bureaucrats say they found Washington to be a slap in the face.

Nearly all professors returning from their experience in public service note the disparity between the academic and political environments.

"It is an entirely different exercise to make and implement policy diplomatically than to be a scholar," Carter says.

Not accustomed to having ideas discussed in the media on the political level, some say they found it difficult to argue their points.

"It was a bit different than academia in that it can be fairly rough down there," Cutler says.

And while Cutler seems to feel this Washington culture could represent a flaw in our system, others seemed to disagree.

"Professors are used to having ideas--it's appropriate for ideas to be examined by people," says Lawrence Summers, deputy secretary of the treasury and the former Ropes professor of political economy.

Summers, who is currently second in the treasury department's chain of command, acknowledges constant discouragement from Washington bureaucrats but remains optimistic.

"It is enormously frustrating, but there is also the chance to impact in a small way really big things," Summers says.

Summers' duties range from forming tax policy and responding to currency fluctuations to dealing with development issues with the World Bank.

Although he declines to indicate how long he plans to stay in Washington, few administrators remain for more than four years due to the enormous demands of working for the federal government.

Summers still points out that he has "emotional if not legal ties to Harvard University."

Federal appointees returning to academia cite the executive branch's exhausting pace and their desire to re-establish a family life as reasons for brief tenures in public service.

Political Departures

Although family and exhaustion often cause faculty members to leave their federal appointments, political friction frequently plays a major role.

This fall, after President Clinton signed the welfare reform bill ending the guarantee of cash assistance to many of the nation's poorest children, Mary Jo Bane, assistant secretary for families and children at the department of health and human services (HHS) and a former Weiner professor of social policy, abruptly submitted her resignation.

In an e-mail message sent to colleagues announcing her decision, Bane said the welfare bill had "led me to conclude that I can not continue to serve" as assistant secretary.

David T. Ellwood '75, Bane's colleague at both Harvard and HHS, left the Clinton Administration to become academic dean of the Kennedy School prior to passage of the bill.

Although Ellwood did not resign over political issues, he shares Bane's concerns.

"I certainly understand her decision," Ellwood says. "I, too, am very disappointed with the welfare bill."

After spending his time in Washington as assistant secretary for planning and evaluation at HHS, a position in which he focused on welfare reform, Ellwood says he has developed "misgivings" about government.

Asked whether the misgivings were rooted in the Clinton Administration's continued shift to the right or in Washington culture itself, Ellwood says it is "hard to separate them."

Following Clinton's re-election this month, Labor Secretary Robert Reich resigned, citing his desire to return to Cambridge to be with his two children. But some have speculated that the former Kennedy School professor is stepping down from his position for political reasons.

Many Washington insiders feel that, in an effort to appeal to a broader spectrum of voters, Clinton's administration has alienated traditional liberals such as Reich.

But most Kennedy School professors deny that Reich is getting forced out by the Administration's change of course.

Calling the accusations a "crock," John Donahue, a long-time friend of Reich and a Kennedy School professor, argues that a secretary of labor can not at the same time run a family.

Faculty members currently in the administration tend to deny that Clinton has changed his course.

Summers says that throughout his years at the treasury department, the Clinton Administration has been concerned with "making government a more effective tool in people's lives."

Responding to criticism that Harvard faculty are often too liberal to be effective in policy making positions, Donahue points out that faculty members returning to Cambridge do not share a particular political leaning.

"The people coming back cover a lot of terrain on the liberal to conservative spectrum," he says.

All the Better For It

Regardless of the circumstances of their departure, most faculty say they feel their experiences in Washington have raised their level of teaching to a new plateau.

"I can't believe they let me teach at the Kennedy School before [working in the administration]," says Donahue, who worked for the department of labor in the Clinton administration.

Faculty members such as Cutler have also realized the power of the media as a result of their Washington experiences.

"They are much more appreciative of the power of press and television to fashion a public policy issue," explains Marvin L. Kalb, director of the Shorenstein Center for Press and Public Policy.

Kalb suggests that while faculty may understand the theoretical aspects of the media, their work in Washington is a crash course in the practical power of television, radio and the press.

Future Appointments

Although few expect any prominent appointments to Clinton's second administration to come from Harvard, no one would be surprised by junior faculty members appointed to lower-level posts.

Sources also say that Laura D'Andrea Tyson, the outgoing Chair of the President's Council of Economic Advisors, was sought by the business school. However, it now appears that she will return to her former position at the University of California-Berkeley.

Even if Tyson does not defect, Harvard may be a much stronger place as policy entrepreneurs return from Washington to resume the roles of teachers, researchers, administrators and scholars.