Prestige and Process at CDC: Reconciling Administrative Expertise with Regulatory Flexibility

Abstract

Of all the United States’ executive agencies, none leans so heavily on its reputation for expertise as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Constitutionally obligated to persuade rather than coerce, the agency’s effectiveness hinges on its credibility, which in turn rests on its expertise. The coronavirus pandemic forced CDC to reevaluate its relationship with expertise, and to transform in a way that has broad implications for other agencies who also rely on their reputations for knowledge and professionalism.

This Paper tracks how CDC transformed during the tumultuous pandemic years; how it transitioned from an institution that relied on the scientific and academic prestige of its decision makers to one that relies on the rigor and flexibility of its decision-making process. From this transformation, we draw an important doctrinal inference: CDC’s troubles during the pandemic highlight a latent tension between the values of expertise and flexibility in administrative decision making. In the face of uncertainty, CDC could not simultaneously leverage both.

The Paper concludes by isolating and naming a new model of administrative expertise suggested by the post-pandemic CDC. This model, which we call process–expertise, promises to resolve the tension between administrative expertise and regulatory flexibility, offering other scientific agencies a blueprint to avoid the crisis of confidence that spurred CDC’s transformation.