Using data from interviews with 111 reading policy actors from California, Connecticut, Michigan, and Utah, this study explains how individuals acquire central positions in issue networks. Regression analyses showed that the greater a policy actor's reputed influence was and the more similar their preferences were to other members in the network, the more central an actor was in a state reading policy network. The findings suggest that reading policy actors were forming relationships with other actors to gain access to influential organizations that have resources that political actors themselves may not possess--irrespective of policy preferences. In addition, the results indicate that central actors in an issue network may indeed hold the minority or majority opinion--marginalization due to divergence is not a given.