toward the military.- 7 Scientists at work on 

 wartime projects were anxious to return to their 

 academic posts but hopeful of continuing to 

 receive there the Federal support to which they 

 had grown accustomed. And some reformers, 

 both within the Government and within the 

 community of science, were anxious to use the 

 funds and flexibility of wartime for the 

 peacetime benefit of science and its service to 

 the Nation. 



Two specific plans for organizing Federal 

 support for postwar science emerged during the 

 last months of the war. The first was legislation 

 proposed by Senator Harley M. Kilgore after 2 

 years of hearings and consultations with 

 leading scientists. According to his plan, a 

 National Science Foundation would be es- 

 tablished which would supervise the disposal 

 of Government funds in three large areas of 

 concern: national defense, health and medical 

 care, and "the advancement of the basic 



sciences. 



"28 



The second plan was that of Vannevar Bush, 

 and was based both on his wartime experience 

 with OSRD and his own conception of how 

 science should be organized. In his report of July 

 1945, entitled Science, the Endless Frontier, 

 (requested by President Roosevelt but received 

 by President Truman), Bush proposed the 

 setting up of a National Research Foundation 

 organized into five divisions corresponding to 

 major areas of national need: medical research, 

 the natural sciences, nationaldefense, scientific 

 personnel and education, and publication and 

 scientific collaboration. 29 On the subject of 

 basic research, Bush stressed that it "leads to 

 new knowledge. It provides scientific capital. It 



-' Perry McCoy Smith. The Air Force Plans for Peace, 1943- 



1945 [Baltimore, 1970), p. 1 10. 



-"See Technological Mobilization, I. Hearings before the 



Subcommittee of the Committee on Military Affairs, U.S. 



Senate. 77th Cong.. 2nd sess. |1942). pp. 1-3. 



J11 Vannevar Bush, Science— the Endless Frontier. A Report 



to the President on a Program for Postwar Scientific 



Research. )uly 1945. Reprinted July 1960 by the National 



Science Foundation (Washington. 1960). 



creates the fund from which the practical 

 applications of knowledge must be drawn. . . 

 Today, it is truer than ever that basic research is 

 the pacemaker of technological progress. . . A 

 nation which depends upon others for its new 

 basic scientific knowledge will be slow in its 

 industrial progress and weak in its competitive 

 position in world trade, regardless of its 

 mechanical skill." 10 The long war and intensive 

 research and development effort had, in the 

 view of many, seriously retarded the growth of 

 fundamental science. In the past, according to 

 this belief, the United States had relied heavily 

 upon European scientists, particularly those of 

 Germany, to supply this need for it. Now, with 

 Europe prostrate, there seemed no choice but to 

 make the Nation self-sufficient in this essential 

 resource. 



A bill based on Bush's plan was introduced by 

 Senator Warren G. Magnuson of Washington on 

 the same day that Science, the End/ess Frontier 

 was released to the public. 



Although superficially similar, the Kilgore 

 and Bush plans for postwar science were 

 formed from very different perceptions of what 

 was best for both science and the Nation at 

 large. Four major areas of conflict were obvious. 

 They could be summed up as follows: 



1. Whether the social sciences should be 

 included in the subsidy (Kilgore thought 

 so, Bush did not): 



2. Whether funds should be distributed to 

 centers and individuals of proven ex- 

 cellence, or should be distributed more 

 according to the traditional geographical 

 pattern (Bush argued for excellence as 

 defined by peer groups, Kilgore for a 

 greater concern for improving those which 

 fell short of that goal); 



3. Whether scientists should have exclusive 

 jurisdiction over the spending of Federal 

 money or should be held politically respon- 

 sible (Kilgore emphasized responsibility 



'" Ibid., pp. 17-18 (|uly 1960). 



RESEARCH IN THE UNITED STATES 11 



