research, though its products are not marketed 

 in the usual way, does have a price. That price 

 will be paid only if the climate of opinion favors 

 it, and this requires leadership from theFederal 

 Government. If leadership is indifferent to 

 science or against it, or if it misuses science to 

 the detriment of the public, then science 

 becomes ineffective and ultimately the people 

 are impoverished. 



The university sector produced many 

 statements of concern about attitudes held 

 within government. This was the fourth-ranked 

 issue among presidents and vice presidents 

 (combined) of Carnegie Research Universities 

 II, and also among all university presidents. 

 Robert MacVicar, President of Oregon State 

 University, mentioned especially the staff 

 members of certain Congressional committees 

 and the Executive Office of the President: 



As a chief executive officer of a university, it 

 would seem to me that the first concern that I 

 would have about the health of short-term 

 fundamental or basic research is a growing 

 antagonism on the part of those in the Federal 

 Government who should be most supportive of it. 

 I speak specifically of the Executive Office of the 

 President and of certain critical Congressional 

 committees, the staff members of which must 

 clearly be aware of the importance of basic 

 research to the long-term well-being of science 

 and indeed the long-term well-being of the United 

 States. Nonetheless, as you are fully aware, both 

 the Executive Office of the President and certain 

 key Congressional committees have been very 

 critical of the National Science Foundation, the 

 National Institutes of Health and other federal 

 funding agencies for their support of certain 

 types of basic research I do not think that it is 

 enough to chalk this up as some kind of 

 temporary aberration of anti-intellectualism, but 

 rather that it should be confronted for what it 

 appears to me to be; and that is, a very serious 

 breach of confidence between those who must 

 support basic science in the United States and the 

 scientific community. 



Alexander Heard, Chancellor of Vanderbilt 

 University, also mentioned State legislatures: 



76 CONFIDENCE IN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 



Anti-intellectual sentiments have been growing in 

 the country, in my view heavily spurred by 

 campus conduct during the time of troubles 

 beginning in 1964. The ramifications are exten- 

 sive. Recent attacks on National Science Founda- 

 tion procedures for awarding research grant 

 support are, in my judgment, a manifestation of 

 this skepticism toward intellectuals, universities, 

 and their faculties. Attitudes in state legislatures 

 can lead to actions unsympathetic to fundamen- 

 tal research that are both quicker and surer. 



From the University of Cincinnati, Frank R. 

 Tepe, Jr., the Assistant University Dean for 

 Graduate Education and Research, had this to 

 say about a lack of understanding on the part of 

 the public and Congress: 



It is our feeling that the lack of understanding on 

 the part of the American public, and in particular 

 the majority of the members of Congress, of the 

 significance of basic research is the number one 

 problem now facing long-term, basic research. In 

 this age of relevance and immediate return for an 

 investment, the public is not anxious to support 

 the funding of projects whose possible payoff 

 cannot be well documented prior to the initiation 

 of the project. Because of this attitude the funding 

 for basic research and the importance placed on 

 it is decreasing. We would encourage the idea 

 that a program of education, perhaps coor- 

 dinated by the National Science Foundation or 

 the National Academy of Sciences, be initiated to 

 better educate the public on the long-term 

 benefits and possible far reaching applicationsof 

 fundamental research. 



Thus he also recommends here a program of 

 education directed toward the public. 



Finally, A. M. Cormack, Chairman of the 

 Physics Department at Tufts University, found 

 some negative attitudes toward research within 

 the university itself, as well as in the public and 

 government. He also defends the value of basic 

 research: 



There is one problem for the near and distant 

 future which, to my mind, so transcends all others 

 that it is the only one I shall mention. This is the 

 erosion of the traditional view of what the 

 function of a university is. I see this in the 



