51 



nation's science policy in 1965 when it began an extensive review 

 of the National Science Foundation's charter of 1950. Joined later 

 by Democratic Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, the 

 Daddario review culminated in the 1968 amendments to the NSF 

 charter. 35 



Unlike the House, the Senate did not have a single committee 

 with legislative and oversight responsibilities for science. Although 

 the creation of the Subcommittee on Government Research within 

 the Government Operations Committee in 1965 did not resolve this, 

 it did provide the Senate with a new lens through which to focus 

 on certain broad aspects of the Federal science program. The Sub- 

 committee on Government Research was chaired by Senator Fred 

 R. Harris, Democrat of Oklahoma, and examined such issues as the 

 geographical distribution of research and development funds, the 

 support of the social sciences, the Federal contract and granting 

 systems with universities, and the promotion of applications of bio- 

 medical knowledge. Despite its usefulness in concentrating atten- 

 tion of Government research issues, the subcommittee was disband- 

 ed at the end of the 90th Congress in 1969, at which time the full 

 committee assumed its legislative responsibilities in the field of sci- 

 entific research. 36 



In order to assist the Elliott and Daddario committees, as well as 

 the other committees and Members of Congress in need of an im- 

 partial source of scientific and technical information, the Legisla- 

 tive Reference Service of the Library of Congress established a Sci- 

 ence Policy Research Division in 1964. 37 In addition, the House 

 Committee on Science and Astronautics began strengthening its 

 own professional staff and assembled a Research Management Ad- 

 visory Panel. Expansion of such support services was an attempt by 

 Congress to supply itself with an independent source of scientific 

 information and analysis, thus freeing itself from the Executive 

 Branch and providing a balance to the President's Office of Science 

 and Technology. 38 



Committee on Science and Public Policy 



Congress also turned to the National Academy of Sciences for in- 

 dependent advice on matters dealing with science and technology. 

 From its inception during the Civil War, the Academy was charged 



Purpose (88th Congress, 1st session. Washington: GPO, 1963); No. 2, Fiscal Trends in Federal 

 Research and Development (88th Congress, 2nd session, 1964); No. 3, Scientific-Technical Advice 

 for Congress: Needs and Sources (88th Congress, 2nd session, 1964); No. 4, Geographic Distribu- 

 tion of Federal Research and Development Funds (89th Congress, 1st session, 1965); and No. 5, 

 Indirect Costs under Federal Research Grants (89th Congress, 1st session, 1965). 



35 Public Law 90-407. See also, U.S. Congress, House Committee on Science and Astronautics, 

 The National Science Foundation: A General Review of Its First 15 Years (89th Congress, 2nd 

 session. Washington: GPO, 1965); and U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Labor and Public 

 Welfare, National Science Foundation Act Amendments of 1968, hearings before the Special Sub- 

 committee on Science (90th Congress, 1st session. Washington: GPO, 1968). 



36 See Dorothy Bates, "The History of Federal Science Policy, 1787-1970," in U.S. Congress, 

 House Committee on Science and Astronautics, Toward a Science Policy for the United States 

 (91st Congress, 2nd session. Washington: GPO, 1970), p. 97. 



37 See George E. Lowe, "Congress and Science Advice," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 21 

 (December 1965), 39-42; "A Wenk Legacy: Science-Policy Staff for Congress," Washington Sci- 

 ence News, 1 (November 1966), 25-26; and Frank Sartwell, "Effective Advisers to Congress," Sci- 

 ence News, 91 (April 8, 1967), 335. 



38 See Emilio Q. Daddario, "Setting Technological Goals in a Pluralistic Society," Air Force 

 and Space Digest, 47 (April 1964), 56; Clinton P. Anderson, "Scientific Advice for Congress," Sci- 

 ence, 144 (April 3, 1964), 29-32; and Frye, The Legislative Role in Science Policy. 



