45 



One of the most difficult tasks facing us is to achieve a 

 long-range planning effort which would remove expediency 

 as the sole controlling factor. A national science policy is 

 needed for a wise and rational distribution of scientific ac- 

 tivities, so that space, defense, education, atomic energy, 

 oceanography, and medical research are not bidding 

 against each other for limited available support. The grow- 

 ing demand for scientists in the face of a limited supply of 

 scientists, materials, funds, and facilities requires major 

 policy decisions as to the distribution of resources. These 

 decisions should of course include the extent to which spe- 

 cialized agencies may recruit by scholarship, fellowship, 

 and research support. * 1 



Despite considerable support for the creation of a Department of 

 Science and Technology, the legislation was never passed. It was 

 opposed by several influential groups, both within Congress and 

 the scientific community. Opponents included (a) scientists who 

 preferred the pluralistic approach to Federal support of science; (b) 

 agency officials concerned with protecting their areas of jurisdic- 

 tion with regard to mission-oriented research support; and (c) indi- 

 viduals and groups opposed to growth in government across the 

 board. Many of the arguments made against a Department of Sci- 

 ence and Technology were highly pragmatic, as illustrated by 

 Harvey Brooks's 1961 memorandum to Presidential Science Advi- 

 sor Jerome B. Wiesner: 



Science and technology, regarded as ends in themselves, 

 or as purely cultural activities, do not attract public sup- 

 port, at least on the scale which is now required. Support 

 of science on this scale can only be sold to the public and 

 to Congress by identifying it with specific desirable social 

 goals such as the curing of disease, the enhancement of na- 

 tional security or national prestige, or the protection of 

 public health or safety. * 2 



Although Congress chose not to create a Department of Science 

 and Technology, the need for coordination of the nation's science 

 activities was nevertheless again brought forward for debate. That 

 debate undoubtedly contributed to reorganization of the science 

 policy apparatus within the Executive Branch, in particular, the 

 creation of the Office of Science and Technology in 1962. 



Science Policy Under President Eisenhower 



Unlike Congress and the news media, the Eisenhower Adminis- 

 tration initially downplayed in public the importance of Sputnik. 

 Nevertheless, the Soviet satellite did stir profound concern within 

 the Administration for the state of science in the United States 

 and led to two major White House initiatives to improve the Ad- 



11 Wallace R. Brode, "Development of a Science Policy," in Robert H. Kargon (ed.), The Ma- 

 turing of American Science (Washington: American Association for the Advancement of Science, 

 1974), p. 163. 



12 This memorandum was later published in Harvey Brooks, The Government of Science (Cam- 

 bridge: The MTT Press, 1968), pp. 1-18. Quotation taken from page 11. See also, George H. Dan- 

 iels, "The Pure-Science Ideal and Democratic Culture," Science, 156 (June 30, 1967), 1699-1705; 

 and Harvey Brooks, "The Problem of Research Priorities," Daedalus, 107 (Spring 1978), 171-190. 



