~22 HISTORY OF THE COMMITTEE ON S( IEN( I AND IK HNOLOGY 



MINORITY STAFF 



The successive committee chairmen fought consistently against 

 a separate staff for the minority. Brooks, Miller and Teague shared 

 the same philosophy -that the committee staff was there to serve all 

 committee members without reference to party. The issue did not arise 

 while Brooks was chairman, but Fulton as ranking minority member 

 brought it up frequently during the 1960's. As pointed out on pages 

 183-184, Fulton was finally successful in appointing the first minority 

 staff member, Richard E. Beeman, in 1968. 



From that point on, the struggles of the minority to obtain 

 fairer staff representation increased each year. Since the Republicans 

 were in a minority during the entire period and had not controlled 

 the Congress since 1953-55, it is unfortunate that the debate took on 

 strictly partisan overtones. This made it more difficult for the minority 

 to argue, which they did very effectively, that the caliber of legis- 

 lation was raised through better data compiled by staff working 

 directly for minority members. It was undeniable that no matter how 

 fair the chairman, and no matter how nonpartisan the staff, there 

 were occasions when minority members took a position on legislation 

 which needed staff aid on issues like drafting amendments, re- 

 searching arguments, and presenting minority testimony. In ad- 

 dition, of course, it was obvious that the regular staff responded 

 with higher priority to requests from the chairman, subcommittee 

 chairmen and executive director. The minority wanted a staff which 

 would be more responsive. 



During the 1960's when Fulton was the ranking minority member 

 of the full committee, there was a growingly favorable sentiment in 

 the Congress and among political scientists and journalists toward 

 better minority staffing. While the Democrats controlled the White 

 House up until 1969, this became more marked. But even with the 

 period of Republican administrations from 1969 until 1977, the sup- 

 port for minority staffing grew. There were a few maverick Demo- 

 crats who dared to buck party lines to lend support for minority 

 staffing. For example, when the Monroney-Madden Joint Committee 

 on the Organization of Congress made its 1966 report, of the six 

 House Members, three Democrats and three Republicans had an 

 early standoff on the issue. Hechler broke the tie by voting with the 

 three Republicans to support staffing for the minority. When the House 

 Rules Committee finally came out with a congressional reform bill 

 in 1970, it also contained a provision for minority staffing. Very 

 quickly after the 1970 election, Fulton sent word to Miller in Cali- 

 fornia that the minority was ready to exercise its rights under the 

 1970 legislation. There followed the precipitous action of the 1971 

 Democratic caucus, ratified by the House, wiping out the short-time 

 gift bestowed on the minority. 



