96 HISTORY OF THE COMMITTEE ON S< IEN< 1 AND TECHNOLOGY 



Miller gained some renown as the freshman Congressman who 

 blew the whistle on Elliott Roosevelt for bumping one of Miller's 

 serviceman-constituents from an airplane in order to ship Roosevelt's 

 huge dog Blaze. On the Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee, 

 he became chairman of the Subcommittee on Oceanography, which 

 he helped to create. His progress on the Armed Services Committee 

 was much slower. "I sat on the Armed Services Committee for about 

 8 years," Miller told his committee in a frank executive session shortly 

 after he became chairman. He confessed: "I was never quite taken into 

 the confidence of the people to the extent you are. There was never 

 an opportunity to serve on a subcommittee such as this, to bring this 

 stuff right home to you.'' His experience on the Armed Services Com- 

 mittee, where he looked up toward Chairman Vinson and saw he was 

 only the 14th in seniority, influenced Miller's decision to switch to 

 the Science and Astronautics Committee. Reacting against Vinson's 

 practice, Miller was liberal in delegating authority to subcommittee 

 chairmen on his new committee. 



CONTRASTS BETWEEN BROOKS AND MILLER 



Early in Miller's chairmanship, a staff member remarked: "Under 

 Brooks, I turned out three press releases a week. Now under Miller, 

 there haven't been three in six months." At the organization meeting 

 of the committee on January 17, 1962, Miller quickly organized 

 standing subcommittees, gave them specific names and jurisdictions 

 and encouraged the subcommittees to exercise full responsibility. 



James R. Kerr, in a Ph. D. dissertation written at Stanford Univer- 

 sity, recorded in 1962 an interesting series of interviews with committee 

 members and staff which were very frank because of their anonymity. 

 "Brooks was more inclined to emphasize publicity for the committee, 

 and put this ahead of the work of the committee. We covered a very 

 broad area, but never got to the specifics of the program. * * * We 

 have better cooperation and working together under Miller— there 

 was a feeling of resentment that was there under Brooks," said one 

 member. 



A junior Democrat made this observation: 



Under Brooks we had all full committee hearings— a parade of scientists, military 

 men, civilian experts. But nothing was done about the specifics of the program We 

 didn't know where the money went. But subcommittees are different. You can get a 

 close look at what needs looking at. Generally, you are confined to a small portion 

 of the budget Miller is a fine chairman, but Brooks served a valuable purpose 

 although he epitomised the layman's point of view. He asked that kind of question. 

 He sought publicity, educating the public. 



Another committee member put it this way: 

 There were Brooks and Fulton, two prima donnas. It really became quite 

 impossible with Brooks and Fulton acting like prima donnas baiting each other in 



