144 HISTORY OF THE COMMITTEE ON SCIEN< I AND TECHNOLOGY 



Theodore Wirths of the National Science Foundation, in a June 5, 

 1978, letter to Chairman Teague, described the approach of the Dad- 

 dario subcommittee both on this issue and in general: 



Its operating style is in many respects a model for producing good legis- 

 lation. * * * Entirely in keeping with its interests, the Committee's approach has 

 certain essential elements of good science and good scholarship. Its approach to 

 problems involves research, analysis, recommendations, examination of those ma- 

 terials, presentation of them for general discussion and assessment and then a repeti- 

 tion of thi at least once and sometimes many times. Eventually, the Com- 

 mittee brings forth a recommended legislative package that has been studied with 

 great care, has an intelligent and credible record and is trusted by those involved or 

 interested as a responsible approach. 



At the request of the Daddario subcommittee, the Science Policy 

 Research Division of the Library of Congress made a thorough study 

 of the NSF's legislative authority, organization, funding and programs 

 which the committee published in May 1965, as "The National 

 Science Foundation — a General Review of Its First Fifteen Years." 

 After this report was published, Daddario's subcommittee held 

 hearings from June through August of 1965, designed to provide a 

 critical evaluation of the Foundation, its functions and operations as 

 they then existed and in the future. 



In an extensive article published by the International Science 

 and Technology magazine, senior editor David Allison sized up the 

 work of the Daddario subcommittee in its hearings and gave it high 

 marks. Concerning the investigation itself, Allison noted that, first, 

 the Congressmen had prepared for it through the National Academy of 

 Sciences and Library of Congress studies. Allison also concluded: 



The second distinguishing feature was the subcommittee itself: Daddario and his 

 colleagues, whose questions were often superior to the answers they evoked, and 

 whose responses to those answers often showed a deeper understanding of the place 

 of science in our society than did the responses of some of the committee's witnesses. 



The NSF by 1965 was spending $420 million annually, as contrasted 

 with only $35 million in 1951, its first full year of operation. Director 

 Haworth was a little troubled by the fact that he felt some of the NSF 

 grants might be considered as being applied research. Haworth related 

 in a June 30, 1978 letter to Chairman Teague that he had several dis- 

 cussions with Mim Daddario in Mim's garden after work. "Indeed 

 it was on one such occasion that I first suggested to him and Phil Yeager 

 the idea of including authority for applied research in any bill to mod- 

 ify the National Science Foundation Act." In Haworth's words, it 

 was a suggestion to Daddario that Congress "make the Foundation 

 honest." This was indeed one of the recommendations in the committee 



