(,! MINI AND APOLLO 



173 



Committee published studies of "The Practical Values of Space Ex- 

 ploration" which were frequently updated to reveal productive new 

 spinoffs from the space program. 



Chairman Miller next took up the cudgels for the lunar landing 

 program. He compared the pessimism of opponents to the opponents of 

 exploring the land beyond the Mississippi River early in the 19th 

 century. With obvious relish, Miller quoted Daniel Webster: 



What do we want with this vast, worthless area, this region of savages and wild 

 beasts, of shifting sands and whirlpools of dust, of cactus and prairie dogs? * * * 



I will never vote one cent from the Public Treasury to place the Pacific coast one 

 inch nearer to Boston than it now is. 



In supporting the majority of the Science Committee in its 1963 

 bill, former Speaker Martin again underlined the fact that "it is not a 

 partisan committee. They give equal treatment to all, no matter what 

 party may be involved. The decisions are fair and impartial. The gentle- 

 man from California (Mr. Miller) has always been fair and generous, 

 and he is a good leader." 



One of Teague's major accomplishments during the 1963 and 

 subsequent congressional debates was to convince his colleagues that 

 as a consistent supporter of the antispending bloc in Congress, he was 

 not about to vote for wasteful expenditures. He also could demonstrate, 

 through the cuts voted by his own subcommittee and the other sub- 

 committees, that the Science Committee was rigorously investigating 

 the NASA budget request and was taking the initiative to make the 

 necessary reductions. Teague's credentials as a conservative on spending 

 were known and respected. The thousands of pages of hearings, visits 

 to NASA and industrial installations, conferences with contractors, and 

 investigative reports bolstered his case. He also won support by taking 

 a middle-of-the-road position between those who felt the committee 

 was embarked on a wild spending spree through a crash program, and 

 those in NASA who professed that the committee was cutting the 

 space program too deeply. Teague won many friends and supporters by 

 this line of argument: 



I would like to take a moment to try to dispel several extreme notions that a lot 

 of people have about our man-to-the-Moon program. 



One of these notions is founded on the allegation that we are proceeding on a 

 crash basis, that we are thereby spending a lot more money than we otherwise would 

 need to and are greedily consuming the bulk of the Nation's scientific talent in the 

 process. 



The other notion is based on the allegation, which we have recently heard from 

 NASA's Administrator, that the amount of money requested for the manned lunar 

 landing is a sacrosanct bare minimum which must be left totally intact if we are nm 

 to slip badly in our lunar landing schedules and lose money in the bargain. 



In my opinion, neither of these allegations will win any awards for accuracy. 



- 79 - It 



