364 



HISTORY OF THE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 



did not completely agree, and contended that technology utilization 

 served a different audience. 



The committee urged greater emphasis on the "Spacemobile" 

 which had successfully brought the advantages of the space program 

 into classrooms from coast to coast. Dr. Fletcher furnished figures 

 which contended that a growing proportion of funds were being 

 spent on the Spacemobile. 



A typical example of the difference of opinion between the com- 

 mittee and NASA is contained in this exchange: 



Committee Staff Report. — The NASA Public Affairs program appears to lack 

 innovation, initiative and imagination and can be traced to the policies of the Agency 

 which are the responsibility of the Administrator, Deputy Administrator, and the 

 Assistant Administrator for Public Affairs or a combination of all three. 



Fletcher's response. — Do not agree in the context of our understanding of the 

 terms "innovation, initiative and imagination"; however, NASA does agree that more 

 could and should be done. 



In its 1974 report on the NASA authorization bill, the committee 

 concluded the following, among other views: 



It is the sense of the Committee that NASA should be doing much more in the 

 area of disseminating space benefits information to the public at large through its 

 Public Affairs Organization. 



Although there were some spotty improvements in NASA 

 efforts, the committee throughout the period remained critical of 

 NASA's total accomplishments in getting the space benefits story 

 to the people. In a letter to Teague on May 24, 1978, Dr. Fletcher 

 commented: 



The Committee really gave NASA a difficult time trying to encourage it to 

 broaden and intensify its program of communicating with American taxpayers. 

 Engineers typically do this rather poorly, and yet Congressmen, because of the nature 

 of the political process, are skillful at this. Part of the pressure on the part of Com- 

 mittee members was frustration at NASA's inability to perform better in this field. 



We did succeed in bringing professionals into NASA's Headquarters organiza- 

 tion, but I'm afraid we never really did satisfy the Committee's hopes in this regard. 

 * * * One difficulty, however, which is a perpetual one is that the Committee wanted 

 us to spend more money in this area but we were severely constrained from doing so 

 by (1MB, and I imagine this is still the case. 



The most exciting development in response to the committee's 

 efforts has been the publication of the annual "Spinoff" reports by 

 the Technology Utilization Division, which commenced in the 

 bicentennial year of 1976. "Spinoff 1979," a 116-page color illus- 

 trated publication, proved to be one of NASA's most popular publica- 

 tions, and the demand exceeded the supply. 



Some of the "mainline" or direct benefits are provided through 

 weather and communications satellites, orbiting satellites like Landsat 



