466 HISTORY OF III! COMMITTE1 ON S< II \< E AND TECHNOLOGY 



In October 1971, the Science Committee published as a committee 

 print the study entitled "A Metric America", noting "the interest in 

 the report, and particularly the nationwide recommendations con- 

 tained therein." 



The year 19~2 was a relative inactive one for the progress toward 

 the metric system in the Science Committee. It was an election year. 

 The No. 1 cheerleader for the metric system, George P. Miller, intro- 

 duced a conversion bill in March, but in June he went down to defeat 

 in the California primary and nothing further was done that year. 

 The National Aeronautics and Space Administration, which had de- 

 creed in 1970 that its policy was henceforth to utilize metric symbols in 

 its work, reported a highly successful response. With space exploration 

 becoming an international venture, along with the multinational 

 scientific work in which the United States collaborated, this was a 

 natural development for the agency authorized by the Science Commit- 

 tee. But while Senator Pell was steering a 10-year metric conversion 

 bill through the Senate in 1972, the Miller bill died without any House 

 action as the 92d Congress drew to a close at the end of 1972. Also, more 

 and more ominous rumblings of opposition began to be heard from 

 organized labor and small business, concerned about conversion costs. 



SMALL BUSINESS OPPOSITION 



In 1972, the House Select Committee on Small Business issued a 

 report, based on hearings in June 1971, suggesting that the metric sys- 

 tem w r ould produce long-range advantages to U.S. industry and busi- 

 ness, but could inflict financial hardships on the small business com- 

 munity. The Small Business Committee report concluded: 



The subcommittee finds that although there is an increasing use of the metric 

 system by many large business concerns, small businessmen appear to use this system 

 to a far lesser degree. This would indicate that small firms are likely to encounter more 

 difficulties in converting to metrics than is the case with big business. The subcom- 

 mittee therefore concludes that the small business sector of the economy would need 

 affirmative and meaningful assistance in metrication. 



Numerous bills providing Federal subsidies to small business to con- 

 vert to the metric system were introduced in both the House and Senate, 

 putting pressure on the Science Committee to do likewise. 



At the beginning of 1973, there was a renewed interest in the 

 Science Committee and the rest of Congress in carrying out the recom- 

 mendations of the Commerce Department's metric report. At the same 

 time Senator Pell was gearing up to get some version of a metric bill 

 passed again in the Senate, a number of bills were introduced in the 

 House. Among the Science Committee members who introduced 

 metric conversion bills in 1973 were Teague, Mosher, Hechler, Davis, 



