508 HISTORY OF THE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 



On the opening day of the hearings in 1973, Pickle summarized 

 the general scientific attitude: 



There is a great feeling of uneasiness and apprehension, if not fear, among many 

 scientists throughout the United States. 



The battle within the committee over the NSF authorization was 

 joined when Conlan, Parris, and Martin moved to hold the total 

 authorization at the budgeted level, while making other adjustments 

 in programs to give more emphasis to institutional and science educa- 

 tion support. Conlan penned a memorandum to Davis on March 30, 

 1973, noting: 



Hope this meets with your approval, as our Nation doesn't need any more 

 inflation at this time. 



Davis immediately responded that he shared their concern over 

 inflation, but that the NSF budget was already far less than requested 

 in 1972. Davis added: 



This decrease should be compared to requested increases of almost $1 billion 

 for public assistance payments and an undetermined amount for aid to North Vietnam. 



FUNDING THE NSF IN 1973 



At this point, Fuqua introduced a compromise which was midway 

 between the Davis bill and the budgeted level sought by Conlan's 

 group. In the subcommittee markup, McCormack strongly supported 

 the Davis funding level, but he and Bell agreed to support the Fuqua 

 compromise if the level for RANN were increased. The conservative 

 bloc traded for a few reductions in the Fuqua proposal, prompting 

 Martin to muse at one point: 



There is an arbitrary nature to this anyway, which I think forgives a certain 

 amount of horse-trading. 



The mood of compromise dominated the markup session, with 

 Davis concluding: 



There isn't any question about the mood of the country being one to economize 

 wherever possible, and also it's extremely important that the credibility of this 

 subcommittee be well established and preserved. It's got a good reputation now as 

 having reasonable views on the amount of effort that ought to go into our scientific 

 and technical effort in this country, and I want to preserve that reputation. 



Fuqua added that his compromise effort was both an attempt to avoid 

 a Presidential veto and to preserve the essentially important areas of 

 NSF support for science. 



IMPOUNDMENT BATTLE IN THE HOUSE 



The thorny issue of impoundment was not easily settled. The full 

 committee debated the question at length on three occasions. In 



