582 HISTORY OF THE COMMITTE] ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 



and informational in nature. Thornton, Hollenbcck, and Brown the 

 most outspoken subcommittee members — provided the leadership to 

 move the subcommittee to focus on research and development policy 

 in the materials area. Accordingly, the subcommittee held hearings in 

 February, March, and September 1978 on the issues and the new legis- 

 lation introduced. In a statement on September 7, 1978, Thornton 

 indicated: 



As I said last February, this issue is second to none when the United States must 

 import 50 to 60 percent of 39 basic minerals it needs for survival. 



Hollenbeck added: 



It is extremely important to recognize that the decisions we make today on 

 materials and, I might add, energy, will affect our economy and environment for 30 

 to 50 years hence while capital facilities and skilled labor representing our technology 

 slowly evolve into the next generation. 



After eight years of carefully planned groundwork, the subcom- 

 mittee held its first full-scale public hearings on the materials policy 

 issue in 1977 and 1978. Through the efforts of the subcommittee, the 

 problems involved were fully aired. At one point, Thornton observed: 



It is unfortunate but true that when we talk of a materials problem the response 

 that most often returns to us is a blank stare. 



The subcommittee helped to reduce these blank stares in the Congress 

 as well as in the executive branch and to some extent among the 

 general public. The increasing amount of attention directed at the 

 issue even raised the question within the Science Committee as to 

 whether there might be created a Materials R. & D. Subcommittee 

 in the future. As observed by subcommittee Staff Director Yeager: 



It is not an issue which is likely to peak and fade away, for like energy, except 

 on a broader scale, it would appear that materials research is going to be a necessary 

 activity of this committee indefinitely. 



On September 7, 1978, Teague wrote a thoughtful letter to OMB 

 Director James T. Mclntyre, raising the issue of the need for a "high- 

 level analytical capability within the Executive Office of the President' ' 

 in the materials policy area. Teague put his finger on the crux of the 

 problem: 



A key issue, that must be resolved early during deliberations on this legislation, 

 is the question of where to fix responsibility, within the executive branch, for de- 

 fining and analyzing trends and problems in the materials area. It is imperative that 

 this function be lodged within an institutional structure that will assure continuity 

 and high-level interest in materials policy analysis. 



In October 1978, the committee added a materials specialist, Paul 

 Maxwell, to the staff, enhancing the expertise brought to bear on the 

 problem With the opening of the 96th Congress in 1979, materials 



