SCIENCE. RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY. 1970-79 535 



community they are really respected and I want to see them maintain thac respect- 

 ability. When they get involved in controversial areas, issues that arc highly inflam- 

 matory and emotional, then it embroils the Foundation in areas that I question 

 whether they should be involved in or not. And also I think it damages the tine work 

 that the Foundation has been doing over a long period of time. 



Harkin was faced with a solid phalanx of opposition. He pointed 

 out that the Senate was funding the program at a $5 million level, and 

 remarked: "So we are going in totally the opposite direction." This 

 prompted a brief exchange with McCormack : 



Mr. McCormack We will guide them in the conference committee. 

 Mr. Harkix. I do nor know about that. 



Defeated in subcommittee, where he stood alone, Harkin brought 

 his fight to the full committee where he had more support, but not 

 enough. In the full committee markup on March 9, Harkin offered an 

 amendment to increase the science for citizens program from $100,000 

 to $1.2 million, the budgeted request. Harkin argued: 



Many of the decisions that are being made in the area of science and technology, 

 being made by scientists, drastically affect the lives of every citizen in this country. 

 To say somehow that those citizens should not have any inputs or should not be 

 provided the technical data, the scientific data necessary to investigate and explore 

 and to bring into the forum of open public discussion and debate these issues that are 

 going to drastically affect our lives is, I think to take a very nondemocratic attitude 

 towards our whole society. 



McCormack rebutted: 



This program for intervenors started a number of years ago. It came before us in 

 the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy when they came directly in and demanded 

 support, financing so they could come in and oppose the programs the Federal Gov- 

 ernment was proposing. This was rejected. Now we are down to talking about forums 

 and workshops and this sort of thing. But the key words in this are public interest 

 groups. It is not professional science organizations. It is self-starting groups of private 

 citizens who have a particular perspective that they want to impose upon the public 

 and they want to use Federal bucks to do it. 



Myers argued that there were insufficient checks on how the money 

 was to be spent by NSF, and Rudd added: 



It appears to be creating a giant and unnecessary un-think-tank which will not 

 be productive. I oppose it. 



Harkin observed that if the progress of the vast scientific and tech- 

 nological community "is going to be jeopardized by a paltry $1.2 

 million, then that scientific and technological basis is on pretty shaky 

 ground. I don't think that is the case." Harkin's amendment lost on a 

 rollcall, 21-11. 



In the subcommittee markup, a cut of about $30 million had been 

 made in funds for basic research. Dr. Frank Press, Director of the 

 Office of Science and Technology Policy, telephoned Thornton and 



