SCIENCE, RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY, 1970-79 537 



On a rollcall vote of 21 to 12 in the full committee, Dornan's 

 amendment was passed, requiring grantees in precollege education 

 projects to obtain prior school board approval The Dornan amend- 

 ment followed the principle that a greater degree of grass-roots control 

 over education was needed. 



In 1977, the committee endorsed the policy decision that NSF 

 basic research and comparable research throughout the Federal 

 Government should increase at an annual rate of 9 percent. The ration- 

 ale was that this would equal an annual gross national product growth 

 rate of 3 percent, with the other 6 percent covering inflation. 



FLOOR DrBATE ON NSF AUTHORIZATION IN 1977 



During the floor debate on the 1977 bill on March 24, 1977, bi- 

 partisan support for the legislation was expressed both by Wydler 

 (ranking minority member of the full committee) and Hollenbeck 

 (ranking minority member of the subcommittee). Rudd, who had 

 voted against the bill in full committee, also spoke and voted against 

 the bill on the floor on the grounds that the increase over the 1976 

 funding was too large. Rudd's amendment, designed to concentrate 

 more NSF funding to private industry, was defeated, largely through 

 Thornton's opposition argument that 60 percent of all Federal R. & D. 

 funds already went to die industrial sector, with less than one-fifth 

 of that amount going to colleges and universities. Interestingly enough, 

 Rudd, a strong conservative, supported a position which was written 

 into the Senate bill by Kennedy, a strong liberal. The conference 

 committee compromise retained the existing NSF ground rules, with 

 the exception that the door was opened for cooperative industry- 

 academic research projects and exchange programs. 



Once again, the conference committee wrestled with the science- 

 for-citizens issue, on which the House and Senate were far apart. In- 

 stead of the $5 million authorized by the Senate or the $100,000 voted 

 by the House, the conference compromised on $1.8 million — or 50 

 percent above the budget. But the House succeeded in writing severe 

 limitations against use of the funds by either lobbyists or intervenors, 

 and also banned those groups which the Internal Revenue Service 

 defined as substantially engaged in propaganda or the influencing 

 of legislation. 



Another big battle with the Senate took place over one-year or 

 two-year authorization, with the Senate claiming that the two-year 

 period would allow more continuity and planning, and the House- 

 insisting that control and oversight were tighter if the customary pro- 

 cedure were followed. The House position of one-year authorization 

 won out in 1977. But the logic of the two-year authorization plan was 



