646 HISTORY OF THE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 



Teague then added : 



Wc met yesterday and talked about this at length— that if you arc going to pur 

 "engineering" in, we should pur in a number of other things. Our group voted, I do 

 m>t believe unanimously, almost unanimously — ■ — 



Mr. Fuqua. I was outvoted, Mr. Chairman. 



Mr Teague [continuing . Not to include the word "engineering". 



After some minutes of fruitless argument, the subject was deferred. A 

 later staff compromise omitted engineering from the actual title of the 

 hill, but lihcrallv sprinkled it throughout the text of the bill. 



Another sticking point in the conference was the State and regional 

 science and technology program placed in the bill by the Senate, 

 which the House wanted to drop. Just as the engineers had a well- 

 organized campaign for "engineering," so did the State and local 

 organizations flood the conferees with last-minute pressure. The Senate 

 fought hard for its version. Turning to Teague, a deadpan Senator 

 Kennedy intoned: "We do not think all knowledge is here in 

 Washington." Teague responded: "That is one thing our side will 

 agree with you on." 



SUBSIDIES TO STATES 



After some laughter, the debate proceeded along somewhat more 

 acrimonious lines. Senator Ford cited the support of the National 

 Governors' Conference, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the Federa- 

 tion of Rocky Mountain States, and many other organizations. Mosher 

 touched off a violent reaction by Senator Ford when he suggested: 

 Somehow, to me, it seems that this is excess baggage in this bill. * * * 



Ford, his eyes blazing, snapped: 



The term "excess baggage" I do not think would be appreciated by those states 

 who are very strongly interested in this piece of legislation. I might tell my colleagues 

 that I am only 15 months away from being governor. * * * And I have a hard time 

 restraining my emotion when 1 hear, when you want to call states "excess baggage." 

 I do not take exception to the Congressman, only in his language and terminology. 



Teague weighed into the argument from the chair: 



From the time I have been around this place, the science and technology in the 

 White House has been utter confusion. And President Nixon fired his science adviser, 

 and we worked on this damn bill for I do not know how long, and we final 1 

 something worked up that they will agree to. And I do not and I think what Charlie 

 was saying, he certainly was not downgrading the states. But this is not the place 

 to do this. The National Science Foundation, yes; and I will support in every way, 

 form or fashion whatever you want to put in there in this way. There is no question 

 it is a good idea and a good point. But it is not in this bill. In the firsr place, a point 

 of order will be made against it. 



The issue of funding State efforts in science and technology, which was 

 already being undertaken by the National Science Foundation, was 

 finally resolved by a compromise partially sui^cstcd by Symington, 

 who promised to beef up the intergovernmental program in the NSF 



