16 HISTORY OF THE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 



Despite the known opposition of Speaker Rayburn to this concept, 

 the joint committee was written into all the early drafts of the proposed 

 Space Act legislation. At executive sessions held in the House Ways 

 and Means Committee room, just off" the House floor, on May 13, 14, 

 19, and 20, the joint committee concept remained in the bill and was 

 unanimously approved by the select committee. When Chairman 

 McCormack introduced a clean bill, H.R. 12575, on May 20, the joint 

 committee not only survived but also received strong support in the 

 committee report (House Report No. 1770), dated May 24: 



The select committee gave serious consideration to the establishment of standing 

 committees (on aeronautics and outer space) in the House and Senate, but decided 

 instead on the establishment of a joint committee. The provisions of title IV of the 

 bill are patterned closely after the provisions of the Atomic Energy Act creating the 

 Joint Committee on Atomic Energy. * * * 



Such a committee would provide a number of advantages. In addition to prevent- 

 ing possible conflicts and omissions, as well as unnecessary duplication, it would give 

 Congress the means to oversee executive operations effectivel v in the highly important 

 and urgent field of space flight. 



Something funny happened to the idea of a joint committee on the 

 way to the House floor. Between May 24, when the House select com- 

 mittee had glowingly endorsed a joint committee and June 2, when 

 the bill was taken up in the House of Representatives, the joint 

 committee suddenly fell from favor. Introduced on May 27, Carl 

 Albert's Resolution 580 sailed through the Committee on Rules on 

 May 29, putting the leadership squarely on record in favor of a separate 

 standing Committee on Science and Astronautics for the House. When 

 Majority Leader McCormack was explaining the action in killing the 

 joint committee, he told the House of Representatives on June 2: 



In the bill we provide for a joint committee, but we have eliminated that, and I 

 am going to offer a motion to strike that out, because the Committee on Rules has 

 reported out a resolution within the past few days establishing another standing 

 Committee on Science and Astronautics, which gives it a broad base of legislative 

 action, and in the light of that it will be unnecessary to continue the joint com- 

 mittee in this bill; at least, the members of the select committee feel that way. 



Chairman McCormack told the House that on the morning of 

 June 2, just before the bill reached the House floor, the select committee 

 had unanimously agreed to strike the joint committee from the bill. 

 McCormack moved on the floor to excise the joint committee, and his 

 motion received no comment, debate, or objection and was accepted 

 immediately without opposition. When the Senate considered the 

 proposal, there were only passing references to the advantages or dis- 

 advantages of a joint committee. Senator Jacob Javits (Republican of 

 New York) asked Senator Johnson whether the joint committee would 

 have oversight jurisdiction over the National Aeronautics and Space 



