SCIENCE, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT. 1963-69 143 



At the beginning of 1965, the Subcommittee on Science, Research 

 and Development included the following members: 



Democrats Republicans 



Emilio Q. Daddano, Connecticut, Chair- Charles A. Mosher, Ohio 

 " lan Alphonzo Bell, California 



J. Edward Roush, Indiana Barber B. Conable, Jr., New York 



John \V. Davis, Georgia 

 Joe D. Waggonner, Jr., Louisiana 

 George E. Brown, Jr., California 

 Weston E. Vivian, Michigan 



THREE-YEAR REVIEW OF THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION 



Congress is forever facing deadlines dictated by the calendar, such 

 as the necessity of completing authorization legislation in time, 

 hopefully, for the appropriation bills to reach the floor and be enacted 

 before the opening of the fiscal year. The scientists who contributed 

 to the National Academy of Sciences study "Basic Research and Na- 

 tional Goals" were somewhat appalled that the Science Committee 

 pressed them for an early deadline. In its report, the Academy states: 



The National Science Foundation is viewed as playing a decisive role. The 

 National Science Foundation is the sole agency of Government whose purpose is 

 support of science across the board and without regard for immediate practical gains. 

 If there is good basic science ready to be done but which does not as yet command 

 support from some mission-oriented agency, then the National Science Foundation 

 must be equipped to step in, if it chooses, to pick up the tab. 



The summary also noted the possibility that contemplated making — 



the National Science Foundation a much larger agency than it now is — so large that 

 it can eventually become the "'balance wheel", or even the main "umbrella", for the 

 support of basic research — especially in the physical sciences — that is too remote to 

 merit support from the mission-oriented agencies. Such a specific policy with respect 

 to the future growth of the National Science Foundation involves a major political 

 decision by Congress and by the executive branch, as formidable and as far-reaching 

 as its decision has been with respect to expansion of the National Institutes of Health. 



The Academy study brought into sharper focus the need for 

 writing a new charter for the National Science Foundation — which the 

 Daddario subcommittee proceeded to do in the next three years. If 

 the Daddario subcommittee had followed the practice of some congres- 

 sional committees of rushing in, thrusting a sweeping solution at the 

 Congress and the NSF within a self-imposed deadline, and insisting 

 on early action, it is entirely possible that the whole exercise might 

 have been futile. 



