628 HISTORY OF TH1 COMMITTE1 ON SCIENC1 AND TECHNOLOGY 



A new Congress — the 94th— assembled in January 1975. With 

 newly expanded jurisdiction and a new name, the Committee on Sci- 

 ence and Technology flexed its muscles with pride. But at two orga- 

 nization meetings held on January 23 and 30, not a word was said 

 about the important substantive work being carried on, or the nego- 

 tiations underway with respect to the advisory science machinery in 

 the White House. Aside from Teague, Mosher, and a few staff prin- 

 cipals, most Members and those associated with the committee were 

 completely in the dark on what was occurring. The two organization 

 meetings of the full committee were devoted to extensive debates on 

 such mundane matters as proxy voting, the party ratios on subcom- 

 mittee, and the voting rights of ex officio members of subcommittees. 



Meanwhile, over on the other side of the Capitol, Senator Kennedy 

 reintroduced S. 32, which had died with the expiration of the 93d 

 Congress at the end of 1974. Symington was asked by Kennedy's staff 

 to introduce S. 32 in the House, and he informed Teague he would 

 not do so without consulting his chairman. P.S. : he didn't introduce it. 



When asked how the House bill was going to differ from S. 32, 

 Yeagcr said that it "would go beyond the establishment of a White 

 House science advisory system to deal with the way line agencies 

 whose primary mission is R. & D. should be structured and with 

 the gathering and dissemination of science information within the 

 Government." 



ROCKEFELLER MAKES HIS REPORT 



In February 1975, things really started to move fast. Vice President 

 Rockefeller submitted his report, entitled "Science, Technology and 

 the President's Executive Office," on February 5. The same day Yeager 

 talked by telephone with James M. Cannon, Director of the Domestic 

 Council at the White House — the key man with whom the committee 

 kept closely in touch — and brought him up to date on the draft bill 

 which had now been completed. Teague gave the green light to pro- 

 vide Cannon anything and everything he could use to start working 

 toward a meeting of the minds between the White House and the 

 committee. So Yeagcr bundled up a huge batch of material — -hearings, 

 reports, portions of the draft bill, and analyses. Yeager was careful 

 to add this disclaimer in his February 6 note to Cannon: 



It is important to understand that while this material has been put together 

 only after careful study, it is intended solely for discussion purposes at present. 

 The draft enclosed has not been circulated elsewhere and it does not necessarily 

 represent the views of the committee or any of its members. At this point and in 

 the future we will be mainly concerned with obtaining the reactions and views of 

 others with regard to such legislation as may be introduced 



