\ \!\\ NAME AM) EXPANDED AUTHORITY FOR THE COMMITTHE 697 



Congress now authorizes and appropriates over $15 billion annually for scientific 

 research and development. It is also faced with the task of monitoring a complex 

 array of 42 technical programs that cross agency lines. 



At present, no single committee in either House has comprehensive and coordi- 

 nating lurisdiction over these activities. * * * We therefore recommend that the 

 committee in each House that now most nearly approaches such concentration have 

 its present jurisdiction expanded to encompass the necessary coordination. 



At this point, once again the Science Committee lost its oppor- 

 tunity. There was no rallying of the troops, and in fact there was 

 sheer apathy toward the recommendation of the joint committee on 

 the part of the Science Committee. Soon other committees began to 

 object to any action to change committee jurisdictions. The report 

 gathered dust. The Committee on Rules did not act because there was 

 simply not enough pressure to act. Finally, the Rules Committee de- 

 cided to hold hearings in 1970 on a stripped-down version of the 1966 

 recommendations. Here again, the Science Committee leadership 

 neither testified nor seemed to express any interest. Perhaps the Rules 

 Committee would have smothered such an effort, yet there were those 

 who felt at the time that the effort was at least worth a try. 



EXODUS FROM THE COMMITTEE 



In 1970 and 1971, the first effects of the impending decline in space 

 funding and space interests began to be felt. The younger members 

 of the committee began to look for greener pastures — committees 

 which could produce more direct benefits for their districts. At the 

 close of the 91st Congress in 1970, the Democratic side of the committee 

 was hit with a wave of resignations. Daddario left to run for Gov- 

 ernor of Connecticut, and Brown went off to try for the Senate in 

 California; seven other members voluntarily left to join other com- 

 mittees. This meant that out of the 18 Democrats on the committee 

 in 1970, only nine opted to be assigned to the committee in 1971. 



For Miller and Teague, this represented a crisis in the life of the 

 committee. As chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, Teague 

 had frequently discussed with Speaker Rayburn the problem of keeping 

 good Members on that committee, which Teague realized could only 

 be done if they were allowed to serve at the same time on other com- 

 mittees. Since the caucus rules permitted service on only one major 

 committee, the status of the Science Committee as a "major 

 committee" was effectively preventing some Members from serving 

 on any other committee. This issue, of course, cut both ways : Changing 

 the Science Committee to a nonmajor committee would enable more 

 good Members to bid for assignment, but at the same time it seemed 

 to reduce the prestige of the committee. 



