73 



our prospective partners are asking themselves how such coopera- 

 tion will help them leverage us in the future; and we ought to 

 demand real concessions for making our facilities available. 



As for which fields of science are critical, I understand how diffi- 

 cult it must be to choose. When his colleagues were agonizing over 

 the complexities of space policy after Sputnik, the late Senator 

 Clinton Anderson told Senators not to despair. His experience on 

 the Joint Atomic Energy Committee had taught him that "commit- 

 tee members cannot compete with scientists on their own ground. 

 So we stay in our field — the objective." 



Congressmen are, by definition, more qualified than any expert 

 to weigh the national interest, and I, for one, gratefully defer to 

 your judgment. I can only suggest that in science, as in all else, the 

 first duty of government is to ensure the life, liberty, and property 

 of the people. I personally am not comfort.able with government re- 

 sponsible for the pursuit of happiness, so I barken back to John 

 Locke's original words. 



Life, liberty, and property translates into research for health, en- 

 vironmental sciences, defense, and seed money for new commercial 

 fields. That is not meant to be an exclusive list. But let us remem- 

 ber that government cannot do for universities or the Pentagon 

 or for American business what they are no longer willing to do 

 for themselves. That, perhaps, was the crux of Britain's later 

 problems. 



I do not think that American business suffers yet from the Brit- 

 ish disease. Rather, I believe that if we make the same decision as 

 the Parliament did in 1849, to encourage and to rely on the dyna- 

 mism of the private sector, universities and business, that this 

 country need only be excited about the prospects for American 

 science. 



Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



[The prepared statement of Dr. McDougall follows:] 



