154 



substantial support in keeping the Space Telescope alive and 

 coming, we all hope, to a successful conclusion. 



But the energy of the OSTP community, I suppose, is also limit- 

 ed, and can be exhausted in struggling with a mission like the 

 Space Telescope and other things of that size. 



Mr. Brown. Well, it is very important to remember that none of 

 these important projects are conceived and developed in one ad- 

 ministration. Going back to IGY, it was conceived, developed, and 

 planned and implemented over a period of years which spans sever- 

 al administrations. And in order to ensure that it continues over 

 several administrations, it requires that there be a broader base 

 than just the individual occupancy of a particular position in any 

 administration. Am I communicating to you? 



Dr. Friedman. Yes. Certainly. 



Mr. Brown. That is why I am focusing on this linkage, which 

 has to be ongoing and which has to have some political basis some- 

 where. 



Dr. Friedman. We have been talking primarily about astronomy. 

 For reasons that I think are entirely admirable, the country at 

 large supports our astronomy efforts, which far exceed those of the 

 rest of the world. If we try to put it in a political context, we usual- 

 ly come down to talking about spinoffs. What are the broad values 

 in a very practical technological way of doing missions of this type? 

 I think there are very good reasons in the spinoff category for 

 doing them, but we are not usually forced to push those reasons in 

 order to get political support. 



Mr. Brown. Well, I don't think you should. Your strength is that 

 in basic science you are funded not because of the spinoffs but, in 

 this administration, and I think in the Congress, because of a rec- 

 ognition of the importance of basic science per se. You get into the 

 spinoff problem when you get into technology and the applications 

 of technology. 



I apologize for taking so much time, Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. FuQUA. Mr. Packard. 



Mr. Packard. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. Brown asked a question that I was particularly interested in 

 also, and that is, how we prioritize, and so forth. Let me carry that 

 just a little bit further. You have talked about how we do it here 

 nationally, but I am interested also in terms of international priori- 

 tization and how that fits in, as well as the private sector here in 

 this country, and how they are involved in that prioritizing of our 

 dollars. 



Frankly, we are reaching the point where I think a lot of our 

 policy is driven by economic concerns and considerations. How do 

 we determine how much of our budget is going to go toward astro- 

 nomical research, and how much is going to go toward high-energy 

 physics, and how much is going to go toward biomedical and a mul- 

 titude of other scientific research programs? 



I would be interested in your evaluation of how that can be car- 

 ried out now in the international community and the dollars that 

 are available from the various international participants, as well 

 as plugging in the private sector and whether they have any influ- 

 ence in that prioritization. 



