OCEAN SCIENCES AND NATIONAL SECURITY 151 



them from being established merely to forestall other forms of action that might 

 be more effective. 



The potentialities of the committee device require testing by analysis of exist- 

 ing experiences, after which there will be more of a basis for determining the 

 extent, if any, to which it should be preferred to other measures for securing 

 coordination. 



# I): « * 4: * * 



There are a number of specific issues that bear directly upon the potentialities 

 of the interdepartmental committee. The first and most fundamental is that 

 of the types of activity that can appropriately and effectively be carried on 

 through interdepartmental committees. A second is that of what to do to 

 secure a decision in those cases where, after consideration of an issue, a commit- 

 tee finds itself deadlocked. A third, closely related to the previous two, is that 

 of the level in the governmental hierarchy at which committees should normally 

 be established for maximum effectiveness. A fourth has to do with the method 

 of establishing and discontinuing committees ; a fifth with where responsibility 

 shall be fixed for the administrative supervision of committees, if it is agreed 

 that there is a need for such supervision ; and a sixth with the question of how 

 committee secretariats shall be provided. Several of these issues arise on every 

 occasion on which the establishment of an interdepartmental committee is 

 considered. 



Issue 1: (a) Types of activities 



It may be usefiil for analytical purposes to state a range of alternatives that 

 reflect a spectrum starting with substantive policy at one end and detailed ad- 

 ministrative activity at the other. If this is done, the major positions or alterna- 

 tives along the scale might be somewhat as follows : (1) The formulation of sub- 

 stantive policy, the drafting and adoption of policy papers, and the review of the 

 implementation of policy; (2) responsibility for program planning and review, 

 including the framing of program proposals, adoption of program plans, and 

 review of program performance; (3) responsibility for pi-eparing proposals for 

 presentation to Congress and instructions for negotiations with other govern- 

 ments; (4) responsibility for determining the assignments to be made to the 

 various participating agencies in carrying out agreed programs of action, in- 

 cluding the settlement of such incidental jurisdictional questions as may arise; 

 and (5) responsibility for coordinating and controlling program administration 

 in detail when it is necessary to carry on a program through the joint activities 

 of several agencies. 



* * * * * tf m 



Moreover, although the usually cumbersome nature of a committee may be 

 thought to restrict its usefulness in the formulation of broad new programs or 

 policies, a committee can more easily perform the almost equally important 

 function of revieio of policies and programs. Here there is no necessity for 

 opening up broad new vistas ; the question is only one of what is to be seen at 

 the end of the vista ; and yet the policy problem is an important one, and 

 is the kind of problem on which the views of a variety of agencies may be of 

 real assistance. 



Issue 2: Appellate procedures 



Effective operation of an interdepartmental committee depends upon some 

 method of breaking possible stalemates in the committee. Inability to resolve 

 committee differences may lead to reconciliation of views on the basis of the 

 lowest common denominator, or to a postponement of decision, perhaps until the 

 issue is settled by inaction. In addition, it is possible that the primary responsi- 

 bilities of an agency may be seriously affected by its inability to get a firm 

 decision from an interdepartmental committee on a matter related to the area 

 of its responsibility. The poor reputation of interdepartmental committees among 

 governmental officials is largely attributable to the fi^equent absence of a clear 

 method of compelling a decision in the event of deadlock. 



******* 



While it is true that an individual with some shadow of Presidential authority 

 can sometimes mediate in situations where committees cannot agree, the fact 

 is that the recurrent use of the interdepartmental device is based on the need 

 to bring together the views of a number of agencies plus a distrust in most 



