OCEAN SCIENCES AND NATIONAL SECURITY 157 



as specifically suited to "Government scientific and technical serv- 

 ices not principally involved in existing department objectives or 

 strongly related in the organic sense to the functions of a single Federal 

 Department, but of the utmost importance to the Government and 

 people as a whole." ^°^ 



Dr. Berkner stated that in this category responsibilities are not now, 

 nor can be, well discharged by Government: 



(1) since the agencies concerned * * * are stepchildren of considerable nuisance 

 value to their individual departments 



(2) the organizational division * * * prevents collaboration 



(3) these agencies are at a vital disadvantage in obtaining budget support in 

 competition with other bureaus not closely connected to individual departmental 

 objectives 



(4) since these agencies are minor departmental responsibilities, departmental 

 heads have little knowledge of their real importance. * * * Certainly such a depart- 

 ment would include the following divisions: 



1. Phj-sical Sciences and Standards 



2. Oceanography 



3. Meteorology 



4. Resources 



5. Scientific and Technical Information 



6. Mapping 



7. Time, Geodesy and Astronomy 



8. Continental Fish and Wildlife 



9. Radio and Outer Atmospheric Research 

 10. Polar Activities 102 



Somewhat similar proposals, although perhaps less specific, have 

 been advised bv Dr. Wallace Erode, science adviser to the Secretarv 

 of State : 



1. There should be a regrouping of some of the Government's scientific agencies 

 or activities: either a Department of Science, a National Science Institute, or some 

 other coordinated structure. A well-developed coordination must be established 

 between the regrouped combination and those scientific agencies which remain 

 separate, so as to insure an efficient and comprehensive national science program. 



2. There should be a realinement of the distribution methods and responsi- 

 bility for support of basic research in our educational institutions, with a move- 

 ment toward university grants, administered largely by a department concerned 

 with basic research, rather than by agencies concerned with applications. This 

 may well need to be coordinated with the growing problem of support for our 

 advanced-education program in all areas. 



3. There should be some separation of governmentally sponsored, major 

 research institutions from our educational and industrial system, especially of 

 those institutions which are essentially concerned with applied science. There 

 should be a greater acceptance of the idea of operation of such institutions under 

 an improved, directly governmental administration. 



4. The liaison of scientists in government with scientists in the academic field 

 and in industry should be represented by a National Science Council in such a 

 manner as to be compatible with the maintenance of our broad culture and 

 balanced development. i"^ 



Legislation focused in this direction ^vas introduced through the 

 Science and Technology Act of 1958 (S. 3126) and a considerable 

 amount of testimony has been offered concerning the effectiveness 

 either of a central Department of Science and Technology or of the 

 use of national institutes. A modified form of the bill was'introduced 

 in the 86th Congress by Senator Hubert H. Humphrey (S. 676), but 

 at this writing it had not been acted upon. 



'01 "Science Program— Sfth Congress." S. Rept. 120, by tbe Suhcomraittee on Reorganization and Inter- 

 national Organizations, Committee on Governirent Operations, March 1959, p. 117. 



'"2 Ibid. 



103 "Development of a Science Policy" by Wallace R. Erode, Science, vol. 1.31, No. 33S2 Jan I 19(10 pp 

 9-15 (presidential address by Dr. Brode on Dec. 28, 1959, during 126th annual meeting of AAAS in 

 Chicago, 111.). 



