30 EFFECTIVENESS OF THE COMMITTEE ON OCEANOGRAPHY 



Mr. Wakelin. Yes, sir; we have even been encouraged to do this 

 by Dr. Wiesner. 



Mr. Lennon. You didn't mention that in your statement. 



Mr. Wakelin. No, I did not, and that, I think, is a serious omission. 



Mr. Lennon. I, for one, have never been able to recognize that 

 you can have a long-range national objective program when each 

 department and each participating department, agency, and bureau 

 has in substance the veto over the long-range objectives of your total 

 program, and that is what I think you have got here, and that is the 

 inherent weakness, I believe, of the ICO. 



Do you care to comment on that statement? 



Mr. Wakelin. Would you feel that the provisions of the proposed 

 bill 4276 would help us in this regard? And the reason I ask is for 

 my own information. It seems to me that if one is considering a 

 structure established by statute, that if one were to address oneself 

 to this particular issue, that this in a sense would be excising from 

 each department, then, a functional responsibility, and putting it 

 into a new organization. I feel that you are asking me a question 

 about the whole executive structure, using oceanography as an ex- 

 ample, if you understand my reply, sir. 



Mr. Lennon. W'ell, it has a national and international scope, and 

 importance that has been attributed to it by the President, who is 

 constantly referring in public appearances, and even messages to the 

 Congress in the field of oceanography. It does seem to me that it 

 would be worthy of the dignity and the recognition of a department 

 set aside to obtain some long-range national objective, in which the 

 various departments and agencies and bureaus who participate in it 

 would not have the veto through their own budgetary problems over 

 the total program. 



You will have to recognize that even though the program was 

 authorized prior to this Executive order of last year, that it was only 

 this committee which from time to time in the hearings developed the 

 fact that departments or agencies which should be participating in the 

 ICO came in only after it developed in these various hearings that 

 we have had that they were not in it, and that they had a real part or 

 place in it. 



Much to my surprise, time and time again, agencies appeared here 

 who have a very vital interest in this program, and it was conceded 

 that they hadn't even been approached. Ultimately and subse- 

 quently, they were brought in, by invitation, for which we are glad, 

 but it just doesn't seem to me that we can ever do the job that is 

 necessary to be done unless we can have some central agency. 



Now you take the Coast Guard. There are many of us who feel 

 that the Coast Guard is admirably equipped to participate to an 

 appreciable degree in this program. What is your budget for fiscal 

 1962? $134 million? 



Mr. Wakelin. $134 million, sir, for oceanography. 



Mr. Lennon. All right, now what part of this is included in the 

 Coast Guard's budget for oceanography— $134-and-some-odd thou- 

 sand? Is that right? 



Mr. Wakelin. $134,000 is the level that we are talking to in the 

 President's budget, for the Treasury Department. 



Mr. Lennon. Well, let us see to what extent the Coast Guard could 

 participate in this program, budget wise, for fiscal 1962. What does 

 your figure show there, Mr. Secretary? 



