149 



support R&D, technology advancement, as opposed to what is done 

 in some other nations? 



How do we compare to our principal economic adversaries? 



Dr. Press. We do very well. And the problem we faced on the 

 committee is how to maintain that degree of excellence in this 

 country as we face the problems of fiscal constraints, deficit reduc- 

 tion, the pressures on the discretionary budget. 



That was the key issue that we faced as a panel. We want to 

 maintain the strength that we've built up because of bipartisan po- 

 litical support over four decades. 



Mr. McHale. Do the other witnesses have a comment on that? 



Mr. Mahoney. In the case of Japan, the emphasis in the U.S. 

 budget on the R part of R&D has been an extraordinary gain. They 

 have been developing more than researching, and that's become a 

 great concern in Japan, that adaptation is not necessarily going to 

 carry them another 20 years as it did the last 20 years. 



And the U.S. has an extraordinary lead, at least against that 

 country, in the use of R. 



On the European side, the R is a fairly sizable portion of what 

 they're up to. 



Dr. Press. Just to go back to Japan, perhaps they have seen the 

 success story in this country over the past four decades because 

 they are increasing the government contributions to the research 

 budgets. They are making new investments in their universities, 

 trying to emulate the research university concept that has grown 

 here, that has been so successful. 



So I would say that the projection for their budget, even though 

 they have a tough fiscal situation as we do, their projection is in- 

 creasing budgets for science. 



Mr. McHale. It's a clear implication — I'm sorry. 



Dr. Fox. The procedures that we're advocating for determining 

 pre-eminence in science and those fields in which we are world- 

 class would of course address that question on a continuing basis 

 and provide a means by which the investments that are made 

 could be monitored and could be adjusted as fiscal realities make 

 possible. 



Mr. McHale. I think the clear implication of your testimony is 

 that, while in certain areas, for instance, labor costs, we find it 

 very difficult to compete with the wages that are paid in nations 

 that compensate their workers at a much lower rate than we do, 

 that our edge really is in terms of cutting-edge technology, that 

 that's our principal advantage. 



And I think the implication of your testimony is that our past 

 success in that regard has clearly been the result of the public/pri- 

 vate partnership that you would like to see be maintained. 



Is that a fair statement? 



Dr. Press. Good summary. Thank you. 



Dr. Fox. And one of sustained investment over many decades. 



Mr. McHale. Yes. It was not accidental. 



The second and final question I have has to do with a comparison 

 between the advancement of technology, on one hand, versus the 

 transfer of that technology to the market place, on the other. 



If you were prioritizing our investment, would you emphasize 

 continued funding for substantive advances in technology, or would 



