82 



(HC) is a facility that our scientists want to use, we certainly 

 should make it possible for them to do that. 



In the meantime, and probably for all time, we will be building 

 facilities that scientists from all over the world will want to use, 

 as we are now. 



Mr. Olver. Should these cooperative efforts be proportionate? 

 Are we going to allow that one be the first among equals, that 

 someone else may be the first among equals in some projects? Is 

 there any problem with that? 



Dr. Lane. That is a very tough question. I wish I knew the an- 

 swer. 



My feeling is that there is some problem with that, but it is a 

 very difficult question. 



Right now, for example, our telescopes that we have made sub- 

 stantial investment in are available for the world. There is a peer- 

 review process where the best ideas and the best people can work 

 at these facilities. 



Many of our other large facilities are available to the world of 

 scientists in that same way. That reciprocity is very good for 

 science. It means the best science gets funded, as opposed to the 

 best science within some subcategory of more deserving folks. 



Science is going to prosper if we can keep peer-review of the way 

 in which the decisions are made. 



So I think there is a problem, but it is a very important question 

 and a very difficult one in dealing with these large, expensive 

 projects. I don't have the answer. 



Mr. Olver. Is there enough money 



Mr. Ehlers [presiding]. The gentleman's time has expired. I will 

 let you ask this one final question. 



Mr. Olver. Do we have enough money investing — are we invest- 

 ing, or is there a proposal to invest enough money to make certain 

 that the general principles that you have put forward are going to 

 be met? 



Are the proposals in the budgets by the President, or those which 

 have been under discussion for this year and the planned expendi- 

 tures there for the next few years, are those enough to do what you 

 are suggesting I think in broad form? 



Dr. Lane. I don't believe that the analysis across all of the in- 

 vestment, federal investment, has been done to the extent that I 

 could answer that question confidently in the affirmative, but it is 

 an issue for the fundamental Science Committee. 



We talk about this all the time. NSF, I can say 



Mr. Olver. You cannot answer confidently in the affirmative? 

 That is a fairly circumspect statement. 



Dr. Lane. Well, my feeling is that the plans of the individual 

 agencies do appropriately take into account the need for inter- 

 national cooperation and making available to our scientists access 

 to these facilities. 



The LHC is a good example where that planning is underway. 

 But what I simply do not know is when you add all the pieces to- 

 gether with all of the programs of all of the federal agencies that 

 support science, I think you were asking about the totality, and 

 that is what I do not know the answer to. 



