178 OCEANOGRAPHY 1961 — PHASE 3 



and increased emphasis in terms of effort and finance over the long 

 haul. 



To continue, let me ask you just one more question._ Do there 

 appear to you to be any changes in the existing system which demand 

 to be considered at this moment ? 



Mr. Hughes. I am not aware of any at this particular point in the 

 present Interagency Committee arrangement. Secretary "Wakelin 

 might have some thoughts on that, but I am not aware of any. 



Mr. DiNGELL. In the consideration of this committee, if we could 

 find no strong objections to this addition to the existing program, or 

 if we can find no flaws or bugs in it, in the view of the important 

 witnesses who are participating in it, there would be no strong reason 

 against enacting this, other than just the loss of flexibility of which 

 you are so fearful. Am I correct in this ? 



Mr. Hughes. I think the loss of flexibility is the principal ob- 

 jection. 



Mr. Vanik. Has Congress indicated any lack of understanding 

 of the nee-d for flexibility in this area in the past? Is there any his- 

 torical objection? We have given them about everything they have 

 wanted, have we not ? 



Mr. DiNGEiJL. That is my recollection. 



Mr. Vanik. There has not been any obstruction on the part of this 

 conunittee, as I recall, that would indicate that you could not quickly 

 get any change that you wanted. 



Mr. Hughes. No, I am not aware of any particular problems in this 

 area, but there simply remains the fundamental fact that one of the 

 reasons the committee wishes to put this in statute is to reduce the pos- 

 sibility for change in the structure of the interagency committee on 

 oceanograplw or in the existence of that committee. 



Mr. Vanik. Is not the reverse true ? If we take something which 

 has been established by Executive decree and establish it as a statutory 

 matter, we are firming up the organization and seeking to preserve it. 

 We are strengthening it and giving it a real bulwark in the law. Then 

 you can go ahead and use Executive authority from there on and ex- 

 pand beyond that. We are giving you a firm bulkhead in the law. 

 There conceivably is a time when you might have to resort to it in 

 this area of research. Some successor may come along in the Execu- 

 tive Office and decide to do away with it. We are trying to firm up 

 this thing by statute. 



Mr. Hughes. I think what we are discussing, sir, if I may put it 

 this way, is whether this is the time and the circumstance in which to 

 firm up this type of organization, as the bill would do, by establishing 

 a council of _ the Secretaries of the Departments, which by necessity 

 would function in much the same way through their designees as the 

 Interagency Committee. 



Mr. DiNGELL.^ Mr. Hughes, there is no loss, really, in Executive 

 flexibility in this program, because preserved here is the President's 

 control of the executive departments, the full control of the budgetary 

 structure. If he wished he might say, "We are just not going to give 

 this program any money." Or he might advise the Secretary of 

 Defense, for example, or any of the other Secretaries or other par- 

 ticipating agencies, that "this is the administration policy and this 

 is the way this committee will act." 



