144 NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC PROGRAM LEGISLATION 



Establishment of an independent agency in my opinion has certain 

 organizational advantages, but from a practical standpoint where we 

 are today it is extremely doubtful that we can get the necessary admin- 

 istrative support, support outside of the Congress, or even congres- 

 sional support to create an independent agency. Such a proposal 

 gives rise to the immediate difference of opinion as to whether it is 

 practicable or desirable to excise the oceanographic components out of 

 the various agencies such as the Bureau of Fisheries, the important 

 scientific research carried on by the Navy, and others, and put them 

 into a new civilian agency. 



It might very well be, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, 

 that you gentlemen as experts might want to make the decision that 

 the whole flavor of oceanography ought to be away from the military 

 and have a civilian characteristic. 



It is all too obvious to us that our budgets are always based on 

 priorities. It is all too obvious that because of the military need and 

 necessity and the response of the Congress to that military need and 

 necessity the first money that comes out is military money. 



You might decide in the national security and in the national 

 interest that this whole program out to have nonmilitary direction. 



I am inclined to support that kind of approach. But I don't know 

 whether or not it is scientifically right or not. This is a matter which 

 I think would have to be based on the testimony of the military 

 people and the scientists, oceanographers, and others who could tell 

 you whether that is the correct approach. 



It would seem to me, based on the evidence that is before us today 

 and what we can deduce, that the independent agency approach is not 

 practical from either a scientific point or a political point. 



I realize of course that from the executive point of view it is con- 

 tended that no legislation is necessary and that the present program 

 is working. But I would point out to you that we have all kinds of 

 legislative proposals pending. This indicates that some are dissatis- 

 fied, so I think that the administrative agencies need to take that into 

 consideration if they think that the present setup is satisfactory. 



I don't believe that under present arrangements, oceanography, and 

 I think the evidence supports that view, has special status as a national 

 program or that it has an overall budget definition. 



I believe that if we have a council which has the responsibility as 

 laid out in this bill, while it has its own faults because it is in the Office 

 of the President and from an organizational standpoint this may not 

 be desirable, it seems to be the most practical approach at this time. I 

 concur with the chairman that had we done something that was 

 practical 3 years ago we would be in a lot better shape than we are 

 today. 



Again as a practical matter I point out that in the other body, in the 

 Senate, they have approved the approach of H.R. 5654. It would be 

 very difficult for the agencies to make the same objections to this bill 

 that they made to the bill advocating an independent agency. 



The important action is to start. We could lay down an oceano- 

 graphic charter for a broad objective national program. By acting on 

 H.R. 5654 we would for the time bypass the very delicate and dif- 

 ficult problems of excising out of the agencies the component parts of 

 the oceanographic program if that is ever desirable. 



