148 NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC PROGRAM LEGISLATION 



the University of Miami. I am impressed with the progress we have made in 

 the past few years, the significant discoveries, and extension of the potential 

 for science to be applied to the public interest through a parallel development 

 of ocean engineering. 



It has been gratifying to see that the executive branch and the Congress were 

 almost always in agreement about the importance of these goals. During the 

 early 1960's, the program received an increase in appropriations that permitted 

 healthy growth in all areas of marine science — oceanography developed from its 

 earlier primitive state in comparison with other sciences, our fleet of ships and 

 shore based laboratories were strengthened and the educational and manpower 

 base necessary for a sound attack on our ignorance of the sea has been increased. 



But, Mr. Chairman, after an auspicious beginning, this program needs spirit 

 and direction. The budget is inevitably a measure of our priorities. In the 

 case of oceanography, the President's fiscal year 1966 budget of $141.6 million 

 was only about 4 percent over that for fiscal year 1965 — not enough to accom- 

 modate increased costs to operate new ships that the Congress authorized and 

 funded in 1961-63 ; nor is it enough to provide funds for increased basic research 

 associated with growing university enrollment, and especially to provide funds 

 for applied research and engineering for the purposes outlined earlier. 



In the 2 short years since transmittal to the Congress of the Federal Council's 

 10-year program in oceanography, the level of funding is almost $50 million 

 behind schedule. 



We cannot maintain world leadership in an area in which Soviet competition 

 is so significant with this kind of performance. But it is not the uncertainties 

 in funding that alarm me most. 



The extensive interest by the 89th Congress reflects this concern, for, not- 

 withstanding the good intentions of the executive branch to support this pro- 

 gram, it has been obviously difficult to maintain priority attention and assign- 

 ment of manpower and funds in the face of competition for other scientific 

 programs in the national interest. In the absence of any formal mandate from 

 the Congress that the President could construe as a consensus by the American 

 people that this field deserves the attention that has been focused on outer 

 space, and in the absence of any single agency having identifiable responsibility 

 for this program as is true in space exploration, some additional steps are 

 essential. We need a program compatible both with this Nation's role as a 

 world leader and with the opportunities which the oceans offer in maintaining 

 our welfare and our security. We have taken such steps in connection with 

 the Nation's space program, its atomic energy program, its water resources ; 

 but we have not succeeded in developing a similar charter for our activities 

 in the oceans. 



The very diversity of purposes makes impracticable the reorganization of 

 all these functions in a single operating agency. But H.R. 5654 would be a 

 major step in providing a statutory foundation of goals and leadership. 



The Congress applauded leadership of the executive branch associated with 

 the program during formative years, and the Congress looked to the Federal 

 Council for Science and Technology as the coordinating agent of a program 

 that is necessarily conducted in almost 20 departments, agencies, or bureaus. 

 It was especially eager to see this mechanism utilized after the statutory Office 

 of Science and Technology was established that permitted its Director, currently 

 Chairman of the Federal Council, to provide information and advice to the 

 Congress. 



Legislative proposals in the 87th and 88th Congresses were based on concern 

 over the possibilities of a transient determination to give oceanography the 

 leadership it deserved. 



I realize that the executive branch has contended that this program has 

 advanced and will continue to progress without the need for new legislation. 

 In testimony this spring before the Senate Commerce Committee, Dr. Donald 

 F. Hornig (Director of the Office of Science and Technology, and Chairman of 

 the Federal Council for Science and Technology) restated that over the past 5 

 years the program has been scientifically productive, that the Federal mechanism 

 for coordinating oceanography activities has performed well. On the other hand, 

 in response to written questions of Senator Magnuson related to the Federal 

 Council's procedures of endorsement of the national oceanographie program 

 Dr. Hornig notes that the "Federal Council made no specific recommendations 

 with respect to the fiscal year 1966 program recommended by the Interagency 

 Committee." This is the first time since the Interagency Committee on Oceanog- 



