NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC PROGRAM LEGISLATION 173 



Mr. Wilson. That is rif^lit. 



Mr. Drewry. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. Lennon. Thank yon very much, Mr. Wilson. 



Mr, Tom Downino-, a distino-uished member of the full committee, 

 Ave would be delighted to hear from you at this time, please, sir. 



For the record, Mr. Thomas N. Downing of the Commonwealth of 

 Virginia. 



STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS N. DOWNING, A REPRESENTATIVE 

 IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF VIRGINIA 



Mr. Downino. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen. 



I have a brief statement in siippoi-t of this proposition. 



Like my good friend and colleague. Judge Casey, I sit on the House 

 Science and Astronautics Committee as well as this subcommittee. I 

 am closely familiar with our Nation's objectives and goals in space. 

 Space, we are fond of saying, is our new frontier and we are, in this 

 I'ountry, committing about $7 billion annually to explore outer space. 



To me, ocean research is just as important as space research. I see 

 two new frontiers — outer space and inner space, and I believe the 

 public generally shares this subcommittee's view that the United 

 States must achieve preeminence in mner space as well as outer space. 



But, Mr. Chairman, while I see two frontiers, I see only one national 

 frontier program. We have, in the United States, recognizable and 

 broadly known national goals and objectives in space. Every Amer- 

 ican knows of our national deadline on moon landings. 



Americans know what our space policies are and Americans support 

 our space programs but, Mr. Chairman, in the other frontier in inner 

 space there has been no determination of policy for the utilization of 

 our ocean resources. 



Quite the contrary, as many of my colleagues have already pointed 

 out in testimony before this subcommittee, inner space exploration in 

 the U.S. Government is splattered amone* 5 departments, 3 independent 

 agencies and 22 operating bureaus aiiS/or offices. The plans, pro- 

 grams and budgets of this conglomerate activity are considered and 

 disposed of by some 32 authorization and appropriation committees 

 and subcommittees. Our executive branch oceanographic activity is 

 clearly a classic example of messy administration. 



Let nie hasten to add, Mr. Chairman, that I do not make my state- 

 ment critically. Oceanography, like Topsy, "just grew," and I do not 

 believe we could say that anyone is fairly at fault for the 

 administrative omelet we have in oceanographic research today. 



But I do sincerely believe that we would be somewdiat blameworthy 

 if we do not inmiediately move to clarify the role of the various repre- 

 sentatives of the Federal Government in oceanographic research and 

 provide the United States with national goals and national objectives — 

 a national ocean program, if you will — so that we can begin to reap 

 some benefit out of the exploratory activities we have been carrying 

 on at sea. 



There are, of course, any number of ways to deal effectively with 

 the administrative difficulties we are facing in our oceanographic 

 activit3\ I, personally, would be entirely willing to be openminded 

 and accept any solution that is generally acceptable to this subcom- 



