NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC PROGRAM LEGISLATION 277 



public affairs and have a workinp; knowledge and understanding of 

 the Federal Government and its operations. 



I have dwelled at some length on the organization of the Executive 

 Office for Scientific and Technical Affairs because, in my judgment, 

 the organization is sound and has resulted in substantial progress in 

 the last 5 years. I should interpolate that I also think it could be 

 improved. 



Now I should like to turn to the various bills before this subcom- 

 mittee. 



First, H.E. 2218, by the chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. Lennon, 

 and identical bills by Mr. Pelly, a member of the subcommittee, and 

 Ml-. Bonner, chairman of the committee, to provide for a comprehen- 

 sive, long-range, and coordinated national program in oceanography. 

 This bill is identical to H.R. 6994, introduced by Mr. Lennon in the 

 1st session of the 88th Congress, which was strongly supported in a 

 letter from my predecessor. Dr. Wiesner, to Chairman Bonner in June 

 1963, and which subsequently passed the House in 1963. 



In my judgment this bill continues to represent the best approach 

 to Federal management of oceanographic affairs. It clearly estab- 

 lishes a national policj^ for oceanography, effectively fixes responsi- 

 bility for achieving national goals, and provides for substantial con- 

 trols in the program through annual rex)orts to the Congress. I spoke 

 favorably of the bill before this subcommittee a little over a year ago. 

 I commented favorably on H.R. 2218 in a letter to Chairman Bonner 

 in February of this year. And I continue to support this bill Avhich 

 establishes prudent policies and procedures for achieving a compre- 

 hensive, yet coordinated, long-range program in oceanography. I can 

 suggest no essential improvements to this excellent bill. 



Second, H.R. 921, by Mr. Wilson, to establish a National Oceano- 

 graphic Agency. This bill would create an independent agency, to 

 which functions relating to oceanogTaphy would be transferred from 

 a large number of existing agencies. I do not believe this bill provides 

 a satisfactory solution, because it would centralize in a single agency 

 many aspects of oceanography which must and should be carried on 

 by many agencies of the Federal Government if they are to discharge 

 their statutory responsibilities. 



An arbitrary divorce of oceanography from the agencies would 

 break an essential intellectual link the program now has with other 

 Federal programs, w^hich, in the long run, would tend to cause ocean- 

 ography to be less responsive and less efficient in supporting the pro- 

 grams and purposes of the Federal Government. I believe that re- 

 tention of the major base for oceanography in the programs of the 

 various agencies is sound and should continue. It would be a mistake 

 in principle to attempt to centralize in a single agency the great bulk 

 of the work w^hich is carried on most effectively and most properly in 

 alliance with the missions of the several agencies involved. 



Third, H.R. 5654, by Mr. Fascell, and identical bills by Mr. Fulton, 

 Mr. Hanna, and Mr. Huot, to provide for expanded research in the 

 oceans and the Great Lakes and to establish a National Oceanogra])hic 

 Council. As I noted earlier, the President has had available since 

 1959, through the Federal Council for Science and Technolo^, a 

 means of coordinating and planning Government-wide activities relat- 

 ing to oceanography. The functions of the x)roposed National Ocean- 



