112 



weather here on earth. Now we have changed our minds and the pro- 

 fessionals are saying that the activity of the QUESAE, for example, 

 are causing this to be brought about more than, for example, the sun 

 eruptions. 



I don't want to pursue this, Captain, but I do disagree with your 

 analogy so far as it relates to cancer research. Because what you are 

 really talking about in drawing that analogy is one small portion or 

 small segment of medical research and the establishment of a head 

 over it reporting directly to the President. 



Instead of saying that all of medical research should be brought 

 under one head of which cancer is a small part, establish that under one 

 head, one agency, and then report directly to the President. That makes 

 sense and that pretty much I think is what the Commission is recom- 

 mending here, that most aspects of oceanography or oceanologj^ be 

 brought together under one head so that we could have some direction, 

 some emphasis conducive to an aggressive program. 



I agree it may well be true that the Coast and Geodetic Survey does 

 not now have the capabilities of the Geological Survey in geology, 

 any more for example, than NASA had any capabilities in outer space 

 prior to the formation of that agency. But upon being formed, they 

 drew their personnel from other agencies in the Government, from the 

 academic community and from private industrj?-. NASA formed a co- 

 hesive group of professionals, the likes of which I don't think this 

 nation has ever before seen with the exception perhaps of the Depart- 

 ment of Defense. Had it not been for the fact that they were put under 

 one head with a mission, with an objective, with a responsibility, there 

 is no question in my mind that we would not have a viable space pro- 

 gram today. 



We would have a program with many different people, many differ- 

 ent agencies all going in different directions. As I understand the re- 

 port, Mr. Chairman, the commission is not alleging that, having spent 

 hundreds of millions of dollars on oceanographic research, we have 

 deriAT^ed no benefits at all. 



What they are saying is that we should have derived greater benefits 

 and that the only way we can derive these greater benefits of course is 

 to have a single agency with a commitment and with a direct responsi- 

 bility. Hopefully as a result of our past experience, primarily with 

 NASA, then we will better be able to reach the objectives we all seek. 



I again, Mr. Chairman, want to compliment the gentleman for 

 bringing to us his independent viewpoints, but I would want more 

 time to study the appendices attached to the statement and of course 

 greater time to study the statement itself. 



Thank you very much. 



Mr. Lennon. Thank you, Mr. Karth. 



The gentleman from California. 



Mr. Hanna. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



I have been very pleased to be a part of this panel here this morning 

 and hear your testimony. 



I am struck by the fact that I think your approach is right on target, 

 but it requires a lift factor that may give us political double hernia. 



I think it is allied to a history of our country, and the whole present 

 technology in science, which runs from Henry Ford to Robert Mc- 

 Namara, in which we developed a division of labor and specialists in 



