Senator Rockefeller: “The Old Era is Over”

Senator Jay Rockefeller’s (D-West Virginia) first year as chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Science, Technology and Space is coming to an end. As the replacement for now Vice President Al Gore, Rockefeller has become one of the Senate’s chief players in the formation of science and technology policy.

Last month, Rockefeller spoke before the Council of the National Academy of Engineering on a wide range of topics, including the Senate report language on the future of the National Science Foundation. Selections from his address are reprinted below:

“I see Federal science and technology policy being developed and implemented in a new context, or more accurately, in an historical context that most of you are too young to remember.”

“You all know - most of you I suspect from personal experience - that our nation often turns to its scientists and engineers to solve its most pressing problems. For most of the past half century, winning the Cold War was the national priority that shaped Federal science and technology policy and the agencies - both civilian and defense - that implemented it. With the industrial dominance we enjoyed during that half century, economic competitiveness took a back seat.”

”...you scientists and engineers who helped win the Cold War, and those of you who get funding from the Federal government, are getting a new assignment -- help foster `long term economic growth that creates jobs and protects the environment’ [a fundamental goal of the administration’s 2/23/93 technology policy statement.] In the Cold War context this may be perceived as a radical change, but in the America of 1900 or even 1920, emphasis on economic growth and jobs would have been unremarkable.

“This policy has broad, bipartisan support on Capitol Hill. In fact, it was the Congress that began the push for a redirection of Federal science and technology policy, and a lot of us in Congress are pleased to have an administration moving in the same direction.”

Rockefeller later continued:

“What about science research? In this area, Congress is making clear the old era is over. But that does not mean Congress is criticizing basic research per se, despite the perceptions of some in the university community. Rather, we have begun to question budget priorities of the old policy.

“The votes in the House of Representatives against the Supercollider, and recent Senate language on NSF, both illustrate the shift of spending priorities that means nuclear physics will become less important while areas such as manufacturing engineering, materials science, and biotechnology will receive higher priority. The Supercollider may survive - and I hope it does - [this address was given before the SSC’s termination] but I doubt Congress will ever again fund such a large physics laboratory instrument.

“In the case of NSF, the Senate recently gave the university research community a choice -- be more relevant to competitiveness or do not expect much new Federal money. However, I do not read the recent Senate-approved Appropriations Committee report as a proposal to convert universities into applied research centers. Rather, in approving the emphasis on `strategic research’, the Senate is telling universities to do more investigator-initiated, basic research in the national priority areas identified by the Federal Coordinating Council on Science, Engineering, and Technology, which are currently: high performance computing, advanced materials, manufacturing research and education, biotechnology, and global change.

“The majority (about 55%) of the NSF research budget already goes into these areas, but we would like to see that increased somewhat (to 60%). Of course, so-called `non-strategic research’ could create great social benefits and increase our national competitiveness, and research in the so-called `strategic’ areas could produce nothing. The division between the categories is somewhat artificial so we fenced off 40 percent of the NSF research funds for basic research in `non-strategic’ areas of knowledge.”

Rockefeller concluded his address by discussing his subcommittee’s future agenda:

“We will continue to help reshape existing agencies to meet the goals of President Clinton’s technology policy. That means NIST, NASA, and NSF. And we will continue to watch efforts by all Federal laboratories to work with American industry to commercialize technology.

“We will push agencies to work together to meet national needs. I will work with the administration to strengthen interagency efforts in such areas as high-performance computing, the `clean car’, and others. For example, new technologies offer incredible opportunities to improve the quality and lifetime of roads, bridges, buildings, and other infrastructure. Earlier this year I held hearings on how Federal programs might help us to improve our physical infrastructure, and I am preparing legislation in this area.”