GOVERNMENT & POLICY
ADVISING CONGRESS Holt introduces legislation to reestablish Congress' Office of Technology Assessment Department of Energy, the National SciN J.) and 27 cosponsors, including ence Foundation, and the National InstiHouse Science Committee Chairtutes of Health that directly sponsor man Sherwood L. Boehlert (Rresearch. N.Y.), introduced legislation to Not everyone agrees that reestablishrevive the congressional Office of Teching OTA would be a good idea, however. nology Assessment (OTA). The office was Former Speaker of the House Newt Ginabolished in 1995 during a cost-cutting grich says individual members have plenty frenzy aimed at reducing federal budget of access to science advice, often from their deficits. own constituents. What's more, he says, With the budget deficits a fading memory, at least for now, and with Congress facing a host of science-related issues—global warming, stem cell research, energy policy, Internet policy, space policy, and so on—Holt and others say it is time for an OTA comeback. The Holt bill would revive funding for OTA at a level of $20 million per year for five years —the same level of funding made available during the office's last year of operation. The resurrected agency would use both its own staff and outside experts to perform mul- MORGAN HOLT tidisciplinary studies and provide recommendations to Congress on scientific OTA studies took too long to prepare, and and technological matters. similar studies are available, for example, from institutions such as the National Academies. "CONSIDERING THE BUSINESS of government, and considering the impact of Nonetheless, a revived OTA would high technology on the business of gov"raise the focus of issues that have to be ernment in the U.S. today, the need for scisolved politically," saysJohn H. (Jack) Gibentific advice for Congress has probably bons, a former science adviser to then-presnever been greater," says Philip E. Coyle ident Bill Clinton and a former director of 111, a former assistant secretary for defense OTA. As for the length of time necessary and a senior adviser to the Center for to prepare reports, he says, "it's just plain Defense Information. He spoke at a workwrong that OTA studies took too long." shop, "Creating an Institutional Structure "In the 23 years the OTA was in exisTo Provide Science and Technology Advice tence," Holt says, "it provided Congress to the U.S. Congress," held last month in with respected, impartial analyses of sciWashington, D.C. entific and technological questions in fields as diverse as space travel, agriculture, medRegardless ofwhether individual memicine, defense, telecommunications, transbers have scientific or medical training, portation, and the environment." Today, Coyle explains, the real motivation for he adds, "That kind of ability is essential to scientific and technical advice in Conhelp Congress be effective in dealing with gress is "simply the role that science and the many technically sophisticated mattechnology play in the ordinary business ters before us today" of government." "I had this strong and growing sense that Coyle cites the D e p a r t m e n t s of the vacuum of OTA was not likely to be Defense, Transportation, Health & Human filled," says M. Granger Morgan, head of Services, Housing & Urban Development, the School of Engineering & Public Poland Education. "Science and technology icy at Carnegie Mellon University and one are having a huge impact on the business of the organizers of the recent OTA workof all these departments," he says. And shop. He says that only "pressure from the that's before considering agencies like the
L
AST MONTH, REP. RUSH HOLT ( D -
HTTP://PUBS.ACS.ORG/CEN
outside" will convince Congress to fund a new OTA. "Most congressional staffmembers say, rVCfe're inundated,' "when it comes to information available on almost all policy issues. The workshop, which drew on the participation of many people in Congress, including congressional staff members, explored a single question: What institutional arrangements are needed to better provide balanced, independent scientific and technical advice to Congress on largescale issues that require foresight, analysis, and synthesis? SEVERAL POINTS of agreement emerged from that gathering, Morgan says: • Problems that Congress deals with are increasingly complex with an evermore central role for issues involving science and technology • Congress needs a better source of balanced independent scientific and technical policy analysis. • The need for improved analysis is probably best served by an organization that is located inside the legislative branch. In Europe, there are so-called little OTAs, modeled after the 1972 U.S. office created by Congress, Norman J. Vig said at the workshop. Vig is a professor of environmental and technology studies at Carleton College, Northfield, Minn. These offices "may now provide useful models for Congress if it decides to reestablish a smaller version of the former OTA." Vig says that several conclusions can be drawn from his observations of the European experience: Technology assessment can be successfully conducted on a smaller scale than that of the former OTA; it can be adapted to a wide range of legislative environments and can take many different institutional forms; it can avoid political controversy and partisan attacks. "If Congress wishes to consider reestablishing a technology assessment or science advisory capacity," Vig says, it should engage in "reverse learning" by studying the little OTAs of Europe. "It's a hard sell," Vig continues. Supporters of the Holt legislation, he says, should consider an office that emphasizes science advice over policy analysis. What's more, he says, a new OTA should offer advice to individual members or small groups of members and do so on a timescale of three to six months for most studies. Longer term studies, he says, should not stretch beyond ayear.—Wl LLI AM SCHULZ
C&EN
/
JULY
23.
2001
29
