GOVERNMENT Loyalty and Nonsecret Research A w a r d federal grants for unclassified research on basis of integrity not loyalty says NAS committee t o Government Support of Unclassified Research with J. A. Stratton, vice president of MIT, as chairman. T h e committee has just published a report of its findings and recommendations. In the field of unclassified government research, there is no clearly defined policy to guide administrators of government research grants, the committee finds. Congress, in the committee's opinion, has acted wisely in not placing encumbering regulations on research funds made available to nongovernmental institutions. However, for lack of a clearly defined policy;, individual government agencies have pursued somewhat varying courses in awarding research grants. For the most part, Government has refrained from initiating inquiries into the personal character of those people carrying on unclassified research, the committee finds. However, in some cases questions have been raised with respect to the loyalty of specific individuals, even though unclassified research entails no secrecy and involves no danger to national security. The committee believes that when the maintenance of secrecy is contrary to the public interest, as is the case in • Grants for unclassified research unclassified research, irresponsible alshould be awarded o n the basis of the legations reflecting on the loyalty of scientific integrity and competence of individuals in the program should b e the individuals and the merits of the ignored. Under the circumstances, program. character defects such as serious moral • An allegation of disloyalty should defects, indiscretion, or vulnerability not b y itself be grounds for withhold- to blackmail have no bearing on the work. Formal confirmation of this ing a grant. • If the indications of disloyalty are policy by the Federal Government sufficiently serions t o warrant action, would have a vastly reassuring effect the Government should bring formal on the scientific community at large, charges and produce the evidence in the committee says. Scientific integrity should be the open hearings. test in awarding research grants, the Similar recommendations were mad^ committee concludes, because lack of earlier this y e a r by the National Sci- integrity from whatever cause will be ence Foundation in its annual report revealed when the work is scrutinized (C&EN, F e b , 2 7 , p a g e 1956). in the usual way by fellow scientists. • A Confusing P r o b l e m . Over a • Basic D i s a g r e e m e n t . Much of the year ago, the National Academy of Sci- confusion over loyalty clearances for ences was invifed t o advise the Gov- individuals working under federal reernment on formulation of policy de- search grants undoubtedly arises from signed to avoid misunderstandings be- differing points of view regarding the tween scientists and the Government. purpose of government-sponsored reAccordingly, t h e academy established search. One point of view is contained the Committee on [Loyalty in Relation in the widely quoted comment, "It is a
/ I L GROWING TENDENCY on t h e p a r t of
government administrators to carry over into unclassified government research the loyalty-security clearances required by "sensitive" projects is a matter of deep concern to the scientific community. In t h e opinion of a special committee of the National Academy of Sciences, "There is n o reason for singling out research for the application of loyalty requirements which set it apart from t h e multitude of other unclassified activities engaged in by the Government/* No member of the committee condones disloyalty or suggests that the Government ignore evidence of disloyalty. However, the group says that so long as the scientific integrity of an individual is unaffected b y political, moral, ideological, loyalty, or other attitudes, those attitudes have no bearing on the merit of his research. To develop t h e proper climate in unclassified government research, the NAS Committee on Loyalty in Relation to Government Support of Unclassified Research in a special report to the President recommends that the Government adopt these policies:
2014
C&EN
APRIL
2 3,
1956
HALL SYNDICATE
"You mean these secrets have been stolen already?"
privilege, not a right, to work for the Government." The committee takes sharp issue with this point of view. It says t h a t the persistent idea that in granting funds for research the Government confers a favor on scientists as individuals is contrary to fact. The size of our efforts and t h e cost of systematic attacks on the unresolved problems of science make it necessary to draw heavily on public funds. By establishing a system of research grants the Government does not become a charitable foundation on a grand scale, the committee says. The Government is not engaged in philanthropy, b u t only in t h e procurement of t h e rawmaterials of applied science. No action has as yet been taken on the recommendations of the committee. A White House spokesman says that the heads «of a number of government agencies are studying the committee report.
New Joint Committee? Congressional interest in maintaining United States leadership in basic research and in solving the critical shortage of scientific manpower m a y lead to the formation of a Joint Committee of the House and Senate on Scientiilc Research. A joint resolution (S. J. Res. 159) establishing such a committee was introduced in the Senate last week. Principal function of the n e w committee would be to act as an advisory group for other committees of Congress in problems pertaining to science. Although the committee's primary concern would b e the field of manpower in scientific research, it would b e given wide authority in related areas for investigation and study.
