Ask the Scholar
Page 1 of 1
I can add historical knowledge about this page.
Page image
OCR
The original documents are located in Box 7, folder "Science and Technology Adviser:
October 8, 1974-February 5, 1975" of the White House Special Files Unit Files at the
Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald Ford donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Digitized from Box 7 of the White House Special Files Unit Files
at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Jung Jone Juny Jones paper
for you'science
on
Rich
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Dichael
October 8, 1974
MEMORANDUM FOR:
DONALD RUMSFELD
FROM:
PHILIP W. BUCHEN
SUBJECT:
Attached letter from Congressman Udall
dated August 22, 1974
I thought this more appropriate for your consideration.
SEP5 1974
Dear Me:
Thank you very much for your August 22 letter. As
long-time partners in the legislative process, we
have shared major decisions affecting the well-being
of our great country.
I am confident that, in a cooperative effort between
the Legislative and the Executive branches, we will
move ahead to meet our essential domestic and foreign
policy goals. I do want to let you know that your views
and recommendations will always be welcome.
As you may know, I am currently reviewing the structure
of the White House organization and I appreciate having
your suggestions on the importance of including a science
and technology advisory capacity. Your views will be
most helpful to me in assessing the requirements of the
Executive Office of the President.
With warmest personal regards,
Sincerely,
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
JERRY FORD
The Honorable Morris K. Udall
House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515
bcc: w/incoming to William Scranton . - FYI
Note: Interim acknowledgement CC by Bill Timmons and copy of
incoming letter sent to your office on August 30.
GRF:WET:EF:VO:vo
August 30, 1974
Dear Mo:
Until the President has an opportunity to
do so personally, he has asked me to thank
you for your warm comments about his con-
duct of the Presidency. He also appreciated
your sending him your suggestions concerning
the establishment of a three man science
advisory council within the Executive Office
of the President.
Às you may know, the President is reviewing
recommendations for restructuring the White
House organization and your views will be
most helpful to him as he weighs various
proposals.
With warm regards,
FORD & GERALD LIBRARY
Sincerely,
Bill
William E. Timmons
Assistant to the President
The Honorable Morris K. Udall
House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515
bee: w/incoming to William Scranton for appropriate handling
bee: w/incoming to E. Frayer - for Presidential letter
WET:EF:VO:ah
COMMITTEES:
MORR'S 20 DISTRICT K. OF UDALL ARIZONA
INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS
POST OFFICE AND CIVIL SERVICE
Congress of the United States
house of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515
22 August 1974
The President
The White House
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
Washington, D.C. 20006
Dear Mr. President:
May I offer my congratulations on your first week in office.
The spirit of openness, cooperation and straight talking which
you both propose and practice cannot fail to make a major con-
tribution to the solution of the serious problems which face
us. Although I know that you are desperately busy just now,
I should like to offer a suggestion about which I feel very
strongly.
I believe that the current lack of a science and technology
advisory capacity within the Executive Office of the President
is a serious failing that should be remedied as you set up and
organize your administration. Currently, as you know, the
Director of the National Science Foundation serves as the
President's science advisor. This arrangement creates a
serious built-in conflict of interest for the Director. In
this respect I can do no better than to quote from a recent
report published by the National Acadamy of Sciences entitled
"Science and Technology in Presidential Policymaking," which
I commend to you very warmly. The report states:
"It is not merely that an Advisor outside
the White House and the Executive Office
has a different status than one who is
within it. It is also the untenable po-
sition of one who is at the same time both
applicant to the OMB and counselor to it,
who must at the same time battle for the
prerogatives of science and technology and
weigh those prerogatives against the de-
mands of others who make competing claims
on resources."
The Ad-hoc Committee which wrote this report recommended
that the President's Science Advisor be reconstituted in the
form of a three man council, preferably established by law,
whose members would be chosen by the President with the
advice and consent of the Senate and supported by a staff
of sufficient size and appropriate expertise. The Committee
made several other suggestions concerning how the council
THIS STATIONERY PRINTED ON PAPER MADE WITH RECYCLED FIBERS
should function, with which executive agencies it should have
close working relationships, and the need for expert support
from outside the Executive Office. These are sound proposals,
worthy of serious consideration. In my own judgment, however,
the essential element of success will rest in the choice of
the individual advisors -- they must be men and women who
command universal respect among their professional peers, and
for whom you feel complete confidence and a close personal
rapport.
We all know (sometimes to our sorrow when they are misused)
of the enormous power and potential of modern science and tech-
nology. Within just the past year, the longterm problems of
worldwide food and protein shortages, non-renewable natural
resource management, climate change, and energy conservation
and resource development, have taken on frightening new dimen-
sions. These have to be added to the more familiar list of
problems which depend vitally on science and technology for
their solution: national defense and international arms con-
trol, health care and its delivery, urban development and
many more. The list is awesome in its breadth and consequence.
The search for wise solutions will require that the President
of the United States have at his right hand, directly and in-
timately in his service, the best scientific and engineering
advice he can find.
In closing, I urge you to give this suggestion and those
contained in the Academy's report your sympathetic consider-
ation, and I send you my warmest personal wishes for success
in all your undertakings.
Sincerely,
Morris K. Udall
FORD LIBRARY
tmm
Congress of the United States
have
SHINGTON
house of Representatives
-PM
Mashington, D.C. 20515
200
&
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
M.C.
The President
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20006
1/13 - when w do we effect
this and whonshould
d follow. - 0250 up with ?
Naliody -
:OT
Just send back мояч
to me in 2wks
wallat
& ,/28
D - hets memo
R
0 Nell for a
GERALD
Status report
of
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Date
TO: D- -
FROM:
JERRY H. JONES
Put m
follow up- -
supposed Rockyis to
come in with
I
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
December 10, 1974
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JERRY JONES
FROM:
DICK CHENEY
D
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
Jerry, this is just a reminder that you might want to touch base
with Paul O'Neill to make certain he's working up options for the
Science Advisory function. I believe Don talked to him by phone,
but you should follow up.
Barbara is getting the attachment.
FORD LIBRARY
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
November 8, 1974
GERAL FORD LIBRARY
MEMORANDUM FOR :
JERRY JONES
FROM:
DICK CHENEY ?
The President would like to include something in the
State of the Union on the science question. There is
a letter attached from Ed David which should be considered.
The Council approach is probably the best one. You
should keep in mind that we have to consult fully
with Tiger Teague on which approach we take.
You probably ought to get the Domestic Council or
whoever is responsible to prepare some options
along the lines of the Council approach, possibly
with some other non-Council approaches and make
certain somebody checks with Tiger Teague to get
his veiws on the subject.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
DIANA
HERE is THE
ED DAVID
LETTER WHICH
SHOULD BE
GERALD R.FORD LIBRARY
ATTACHED TO
THAT memo
TO J.
BARiPPiE
11-12-174
9:02a.m.
1
OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
WASHINGTON, D.C.
From the
To:
President: Don Rumsfell
a.m.
Date:
Time
p.m.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
He lays it out will.
2 lean toward #3
which is legislation in mill.
Teto' discuss.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 30, 1975
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
DON RUMSEELD
will
Congressman Teague, Congressman Mosher and others
are anxious to be cooperative on the science adviser
matter. Their committee is poised and ready to go.
They want to be helpful and are hopeful of passing a
bill that will be acceptable to you. They are awaiting
consultation and advice from us as to what might be
appropriate.
For this reason, I suggest you might wish to again raise
the matter with the Vice President 80 that, hopefully, he
can give you some sort of report. Otherwise, it strikes
me we ought to get some people in the White House working
on it. We want to get going before the Congress starts
moving on a different track.
ORIGINAL RETIRED FOR PRESERVATION
EDWARD E. DAVID, JR.
1000 INTERNATIONAL TOWER BUILDING
8550 WEST BRYN MAWR AVENUE
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60631
November 4, 1974
Dear Rummy:
I enjoyed discussing briefly with you last week the matter of
science in the White House. As you requested, I am attaching a
brief options paper on the subject. It contains no recommendations
and I think fairly represents the range of actions available at this
time.
My own preference in the matter is to go with a simple, straight-
forward arrangement such as that described in Option #4, namely
appointing a Counsellor for Science and Technology. Clearly,
in the longer range, Option #3, namely a group with operational
responsibility in the Executive Office, is preferable. If it could
be pulled off at this time, it would be a very effective instrument
for the President. The other options seem to me either impractical
or ineffective.
The general matter of science in the White House I have discussed
informally with a number of other people previous to seeing you.
Among these were Senator Charles Goodell, Dr. Ted Marrs, and
the President himself when he was Vice President. For each of
them I wrote a short summary of my views. In addition, I testified
at general hearings before the House Committee on Science and
Astronautics and on Bill S2495 before the Senate Commerce
Committee. I understand that that bill has been approved by the
Committee for action on the Senate floor. This bill calls for a
Council of Science and Technology along the lines of Option #2
which as I said before, would be cumbersome and ineffective.
I will make all the material I have written on these matters avail-
able to you if you so desire.
Please let me know if I can be of further assistance.
Yours cordially,
The Honorable Donald Rumsfeld
Ed
Assistant to the President
The White House
Washington, D. C.
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
OPTIONS FOR SCIENCE IN THE WHITE HOUSE
FORD LIBRARY
Background
The Executive Office of Science and Technology was established in 1962
(Eisenhower Administration). With it and comprising the total White House science
apparatus was the Science Adviser to the President (Assistant rank), the President's
Science Advisory Committee ("distinguished" outside consultants), and the Federal
Council for Science and Technology (Departmental Assistant Secretaries for R&D).
All except the latter were abolished in Reorganization Plan #1 of 1973, effective
June 30, 1973. The Director of the National Science Foundation was designated as
Science Adviser (to the Executive Branch generally, not the President specifically)
and the Federal Council was transferred to his cognizance.
In this role, the National Science Foundation and its advisory apparatus have
worked largely under OMB on issues related to budgets. There has been little
interaction with, for example, the Defense Department or HEW on matters of R&D.
The issue now is whether to re-establish a White House mechanism and, if so, of
what sort.
Any such mechanism must consider two aspects of science and technology
policy. First and most important for the White House is a scientific input for
Presidential policy matters. For example, the President's anti-inflation program
could make greater use of technological methods for increasing productivity,
reducing waste, and reclaiming scrap. This function is commonly called science
for public policy-making.
There is also policy for science. This includes federal policies which impact
the scientific and engineering community. Among such policies are Federal reim-
-2-
bursement of R&D expense by government contractors, federal patent policy, federal
support of graduate education and research in science, and funding of federal
science facilities and laboratories.
There are approximately 1.5 million scientists and engineers in the U.S. today.
About two-thirds are engineers, one-third scientists. This cohort does not have
its own integrated governance. There are many interest groups including professional
societies, scientific organizations, and irregular groupings. Predominantly
engineers work in industry, scientists in academic and non-profit institutions.
Both are present in large numbers in the Federal government. Despite their reputation
for liberal thought, the community at large represents all shades of opinion in very
nearly the same proportion as the general population. There tends to be, however,
different value systems between scientists and engineers, the former value ideas
and intellectual substance, the latter tangible accomplishment in the worlds of
affairs and business.
Option 1 - Department of Science and Technology
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
This option would establish a Cabinet-level department including most of the
independent science-based agencies; for example, NASA, National Science Foundation,
Bureau of Standards, National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Agency, Energy
Research and Development Agency, and perhaps some others. The Department
would not usurp existing Departments' research and development where that work
was directly supporting the Departmental mission. Scientific inputs for the White
House would come from the new Department.
-3-
PRO
1. Consolidates a number of independent elements which can be more effectively
focused on national problems.
2. Can act in part as a representative for the technical community which today
feels underrepresented in national decisions.
3. Avoids expansion of the Executive Office and the White House staff.
CON
1. Requires legislation. (A first step not requiring legislation would appoint
a Presidential Counsellor for Science and Technology and have independent
science agencies report to him.)
2. Reduces diversity of support for technical programs.
3. Increases separation of science and technology from their customers.
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
4. Creates a new bureaucracy.
5. Would be received with some scepticism by technical community.
Option 2 - Council of Scientific Advisers
This Council would be established in the Executive Office after the pattern
of the Council of Economic Advisers. Its duties would be purely advisory and it
would publish a yearly report on the state of U. S. science and technology.
PRO
1. Has been recommended by a distinguished committee of the National Academy
of Sciences, the most prestigious organization of U.S. community.
2. Would essentially re-establish the previous White House science mechanism
with minor modifications.
-4-
3. Would be favorably received principally by scientific community.
CON
1. Would inflate Executive Office and White House staff.
2. Would add nothing new to the previous White House mechanism which in the
end was ineffective.
3. As a purely advisory office, it would have difficulty in establishing itself as a
force for influencing decisions and R&D activities by the agencies and
departments.
GEARLE TORD LIBRARY
Option 3 - Office of Research and Engineering Management
This Executive Office would be charged with approving all Federal R&D
programs before they were submitted to OMB for budgeting. Thus, it would perform
the same function for the Executive as authorization committees do for the Congress.
The Director of the Office could be either a Counsellor or Assistant to the President.
PRO
1. Would be a truly effective means for improving the quality and productivity of
Federal R&D.
2. Would have a well-defined area of responsibility along with the necessary
authority to set R&D priorities in response to national policies.
3. Could attract high-quality industrial as well as academic scientists and
engineers. Thereby more action-orientation would be achieved.
4. Would be well received by entire technical community.
-5-
CON
1. Would be opposed by OMB and perhaps other elements of the Executive Office.
2. Would expand Executive Office and White House staff.
3. Would put another level of approval in budgetary procedure.
Option 4 - Counsellor for Science and Technology
This option envisions appointing a Counsellor to the President with a small
staff. They would be chartered to study the matter of science in the White House
further and make recommendations, say, within six months. During the period,
the Counsellor, using his staff and outside agency resources, would provide
the desired scientific inputs for policy-making.
PRO
LIBRARY &
1. Would be widely recognized as a plausible and constructive step.
2. Would be possible to recruit an outstanding scientist or engineer of
accomplishment to fill position.
3. Would encounter minimum opposition.
4. Would provide sound technical inputs to meet immediate needs.
CON
1. Would create expectations of further action.
2. Would be volatile and could disappear without ceremony.
3. Would depend heavily on outside White House sources for information and
staff work.
-6-
Option 5 - Upgrade the Current Arrangement
This option would dress up the current arrangement making the NSF Director
the Science Adviser to the President and giving him a seat on the White House
councils as well as such prerequisites as an office in the Old EOB.
PRO
1. Could be done at once by promoting the incumbent.
2. Would please the OMB who have already established working relations with
the NSF advisory apparatus.
3. Would re-establish the previous presence of science in the White House.
4. Minimal inflation of Executive Office and White House staff.
CON
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
1. Would not be well received by the technical community generally.
2. NSF by its nature as primarily a basic research-academic support agency is
not well suited to advise across the spectrum of White House needs.
3. The current arrangement does not include military R&D in its scope. Military
analysis of technical options and programs would continue to be carried out
by NSC.
Option 6 - Do Nothing
PRO
1. There is no imposing urgency to re-establish science in the White House.
CON
1. Misses an opportunity to make science and technology an effective part of
White House decision-making.
-7-
2. Undercuts implied (only) resolve by President to take action on the matter
based on statements when he was Vice President.
3. Would disappoint most of technical community.
GERALD
1
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 28, 1975
MEMORANDUM FOR:
PAUL O'NEILL
FROM:
JERRY H. JONES
Would you please put together a status report on the options for
the Science Advisory function.
Thank you.
GERATE R. FORD LIBRARY
1
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Don R.
Have real.
FORO is . 034830 LiBRARY
Interest in Ataffing
comments.
MR 7
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
ORIGINAL RETIRED FOR PRESERVATION
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
February 4, 1975
MEMORANDUM FOR:
DIANNA GWIN
FROM:
JERRY JON
Please find out what Paul O'Neill's intentions
are as to making recommendations either to
the President or the Vice President on the
Science Advisor.
GERALD GERALUR
7
*
*
THE VICE PRESIDENT
*
&
WASHINGTON
73
is
February 5, 1975
MEMORANDUM
TO:
THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
THE VICE PRESIDENT har
THROUGH:
MR. JERRY JONES
As requested, I am sending you
a paper containing recommendations entitled
"Science, Technology and the President's
Executive Office."
SUMMARY
SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND THE
PRESIDENT'S EXECUTIVE OFFICE
In order to meet his responsibilities most effec-
tively, the President must have ready access to
independent scientific and technical advice of the
highest quality.
Recommendation
An Office of Technology and Science should be
established by legislation within the Executive Office
of the President.
Staffing
The Office would be headed by a Director, a highly
qualified scientist, who would serve at the pleasure of
the President.
The Director would be assisted by a Deputy, a
flexible number of Assistant or Associate Directors
depending on the needs of the Office, and a variety of
ad hoc panels created from time to time to provide
specialized advice and judgment.
Activities
Depending on the President's requirements, the Office
would have the capacity, among other things, to
-- resolve conflicting technical advice,
-- gather and analyze expert views,
-- identify gaps in scientific research or
technological development,
-- maintain contact with the scientific and
technical staff of the Departments and
Agencies, and
-- provide specialized assistance to the
Domestic Council and the National Security
Council.
Estimated Budget: 1 to 3 million dollars.
SUGGESTIONS FOR NATIONAL SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD
Dr. Lewis Branscomb, Vice President and Chief
Scientist, IBM
Dr. Harold Brown, President of Cal Tech
Dr. William Hewlett, President of Hewlett-Packard
Dr. Hans Mark, Director, Ames Research Center, NASA
(biographical material will be forthcoming)
SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND THE
PRESIDENT'S EXECUTIVE OFFICE
Recommendations
February 5, 1975
February 5, 1975
SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND
THE PRESIDENT'S EXECUTIVE OFFICE
GERALE FORD LIBRARY
Recommendations
1. There should be a scientific and technological
capability directly available to the President
(a) Many issues that come to the President, either
for decision or for initiative, involve science
and technology, sometimes to a very high degree,
in the analytical and judgmental process.
(b) While the federal departments and agencies have,
and should have, scientific and technological
competence of high quality, the President should
have available to him an independent source of
scientific and technological judgment of the very
highest quality. The organization set up to pro-
vide such a source for the President must not be,
or be perceived as, the representative of the
scientific and technical community in the
President's office.
(c) While the present need for such a capability is
clear, in our complex and technologically varied
society, the need to draw upon science and
technology to meet urgent problems and oppor-
tunities will be even greater in the decades ahead.
- 2 -
2. This capability should be lodged in
an Office of Technology and Science
(a) An Office of Technology and Science should be
established by Congressional action and should
be headed by a Director who should also have the
title of Science and Technology Advisor to the
President. The Office should be made a part of
the Executive Office of the President.
(b) An Office, better than a single Advisor, or a
Council, or Committee of Advisors, can
-- cover the full range of necessary competence
without seeming to subordinate one area to
another;
-- interact with (and "translate" the reports of)
ad hoc expert task forces of consultants drawn
from a variety of disciplines in and out of
science and technology;
-- call on and utilize the best scientific,
technological and professional talents in the
country for specific tasks relevant to the
President's responsibilities;
-- resist the pressures to make the President's
Science Advisor the "spokesman for science and
technology" as distinguished from the President's
need for scientific competence in meeting his
national responsibilities.
- 3 -
3. The areas of potential activity for the Office
of Technology and Science should be principally:
[Note: Not all of the following activities need
be undertaken at the outset. The func-
tions of the Office should be allowed
to grow as the President may require,
as relationships with the departments
and agencies of government develop,
and as emerging national programs,
policies and issues may make desir-
able and useful.]
(a) To respond on scientific and technical matters
to requests from the President with respect to
issues that are before him for decision, or
new initiatives.
(b) To help the President resolve conflicting
advice involving scientific matters that come
to the President from departments, agencies
or the Congress.
(c) To organize ad hoc panels of consultants to
assist in the collection and evaluation of
relevant data with respect to particular technical
and scientific issues.
The membership of such panels would be drawn
from the special competence available in the
private and public sectors including universities,
the National Academies, industry, and government
laboratories.
(d) To provide the President with early warning of either
-- opportunities, or
-- problems
- 4 -
that have a scientific or technological component,
including some longer range forecasting of such
opportunities, problems or developments.
(e) To identify and report on any gaps in scientific
research and technological development in the
public or private sectors that merit attention.
(f) To consult with the President on the appoint-
ments of various scientific and technical
officials in the federal agencies.
(g) To stay in contact with the professional staffs
of the federal departments and agencies, and of
state and local governments, as well as with
private sector organizations involved in science
and technology.
(h) To be available for participation in reviews
of policies and programs of the departments
and agencies having technical responsibilities
and thus to assist in the formulation of national
policy on technical and scientific matters.
(i) To assist the Domestic Council, the National
Security Council and the OMB in reviewing de-
partment and agency programs that have techni-
cal and scientific content.
(j) To have a modest budget to initiate analyses
and studies in support of the ad hoc panels
mentioned in subparagraph (c) above. These
analyses and studies would be performed in
- 5 -
universities, private industry or federally
supported institutions.
4. Organization of the Office
(a)
The full-time Director of the Office should
serve at the pleasure of the President.
(b)
The Director should have a full-time deputy
responsible for the administration of the
Office who need not be a scientist.
(c)
There should be provision for a flexible number
of full-time Assistant Directors (up to five)
SO as to cover a decent range of professional
disciplines without trying for "representation"
of every professional discipline or interest,
and to respond to the possible growth in
Presidential needs for special competence.
(d)
Provision should be made for a flexible number
of full-time professionally qualified staff
(up to a dozen) as well as a clerical staff
to meet the responsibilities of the Office
as they may develop.
(e)
The ad hoc advisory panels (mentioned in para-
graph 3 above) which are central to the effective
functioning of the Office should:
- 6 -
(i) be exempt from the Federal Advisory
Committee Act.
Frank and objective advice cannot be
expected to be available if exposed to con-
tinuous and public scrutiny and controversy;
(ii) have their members, in general, appointed
by the President;
FORD VIBRARY
(iii) serve on a part-time basis for a limited
term;
(f) The Director would maintain close relationships
with the National Academies of Science and of
Engineering and the Institute of Medicine and,
in establishing ad hoc panels, would make full
use of their membership, as well as of academic
faculties and such organizations as the Social
Science Research Council.
(g) The Office in its initial full year of operation
should have an annual budget in the $1 to $3 mil-
lion range.
(h) Since science and technology are profoundly inter-
related (not only among the scientific disciplines
themselves, but with domestic and foreign social
and political issues and the intellectual activity
of the nation) the area of the Office's con-
cern should be broad and include:
- 7 -
-- social and behavioral sciences
-- physical and life sciences
-- medicine
-- engineering
GREATS FORD LIBRARY
-- military applications
-- international aspects of science and technology
-- science and technology in the private sector
-- education and training of scientific manpower
5. The Qualifications of the Director
The Director must have, or be the type of
person who can readily gain, the personal confidence
of the President.
He or she should be a scientist, engineer or
medical person of proven scientific or technical
capability, have some experience in public service
or administration, and should preferably be a member
of one of the National Academies of Science or
Technology or the Institute of Medicine.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
February 5, 1975
MR. PRESIDENT:
Attached are the Vice President's recommendations
as to how you should organize the Executive Office of
the President to provide advice on science and technology.
This paper has not been staffed and the Staff Secretary
is circulating it to Buchen, Marsh, O'Neill, Cavanaugh
and Scowcroft for comment. These comments are due
Friday and I should have a memorandum to you
summarizing them by Monday.
FORD is LIBRARY SERVID
Don
ARM
You MAY want to discuss it
with the U.P. tomorrow when
you meet with him. -
2/9/75 Has This now been
staffed out?
ORIGINAL RETIRED FOR PRESERVATION
OuTBoy
SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND THE
PRESIDENT'S EXECUTIVE OFFICE
Recommendations
GERALE FORD LIDRARY
February 5, 1975
February 5, 1975
SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND
THE PRESIDENT'S EXECUTIVE OFFICE
Recommendations
1.
There should be a scientific and technological
capability directly available to the President
(a) Many issues that come to the President, either
for decision or for initiative, involve science
and technology, sometimes to a very high degree,
in the analytical and judgmental process.
(b) While the federal departments and agencies have,
and should have, scientific and technological
competence of high quality, the President should
have available to him an independent source of
scientific and technological judgment of the very
highest quality. The organization set up to pro-
vide such a source for the President must not be,
or be perceived as, the representative of the
scientific and technical community in the
President's office.
(c) While the present need for such a capability is
clear, in our complex and technologically varied
society, the need to draw upon science and
technology to meet urgent problems and oppor-
tunities will be even greater in the decades ahead.
- 2 -
2.
This capability should be lodged in
an Office of Technology and Science
(a) An Office of Technology and Science should be
established by Congressional action and should
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
be headed by a Director who should also have the
title of Science and Technology Advisor to the
President.
(b) An Office, better than a single Advisor, or a
Council or Committee of Advisors, can
-- cover the full range of necessary competence
without seeming to subordinate one area to another;
-- interact with (and "translate" the reports of)
ad hoc expert task forces of consultants drawn
from a variety of disciplines in and out of
science and technology;
-- call on and utilize the best scientific,
technological and professional talents in the
country for specific tasks relevant to the
President's responsibilites;
-- resist the pressures to make the President's
Science Advisor the "spokesman for science and
technology" as distinguished from the President's
need for scientific competence in meeting his
national responsibilities.
- 3 -
3. The areas of potential activity for the Office
of Technology and Science should be principally:
[Note: Not all of the following activities need
be undertaken at the outset. The func-
tions of the Office should be allowed
to grow as the President may require,
as relationships with the departments
and agencies of government develop,
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
and as emerging national programs,
policies and issues may make desir-
able and useful.]
(a) To respond on scientific and technical matters
to requests from the President with respect to
issues that are before him for decision, or
new initiatives.
(b) To help the President resolve conflicting
advice involving scientific matters that come
to the President from departments, agencies
or the Congress.
(c) To organize ad hoc panels of consultants to
assist in the collection and evaluation of
relevant data with respect to particular
technical and scientific issues.
The membership of such panels would be
drawn from the special competence available
in the private and public sectors including
universities, the National Academies, industry,
and government laboratories.
(d) To provide the President with early warning
of either
-- opportunities, or
-- problems
- 4 -
that have a scientific or technological com-
ponent, including some longer range forecasting
of such opportunities, problems or developments.
(e) To identify and report on any gaps in scientific
research and technological development in the
public or private sectors that merit attention.
(f) To consult with the President on the appoint-
ments of various scientific and technical
FORD LIBRARY &
officials in the federal agencies.
(g) To stay in contact with the professional staffs
of the federal departments and agencies, and of
state and local governments, as well as with
private sector organizations involved in science
and technology.
(h) To be available for participation in reviews
of policies and programs of the departments
and agencies having technical responsibilities
and thus to assist in the formulation of national
policy on technical and scientific matters.
(i) To assist the Domestic Council, the National
Security Council and the OMB in reviewing de-
department and agency programs that have techni-
cal and scientific content.
(j) To have a modest budget to initiate analyses
and studies in support of the ad hoc panels
mentioned in subparagraph (c) above. These
analyses and studies would be performed in
- 5 -
universities, private industry or federally
supported institutions.
4. Organization of the Office
(a) The full-time Director of the Office should
serve at the pleasure of the President.
(b)
The Director should have a full-time deputy
responsible for the administration of the
Office who need not be a scientist.
(c)
There should be provision for a flexible number
of full-time Assitant Directors (up to five)
so as to cover a decent range of professional
disciplines without trying for "representation"
LIBRARY
of every professional discipline or interest,
and to respond to the possible growth in
Presidential needs for special competence.
(d)
Provision should be made for a flexible number
of full-time professionally qualified staff
(up to a dozen) as well as a clerical staff
to meet the responsibilities of the Office
as they may develop.
(e)
The ad hoc advisory panels (mentioned in para-
graph 3 above) which are central to the effective
functioning of the Office should:
- 6 -
(i) be exempt from the Federal Advisory
Committee Act.
Frank and objective advice cannot be
expected to be available if exposed to con-
tinuous and public scrutiny and controversy.
(ii) have their members, in general, appointed
by the President.
(iii) serve on a part-time basis for a limited
term;
(f) The Director would maintain close relationships
with the National Academies of Science and of
Engineering and the Institute of Medicine and,
URD
LIBRARY
in establishing ad hoc panels, would make full
use of their membership, as well as of academic
faculties and such organizations as the Social
Science Research Council.
(g) The Office in its initial full year of operation
should have an annual budget in the $1 to $3 mil-
lion range.
(h) Since science and technology are profoundly inter-
related (not only among the scientific disciplines
themselves, but with domestic and foreign social
and political issues and the intellectual activity
of the nation) the area of the Office's con-
cern should be broad and include:
- 7 -
-- social and behavioral sciences
-- physical and life sciences
-- medicine
-- engineering
-- military applications
-- international aspects of science and technology
-- science and technology in the private sector
-- education and training of scientific manpower
5. The Qualifications of the Director
The Director must have, or be the type of
person who can readily gain, the personal confidence
of the President.
He or she should be a scientist, engineer or
medical person of proven scientific or technical
capability, have some experience in public service
or administration, and should preferably be a member
of one of the National Academies of Science or
Technology or the Institute of Medicine.
FEB 17 1975
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
February 15, 1975
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JERRY JONES
FORD is GERALD LIBRARY
FROM:
DICK CHENEY
1
Jerry, attached is some of the material on the Science Advisor post.
Do we have this resolved yet?
You should pass the names listed in the Vice President's memo to
Walker as potential candidates, should we decide to go with a science
advisor position.
Attachment
attached
This was
envp's
Science
FORD & \ SERATO LIBRARY
Aderson
-
)
may I havea
ROAY
OFFICE OF THE VICE PreSideNT
WASHINGTON, D.C.
2/5/75
Mr. Rumsfeld:
Here is the report
the Vice President
promised you.
an
Ann Whitman
SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND THE
PRESIDENT'S EXECUTIVE OFFICE
Recommendations
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
February 5, 1975
February 5, 1975
FORD & 078839 LIBRARY
SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND
THE PRESIDENT'S EXECUTIVE OFFICE
Recommendations
1.
There should be a scientific and technological
capability directly available to the President
(a) Many issues that come to the President, either
for decision or for initiative, involve science
and technology, sometimes to a very high degree,
in the analytical and judgmental process.
(b) While the federal departments and agencies have,
and should have, scientific and technological
competence of high quality. the President should
have available to him an independent source of
scientific and technological judgment of the very
highest quality. The organization set up to pro-
vide such a source for the President must not be,
or be perceived as, the representative of the
scientific and technical community in the
President's office.
(c) While the present need for such a capability is
clear, in our complex and technologically varied
society, the need to draw upon science and
technology to meet urgent problems and oppor-
tunities will be even greater in the decades ahead.
- 2 -
2.
This capability should be lodged in
an Office of Technology and Science
(a) An Office of Technology and Science should be
established by Congressional action and should
be headed by a Director who should also have the
title of Science and Technology Advisor to the
President.
(b) An Office, better than a single Advisor, or a
Council or Committee of Advisors, can
-- cover the full range of necessary competence
R.FORD
without seeming to subordinate one area to another;
LIBRARY
-- interact with (and "translate" the reports of)
ad hoc expert task forces of consultants drawn
from a variety of disciplines in and out of
science and technology;
-- call on and utilize the best scientific,
technological and professional talents in the
country for specific tasks relevant to the
President's responsibilites;
-- resist the pressures to make the President's
Science Advisor the "spokesman for science and
technology" as distinguished from the President's
need for scientific competence in meeting his
national responsibilities.
- 3 -
3. The areas of potential activity for the Office
of Technology and Science should be principally:
[
Note: Not all of the following activities need
be undertaken at the outset. The func-
tions of the Office should be allowed
to grow as the President may require,
TORO
as relationships with the departments
and agencies of government develop,
LIBRARY
and as emerging national programs,
policies and issues may make desir-
able and useful.]
(a) To respond on scientific and technical matters
to requests from the President with respect to
issues that are before him for decision, or
new initiatives.
(b) To help the President resolve conflicting
advice involving scientific matters that come
to the President from departments, agencies
or the Congress.
(c) To organize ad hoc panels of consultants to
assist in the collection and evaluation of
relevant data with respect to particular
technical and scientific issues.
The membership of such panels would be
drawn from the special competence available
in the private and public sectors including
universities, the National Academies, industry,
and government laboratories.
(d) To provide the President with early warning
of either
-- opportunities, or
-- problems
- 4 -
that have a scientific or technological com-
ponent, including some longer range forecasting
of such opportunities, problems or developments.
(e) To identify and report on any gaps in scientific
research and technological development in the
public or private sectors that merit attention.
(f) To consult with the President on the appoint-
ments of various scientific and technical
officials in the federal agencies.
(g) To stay in contact with the professional staffs
FORD LIBRARY is G7V830
of the federal departments and agencies, and of
state and local governments, as well as with
private sector organizations involved in science
and technology.
(h) To be available for participation in reviews
of policies and programs of the departments
and agencies having technical responsibilities
and thus to assist in the formulation of national
policy on technical and scientific matters.
(i) To assist the Domestic Council, the National
Security Council and the OMB in reviewing de-
department and agency programs that have techni-
cal and scientific content.
(j) To have a modest budget to initiate analyses
and studies in support of the ad hoc panels
mentioned in subparagraph (c) above. These
analyses and studies would be performed in
- 5 -
universities, private industry or federally
supported institutions.
4.
Organization of the Office
(a)
The full-time Director of the Office should
serve at the pleasure of the President.
(b)
The Director should have a full-time deputy
responsible for the administration of the
Office who need not be a scientist.
(c)
There should be provision for a flexible number
of full-time Assitant Directors (up to five)
so as to cover a decent range of professional
FORD i LIBRARY
disciplines without trying for "representation"
of every professional discipline or interest.
and to respond to the possible growth in
Presidential needs for special competence.
(d)
Provision should be made for a flexible number
of full-time professionally qualified staff
(up to a dozen) as well as a clerical staff
to meet the responsibilities of the Office
as they may develop.
(e)
The ad hoc advisory panels (mentioned in para-
graph 3 above) which are central to the effective
functioning of the Office should:
- 6 -
(i) be exempt from the Federal Advisory
Committee Act.
Frank and objective advice cannot be
expected to be available if exposed to con-
tinuous and public scrutiny and controversy.
(ii) have their members, in general, appointed
by the President.
(iii) serve on a part-time basis for a limited
term;
(f) The Director would maintain close relationships
with the National Academies of Science and of
FORD
Engineering and the Institute of Medicine and,
LIBRARY
in establishing ad hoc panels, would make full
use of their membership, as well as of academic
faculties and such organizations as the Social
Science Research Council.
(g) The Office in its initial full year of operation
should have an annual budget in the $1 to $3 mil-
lion range.
(h) Since science and technology are profoundly inter-
related (not only among the scientific disciplines
themselves, but with domestic and foreign social
and political issues and the intellectual activity
of the nation) the area of the Office's con-
cern should be broad and include:
- 7 -
-- social and behavioral sciences
-- physical and life sciences
FORD
-- medicine
GERALD
LIBRARY
-- engineering
-- military applications
-- international aspects of science and technology
-- science and technology in the private sector
-- education and training of scientific manpower
5. The Qualifications of the Director
The Director must have, or be the type of
person who can readily gain, the personal confidence
of the President.
He or she should be a scientist, engineer or
medical person of proven scientific or technical
capability, have some experience in public service
or administration, and should preferably be a member
of one of the National Academies of Science or
Technology or the Institute of Medicine.
Page data
- Page
- 1
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- document
- Media ID
- 1e03945555289d3a
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 1554458
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "1554458",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1554458",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Science and Technology Adviser: October 8, 1974 - February 5, 1975",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1554458",
"collections": [
"White House Special Files Unit Files",
"Issue Decision Papers for the President"
],
"subjects": [
"President (1974-1977 : Ford). Office of Science and Technology Policy. (5/11/1976 - 1/20/1977)",
"Legislation",
"Presidential advisors",
"Science"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/58/5544/1554458/content/library/document/0010/1554458.pdf",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/58/5544/1554458/content/library/document/0010/1554458.pdf",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/58/5544/1554458/content/library/document/0010/1554458.pdf",
"imageCount": 1,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "1554458",
"label": "Science and Technology Adviser: October 8, 1974 - February 5, 1975",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1554458"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "1554458",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1554458",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Science and Technology Adviser: October 8, 1974 - February 5, 1975",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1554458",
"collections": [
"White House Special Files Unit Files",
"Issue Decision Papers for the President"
],
"subjects": [
"President (1974-1977 : Ford). Office of Science and Technology Policy. (5/11/1976 - 1/20/1977)",
"Legislation",
"Presidential advisors",
"Science"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/58/5544/1554458/content/library/document/0010/1554458.pdf",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/58/5544/1554458/content/library/document/0010/1554458.pdf",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/58/5544/1554458/content/library/document/0010/1554458.pdf",
"imageCount": 1,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1554458",
"naId": 1554458,
"coverageEndDate": {
"day": 21,
"logicalDate": "1975-05-21",
"month": 5,
"year": 1975
},
"coverageStartDate": {
"day": 8,
"logicalDate": "1974-10-08",
"month": 10,
"year": 1974
},
"levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
"recordType": "description",
"ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
"seq": 1,
"pageIndex": 0,
"type": "document",
"url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/58/5544/1554458/content/library/document/0010/1554458.pdf",
"mediaId": "1e03945555289d3a",
"ocrText": "The original documents are located in Box 7, folder \"Science and Technology Adviser:\nOctober 8, 1974-February 5, 1975\" of the White House Special Files Unit Files at the\nGerald R. Ford Presidential Library.\nCopyright Notice\nThe copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of\nphotocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald Ford donated to the United\nStates of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.\nWorks prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public\ndomain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to\nremain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid\ncopyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.\nDigitized from Box 7 of the White House Special Files Unit Files\nat the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nJung Jone Juny Jones paper\nfor you'science\non\nRich\nMEMORANDUM\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nDichael\nOctober 8, 1974\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nDONALD RUMSFELD\nFROM:\nPHILIP W. BUCHEN\nSUBJECT:\nAttached letter from Congressman Udall\ndated August 22, 1974\nI thought this more appropriate for your consideration.\nSEP5 1974\nDear Me:\nThank you very much for your August 22 letter. As\nlong-time partners in the legislative process, we\nhave shared major decisions affecting the well-being\nof our great country.\nI am confident that, in a cooperative effort between\nthe Legislative and the Executive branches, we will\nmove ahead to meet our essential domestic and foreign\npolicy goals. I do want to let you know that your views\nand recommendations will always be welcome.\nAs you may know, I am currently reviewing the structure\nof the White House organization and I appreciate having\nyour suggestions on the importance of including a science\nand technology advisory capacity. Your views will be\nmost helpful to me in assessing the requirements of the\nExecutive Office of the President.\nWith warmest personal regards,\nSincerely,\nFORD is LIBRARY GERALD\nJERRY FORD\nThe Honorable Morris K. Udall\nHouse of Representatives\nWashington, D.C. 20515\nbcc: w/incoming to William Scranton . - FYI\nNote: Interim acknowledgement CC by Bill Timmons and copy of\nincoming letter sent to your office on August 30.\nGRF:WET:EF:VO:vo\nAugust 30, 1974\nDear Mo:\nUntil the President has an opportunity to\ndo so personally, he has asked me to thank\nyou for your warm comments about his con-\nduct of the Presidency. He also appreciated\nyour sending him your suggestions concerning\nthe establishment of a three man science\nadvisory council within the Executive Office\nof the President.\nÀs you may know, the President is reviewing\nrecommendations for restructuring the White\nHouse organization and your views will be\nmost helpful to him as he weighs various\nproposals.\nWith warm regards,\nFORD & GERALD LIBRARY\nSincerely,\nBill\nWilliam E. Timmons\nAssistant to the President\nThe Honorable Morris K. Udall\nHouse of Representatives\nWashington, D.C. 20515\nbee: w/incoming to William Scranton for appropriate handling\nbee: w/incoming to E. Frayer - for Presidential letter\nWET:EF:VO:ah\nCOMMITTEES:\nMORR'S 20 DISTRICT K. OF UDALL ARIZONA\nINTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS\nPOST OFFICE AND CIVIL SERVICE\nCongress of the United States\nhouse of Representatives\nWashington, D.C. 20515\n22 August 1974\nThe President\nThe White House\nGERALD FORD LIBRARY\nWashington, D.C. 20006\nDear Mr. President:\nMay I offer my congratulations on your first week in office.\nThe spirit of openness, cooperation and straight talking which\nyou both propose and practice cannot fail to make a major con-\ntribution to the solution of the serious problems which face\nus. Although I know that you are desperately busy just now,\nI should like to offer a suggestion about which I feel very\nstrongly.\nI believe that the current lack of a science and technology\nadvisory capacity within the Executive Office of the President\nis a serious failing that should be remedied as you set up and\norganize your administration. Currently, as you know, the\nDirector of the National Science Foundation serves as the\nPresident's science advisor. This arrangement creates a\nserious built-in conflict of interest for the Director. In\nthis respect I can do no better than to quote from a recent\nreport published by the National Acadamy of Sciences entitled\n\"Science and Technology in Presidential Policymaking,\" which\nI commend to you very warmly. The report states:\n\"It is not merely that an Advisor outside\nthe White House and the Executive Office\nhas a different status than one who is\nwithin it. It is also the untenable po-\nsition of one who is at the same time both\napplicant to the OMB and counselor to it,\nwho must at the same time battle for the\nprerogatives of science and technology and\nweigh those prerogatives against the de-\nmands of others who make competing claims\non resources.\"\nThe Ad-hoc Committee which wrote this report recommended\nthat the President's Science Advisor be reconstituted in the\nform of a three man council, preferably established by law,\nwhose members would be chosen by the President with the\nadvice and consent of the Senate and supported by a staff\nof sufficient size and appropriate expertise. The Committee\nmade several other suggestions concerning how the council\nTHIS STATIONERY PRINTED ON PAPER MADE WITH RECYCLED FIBERS\nshould function, with which executive agencies it should have\nclose working relationships, and the need for expert support\nfrom outside the Executive Office. These are sound proposals,\nworthy of serious consideration. In my own judgment, however,\nthe essential element of success will rest in the choice of\nthe individual advisors -- they must be men and women who\ncommand universal respect among their professional peers, and\nfor whom you feel complete confidence and a close personal\nrapport.\nWe all know (sometimes to our sorrow when they are misused)\nof the enormous power and potential of modern science and tech-\nnology. Within just the past year, the longterm problems of\nworldwide food and protein shortages, non-renewable natural\nresource management, climate change, and energy conservation\nand resource development, have taken on frightening new dimen-\nsions. These have to be added to the more familiar list of\nproblems which depend vitally on science and technology for\ntheir solution: national defense and international arms con-\ntrol, health care and its delivery, urban development and\nmany more. The list is awesome in its breadth and consequence.\nThe search for wise solutions will require that the President\nof the United States have at his right hand, directly and in-\ntimately in his service, the best scientific and engineering\nadvice he can find.\nIn closing, I urge you to give this suggestion and those\ncontained in the Academy's report your sympathetic consider-\nation, and I send you my warmest personal wishes for success\nin all your undertakings.\nSincerely,\nMorris K. Udall\nFORD LIBRARY\ntmm\nCongress of the United States\nhave\nSHINGTON\nhouse of Representatives\n-PM\nMashington, D.C. 20515\n200\n&\nOFFICIAL BUSINESS\nM.C.\nThe President\nThe White House\nWashington, D.C. 20006\n1/13 - when w do we effect\nthis and whonshould\nd follow. - 0250 up with ?\nNaliody -\n:OT\nJust send back мояч\nto me in 2wks\nwallat\n& ,/28\nD - hets memo\nR\n0 Nell for a\nGERALD\nStatus report\nof\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nDate\nTO: D- -\nFROM:\nJERRY H. JONES\nPut m\nfollow up- -\nsupposed Rockyis to\ncome in with\nI\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nDecember 10, 1974\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nJERRY JONES\nFROM:\nDICK CHENEY\nD\nGERALD FORD LIBRARY\nJerry, this is just a reminder that you might want to touch base\nwith Paul O'Neill to make certain he's working up options for the\nScience Advisory function. I believe Don talked to him by phone,\nbut you should follow up.\nBarbara is getting the attachment.\nFORD LIBRARY\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nNovember 8, 1974\nGERAL FORD LIBRARY\nMEMORANDUM FOR :\nJERRY JONES\nFROM:\nDICK CHENEY ?\nThe President would like to include something in the\nState of the Union on the science question. There is\na letter attached from Ed David which should be considered.\nThe Council approach is probably the best one. You\nshould keep in mind that we have to consult fully\nwith Tiger Teague on which approach we take.\nYou probably ought to get the Domestic Council or\nwhoever is responsible to prepare some options\nalong the lines of the Council approach, possibly\nwith some other non-Council approaches and make\ncertain somebody checks with Tiger Teague to get\nhis veiws on the subject.\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nDIANA\nHERE is THE\nED DAVID\nLETTER WHICH\nSHOULD BE\nGERALD R.FORD LIBRARY\nATTACHED TO\nTHAT memo\nTO J.\nBARiPPiE\n11-12-174\n9:02a.m.\n1\nOFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT\nWASHINGTON, D.C.\nFrom the\nTo:\nPresident: Don Rumsfell\na.m.\nDate:\nTime\np.m.\nFORD & LIBRARY GERALD\nHe lays it out will.\n2 lean toward #3\nwhich is legislation in mill.\nTeto' discuss.\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nJanuary 30, 1975\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nTHE PRESIDENT\nFROM:\nDON RUMSEELD\nwill\nCongressman Teague, Congressman Mosher and others\nare anxious to be cooperative on the science adviser\nmatter. Their committee is poised and ready to go.\nThey want to be helpful and are hopeful of passing a\nbill that will be acceptable to you. They are awaiting\nconsultation and advice from us as to what might be\nappropriate.\nFor this reason, I suggest you might wish to again raise\nthe matter with the Vice President 80 that, hopefully, he\ncan give you some sort of report. Otherwise, it strikes\nme we ought to get some people in the White House working\non it. We want to get going before the Congress starts\nmoving on a different track.\nORIGINAL RETIRED FOR PRESERVATION\nEDWARD E. DAVID, JR.\n1000 INTERNATIONAL TOWER BUILDING\n8550 WEST BRYN MAWR AVENUE\nCHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60631\nNovember 4, 1974\nDear Rummy:\nI enjoyed discussing briefly with you last week the matter of\nscience in the White House. As you requested, I am attaching a\nbrief options paper on the subject. It contains no recommendations\nand I think fairly represents the range of actions available at this\ntime.\nMy own preference in the matter is to go with a simple, straight-\nforward arrangement such as that described in Option #4, namely\nappointing a Counsellor for Science and Technology. Clearly,\nin the longer range, Option #3, namely a group with operational\nresponsibility in the Executive Office, is preferable. If it could\nbe pulled off at this time, it would be a very effective instrument\nfor the President. The other options seem to me either impractical\nor ineffective.\nThe general matter of science in the White House I have discussed\ninformally with a number of other people previous to seeing you.\nAmong these were Senator Charles Goodell, Dr. Ted Marrs, and\nthe President himself when he was Vice President. For each of\nthem I wrote a short summary of my views. In addition, I testified\nat general hearings before the House Committee on Science and\nAstronautics and on Bill S2495 before the Senate Commerce\nCommittee. I understand that that bill has been approved by the\nCommittee for action on the Senate floor. This bill calls for a\nCouncil of Science and Technology along the lines of Option #2\nwhich as I said before, would be cumbersome and ineffective.\nI will make all the material I have written on these matters avail-\nable to you if you so desire.\nPlease let me know if I can be of further assistance.\nYours cordially,\nThe Honorable Donald Rumsfeld\nEd\nAssistant to the President\nThe White House\nWashington, D. C.\nGERALD FORD LIBRARY\nOPTIONS FOR SCIENCE IN THE WHITE HOUSE\nFORD LIBRARY\nBackground\nThe Executive Office of Science and Technology was established in 1962\n(Eisenhower Administration). With it and comprising the total White House science\napparatus was the Science Adviser to the President (Assistant rank), the President's\nScience Advisory Committee (\"distinguished\" outside consultants), and the Federal\nCouncil for Science and Technology (Departmental Assistant Secretaries for R&D).\nAll except the latter were abolished in Reorganization Plan #1 of 1973, effective\nJune 30, 1973. The Director of the National Science Foundation was designated as\nScience Adviser (to the Executive Branch generally, not the President specifically)\nand the Federal Council was transferred to his cognizance.\nIn this role, the National Science Foundation and its advisory apparatus have\nworked largely under OMB on issues related to budgets. There has been little\ninteraction with, for example, the Defense Department or HEW on matters of R&D.\nThe issue now is whether to re-establish a White House mechanism and, if so, of\nwhat sort.\nAny such mechanism must consider two aspects of science and technology\npolicy. First and most important for the White House is a scientific input for\nPresidential policy matters. For example, the President's anti-inflation program\ncould make greater use of technological methods for increasing productivity,\nreducing waste, and reclaiming scrap. This function is commonly called science\nfor public policy-making.\nThere is also policy for science. This includes federal policies which impact\nthe scientific and engineering community. Among such policies are Federal reim-\n-2-\nbursement of R&D expense by government contractors, federal patent policy, federal\nsupport of graduate education and research in science, and funding of federal\nscience facilities and laboratories.\nThere are approximately 1.5 million scientists and engineers in the U.S. today.\nAbout two-thirds are engineers, one-third scientists. This cohort does not have\nits own integrated governance. There are many interest groups including professional\nsocieties, scientific organizations, and irregular groupings. Predominantly\nengineers work in industry, scientists in academic and non-profit institutions.\nBoth are present in large numbers in the Federal government. Despite their reputation\nfor liberal thought, the community at large represents all shades of opinion in very\nnearly the same proportion as the general population. There tends to be, however,\ndifferent value systems between scientists and engineers, the former value ideas\nand intellectual substance, the latter tangible accomplishment in the worlds of\naffairs and business.\nOption 1 - Department of Science and Technology\nGERALD FORD LIBRARY\nThis option would establish a Cabinet-level department including most of the\nindependent science-based agencies; for example, NASA, National Science Foundation,\nBureau of Standards, National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Agency, Energy\nResearch and Development Agency, and perhaps some others. The Department\nwould not usurp existing Departments' research and development where that work\nwas directly supporting the Departmental mission. Scientific inputs for the White\nHouse would come from the new Department.\n-3-\nPRO\n1. Consolidates a number of independent elements which can be more effectively\nfocused on national problems.\n2. Can act in part as a representative for the technical community which today\nfeels underrepresented in national decisions.\n3. Avoids expansion of the Executive Office and the White House staff.\nCON\n1. Requires legislation. (A first step not requiring legislation would appoint\na Presidential Counsellor for Science and Technology and have independent\nscience agencies report to him.)\n2. Reduces diversity of support for technical programs.\n3. Increases separation of science and technology from their customers.\nFORD is LIBRARY GERALD\n4. Creates a new bureaucracy.\n5. Would be received with some scepticism by technical community.\nOption 2 - Council of Scientific Advisers\nThis Council would be established in the Executive Office after the pattern\nof the Council of Economic Advisers. Its duties would be purely advisory and it\nwould publish a yearly report on the state of U. S. science and technology.\nPRO\n1. Has been recommended by a distinguished committee of the National Academy\nof Sciences, the most prestigious organization of U.S. community.\n2. Would essentially re-establish the previous White House science mechanism\nwith minor modifications.\n-4-\n3. Would be favorably received principally by scientific community.\nCON\n1. Would inflate Executive Office and White House staff.\n2. Would add nothing new to the previous White House mechanism which in the\nend was ineffective.\n3. As a purely advisory office, it would have difficulty in establishing itself as a\nforce for influencing decisions and R&D activities by the agencies and\ndepartments.\nGEARLE TORD LIBRARY\nOption 3 - Office of Research and Engineering Management\nThis Executive Office would be charged with approving all Federal R&D\nprograms before they were submitted to OMB for budgeting. Thus, it would perform\nthe same function for the Executive as authorization committees do for the Congress.\nThe Director of the Office could be either a Counsellor or Assistant to the President.\nPRO\n1. Would be a truly effective means for improving the quality and productivity of\nFederal R&D.\n2. Would have a well-defined area of responsibility along with the necessary\nauthority to set R&D priorities in response to national policies.\n3. Could attract high-quality industrial as well as academic scientists and\nengineers. Thereby more action-orientation would be achieved.\n4. Would be well received by entire technical community.\n-5-\nCON\n1. Would be opposed by OMB and perhaps other elements of the Executive Office.\n2. Would expand Executive Office and White House staff.\n3. Would put another level of approval in budgetary procedure.\nOption 4 - Counsellor for Science and Technology\nThis option envisions appointing a Counsellor to the President with a small\nstaff. They would be chartered to study the matter of science in the White House\nfurther and make recommendations, say, within six months. During the period,\nthe Counsellor, using his staff and outside agency resources, would provide\nthe desired scientific inputs for policy-making.\nPRO\nLIBRARY &\n1. Would be widely recognized as a plausible and constructive step.\n2. Would be possible to recruit an outstanding scientist or engineer of\naccomplishment to fill position.\n3. Would encounter minimum opposition.\n4. Would provide sound technical inputs to meet immediate needs.\nCON\n1. Would create expectations of further action.\n2. Would be volatile and could disappear without ceremony.\n3. Would depend heavily on outside White House sources for information and\nstaff work.\n-6-\nOption 5 - Upgrade the Current Arrangement\nThis option would dress up the current arrangement making the NSF Director\nthe Science Adviser to the President and giving him a seat on the White House\ncouncils as well as such prerequisites as an office in the Old EOB.\nPRO\n1. Could be done at once by promoting the incumbent.\n2. Would please the OMB who have already established working relations with\nthe NSF advisory apparatus.\n3. Would re-establish the previous presence of science in the White House.\n4. Minimal inflation of Executive Office and White House staff.\nCON\nFORD i LIBRARY GERALD\n1. Would not be well received by the technical community generally.\n2. NSF by its nature as primarily a basic research-academic support agency is\nnot well suited to advise across the spectrum of White House needs.\n3. The current arrangement does not include military R&D in its scope. Military\nanalysis of technical options and programs would continue to be carried out\nby NSC.\nOption 6 - Do Nothing\nPRO\n1. There is no imposing urgency to re-establish science in the White House.\nCON\n1. Misses an opportunity to make science and technology an effective part of\nWhite House decision-making.\n-7-\n2. Undercuts implied (only) resolve by President to take action on the matter\nbased on statements when he was Vice President.\n3. Would disappoint most of technical community.\nGERALD\n1\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nJanuary 28, 1975\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nPAUL O'NEILL\nFROM:\nJERRY H. JONES\nWould you please put together a status report on the options for\nthe Science Advisory function.\nThank you.\nGERATE R. FORD LIBRARY\n1\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nDon R.\nHave real.\nFORO is . 034830 LiBRARY\nInterest in Ataffing\ncomments.\nMR 7\nFORD & LIBRARY GERALD\nORIGINAL RETIRED FOR PRESERVATION\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nFebruary 4, 1975\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nDIANNA GWIN\nFROM:\nJERRY JON\nPlease find out what Paul O'Neill's intentions\nare as to making recommendations either to\nthe President or the Vice President on the\nScience Advisor.\nGERALD GERALUR\n7\n*\n*\nTHE VICE PRESIDENT\n*\n&\nWASHINGTON\n73\nis\nFebruary 5, 1975\nMEMORANDUM\nTO:\nTHE PRESIDENT\nFROM:\nTHE VICE PRESIDENT har\nTHROUGH:\nMR. JERRY JONES\nAs requested, I am sending you\na paper containing recommendations entitled\n\"Science, Technology and the President's\nExecutive Office.\"\nSUMMARY\nSCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND THE\nPRESIDENT'S EXECUTIVE OFFICE\nIn order to meet his responsibilities most effec-\ntively, the President must have ready access to\nindependent scientific and technical advice of the\nhighest quality.\nRecommendation\nAn Office of Technology and Science should be\nestablished by legislation within the Executive Office\nof the President.\nStaffing\nThe Office would be headed by a Director, a highly\nqualified scientist, who would serve at the pleasure of\nthe President.\nThe Director would be assisted by a Deputy, a\nflexible number of Assistant or Associate Directors\ndepending on the needs of the Office, and a variety of\nad hoc panels created from time to time to provide\nspecialized advice and judgment.\nActivities\nDepending on the President's requirements, the Office\nwould have the capacity, among other things, to\n-- resolve conflicting technical advice,\n-- gather and analyze expert views,\n-- identify gaps in scientific research or\ntechnological development,\n-- maintain contact with the scientific and\ntechnical staff of the Departments and\nAgencies, and\n-- provide specialized assistance to the\nDomestic Council and the National Security\nCouncil.\nEstimated Budget: 1 to 3 million dollars.\nSUGGESTIONS FOR NATIONAL SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD\nDr. Lewis Branscomb, Vice President and Chief\nScientist, IBM\nDr. Harold Brown, President of Cal Tech\nDr. William Hewlett, President of Hewlett-Packard\nDr. Hans Mark, Director, Ames Research Center, NASA\n(biographical material will be forthcoming)\nSCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND THE\nPRESIDENT'S EXECUTIVE OFFICE\nRecommendations\nFebruary 5, 1975\nFebruary 5, 1975\nSCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND\nTHE PRESIDENT'S EXECUTIVE OFFICE\nGERALE FORD LIBRARY\nRecommendations\n1. There should be a scientific and technological\ncapability directly available to the President\n(a) Many issues that come to the President, either\nfor decision or for initiative, involve science\nand technology, sometimes to a very high degree,\nin the analytical and judgmental process.\n(b) While the federal departments and agencies have,\nand should have, scientific and technological\ncompetence of high quality, the President should\nhave available to him an independent source of\nscientific and technological judgment of the very\nhighest quality. The organization set up to pro-\nvide such a source for the President must not be,\nor be perceived as, the representative of the\nscientific and technical community in the\nPresident's office.\n(c) While the present need for such a capability is\nclear, in our complex and technologically varied\nsociety, the need to draw upon science and\ntechnology to meet urgent problems and oppor-\ntunities will be even greater in the decades ahead.\n- 2 -\n2. This capability should be lodged in\nan Office of Technology and Science\n(a) An Office of Technology and Science should be\nestablished by Congressional action and should\nbe headed by a Director who should also have the\ntitle of Science and Technology Advisor to the\nPresident. The Office should be made a part of\nthe Executive Office of the President.\n(b) An Office, better than a single Advisor, or a\nCouncil, or Committee of Advisors, can\n-- cover the full range of necessary competence\nwithout seeming to subordinate one area to\nanother;\n-- interact with (and \"translate\" the reports of)\nad hoc expert task forces of consultants drawn\nfrom a variety of disciplines in and out of\nscience and technology;\n-- call on and utilize the best scientific,\ntechnological and professional talents in the\ncountry for specific tasks relevant to the\nPresident's responsibilities;\n-- resist the pressures to make the President's\nScience Advisor the \"spokesman for science and\ntechnology\" as distinguished from the President's\nneed for scientific competence in meeting his\nnational responsibilities.\n- 3 -\n3. The areas of potential activity for the Office\nof Technology and Science should be principally:\n[Note: Not all of the following activities need\nbe undertaken at the outset. The func-\ntions of the Office should be allowed\nto grow as the President may require,\nas relationships with the departments\nand agencies of government develop,\nand as emerging national programs,\npolicies and issues may make desir-\nable and useful.]\n(a) To respond on scientific and technical matters\nto requests from the President with respect to\nissues that are before him for decision, or\nnew initiatives.\n(b) To help the President resolve conflicting\nadvice involving scientific matters that come\nto the President from departments, agencies\nor the Congress.\n(c) To organize ad hoc panels of consultants to\nassist in the collection and evaluation of\nrelevant data with respect to particular technical\nand scientific issues.\nThe membership of such panels would be drawn\nfrom the special competence available in the\nprivate and public sectors including universities,\nthe National Academies, industry, and government\nlaboratories.\n(d) To provide the President with early warning of either\n-- opportunities, or\n-- problems\n- 4 -\nthat have a scientific or technological component,\nincluding some longer range forecasting of such\nopportunities, problems or developments.\n(e) To identify and report on any gaps in scientific\nresearch and technological development in the\npublic or private sectors that merit attention.\n(f) To consult with the President on the appoint-\nments of various scientific and technical\nofficials in the federal agencies.\n(g) To stay in contact with the professional staffs\nof the federal departments and agencies, and of\nstate and local governments, as well as with\nprivate sector organizations involved in science\nand technology.\n(h) To be available for participation in reviews\nof policies and programs of the departments\nand agencies having technical responsibilities\nand thus to assist in the formulation of national\npolicy on technical and scientific matters.\n(i) To assist the Domestic Council, the National\nSecurity Council and the OMB in reviewing de-\npartment and agency programs that have techni-\ncal and scientific content.\n(j) To have a modest budget to initiate analyses\nand studies in support of the ad hoc panels\nmentioned in subparagraph (c) above. These\nanalyses and studies would be performed in\n- 5 -\nuniversities, private industry or federally\nsupported institutions.\n4. Organization of the Office\n(a)\nThe full-time Director of the Office should\nserve at the pleasure of the President.\n(b)\nThe Director should have a full-time deputy\nresponsible for the administration of the\nOffice who need not be a scientist.\n(c)\nThere should be provision for a flexible number\nof full-time Assistant Directors (up to five)\nSO as to cover a decent range of professional\ndisciplines without trying for \"representation\"\nof every professional discipline or interest,\nand to respond to the possible growth in\nPresidential needs for special competence.\n(d)\nProvision should be made for a flexible number\nof full-time professionally qualified staff\n(up to a dozen) as well as a clerical staff\nto meet the responsibilities of the Office\nas they may develop.\n(e)\nThe ad hoc advisory panels (mentioned in para-\ngraph 3 above) which are central to the effective\nfunctioning of the Office should:\n- 6 -\n(i) be exempt from the Federal Advisory\nCommittee Act.\nFrank and objective advice cannot be\nexpected to be available if exposed to con-\ntinuous and public scrutiny and controversy;\n(ii) have their members, in general, appointed\nby the President;\nFORD VIBRARY\n(iii) serve on a part-time basis for a limited\nterm;\n(f) The Director would maintain close relationships\nwith the National Academies of Science and of\nEngineering and the Institute of Medicine and,\nin establishing ad hoc panels, would make full\nuse of their membership, as well as of academic\nfaculties and such organizations as the Social\nScience Research Council.\n(g) The Office in its initial full year of operation\nshould have an annual budget in the $1 to $3 mil-\nlion range.\n(h) Since science and technology are profoundly inter-\nrelated (not only among the scientific disciplines\nthemselves, but with domestic and foreign social\nand political issues and the intellectual activity\nof the nation) the area of the Office's con-\ncern should be broad and include:\n- 7 -\n-- social and behavioral sciences\n-- physical and life sciences\n-- medicine\n-- engineering\nGREATS FORD LIBRARY\n-- military applications\n-- international aspects of science and technology\n-- science and technology in the private sector\n-- education and training of scientific manpower\n5. The Qualifications of the Director\nThe Director must have, or be the type of\nperson who can readily gain, the personal confidence\nof the President.\nHe or she should be a scientist, engineer or\nmedical person of proven scientific or technical\ncapability, have some experience in public service\nor administration, and should preferably be a member\nof one of the National Academies of Science or\nTechnology or the Institute of Medicine.\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nFebruary 5, 1975\nMR. PRESIDENT:\nAttached are the Vice President's recommendations\nas to how you should organize the Executive Office of\nthe President to provide advice on science and technology.\nThis paper has not been staffed and the Staff Secretary\nis circulating it to Buchen, Marsh, O'Neill, Cavanaugh\nand Scowcroft for comment. These comments are due\nFriday and I should have a memorandum to you\nsummarizing them by Monday.\nFORD is LIBRARY SERVID\nDon\nARM\nYou MAY want to discuss it\nwith the U.P. tomorrow when\nyou meet with him. -\n2/9/75 Has This now been\nstaffed out?\nORIGINAL RETIRED FOR PRESERVATION\nOuTBoy\nSCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND THE\nPRESIDENT'S EXECUTIVE OFFICE\nRecommendations\nGERALE FORD LIDRARY\nFebruary 5, 1975\nFebruary 5, 1975\nSCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND\nTHE PRESIDENT'S EXECUTIVE OFFICE\nRecommendations\n1.\nThere should be a scientific and technological\ncapability directly available to the President\n(a) Many issues that come to the President, either\nfor decision or for initiative, involve science\nand technology, sometimes to a very high degree,\nin the analytical and judgmental process.\n(b) While the federal departments and agencies have,\nand should have, scientific and technological\ncompetence of high quality, the President should\nhave available to him an independent source of\nscientific and technological judgment of the very\nhighest quality. The organization set up to pro-\nvide such a source for the President must not be,\nor be perceived as, the representative of the\nscientific and technical community in the\nPresident's office.\n(c) While the present need for such a capability is\nclear, in our complex and technologically varied\nsociety, the need to draw upon science and\ntechnology to meet urgent problems and oppor-\ntunities will be even greater in the decades ahead.\n- 2 -\n2.\nThis capability should be lodged in\nan Office of Technology and Science\n(a) An Office of Technology and Science should be\nestablished by Congressional action and should\nGERALD FORD LIBRARY\nbe headed by a Director who should also have the\ntitle of Science and Technology Advisor to the\nPresident.\n(b) An Office, better than a single Advisor, or a\nCouncil or Committee of Advisors, can\n-- cover the full range of necessary competence\nwithout seeming to subordinate one area to another;\n-- interact with (and \"translate\" the reports of)\nad hoc expert task forces of consultants drawn\nfrom a variety of disciplines in and out of\nscience and technology;\n-- call on and utilize the best scientific,\ntechnological and professional talents in the\ncountry for specific tasks relevant to the\nPresident's responsibilites;\n-- resist the pressures to make the President's\nScience Advisor the \"spokesman for science and\ntechnology\" as distinguished from the President's\nneed for scientific competence in meeting his\nnational responsibilities.\n- 3 -\n3. The areas of potential activity for the Office\nof Technology and Science should be principally:\n[Note: Not all of the following activities need\nbe undertaken at the outset. The func-\ntions of the Office should be allowed\nto grow as the President may require,\nas relationships with the departments\nand agencies of government develop,\nGERALD FORD LIBRARY\nand as emerging national programs,\npolicies and issues may make desir-\nable and useful.]\n(a) To respond on scientific and technical matters\nto requests from the President with respect to\nissues that are before him for decision, or\nnew initiatives.\n(b) To help the President resolve conflicting\nadvice involving scientific matters that come\nto the President from departments, agencies\nor the Congress.\n(c) To organize ad hoc panels of consultants to\nassist in the collection and evaluation of\nrelevant data with respect to particular\ntechnical and scientific issues.\nThe membership of such panels would be\ndrawn from the special competence available\nin the private and public sectors including\nuniversities, the National Academies, industry,\nand government laboratories.\n(d) To provide the President with early warning\nof either\n-- opportunities, or\n-- problems\n- 4 -\nthat have a scientific or technological com-\nponent, including some longer range forecasting\nof such opportunities, problems or developments.\n(e) To identify and report on any gaps in scientific\nresearch and technological development in the\npublic or private sectors that merit attention.\n(f) To consult with the President on the appoint-\nments of various scientific and technical\nFORD LIBRARY &\nofficials in the federal agencies.\n(g) To stay in contact with the professional staffs\nof the federal departments and agencies, and of\nstate and local governments, as well as with\nprivate sector organizations involved in science\nand technology.\n(h) To be available for participation in reviews\nof policies and programs of the departments\nand agencies having technical responsibilities\nand thus to assist in the formulation of national\npolicy on technical and scientific matters.\n(i) To assist the Domestic Council, the National\nSecurity Council and the OMB in reviewing de-\ndepartment and agency programs that have techni-\ncal and scientific content.\n(j) To have a modest budget to initiate analyses\nand studies in support of the ad hoc panels\nmentioned in subparagraph (c) above. These\nanalyses and studies would be performed in\n- 5 -\nuniversities, private industry or federally\nsupported institutions.\n4. Organization of the Office\n(a) The full-time Director of the Office should\nserve at the pleasure of the President.\n(b)\nThe Director should have a full-time deputy\nresponsible for the administration of the\nOffice who need not be a scientist.\n(c)\nThere should be provision for a flexible number\nof full-time Assitant Directors (up to five)\nso as to cover a decent range of professional\ndisciplines without trying for \"representation\"\nLIBRARY\nof every professional discipline or interest,\nand to respond to the possible growth in\nPresidential needs for special competence.\n(d)\nProvision should be made for a flexible number\nof full-time professionally qualified staff\n(up to a dozen) as well as a clerical staff\nto meet the responsibilities of the Office\nas they may develop.\n(e)\nThe ad hoc advisory panels (mentioned in para-\ngraph 3 above) which are central to the effective\nfunctioning of the Office should:\n- 6 -\n(i) be exempt from the Federal Advisory\nCommittee Act.\nFrank and objective advice cannot be\nexpected to be available if exposed to con-\ntinuous and public scrutiny and controversy.\n(ii) have their members, in general, appointed\nby the President.\n(iii) serve on a part-time basis for a limited\nterm;\n(f) The Director would maintain close relationships\nwith the National Academies of Science and of\nEngineering and the Institute of Medicine and,\nURD\nLIBRARY\nin establishing ad hoc panels, would make full\nuse of their membership, as well as of academic\nfaculties and such organizations as the Social\nScience Research Council.\n(g) The Office in its initial full year of operation\nshould have an annual budget in the $1 to $3 mil-\nlion range.\n(h) Since science and technology are profoundly inter-\nrelated (not only among the scientific disciplines\nthemselves, but with domestic and foreign social\nand political issues and the intellectual activity\nof the nation) the area of the Office's con-\ncern should be broad and include:\n- 7 -\n-- social and behavioral sciences\n-- physical and life sciences\n-- medicine\n-- engineering\n-- military applications\n-- international aspects of science and technology\n-- science and technology in the private sector\n-- education and training of scientific manpower\n5. The Qualifications of the Director\nThe Director must have, or be the type of\nperson who can readily gain, the personal confidence\nof the President.\nHe or she should be a scientist, engineer or\nmedical person of proven scientific or technical\ncapability, have some experience in public service\nor administration, and should preferably be a member\nof one of the National Academies of Science or\nTechnology or the Institute of Medicine.\nFEB 17 1975\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nFebruary 15, 1975\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nJERRY JONES\nFORD is GERALD LIBRARY\nFROM:\nDICK CHENEY\n1\nJerry, attached is some of the material on the Science Advisor post.\nDo we have this resolved yet?\nYou should pass the names listed in the Vice President's memo to\nWalker as potential candidates, should we decide to go with a science\nadvisor position.\nAttachment\nattached\nThis was\nenvp's\nScience\nFORD & \\ SERATO LIBRARY\nAderson\n-\n)\nmay I havea\nROAY\nOFFICE OF THE VICE PreSideNT\nWASHINGTON, D.C.\n2/5/75\nMr. Rumsfeld:\nHere is the report\nthe Vice President\npromised you.\nan\nAnn Whitman\nSCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND THE\nPRESIDENT'S EXECUTIVE OFFICE\nRecommendations\nGERALD FORD LIBRARY\nFebruary 5, 1975\nFebruary 5, 1975\nFORD & 078839 LIBRARY\nSCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND\nTHE PRESIDENT'S EXECUTIVE OFFICE\nRecommendations\n1.\nThere should be a scientific and technological\ncapability directly available to the President\n(a) Many issues that come to the President, either\nfor decision or for initiative, involve science\nand technology, sometimes to a very high degree,\nin the analytical and judgmental process.\n(b) While the federal departments and agencies have,\nand should have, scientific and technological\ncompetence of high quality. the President should\nhave available to him an independent source of\nscientific and technological judgment of the very\nhighest quality. The organization set up to pro-\nvide such a source for the President must not be,\nor be perceived as, the representative of the\nscientific and technical community in the\nPresident's office.\n(c) While the present need for such a capability is\nclear, in our complex and technologically varied\nsociety, the need to draw upon science and\ntechnology to meet urgent problems and oppor-\ntunities will be even greater in the decades ahead.\n- 2 -\n2.\nThis capability should be lodged in\nan Office of Technology and Science\n(a) An Office of Technology and Science should be\nestablished by Congressional action and should\nbe headed by a Director who should also have the\ntitle of Science and Technology Advisor to the\nPresident.\n(b) An Office, better than a single Advisor, or a\nCouncil or Committee of Advisors, can\n-- cover the full range of necessary competence\nR.FORD\nwithout seeming to subordinate one area to another;\nLIBRARY\n-- interact with (and \"translate\" the reports of)\nad hoc expert task forces of consultants drawn\nfrom a variety of disciplines in and out of\nscience and technology;\n-- call on and utilize the best scientific,\ntechnological and professional talents in the\ncountry for specific tasks relevant to the\nPresident's responsibilites;\n-- resist the pressures to make the President's\nScience Advisor the \"spokesman for science and\ntechnology\" as distinguished from the President's\nneed for scientific competence in meeting his\nnational responsibilities.\n- 3 -\n3. The areas of potential activity for the Office\nof Technology and Science should be principally:\n[\nNote: Not all of the following activities need\nbe undertaken at the outset. The func-\ntions of the Office should be allowed\nto grow as the President may require,\nTORO\nas relationships with the departments\nand agencies of government develop,\nLIBRARY\nand as emerging national programs,\npolicies and issues may make desir-\nable and useful.]\n(a) To respond on scientific and technical matters\nto requests from the President with respect to\nissues that are before him for decision, or\nnew initiatives.\n(b) To help the President resolve conflicting\nadvice involving scientific matters that come\nto the President from departments, agencies\nor the Congress.\n(c) To organize ad hoc panels of consultants to\nassist in the collection and evaluation of\nrelevant data with respect to particular\ntechnical and scientific issues.\nThe membership of such panels would be\ndrawn from the special competence available\nin the private and public sectors including\nuniversities, the National Academies, industry,\nand government laboratories.\n(d) To provide the President with early warning\nof either\n-- opportunities, or\n-- problems\n- 4 -\nthat have a scientific or technological com-\nponent, including some longer range forecasting\nof such opportunities, problems or developments.\n(e) To identify and report on any gaps in scientific\nresearch and technological development in the\npublic or private sectors that merit attention.\n(f) To consult with the President on the appoint-\nments of various scientific and technical\nofficials in the federal agencies.\n(g) To stay in contact with the professional staffs\nFORD LIBRARY is G7V830\nof the federal departments and agencies, and of\nstate and local governments, as well as with\nprivate sector organizations involved in science\nand technology.\n(h) To be available for participation in reviews\nof policies and programs of the departments\nand agencies having technical responsibilities\nand thus to assist in the formulation of national\npolicy on technical and scientific matters.\n(i) To assist the Domestic Council, the National\nSecurity Council and the OMB in reviewing de-\ndepartment and agency programs that have techni-\ncal and scientific content.\n(j) To have a modest budget to initiate analyses\nand studies in support of the ad hoc panels\nmentioned in subparagraph (c) above. These\nanalyses and studies would be performed in\n- 5 -\nuniversities, private industry or federally\nsupported institutions.\n4.\nOrganization of the Office\n(a)\nThe full-time Director of the Office should\nserve at the pleasure of the President.\n(b)\nThe Director should have a full-time deputy\nresponsible for the administration of the\nOffice who need not be a scientist.\n(c)\nThere should be provision for a flexible number\nof full-time Assitant Directors (up to five)\nso as to cover a decent range of professional\nFORD i LIBRARY\ndisciplines without trying for \"representation\"\nof every professional discipline or interest.\nand to respond to the possible growth in\nPresidential needs for special competence.\n(d)\nProvision should be made for a flexible number\nof full-time professionally qualified staff\n(up to a dozen) as well as a clerical staff\nto meet the responsibilities of the Office\nas they may develop.\n(e)\nThe ad hoc advisory panels (mentioned in para-\ngraph 3 above) which are central to the effective\nfunctioning of the Office should:\n- 6 -\n(i) be exempt from the Federal Advisory\nCommittee Act.\nFrank and objective advice cannot be\nexpected to be available if exposed to con-\ntinuous and public scrutiny and controversy.\n(ii) have their members, in general, appointed\nby the President.\n(iii) serve on a part-time basis for a limited\nterm;\n(f) The Director would maintain close relationships\nwith the National Academies of Science and of\nFORD\nEngineering and the Institute of Medicine and,\nLIBRARY\nin establishing ad hoc panels, would make full\nuse of their membership, as well as of academic\nfaculties and such organizations as the Social\nScience Research Council.\n(g) The Office in its initial full year of operation\nshould have an annual budget in the $1 to $3 mil-\nlion range.\n(h) Since science and technology are profoundly inter-\nrelated (not only among the scientific disciplines\nthemselves, but with domestic and foreign social\nand political issues and the intellectual activity\nof the nation) the area of the Office's con-\ncern should be broad and include:\n- 7 -\n-- social and behavioral sciences\n-- physical and life sciences\nFORD\n-- medicine\nGERALD\nLIBRARY\n-- engineering\n-- military applications\n-- international aspects of science and technology\n-- science and technology in the private sector\n-- education and training of scientific manpower\n5. The Qualifications of the Director\nThe Director must have, or be the type of\nperson who can readily gain, the personal confidence\nof the President.\nHe or she should be a scientist, engineer or\nmedical person of proven scientific or technical\ncapability, have some experience in public service\nor administration, and should preferably be a member\nof one of the National Academies of Science or\nTechnology or the Institute of Medicine."
}