Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Source Description
Records pertain to the Office of Science and Technology Policy.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
285790745
label
January 1991: 1/11/91 (11:00 a.m.) PCAST [President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology] Meeting with A. Bromley [Agenda and Talking Points]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
285790745
contentType
document
title
January 1991: 1/11/91 (11:00 a.m.) PCAST [President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology] Meeting with A. Bromley [Agenda and Talking Points]
description
Records pertain to the Office of Science and Technology Policy.
citationUrl
identifierLocal
08066-003
collections
Records of the Council of Economic Advisors (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Michael J. Boskin Meeting Files
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
285790745
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
6249bc7ce0dbaacf
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
2005-0336-F
2005-0336-F
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Economic Advisers, Council of
Series:
Boskin, Michael, Files
Subseries:
Meeting Files
OA/ID Number:
08066
Folder ID Number:
08066-003
Folder Title:
January 1991: 1/11/91 (11:00 a.m.) PCAST [President's Council of Advisors on Science and
Technology] Meeting with A. Bromley [Agenda and Talking Points]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
13
24
7
3
Document originally attached to following page.
To
Date
11/200 Time 9:20
WHILE YOU WERE OUT
M ThillSmydor
of
Phone X5101
Area Code
Number
Extension
TELEPHONED
PLEASE CALL
CALLED TO SEE YOU
WILL CALL AGAIN
WANTS TO SEE YOU
URGENT
RETURNED YOUR CALL
asked chooge
Message 4nB
to
hames.
C 23-023 CARBONLESS
Operator
AMPAD
EFFICIENCY®
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
ask Bill Sayder
January 4, 1990
to change MBb
name to
Dr.
Dear Mike,
I am most pleased that you can meet with the President's Council of Advisors
on Science and Technology on Friday, January 11, 1991.
At its inception a year ago, the President asked the PCAST to study and later
advise him on specific issues of National importance. We have done this and will
continue to offer advice on these issues. Now we believe it appropriate to revisit the
needs of the President and the Presidency and identify those issues which the PCAST
can offer helpful and substantive advice in 1991.
Your participation on January 11 will greatly assist us in meeting this goal and
setting our priorities for this coming year.
Sincerely,
Am
D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
The Honorable Michael Boskin
Chairman
Council of Economic Advisors
Room 314
Old Executive Office Building
Enclosures:
Draft Agenda for PCAST Meeting
PCAST Membership
PCAST Executive Order
DRAFT
As of noon, January 4, 1991
PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL OF ADVISORS
ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
JANUARY 10-11, 1991
AGENDA
THURSDAY, JANUARY 10, 1991
OPEN SESSION 9:00 AM - 12:00 NOON
CONFERENCE ROOM
COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
722 JACKSON PLACE, NW
8:30 - 9:00
ARRIVAL - COFFEE AND PASTRIES
9:00 - 9:30
OPENING REMARKS
DR. BROMLEY
9:30 - 10:30
BIODIVERSITY
DR. WILSON
- AN INFORMATION BRIEFING
10:30 - 10:45
DISCUSSION
10:45 11:45
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE
DR. PECK
RESEARCH PROGRAM
- A PROGRESS REPORT
11:45 - 12:00
CLOSING REMARKS
DR. BROMLEY
DRAFT
THURSDAY, JANUARY 10, 1991 Continued ...
CLOSED SESSION, 12:00 NOON - 5:00 PM
ROOM 248
OMB DIRECTOR'S CONFERENCE ROOM
OLD EXECUTIVE OFFICE BUILDING
12:00 - 12:45
LUNCH
12:45 - 1:00
BREAK
1:00 - 4:30
ISSUES FOR PCAST CONSIDERATION
DR. BROMLEY
1:00 - 2:00
MR. DARMAN
2:00 - 3:00
MR. BERNTHAL
3:00 - 4:00
GENERAL SCOWCROFT
4:00 - 4:30
ADMIRAL TRULY
- 4:30
OTHER BUSINESS
DR. BROMLEY
- 6:30
COCKTAILS AND DINNER
MAYFLOWER HOTEL
DRAFT
FRIDAY, JANUARY 11, 1991
CLOSED SESSION 9:00 AM - 12:00 NOON
ROOM 180
OLD EXECUTIVE OFFICE BUILDING
8:30 - 9:00
ARRIVAL - COFFEE AND PASTRIES
(DR. BROMLEY'S OFFICE, ROOM 360, OEOB)
9:00 - 10:00
DISCUSSION OF FEBRUARY AGENDA
DR. BROMLEY
AND OTHER ISSUES
10:00 - 12:00
ISSUES FOR PCAST CONSIDERATION
DR. BROMLEY
10:00 - 11:00
GOVERNOR SUNUNU
11:00 - 12:00
MR. BOSKIN
- 12:00
CLOSING REMARKS
DR. BROMLEY
THE PRESIDENTS COUNCIL OF ADVISERS ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
(PCAST)
NORMAN BORLAUG, Distinguished Professor, Department of Soils and Crop Sciences,
Texas A&M University
ALLAN BROMLEY, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, Executive Office
of the President (Chairman)
SOLOMON BUCHSBAUM, Senior Vice President, Technology Systems, AT&T Bell
Laboratories
CHARLES DRAKE, Albert Bradley Professor of Earth Sciences and Professor of Geology,
Dartmouth College
RALPH GOMORY, President, The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
BERNADINE HEALY, Chairman of the Research Institute, The Cleveland Clinic Foundation
(Vice-Chairman)
PETER LIKINS, President, Lehigh University
THOMAS LOVEJOY, Assistant Secretary for External Affairs, Smithsonian Institution
WALTER MASSEY, Vice President for Research and for Argonne National Laboratory,
University of Chicago
JOHN McTAGUE, Vice President-Research, Ford Motor Company
DANIEL NATHANS, Professor of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Johns Hopkins University
School of Medicine
DAVID PACKARD, Chairman of the Board, Hewlett-Packard Company
HAROLD SHAPIRO, President, Princeton University
office of the Press Secretary
(Miami, Florida)
For Immediate Release
January 19, 1990
EXECUTIVE ORDER
PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL OF ADVISORS ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
By the authority vested in me as President by the
Constitution and laws of the United States of America, and in
order to establish, in accordance with the provisions of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App. 2),
an advisory committee on science and technology, it is hereby
ordered as follows:
Section 1. Establishment. There is established the
President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology
("Council"). The Council shall be composed of not more than
15 members, one of whom shall be the Director of the Office
of Science and Technology Policy, and 14 of whom shall be
distinguished individuals from the private sector to be
appointed by the President. The Director of the Office of
Science and Technology Policy shall serve as Chairman of the
Council. The Vice Chairman shall be appointed by the
President from among the 14 private sector members. The
Chairman shall report directly to the President.
Sec. 2. Functions. (a) The Council shall advise the
President on matters involving all areas of science and
technology.
(b) In the performance of its advisory duties the
Council shall conduct a conţinuing review and assessment of
developments in science and technology, and shall, through the
Chairman, report thereon to the President whenever requested.
(c) The Chairman may, from time to time, invite experts
to investigate and report to the Council on specific issues of
national consequence.
Sec. 3. Administration. (a) The heads of Executive
agencies shall, to the extent permitted by law, provide the
Council and its panels such information with respect to
scientific and technological matters as required for the
purpose of carrying out its functions.
(b) Members of the Council shall serve without any
compensation for their work on the Council. However, members
appointed from among private citizens of the United States may
be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of
subsistence, as authorized by law for persons serving
intermittently in the Government service (5 U.S.C. 5701-5707).
(c) Any expenses of the Council shall be paid from the
funds available for the expenses of the Office of Science and
Technology Policy.
(d) The Office of Administration shall, on a
reimbursable basis, provide such administrative services
as may be required.
Document originally attached to following page.
1/10/91
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS
Michael-
Here are same Notes
for your meeting
@ Bronley's felhs
tanan. Lot he know
it you uant t's or
D's.
frie 1 previshment Click earnus Member Richard Schmalensee meeturey n proder
diverdent indulant
2 butter 3
GNP dan
(newpredent
RS/AJ/1/10
TALKING POINTS: PCAST SESSION 1/11/91
Note: You are down for an hour with this crowd, "12 prestigious
individuals from academia and industry," much of which I assume
is to be in the form of conversation. You follow Sununu. Per
Bromley's form letter, they are interested "in learning about
activities of your office and can give advice and assistance on
science and technology issues," "in hearing your top objectives
for 1991 and how PCAST can be of assistance, "to hear other
issues that are of importance to you and your office and those
issues for which you believe the PCAST can offer advice, and
"your ideas on private sector initiatives that might be
supportive of your objectives and the needs of the President." "
What follows is organized roughly around "S&T-related issues I
care about and on which you might concievably be able to help."
0.
CEA's task is to advise the President about the health of
the economy as a whole and to work for policies that
contribute to its health. We often think of our
consistuents as U.S. consumers, since other agencies
represent our citizens in their roles as workers,
shareholders, patients, etc.
A. We are smaller than Allan's massive operation and have
a staff mainly on leave from academia add details at
will.
I.
The President's top economic priority is maximizing
sustainable economic growth -- add hymn. The CEA is
interested in technology and innovation because they are
major determinants of growth, and thus of the economic
success of nations:
A. We know this empirically from economic history and from
economic research (e.g., Boskin/Lau)
B. Thus your work, and Allan's are of vital importance to
the economy and the nation. (add praise in layers)
C.
I want to talk briefly about what I see as the federal
government's role in encouraging science and
technology.
II. Government Must Create the Right Environment: The
government has a crucial role to play in creating an
economic and institutional environment that fosters both the
development and widespread diffusion of new technologies.
We stressed this in last year's ERP and continue to push it.
PCAST can help us set priorities in B & C...?
2
A.
General investment environment
1.
Stable macroeconomic environment (through stable
policy rules)
2.
Lower interest rates through deficit reduction
B.
Tax policy
1.
Permanent R&E tax credit (Note: according to
yardop
Treasury, a final decision has not yet been made
on whether to repeat our proposal to make the R&E
credit permanent in the 1992 Budget submission.)
2.
Incentives for entrepreneurship and capital
formation, e.g., K-gains (As above, have pushed
but may drop ?)
C.
Legal environment
1.
Strong protection for intellectual property, at
home (resisting softening the orphan drug law) and
abroad (GATT)
2.
Predictable and balanced product liability rules
(we tried and will, presumably, try again)
3.
Fostering competition, which generally spurs
innovation, through economic deregulation (go
light on telephone; you likely have old Bell labs
guys in the audience)
4.
Environmental and product-safety regulation that
is sensitive to the need not to unduly burden
innovation (a hot area here is biotechnology,
where a variety of useless restrictions have been
a problem)
5.
Antitrust policy that recognizes that cooperative
research may be desirable (again, we tried to
broaden the cooperative R&D exemption to include
production)
III. Education: A progressive economy clearly requires leading
edge S&T professionals, but it also requires a well-educated
work force and a general public that can think sensibly
about science and technology.
Ksamn not Loans
3
A.
K-12 education is failing to do its job -- I'm aware
that this has been a concern of yours as well. (They
have given the President a generally sensible paper on
this subject.) What's needed are, among other things:
1.
comprehensive reform to improve the flexibility
and accountability of the school system; and
2.
more attention to attracting talented individuals
into math and science teaching (alternative
certification) in order to create a technically
literative, adaptable workforce.
B.
Public education is needed to develop better general
understanding of:
1.
the importance of innovation and entrepreneurship
for the economy;
2.
scientific reasoning, to distinguish between a
provocative conjecture (e.g., being near wires
that carry electricity is bad for you) and a well-
supported theory -- a problem I have frequently in
discussions of economic matters; and
3.
the issue of risk, and the harm that is created by
an explicit or implicit standard of zero risk for
other
new technologies. The public seems simply unable
to deal with low probability/high loss risks in
ex?
any sort of rational manner (e.g., pesticides get
hysteria, while radon is ignored) -- what can be
done? // this should generate discussion //
IV. the Fed government does have an important role in supporting
R&D investments that generate large spillovers (and hence
will be inadequately provided by the private sector acting
alone).
And we do a lot of it: $66.1 billion in FY91, up 6% from
FY90. Much of this is military, of course, but we spent
$27.2 billion on civilian R&D, up 11% from FY90
The problem is how to allocate these resources so as to
maximize the long-run return to the taxpayer.
A. A few principles seem clear:
1.
Government should not second-guess private
decisions with respect to investments which, if
successful, would yield significant profits to a
firm undertaking them. That is,
4
-- We should avoid choosing particular
industries to support - government is bad at
determining which industries are truly
"strategic" in anything but the strict DOD
sense and is very vulnerable to special
pleading.
-- We should also avoid supporting the
development of particular commercial
technologies - these pose no special
spillover problem, so that rejection of some
technologies in favor of others by the
private sector generally means simply that
the rejected technologies are bad
investments.
2.
Some investments may yield significant social
benefits, but in such a way that even if the
project is successful no private firm could
exploit those benefits to its own advantage.
These investments will be underprovided by the
private sector.
3.
Thus, if we observe a certain research endeavor
not being undertaken by the private sector we
should ask: If a private firm undertook this
endeavor, and it achieved its objective, would it
make money from it?
-- If the answer to the question is yes, then
the failure of the private sector to fund it
suggests that it is not worthwhile.
-- If the answer is no, then the endeavor is at
least a candidate for public support,
depending on the expected social benefit, the
investment cost, and the likelihood of
success.
4.
Using the criterion of market failure/
appropriability of benefits in this fashion is a
superior decision rule about government's role in
R&D than using the simple linear model of basic
research/applied research/development, with a
presumption that government starts the process
with basic research, and then firms take over.
The key consideration is not how far along some
hypothetical basic-applied-commercial trajectory
5
the endeavor lies, but rather whether the private
incentives are approximately correct.
B.
Translating these principles into specific policies is
somethimes difficult, of course. But two categories
that generate spillovers seem clear:
1.
Basic research whose commercial implications are
unclear
a.
Outcomes are serendipitous; any particular
firm will be reluctant to undertake research
whose benefits are not privately
appropriable.
b.
Difficult or impossible to establish or
enforce property rights in many cases.
C.
CEA has worked hard in this area to get
funding increased; to double the NSF
budget
(Something about economic research
contributing to public policy and education?)
2.
Applied research with generic applicability, on
what Allan has called "generic, enabling, pre-
commercial technologies"
a.
Here outcomes may be more predictable, but if
results are applicable to widely diverse
technical or market circumstances, any one
firm may be unable to exploit them fully. If
research is very expensive, benefits in
narrow application may not be sufficient
motivation.
b.
Again property rights may be difficult to
establish, particularly for process
developments.
C.
Cooperative (or joint venture) research among
private firms may be a partial solution, but
some government involvement may be desirable
to ensure wide dissemination and fostering of
market competition.
d.
This is the area in which the tension with
the "don't pick commercial winners and
losers" principle is greatest.
6
Any R&D funding decision, of course, involves
choice, even in basic research (chemistry or
biology?). But here one's choices have
clearer implications for at least clusters of
industries.
It is important nonetheless both to mine this
ore and to be very careful that the
government does not attempt to do that which
it simply can't do well.
Federal Funding of R & D (For Background)
FY 1990
FY 1991
Basic
$11.3 b
$12.3 b
+8%
Applied
$10.3 b
$11.0 b
+6%
Development
$40.6 b
$42.9 b
+6%
TOTAL
$62.3 b
$66.1 b
+6%
Defense (DOD & DOE) $37.8 b
$38.8 b
+3%
Civilian
$24.6 b
$27.2 b
+11%
Need any other numbers?