Annual Spring Forum Held at NAS
- PDF / 609,283 Bytes
- 2 Pages / 604.8 x 806.4 pts Page_size
- 61 Downloads / 144 Views
George A. Keyworth (chairman of Keyworth/Meyer International and former science advisor to President Reagan) speaks on the state of science in America.
John M. Poate (AT&T Bell Labs and former MRS president) reports on an NM AB study of "Electronic Materials and Surface Modification in the United States and Japan."
Praveen Chaudhari (IBM), co-chair of the Materials Science and Engineering Study, announces chairpersons for the Study's five panels.
The Solid State Sciences Committee (SSSC) and the Committee on Atomic and Molecular Science (CAMS) held their joint spring forum on March 10 and 11, 1986 at the National Academy of Sciences in Washington, DC. Presentations covered both science policy and funding issues as well as forefront areas of basic research. After introductory remarks by Al Narath and Lloyd Armstrong, who are respectively chairmenof the SSSC and CAMS, the first session comprised talks by Harold Hanson, Executive Director for the House Science and Technology Committee; Hugh Loweth of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB); Richard Nicholson, Assistant Director for Mathematical and Physical Sciences at the National Science Foundation; Leo Young, Director for Research and Laboratory Management at the Department of Defense; and Alvin Trivelpiece, Directorof the D e p a r t m e n t of Energy's Office of Energy Research. Hanson summarized the current budget situation, emphasizing that things are in a state of flux and eventual outcomes are uncertain. The generally austere picture for basic research was confirmed, however. In answer to a question from Herbert Johnson (Cornell University), Hanson noted that the direct "pork barrel" approach of universities to congress for funds "is not a new phenomenon." What's new is that "they are now using public relations firms and professional fund raisers called 'vice presidents.'" Hanson noted that Congressman Fuqua (Florida) is attempting to create "a proper path for construction funds requests" but he held out little hope for such a process in a "Gramm-Rudman era." Concerning classified research on campuses—a point raised by I. Sellin (Oak
Ridge National Laboratory)—Hanson favored both openness in research and the right of researchers to study what they want, including classified programs, but reminded the audience that his House Committee does not deal with DOD-sponsored research. Loweth echoed the combination of austerity and uncertainty in present budget deliberations. He also informed the group that OMB is sensitive to the issue of large facility versus small science. In answer to a query from Morris Cohen (MIT) he noted that increased funds to NSF explicitly recognize the importance of small science. He continued by noting that one large facility, the proposed space station, is not viewed in the same context by the administration or congress and is thus not in a "tradeoff" relationship with other science support. Loweth conceded that such programs as the cold-neutron source at NBS are having a tough time getting support in spite of their clear desirabili
Data Loading...
