SCIENTIFIC MANPOWER UTILIZATION, 1967 WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 25, 1967 U.S. Senate, Manpower Utilization Of The Washington, D.C. The special subcommittee met at 9:30 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room 4232, Senate Office Building; Senator Gaylord Nelson (chairman of the special subcommittee) presiding. Present: Senator Nelson (presiding). Committee staff members present: William Spring, special counsel to the subcommittee. Senator Nelson. We will continue hearings today on S. 430, the Scientific Manpower Utilization Act of 1967, and S. 467, the National Commission on Public Management. This morning we will have testimony from Senator Hugh Scott of Pennsylvania; Dr. Simon Kamo, vice chairman of the board, TRW, Inc.; and Dr. Robert Lekachman, chairman, Department of Economics, State University of New York. Mr. Kurt Bauer, executive director, Southeast Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, was unable to get a plane out of Milwaukee because of weather, so he will not be here this morning. We are very pleased to welcome the distinguished U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania, Hugh Scott, who is the author of S. 467, the National Commission on Public Management. We are pleased to have you here this morning, Senator Scott. STATEMENT OP HON. HUGH SCOTT, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA Senator Scott. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I am very happy to be here and have the opportunity to discuss the approach embodied in S. 467. In the current issue of U.S. News & World Report, there is an article on the future, and there is a line in that article which says that the dreams often have a way of coming true. The point is made that in this past short decade alone, advances have occurred which greatly affect the present and will more greatly affect the future of all our citizens. The point is made that 10 years ago there were no jet commercial aircraft and virtually no activity in space, and that the use of computer systems was just beginning. how to expend these resources. No longer can we afford to expend 90 percent of all Federal research and development funds on defense, space, and nuclear energy developmental projects. Not only must the Federal Government increase its expenditures to combat pollution, urban sprawl, and natural resources dissipation, but the State and local governments must do likewise. What steps can be taken to achieve our ultimate goals? Two worthy efforts have been initiated within the Congress which can go far in helping to resolve the national and community problems in the nondefense, nonspace sector. You, Mr. Chairman, proposed a bill in October 1965, reintroduced as S. 430 last week, which delineates a course of action in precise terms: To mobilize and utilize the scientific and engineering manpower of the Nation to employ systems analysis and systems engineering to help to fully employ the Nation's manpower resources to solve national problems. A series of hearings were held last year which have been most useful in obtaining factual data and commentary from experienced participants in using the systems approach in various applications areas. A concurrent approach, which I believe to be complementary both in concept and ultimate ramifications, was introduced last August which called for the establishment of a National Commission on Public Management. I had the honor to introduce this measure, which was cosponsored by nine other Senators: a companion bill was introduced in the House of Representatives by the Honorable F. Bradford Morse of Massachusetts and more than 40 of his colleagues. With the convening of the 90th Congress, these bills were reintroduced by Representative Morse (H.R. 20); and myself (S. 467) with the same strong support. The mandate of the Commission, as I stated in my introductory speech on the floor of the Senate on January 18, will be to answer two fundamental questions: "Can the systems approach contribute to the solution of these problems? If so, how can it best do the job?" The Commission, to be composed of 13 outstanding representatives from business, labor, education, and Government, would have a fulltime staff. With a basic purpose of studying the ways in which modern systems analysis and management techniques may be utilized to overcome society's problems, the results would be in the form of specific recommendations for legislation, Federal executive action, and implementing action by State and local jurisdictions. Senator Nfxsost. If I may interrupt, Congressman Bradford Morse was before the committee yesterday. I understood him to say that last year your bill had on that Commission, Members of Congress, and this year your bill in this House does not. Am I incorrect? Senator Scott. I cannot speak with certainty about Congressman Morse's bill, but mine, both last year and now does not. Senator Nelson. He called my attention to that, and was urging that Members of Congress be on the Commission. I understand his version does include Members of Congress. Is there a policy reason for not including Members of Congress? Senator Scott. No, there is no policy reason, Mr. Chairman I would have no objection at all. Mr. Morse has told me of his willingness to accommodate me by combining the two approaches. I would, in turn, have no objection whatever to considering the advisability of including—in fact I would react favorably toward including—a provision that members of the Commission either may or shall be Members of Congress, as seems best after I have a chance to talk with Mr. Morse. Senator Nelsox. I don't personally have an opinion on it. He seemed to have one, so I though I would call it to your attention. Senator Scott. I appreciate that. We will consult with Representative Morse. During the current set of hearings before this special subcommittee, emphasis has been placed upon learning more about the ways in which the systems approach, as developed in private industry, can be brought to bear on these pressing problems. I feel that the subcommittee is wisely inquiring into the role and relationships of the many participating elements in this complex environment: the State, local, and regional governmental groups, the universities and colleges, the "think-type" institutions—both profit and not for profit—and the Federal Government. I did not mean the last statement to be wholly exclusionary; I would not exclude the Federal Government from the category of "think-type" institutions, although I would like to give that some consideration, also. Many tools and techniques, including the electronic computer, have been developed and applied to the spectrum of domestic problems. In a few instances, as in the State of California, where specific subject studies were undertaken by selected aerospace firms, valuable data concerning the nature of the problem and possible mechanisms for solution were obtained. It is my firm belief that before steps are taken to allocate funds to various States, we need to know more about which management techniques can be really effective in coping with the complex problems which were earlier identified. Forecasting the future is a responsibility to be shared by all of us in the policymaking role. The problems are multidimensional and will be solved only by the joint efforts of the private and public sectors. I was particularly impressed by your call to action, Mr. Chairman, when you stressed: Nothing short of a massive effort by industry and government at every level will solve this problem. This can be done only after a total analysis of the problem and development of an overaU program of action. 'Hie Congress has evinced willingness to confront the issues of the <lay, and to pose solutions. Technology is now available which will allow ns to purify our streams, cleanse the air we breathe, construct (rood housing at a fair price, and provide health care for every citizen. TV men and women of America have had to comprehend and assimilate new techniques for producing the everyday necessities, engaging in recreation, and communicating with their neighbors. Forward progress is not alwavs smooth and some turmoil and adjustment is involved in almost all technological change. But our record for fronting these challenges in this country is very good. In summary, I commend this subcommittee as it moves forward to nrovine a better way of life for this generation and generations to come. It will be the responsibility of the Congress to take those steps neces M,„;,i11 iv,p forceaJ^Hir society with the truidance and renary to provide me i ,- . » * ~.*„, fokl!ch a reasonable course of action, sources to cr.tawiisn a |