Advertisement

If you have an ACS member number, please enter it here so we can link this account to your membership. (optional)

ACS values your privacy. By submitting your information, you are gaining access to C&EN and subscribing to our weekly newsletter. We use the information you provide to make your reading experience better, and we will never sell your data to third party members.

ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCES TO C&EN

Policy

Remembering The Office Of Technology Assessment

November 30, 2009 | A version of this story appeared in Volume 87, Issue 48

In his editorial "Bring Back OTA," Rudy Baum reports his whole-hearted agreement with a suggestion by Ralph Nader to reestablish the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA), a low-cost advisory office of Congress (C&EN, Aug. 31, page 3). Like him, I have seldom agreed with Nader, but this time Nader is right, and his idea is excellent. The abolishment of OTA was an act of arrogance and willful ignorance, and it never should have happened.

I say this from personal experience with OTA, having served on the committee that produced an influential report in its time, "Assessment of Technologies for Determining Cancer Risks from the Environment" (OTA, June 1981, Washington, D.C.). The committee was ably chaired by a noted environmental medical scientist, Norton Nelson of New York University, and it was supported by Michael Gough of OTA. I was one of the members from industry; others were from the environmental movement, law, academia, medicine, and government agencies. And the committee sought advice from still others, as well.

I approached the committee with some trepidation, wondering how much politicking there might be instead of science. I was soon reassured because there was none. Although some members were opponents of others in other arenas, science and technology were the only considerations in all of the deliberations and in the final product. I came away with much new knowledge and with great respect for OTA and its reservoir of talent and knowledge. I also came away with a strong appreciation of its work in support of Congress in areas where a grasp of the meaning of science and technology was so important for lawmakers to do their jobs. I was deeply chagrined and angered when OTA was abolished, and I hope that Nader's idea will be put into practice.

Paul F. Deisler Jr.
Austin, Texas

Advertisement

Article:

This article has been sent to the following recipient:

0 /1 FREE ARTICLES LEFT THIS MONTH Remaining
Chemistry matters. Join us to get the news you need.