Office of Technology Assessment, United States Congress, science, technology, policy
Steve Mirsky |Scientific American: 60-Second Science |February 19, 2009
A podcast about science advice to Congress from a session at the AAAS annual meeting says, “Time to bring back the Office of Technology Assessment.” Statements by Rep. Rush Holt and Lou Branscomb offered reasons for restoring OTA.
Laura Sanders | Science News | March 14, 2009
In a column (interview) about the state of U. S. science, Rush Holt (D-NJ) says he is troubled that many people have a bad attitude about science. He said, “This attitude is seen with the latest stimulus package, where people go on the House floor — members of Congress — and ridicule the idea of funding science. They did!”
To explain why he thinks that science is important, Holt said,
It is from science that we get the innovation that provides productivity and growth for the future economy, so it is critically important for our economic well-being. It also adds to our quality of life in material ways. But I think most scientists still feel that there is a higher calling to what they do, that understanding how things work is an end in itself, and it’s a glorious end in itself.
Where legislators get their science information, according to Rep. Holt:
Well, in many cases, they don’t. They get it from whoever was the last person to visit their office, who may or may not know anything about science….
We should return to vibrancy the Office of Technology Assessment, which was abolished 14 years ago now. OTA was a terrific resource for anticipating the [scientific] questions that were coming up. It worked very well, and we can restore it just as it was, to very good effect.
About plans to reinstate OTA, Holt said, “I try again every year. I’m trying again this year.”
David P. McClure | The CPA Technology Advisor | January 2009
A recent magazine column scores technology predictions for 2008 and makes new predictions for 2009. One of the predictions is that a cabinet-level technology officer will be created in the new administration, which is based upon an idea floated by President Obama during his campaign. Pointing out the need for such an office, the column states, “Since the Congress dismantled the Office of Technology Assessment more than a decade ago, the federal government has been forced to deal with rapidly evolving technologies with little or no independent guidance and no central point from which to make national policies to advance technology utilization. I’m all for changing that.”
It has been thirteen years since the closing of OTA, which was officially closed on September 29, 1995. Unoffficially, a few people stayed on to finish up some projects and a few people stayed officially for two more month to clear up the rubble. (I guess that is the answer to your trivia question, Mike.)
The amazing thing is that, thirteen years later, OTA is mentioned in the press almost every day. It shows that former Congressman Amo Houghton (R-New York) was right when he said, “Those of us who have used OTA reports know that most of them have long shelf lives. The really important issues–the issues OTA worked on–do not get solved and go away in one Congress.” from In Memoriam: The Office of Technology Assessment, 1972-95
Hidden among the many, many documents related to OTA we’ve received are some real treasures. Today we have photos of some old OTA coffee mugs. Does anyone else have old OTA memorabilia that we could photograph and add to the site? Yours truly is featured in the final shot.
Posted Aug. 1, 2008
The folks over at denialism blog have a new write-up about the Office of Technology Assessment that mentions the OTA Archive project. The full post is available here.
© 2011-2012 OTA Archive All Rights Reserved
