DOCSLIB.ORG

Science and the Evolution of Public Policy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Science and the Evolution of Public Policy SCIENCE AND THE EVOLUTION OF PUBLIC POLICY JAMES A. SHANNON Editm P u a L I s HE D BY ?lie RocKefelIcllcr Uniwmsi&Press NEW YORK CITY 1973 SCIENCE AND THE EVOLUTION OF PUBLIC POLICY SCIENCE AND THE EVOLUTION OF PUBLIC POLICY JAMES A. SHANNON Editm P u a L I s HE D BY ?lie RocKefelIcllcr Uniwmsi&Press NEW YORK CITY 1973 COPYRIGHT© 197 3 BY THE ROCKEFELLER UNIVERSITY PRESS L I B R A R Y 0 F C 0 N G R E S S C A T A L 0 G U E C A R D N 0. 7 3 · 7 6 3 9 8 S T A N D A R D B 0 0 K N 0. 8 7 4 7 0 - 0 1 7 · 5 PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA SEC 0 N D PRINTING 1975 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION JAMES A. SHANNON vii THE PURPOSE AND UTILITY OF SCIENCE I. Science and Social Purpose CARYL P. HASKINS 1 II. The Utility of Science WILLIAM D. McELROY 19 DEVELOPMENT AND GOALS III. Organization and the Growth of Scientific Knowledge HAROLD HIMSWORTH 31 IV. Problems of Science, Goals and Priorities RoBERTS. MoRISON 47 THE UNIVERSITY V. Science, Technology, and The University WALTER A. RosENBLITH 67 VI. Support of Research and Graduate Education in the United States IvAN L. BENNETT, JR. 87 THE FEDERAL SUPPORT OF SCIENCE VII. The Physical Sciences: Bellwether of Science Policy HARVEY BROOKS I 05 VIII. Social Change and Social Science HENRY w. RIECKEN 135 IX. Biomedical Sciences JosEPHS. MuRTAUGH 157 X. Industrial Research and Development PATRICK E. HAGGERTY 189 SUPPORT OF SCIENCE XI. Federal Science and Its Prospects EDWARD E. DAVID, JR. 217 XII. The Role of Graduate Education GERARD PIEL 227 CONTRIBUTORS 239 INDEX 247 INTRODUCTION The science enterprises of the nation • are vigorous, diversified, and gen­ erally characterized by excellence. But, looking to the future, there are uncertainties which may limit their effectiveness. The recent erosion of federal support for science may be less a factor in this than the lack of suitable mechanisms to guide the further evolution of science programs and adjust their goals to the needs of society. Federal actions are par­ ticularly important, because of the dominant role of federal agencies in these regards. The profound influence of science and its derived technologies on contemporary society is obvious. But the reverse-i.e., the pervasive in­ fluence of societal need and its attitude on the magnitude and substan­ tive content of contemporary science-is less evident, even though a mix of domestic and international forces are common determinants in the definition of both the character and the scope of the nation's scientific inquiries. In this view, scientists should have a sensitive and clear under­ standing of the needs of society and the role science can play in their satisfaction. But also, in these complex interactions, society would do well to understand its own obligations. It must recognize that demands are imposed on scientists by the internal dynamics of their fields, com­ pliance to which directly determines the effectiveness of their enterprises. THE SOCIAL BACKDROP 1945-1970 The last quarter of a century was a period of dramatic change in the lives of all nations and the relations of many to one another. 1945-1955: The United States was clearly a superpower of great affluence, and there seemed to be few limitations on its domestic or inter­ national capabilities. Concurrently, there was a progressive decay in colonialism and many new nations emerged, each with a limited modern capability. In consequence, the world influence of some Western Euro­ pean nations lessened, despite the rapid restoration of their industrial *Science is used here as a general term to encompass research, development, and their associated educational enterprises. The term covers both academic and industrial ac­ tivities that are supported by official and private agencies alike. vii plants, and that of the U.S.S.R. increased as it developed a substantial technological competence. These happenings were accompanied by open conflict in the Far East, continuing unease in the Middle East, and in­ creasing tension between the United States and the U.S.S.R. The overall influence of these occurrences on U.S. science was mixed, but throughout the decade there was a general expansion in the federal support of academic science, somewhat hampered in the latter years as national resources were expended during the terminal phases of the Korean conflict. Cutbacks in the support of science as a result of the Korean conflict were less evident than a slowing of the anticipated growth. 1955-1960: The United States during this mid-period had many costly international commitments. But by compromising one conflict (Korea) and taking initial steps in another (Vietnam), there was a firming of the polarization between the United States and the Communist na­ tions. Then, there was a progressive disillusionment of many dependent nations in the benevolence of the great powers and the emergence of "third world" nations, poor as well as uncommitted. The U.S.S.R., with nuclear weapons available, put both missiles and man in orbit, thus challenging the technical preeminence of the United States. This period was particularly important to scientific research and de­ velopment in the United States. The superiority of U.S. science seemed secure during the early years of the fifties. While early-warning systems (for aircraft) and the propulsion and guidance of rockets were trouble­ some, the defense agencies selected short-range targets for emphasis, ac­ companied by a beginning withdrawal of its support for academic sci­ ence. Although NIH programs burgeoned beginning in 1956, modest increases were given to the newly developed National Science Foundation, and the Atomic Energy Commission embarked on the peaceful use of nuclear energy, some academic programs in the physical sciences were in jeopardy. Academic programs supported by the Air Force were in the process of substantial reduction when the Russian challenge of Sputnik I and II sharply reversed the downward trend and signalized a sharp change in national priorities. Preeminence was given to space and de­ fense-related science and technology, and to associated educational activi­ ties. The growth of biomedical programs continued and were not par­ ticularly affected. 1960-1970: The past decade has seen the United States disturbed by events surrounding the firm establishment of a Communist nation in the Western Hemisphere, its resources drained by an increasingly unpopular war in Southeast Asia, and other costly international commitments. Then there was a flare-up of open hostility in the Middle East, with the viii Introduction U.S.S.R. committed to support what it viewed to be its own interests in both Southeast Asia and the Near East. The period also covered the open break between the U.S.S.R. and mainland China. The latter, with great hostility to the western world and a beginning competence in modern weaponry, was viewed as a threat to peace in its own right. Then there was a break in the solid front of the NATO nations, a deterioration in the industrial capability of some member nations, and an increased capability of others. The counterpart took place to a lesser extent within the U.S.S.R. and some of its satellite nations. Political instability became a way of life for a number of nations, but there was increasing disillusion­ ment of an increasing number of nations with war as an instrument of national policy. Also, the costly arms race between the United States and the U.S.S.R., and some appreciation of their inability to continue in their present operational modes, led to beginning attempts to find areas of mutual accommodation. It is not surprising that increasing social unrest was more common during this period than social tranquility and that rational guidelines for the future development of many nations were less than clear. The United States entered the decade an arrogantly affluent nation with the appearance of having unlimited resources. It ends the decade with many uncertain purposes, but with a profound appreciation of unmet social needs. There are two coupled imperatives, as we now view our national life. First, our priorities do not seem to reflect our national needs, and the extent of the shift that will be required is now only dimly apparent. Second, the nation's ability to satisfy its internal needs has as one essen­ tial a continuing healthy economy. Science and technology must find their place within the framework of these coupled imperatives. This will be a complicated undertaking and will impose strains on our national purposes and the vigor with which they are pursued. The undertaking will be made more difficult or more simple, depending on the correctness of our estimates of: the resources that are expended for defense; the consensus we reach on the priority given to competing social objectives and on the rate of progress we deem to be reasonable; the resulting balance that obtains in the allocation of resources for social and all other purposes. All this is complicated by the increasing development of humanistic life styles of large segments of the population, by public disenchantment with the power of science and technology to solve complex problems, by the impatience of some groups to share in the fruits of affluence, and Introduction ix the unwillingness of others to place their recent economic gains in jeopardy. THE SCIENCE SCENE With this pot pourri of domestic and international problems, it is not surprising that fundamental trends relating to science were perturbed by transients. The important trends include a progressive increase in all science and technology and a general increase in the educational level of the nation.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Why Should We Worry About the National Debt: MITCH DANIELS Questions and Answers LEON PANETTA TIM PENNY April 16, 2019
    CHAIRMEN Why Should We Worry About the National Debt: MITCH DANIELS Questions and Answers LEON PANETTA TIM PENNY April 16, 2019 “Why Should We Worry About the National Debt?” describes six important ways PRESIDENT MAYA MACGUINEAS that the growing national debt will affect the budget and the economy. Below, we answer specific questions frequently raised about the topic. DIRECTORS Isn’t debt sustainable when the economy grows faster than interest rates? BARRY ANDERSON Despite the fact economic growth rate is higher than government interest rates (r<g), ERSKINE BOWLES CHARLES BOWSHER debt remains on an unsustainable trajectory in the United States. Economist Olivier KENT CONRAD Blanchard and others have pointed out that governments can shrink their debt-to- DAN CRIPPEN GDP ratio while still borrowing to finance their interest payments when r<g. VIC FAZIO However, this only leads to a sustainable outcome if a government is running a WILLIS GRADISON primary balance (revenue equals non-interest spending) or a sufficiently modest JANE HARMAN WILLIAM HOAGLAND primary deficit. The United States today is running a large and growing primary JIM JONES deficit. As a result, both debt and interest payments will continue to rise faster than LOU KERR the economy despite low interest rates. There is also no guarantee that the economic JIM KOLBE growth rate will remain higher than interest rates, particularly as rising debt puts CYNTHIA LUMMIS MARJORIE MARGOLIES downward pressure on growth and upward pressure on rates. DAVE MCCURDY JAMES MCINTYRE, JR. Do low interest rates mean deficits don’t “crowd out” investment? DAVID MINGE Evidence suggests that today’s low interest rates are in spite of, not because of, high JUNE O’NEILL deficits and debt – and that deficits continue to “crowd out” investment.
    [Show full text]
  • The Defense Program and the Economy Hearings
    THE DEFENSE PROGRAM AND THE ECONOMY HEARINGS BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC GOALS AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL POLICY OF THE JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES NINETY-SEVENTH CONGRESS FIRST AND SECOND SESSIONS PART 1 OCTOBER 7, 13, 22, AND 29, 1981, AND DECEMBER 15, 1982 Printed for the use of the Joint Economic Committee U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 9-760 WASHINGTON:.1983 JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE (Created pursuant to see. 5(a) of Public law 304, 79th Cong.) HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES SENATE HENRY S. REUSS, Wisconsin, Chairman ROGER W. JEPSEN, Iowa, Vice Chairman RICHARD BOLLING, Missouri WILLIAM V. ROTH, Ja., Delaware LEE H. HAMILTON, Indiana JAMES ABDNOR, South Dakota. GILLIS W. LONG, Louisiana STEVEN D. SYMMS, Idaho PARREN J. MITCHELL, Maryland PAULA HAWKINS, Florida FREDERICK W. RICHMOND, New York' MACK MATTINGLY, Georgia CLARENCE J. BROWN, Ohio LLOYD BENTSEN, Texas MARGARET M. HECKLER, Massachusetts WILLIAM PROXMIRE, Wisconsin JOHN H. ROUSSELOT, California EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts CHALMERS P. WYLIE, Ohio PAUL S. SARBANES, Maryland JAMES K. GALBRAITH, Executive Director BRucE R. BARTLETT, Deputy Director SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC GOALS AND INTERGOVEBNMENTAL PoLIor HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES SENATE LEE H. HAMILTON, Indiana, Chairman LLOYD BENTSEN, Texas, Vice Chairman RICHARD BOLLING, Missouri PAULA HAWKINS, Florida STEVEN D. SYMMS, Idaho MACK MATTINGLY, Georgia 1 Representative Richmond resigned from the U.S. House of Representatives on Aug. 25, 1982, and Representative Augustus F. Hawkins, of California, was subsequently appointed to the committee on Sept. 23, 1982. CONTENTS WITNESSES AND STATEMENTS WEDNESDAY, OCTOBEB 7, 1981 Reuss, Hon. Henry S., chairman of the Joint Economic Committee: Open- Page ing statement ------------------------------------------------- 1 Weidenbaum, Hon.
    [Show full text]
  • Janet Yellen's Legacy at the Federal Reserve
    Journal of Finance and Bank Management December 2019, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 82-87 ISSN: 2333-6064 (Print), 2333-6072 (Online) Copyright © The Author(s). All Rights Reserved. Published by American Research Institute for Policy Development DOI: 10.15640/jfbm.v7n2a6 URL: https://doi.org/10.15640/jfbm.v7n2a6 Janet Yellen’s Legacy at the Federal Reserve Alexander G. Kondeas1 Abstract This paper examines the empirical results of the monetary policies followed by the Federal Reserve during the period of 2010-2018, when Janet Yellen served first as vice chair (2010-2014) and subsequently as chair (2014-2018) of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors. As the Central Bank of the United States, the Federal Reserve System (FED) is entrusted with conducting the monetary policy in a way that fulfills the Congressional dual mandate of price stability and full employment. Janet Yellen generally adhered to a dovish view of monetary policy, one that favors looser monetary control and lower interest rates in order to stimulate economic growth. At first glance, the dual mandate was satisfied during her eight years of progressively higher leadership roles at the FED. The economic recovery from the Great Recession (2007- 2008) continued, inflation remained tamed, and the rate of unemployment fell to its lowest level since 1970. Yet a closer look at consumer spending and private fixed investment indicate a sharp decline in the years following the Great Recession and until the end of Yellen’s term at the FED. It is difficult therefore, to argue that the loose monetary policies of her years in office had much of a stimulating effect on the household sector or the business sector.
    [Show full text]
  • Symposium Proceedings, 1998: Income Inequality: Issues And
    The Contributors A.B. Atkinson, Warden, Nuffield College, Oxford University Mr. Atkinson is currently serving as warden of Nuffield College, Oxford University. Previously, he was professor of political econ- omy at the University of Cambridge, and chairman of the Suntory Toyota International Centre at the London School of Economics. A fellow of the British Academy, he is a past president of the Royal Economic Society, the Econometric Society, the European Eco- nomic Association, and the International Economic Association. He has served on the Royal Commission on the Distribution of Income and Wealth, the Pension Law Review Committee, and the Commis- sion on Social Justice. He is also the author or co-author of a number of books dealing with public economic issues and income distribution. Alan S. Blinder, Professor, Princeton University Mr. Blinder is the Gordon S. Rentschler Memorial Professor of Economics and co-director and founder of the Center for Economic Policy Studies at Princeton University where he has been a member of the faculty since 1971. He is also vice chairman of the G-7 Group. Between June 1994 and January 1996, he was vice chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Before joining the Board, he was a member of President Clinton’s Council of Eco- nomic Advisers where he was in charge of macroeconomic forecast- ing and also worked on budget, international trade, and health care issues. Mr. Blinder is the author or co-author of 12 books and scores ix x Contributors of articles on such topics as fiscal policy, monetary policy, and the distribution of income.
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Oral History Office University of California the Bancroft Library Berkeley, California
    Regional Oral History Office University of California The Bancroft Library Berkeley, California Charles Schultze Slaying the Dragon of Debt: Fiscal Politics and Policy from the 1970s to the Present A project of the Walter Shorenstein Program in Politics, Policy and Values Interviews conducted by Martin Meeker in 2010 Copyright © 2011 by The Regents of the University of California ii Since 1954 the Regional Oral History Office has been interviewing leading participants in or well-placed witnesses to major events in the development of Northern California, the West, and the nation. Oral History is a method of collecting historical information through tape-recorded interviews between a narrator with firsthand knowledge of historically significant events and a well-informed interviewer, with the goal of preserving substantive additions to the historical record. The tape recording is transcribed, lightly edited for continuity and clarity, and reviewed by the interviewee. The corrected manuscript is bound with photographs and illustrative materials and placed in The Bancroft Library at the University of California, Berkeley, and in other research collections for scholarly use. Because it is primary material, oral history is not intended to present the final, verified, or complete narrative of events. It is a spoken account, offered by the interviewee in response to questioning, and as such it is reflective, partisan, deeply involved, and irreplaceable. ********************************* All uses of this manuscript are covered by a legal agreement between The Regents of the University of California and Charles Schultze, dated January 19, 2011. The manuscript is thereby made available for research purposes. All literary rights in the manuscript, including the right to publish, are reserved to The Bancroft Library of the University of California, Berkeley.
    [Show full text]
  • Henry Aaron, Brookings Insitution Gilbert Metcalf, Tufts University
    An Open Statement Opposing Proposals for a Gas Tax Holiday In recent weeks, there have been proposals in Congress and by some presidential candidates to suspend the gas tax for the summer. As economists who study issues of energy policy, taxation, public finance, and budgeting, we write to indicate our opposition to this policy. Put simply, suspending the federal tax on gasoline this summer is a bad idea and we oppose it. There are several reasons for this opposition. First, research shows that waiving the gas tax would generate major profits for oil companies rather than significantly lowering prices for consumers. Second, it would encourage people to keep buying costly imported oil and do nothing to encourage conservation. Third, a tax holiday would provide very little relief to families feeling squeezed. Fourth, the gas tax suspension would threaten to increase the already record deficit in the coming year and reduce the amount of money going into the highway trust fund that maintains our infrastructure. Signers of this letter are Democrats, Republicans and Independents. This is not a partisan issue. It is a matter of good public policy. Henry Aaron, Brookings Insitution Gilbert Metcalf, Tufts University Joseph Stiglitz, Columbia University (Nobel Prize in Economics, 2001) James Heckman, University of Chicago (Nobel Prize in Economics, 2000) Daniel Kahneman, Princeton University (Nobel Prize in Economics, 2002) Charles Schultze, Brookings Institution (President of the American Economic Association, 1984, Chairman Council of Economic Advisers 1977-1981, Director, Bureau of the Budget, 1965-1967) Alice Rivlin, Brookings Institution (President of the American Economic Association, 1986, Director of O.M.B.
    [Show full text]
  • The Buttonwood Gathering New York, October 25 - 26, 2010 the Graduate Center/City University of New York
    The Buttonwood Gathering New York, October 25 - 26, 2010 The Graduate Center/City University of New York About the event At last year’s Buttonwood Gathering, National Economic Council Director Larry Summers called on banks to accept the responsibility of greater regulation as a service to their country. Have they taken his words to heart? As the news continues to tell of a weak and jobless recovery, are banks and other financial institutions living up to their responsibilities? Once again in 2010, The Buttonwood Gathering will draw together leading policymakers, banking executives and regulators to discuss restoring trust in the financial system and evaluate our place on the road to recovery. Chair person John Micklethwait, Editor-in-Chief, The Economist The Bagehot lecture Mervyn King, Governor, Bank of England Confirmed speakers Mark Almeida, President, Moody’s Analytics Clifford Asness, Managing & Founding Principal, AQR Capital Management Zanny Minton Beddoes, Economics Editor, The Economist Matthew Bishop, American Business Editor, New York Bureau Chief, The Economist Joshua Bolten, Visiting Professor, Princeton University Joyce Chang, Managing Director and Global Head of Emerging Markets Strategy and Credit Research, JPMorgan James Chanos, Founder and Managing Partner, Kynikos Associates Ed Clark, President and Chief Executive Officer, TD Bank Financial Group Philip Coggan, Capital Markets Editor and Buttonwood Columnist, The Economist Sean Dobson, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Amherst Securities Group Former Senator Pete
    [Show full text]
  • Health Care Reform: Healthwill We Care Ever Reform: Willget Weit Right? Ever Get It
    The Thomas Willis Lambeth Lecture Health Care Reform: HealthWill We Care Ever Reform: WillGet WeIt Right? Ever Get It ALICE M. RIVLIN Senior Fellow, The Brookings Institution Right?Visiting Professor, Georgetown University September 27, 2012 THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL HEALTH CARE REFORM: WILL WE EVER GET IT RIGHT? The Thomas Willis Lambeth Lecture in Public Policy is sponsored and published in association with the Department of Public Policy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill CB# 3435 Abernethy Hall © Alice M. Rivlin 2012. Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-3435. All rights reserved. Lecture and publication costs are supported by the generous gift of an anonymous donor. ALICE M. RIVLIN Health Care Reform: Will We Ever Get It Right? HEALTH CARE REFORM: WILL WE EVER GET IT RIGHT? am honored to have been asked to replace the late Elinor Ostrom, who had agreed to give this lecture before her death in June of this year. Elinor I was an original thinker – a constructive maverick who made important contributions to economics from outside the mainstream of the discipline. She was a prolific researcher, who inspired a generation of development economists around the world. She focused on how real people in many parts of the developing world set up their own rules for sustainable management of the common resources on which their lives depend. Many of us were delighted when her contributions were recognized with a Nobel Prize in Economics. In our different ways, Elinor Ostrom and I have both worked at the intersection of economics and political science.
    [Show full text]
  • L5 News, April 1976
    In an effort to appease the budget (space stations housing up to two L-5 NEWS watchdogs, both within Congress and hundred people) and, possibly, to space OMB, however, the Committee kept the colonies. A Newsletter from the L-5 Society overall NASA budget within the $3.69 Several Soviet scientists have stated Number 8 * April * 1976 billion figure by dropping some other that many of the experiments being programs that OMB had allowed. carried out within the Salyut space MSFC SYMPOSIUM ON Most significant is a cut of $8 million station program are aimed at developing SPACE INDUSTRIALIZATION from Development Test and Mission new techniques for large permanent Operation (DTMO). These funds are part orbital bases. A two-day symposium on “Space of the Shuttle R&D budget. The Shuttle In an interview with the Soviet news- Industrialization” will be held at the is essential for the construction of the paper, Izvestia, August 1975, NASA-Marshall Space Flight Center, 200-person orbiting facility, planned to Academician V. Glushko stated that Alabama, May 26-27. be completed in 1983-85 (given “There can be no doubt that in the future To be sponsored jointly by the appropriate funding), at which solar the crews of orbital stations will be Alabama Section of the American power satellite construction techniques international and space exploration will Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics will be developed. A strong case could be become a matter involving that whole (AIAA) and the Marshall Center, the 1 made that funding power satellite planet.“ symposium will cover four primary research by diverting Shuttle funds is Another statement by Academician topics: Space Habitation, Space counterproductive.
    [Show full text]
  • Nobel Prize for Physics 1970
    Nobel Prize for Physics 1970 The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences has awarded the 1970 Nobel Prize jointly to two European physicists: to H. Alfvén for his establishment of the fundamental principles of magnetohydrodynamics which decisively influenced the development of plasma physics, and to L. Néel for his research and funda­ mental discoveries regarding antiferromagnetism and ferrimagnetism, which have important applications in the physics of solids. An assessment of these men and their work is given below. the predicted magnetic decomposition that there could exist, below the Curie of the solid into two sublattices. point, a compensation temperature at In 1936 Néel also showed theore­ which the magnetizations on the two tically that antiferromagnetism must sublattices are equal in magnitude be characterized by the existence of but opposite in sign, so that the net a critical external magnetic field. macroscopic moment becomes zero. Passing through this critical value the The moment of such a permanent magnetic susceptibility exhibits a magnet would change its sign at that discontinuity. Sixteen years later this temperature. A few years later, E.W. curious phenomenon was detected Gorter in Eindhoven found that a experimentally by C.J. Gorter and N.J. mixed ferrite of lithium and chromium Poulis in CUCI2.2 H2O. has this property. In 1948, Néel succeeded in inter­ The theory of ferrimagnetism en­ preting for the first time the magnetic abled Néel and Bertaut to elucidate properties of spinel structures of the the properties of pyrrhotine, Fe7S8, a Louis Néel ferrites, which had remained a mys­ mysterious substance on which Weiss Louis Néel received the award in tery to physicists for fifty years.
    [Show full text]
  • 106–928 District of Columbia Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2001
    S. HRG. 106–928 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001 HEARING BEFORE A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION ON H.R. 4942 and 5633/S. 3041 AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AND OTHER ACTIVITIES CHARGEABLE IN WHOLE OR IN PART AGAINST THE REVENUES OF SAID DISTRICT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2001, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES Council of the District of Columbia Financial Responsibility and Management Assistance Authority Office of the Mayor Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 62–772 cc WASHINGTON : 2001 For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office Superintendent of Documents, Congressional Sales Office, Washington, DC 20402 COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS TED STEVENS, Alaska, Chairman THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, South Carolina CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont SLADE GORTON, Washington FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky TOM HARKIN, Iowa CONRAD BURNS, Montana BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama HARRY REID, Nevada JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire HERB KOHL, Wisconsin ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah PATTY MURRAY, Washington BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota LARRY CRAIG, Idaho DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois JON KYL, Arizona STEVEN J. CORTESE, Staff Director LISA SUTHERLAND, Deputy Staff Director JAMES H.
    [Show full text]
  • Front Matter, INCOME INEQUALITY Regional Analyses Within a Human
    This PDF is a selection from an out-of-print volume from the National Bureau of Economic Research Volume Title: Income Inequality: Regional Analyses within a Human Capital Framework Volume Author/Editor: Barry R. Chiswick Volume Publisher: NBER Volume ISBN: 0-870-14264-X Volume URL: http://www.nber.org/books/chis74-1 Publication Date: 1974 Chapter Title: Front matter, Income Inequality: Regional Analyses within a Human Capital Framework Chapter Author: Barry R. Chiswick Chapter URL: http://www.nber.org/chapters/c3668 Chapter pages in book: (p. -16 - 0) INCOME INEQUALITY Regional Analyses within a Human Capital Framework NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH Human Behavior and Social Institutions 4 Ic Income Inequality RegionalAnalyses within a Human Capital Framework CH BarryR. Chiswick National Bureau of Economic Research and Queens College, C.U.N.Y. ER NationalBureau of Economic Research New York 1974 Distributed by Columbia University Press New York and London Copyright t 1974 by the National Bureau of Economic Research Al! Rights Reserved library of Congress card nO.: 73—88509 ISBN: O—87014—264—X Printed in the United States of America NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH OFFICERS Arthur F. Burns, Honorary Chairman Edwin Kuh, Director. Computer Research Walter W. Heller,Chairman Center J. Wilson Newman, Vice Chairman Hal B. Lacy. Vice Preoident-Research John R. Meyer, President Robert E. Lipsey, Vice President-Research Thomas 0. Flynn, Treasurer Sherman J. Maisel, Co-director NBER. West Douglas H. Eldridge, Vice President. Geoffrey H. Moore, Vice President-Research ExecutiveSec retarv Edward K. Smith, Vice President VictorR. Fuchs, Vice President-Research: Co-director NBER-West DIRECTORS AT LARGE Atherton Bean, international Multifoods Corporation J.
    [Show full text]