A few more blogs have discussed the OTA since our launch Wednesday…
From The Great Beyond, a blog hosted by Nature:
“Washington is full of science-policy wonks who bemoan the loss of the Office of Technology Assessment, which between 1972 and 1995 was the go-to place for smart independent advice for policymakers on science and technology topics. Fortunately, OTA junkies now have an online fix for all their needs.”
From Rhetoric and Rockets:
“Before OTA is reborn I would want to know the following:
- How, exactly, would a revived OTA would function?
- How big would it be?
- Who would participate?
- More importantly (from my semi-mistrustful point of view) who DECIDES who gets to participate?
- What would the new OTA charter look like?
- What steps would be taken to prevent the real or perceived irrelevance of the agency?
- What provisions will be made to ensure that OTA remains a “lean and mean,” think tank type of organization?
- In short, what will OTA supporters do to assure budget hawks that the agency deserves to be reborn when there is already a call to decrease the deficit, balance the budget, and eliminate a great deal of waste elsewhere in the federal government?”
“The Agency, which we as staffers labeled “Congress’ Own Think Tank,” had become official in 1972, and was tasked with taking a long-term look at the implications of technology on all aspects of society. By most accounts, we did a phenomenal job.”