Office of Technology Assessment, United States Congress, science, technology, policy
Tutor | September 8, 2008
A blog entry credited OTA for their worldwide leadership in technology assessments in the health care field in the 1970’s, providing politicians with an evaluation of not only the medical technologies and procedures but also the organizational structures in which medical services are provided. European countries (Sweden, the Netherlands, France, and Britain) later developed similar programs in the 1980’s.
A blog post about the failure of the Congress to reinstate OTA says, “While the OTA may have died on the altar of partisan ideology in 1995, its revival today seems to be inhibited by a bipartisan failure to understand why it’s needed.”
Read more about Rep. Rush Holt’s (D-NJ) recent efforts to reinstate OTA here.
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
Today’s document of the day (available here) is a press release and memo sent to members of the Technology Assessment Board (TAB) on December 31, 1974. Senator Kennedy’s term as Chairman of the TAB was coming to a close and he used this document to “share his thoughts with (the TAB) about what we have accomplished thus far, and what still needs to be done.”
The memo continues as follows:
Congress needs its own source of unbiased technical expertise, and OTA is an institutional innovation to meet that need. But even more than a technical or institutional experiment, OTA is an experiment in how to make democracy work.
It is not just a matter of whether Congress can utilize technical information and advice. The crucial point is whether Congress can do so in the full glare of public scrutiny–and with the full participation of the varied public groups that have a stake in the outcome of the decisions.
Later on in the memo Sen. Kennedy mentions the topics OTA decided to examine:
-How should we allocate our resources to energy R&D?
-How economical is solar energy for the generation of electric power?
-What are the economic, social, and environmental impacts of drilling for offshore oil and gas? Of the use of deep water ports?
-How can we strengthen the technology of our fisheries industry?
-How can we strengthen overall food technology systems? What is the impact of the energy shortage on fertilizers and food production?
-How can we assure the nation adequate supplies of materials resources?
-What is the impact of automated mass transit technology–not only on movement of people and goods, but on jobs and the economy in general?
-How can we use our high technology products to strengthen America’s international competitive position?
This document is the first in a series of material from the OTA library. You can also find today’s document here on the OTA library page. Check back regularly as we add to this section of the site.
We’re continuing to highlight new documents that we’ve received for the archive. Slowly but surely, we’re turning them into PDF documents and getting the material online. Today we have a collection of nine OTA newsletters. According to the first newsletter:
In response to an expressed need to be better informed about goings-on within the Office, we present to you Volume 1, Number 1 of the “OTA NEWSLETTER”
At this early stage, we intend to publish the Newsletter in two parts. Part one will feature business-related matters and may later be distributed to select audiences outside OTA. The second part will contain matters of an in-house nature.
To see at all nine editions of the OTA Newsletter click here.
The Office of Technology Assessment, like any successful organization, used regular self-evaluation to ensure that Congress got the most out of OTA reports. In response to suggestions from members of Congress and Hill staff, OTA created report briefs. These two to four page documents summarized the main points of a full report in simple, direct language. Today’s document is one of those report briefs, “The tragic loss of life from ‘friendly fire’ can be reduced”. It beings as follows:
The disturbing incidents of ‘friendly fire’ deaths suffered by the United States and its allies in the Persian Gulf War focused new attention on an old problem. U.S. forces shooting at their own units caused 24 percent of U.S. combat deaths in the war. The fraction of losses due to friendly fire, or fratricide, seemed extraordinarily high and caused considerable public concern and international friction. The OTA report, Who Goes There: Friend or Foe?, explores the causes of friendly fire and some of the remedies that might be found in new technology, training, and doctrine.
Click here to read the full 1993 OTA report, “Who goes there: friend or foe?”
More report briefs will be posted on this page in the coming days.