Describing the last 3 months on the Subcommittee on International Scientific Cooperation of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space, and Technology is no easy task.  I have learned a great deal about many issues and about the workings of Congress; yet this knowledge has not been gained in a necessarily straightforward or logical manner.

Although my status on the Subcommittee is that of a Fellow, in effect I am expected to function as a regular staff member.  I immediately became involved in the preparation of two hearings, the first on science and technology initiatives for Poland and Hungary, and the second on the Human Genome Project.  At these hearings, I learned firsthand about important aspects of science-related issues that concern Congress, namely, intellectual property rights, U.S. competitiveness in the science and technology arena with other countries, Japan, in particular, and big science versus small science funding.

The tasks I have been assigned have been varied: developing an International Congressional Science and Technology Fellows Program for 10 foreign parliamentarians to be hosted each year by the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology; helping the Polish government in their efforts to set up a geological survey; and trying to ascertain whether or not it would be meaningful to hold a hearing on the United States rejoining UNESCO.  In addition, I have represented my subcommittee at meetings dealing with international environmental technology transfer and at workshops on the economics of suistainable development.  Next month I may have the opportunity to attend a trade fair in Leipzig with the aim of encouraging science and technology exchange between the United States and East Germany.

Has it been a good year so far?  Without a doubt!  At times it is frustrating to deal with so many broad issues simultaneously; yet in this manner I have learned that science and technology issues are multifaceted, with science being only one of the considerations, and not always a primary consideration at that.

An important issue facing Congress this year is "global warming."  As an environmental geologist I am dismayed to find that the geological aspects of global environmental problems are not understood by Congressional staffers.  This has resulted in the exclusion of geology from the "global warming debate."  I feel that it is very important for more scientists to be involved in policy debates.  We can't expect nonscientists to represent our interests adequately.

Barbara J. Frank, AGU Congressional Science Fellow, 1989-1990

Return to AGU's Congressional Science Fellowship page
Return to Science and Policy