Engineers, scientists and at least one lawmaker are pushing like never before to resuscitate a legislative agency that once provided Congress with technological expertise.
In an era of supposed government transparency, with allegations that even scientists are attempting to cover up research on global warming, an objective, authoritative Office of Technology Assessment is of utmost importance, advocates say.
Several lawmakers, particularly House member and physicist Rush Holt, D-N.J., have repeatedly rallied for appropriations to revive the office that Congress dismantled to save money in 1995. The counterargument against funding has always been that other agencies, such as the Government Accountability Office or Congressional Research Services, could provide the same services.
Now that belief may be changing, says Francesca Grifo, scientific integrity program director at the Union of Concerned Scientists, who will testify on Wednesday before the House Legislative Branch Appropriations Subcommittee. Holt also will testify in support of restored funding.
"We've decided to make it a priority issue," Grifo said in an interview with Nextgov on Tuesday. Her group is releasing a letter of encouragement signed by 30 organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union and the United Auto Workers. "It seems a little counterintuitive but, if you look at our current fiscal situation, OTA saves money," she said, explaining that if lawmakers have sound technical advice when they make policy decisions, "you'll waste less money."
Established in the early 1970s, the office was responsible for providing Congress with early evaluations of the potential costs and benefits of new technologies and new applications of existing technologies.
Grifo's organization estimates that the office cost Congress about $20 million annually but, since its extinction, the federal government has squandered billions of dollars on failed systems, including virtual fences to guard the U.S-Mexico border and baggage screening equipment.
A sample of reports produced shortly before its demise shows that the office already was on top of many innovations at the forefront of today's legislative agenda.
One 1995 report referenced the potential for tracking the efficacy of medical treatments with electronic health data - a controversial issue in the ongoing debate over healthcare reform. "Because large amounts of electronic data now can be collected and manipulated, there has been increased emphasis on using existing data, often in the form of insurance claims databases, to evaluate health care technologies," the research stated. "Data gathered from events occurring in a wide range of practice settings have become viewed as a tool for looking at effectiveness-- average outcomes achieved by average doctors and patients."
In a report entitled "Bringing Health Care Online: The Role of Information Technologies," the office found that electronic patient records, portable computers, automated data capture and computer networks "can potentially improve the quality of health care" by "enhancing clinical decision support and by improving data for assessing the effectiveness of health services and the performance of health care providers and insurance plans."
Another 1995 report probed the ramifications of electronic surveillance, concluding, "If major problems arise in meeting the needs of law enforcement, they will likely arise as a result of institutional difficulties in dealing with a diverse, highly entrepreneurial industry made up of a large number of telecommunications companies offering many new innovations and features, with the number of players steadily increasing."
