OTA analyzed point by point a critical review from drug company, P.M.A., law firm and Wall Street representatives, and in the review process corrected some profit calculations and made other changes. Considerable time and resources were expended in this effort, and the result was a report which, although still not completely satisfying to industry, OTA believes is the most complete, thoroughly documented analysis of its kind.

Concluding Comments

The two aspects of OTA I have just described are central features that differentiate OTA's work for the Congress. Together they explain OTA's determination and capacity to produce impartial, detailed, accurate and scientifically sophisticated work for client committees. Although much of OTA's output is in the form of multi-year reports, even the shorter, more sharply focused and timely work that OTA is producing today benefits from external input, project specific staffing, careful internal and external review, doctorate level senior staff, and the influence of OTA's culture and Board for nonpartisan, non-ideological impartiality.

Dear Co-Chairmen Boren and Hamilton and Vice Chairmen Domenici and Dreier:

The Office of Technology Assessment figures on women and minority positions which you requested at the hearing of the Joint Committee on June 10, 1993 are as follows:

ROGER C. NEROMAN
DIRECTOR

In addition you requested that if OTA had any suggestions for
streamlining work requests or providing protection from increasing or possibly
inappropriate requests, we advise you. I have raised this issue with the
Technology Assessment Board at the regularly scheduled June 22, 1993, meeting.
At their suggestion, and in response to you, I can make the following two
points. First, the Board functions well as a protection for the agency from
inappropriate or excessive requests. As OTA's resources diminish, management
will attempt to maintain analytic capacity as the highest priority, but
inevitably there may be some loss of ability to respond to congressional work
requests. The Technology Assessment Board expects to continue to monitor
OTA's workload and ensure that it is organized and prioritized for the best

The Board wishes to stress, as the second point, that the inclusion of language requiring OTA to perform defined tasks in laws enacted by the Congress is an attempt to circumvent this orderly and effective process which was contemplated by OTA's enabling statute, P.L. 92-484. Both the Board and the Appropriations committees have spoken out against these legislative mandates, as we noted in our May 28, 1993, submission of answers to your questions. The Board has asked that I reinforce to you their strong view that mandates are inappropriate. Senator Kennedy and Congressman Sundquist, Board Chairman and Vice Chairman respectively, would be pleased to be consulted if you have an intent and device for strengthening the ban on mandates.

Sincerely,

KA

Roger C. Herdman

The Office of Technology Assessment's (OTA)
Responses to the Questionnaire of

the Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress

Question #1: What is the mission of your organization under your authorizing statute, and how has this mission changed over time?

OTA was authorized by the Technology Assessment Act of 1972 (Public Law 92-484), an act "to establish an Office of Technology Assessment for the Congress as an aid in the identification and consideration of existing and probable impacts of technological applications."

The 1972 law contains the following language pertaining to OTA's mission, "The Congress...finds and declares that....it is essential that....the consequences of technological applications be anticipated, understood, and considered in determination of public policy on existing and emerging national problems. Accordingly, it is necessary for the Congress to -

(1) equip itself with new and effective means for screening competent, unbiased, information concerning the physical, biological, economic, social, and political effects of such applications, and

(2) utilize this information whenever appropriate, as one factor in the legislative assessment of matters pending before Congress, particularly in those instances where the Federal Government may be called upon to consider support for, or management or regulation of, technological applications."

"The basic function of the Office (of Technology Assessment) shall be to provide early indications of the probable beneficial and adverse impacts of the applications of technology and to develop other coordinate information which may assist the Congress. In carrying out such function, the Office shall:

(1) identify existing or probable impacts of technology or technological programs;

(3) identify alternatives to technological methods of implementing specific programs;

(4) identify alternative programs for achieving requisite goals;

(5) make estimates and comparisons of the impacts of alternative methods and programs;

(6) present findings of completed analyses to the appropriate legislative authorities;

(7) identify areas where additional research or data collection is required to provide adequate support for the assessments and estimates described in paragraph (1) through (5) of this subsection; and (8) undertake such additional associated activities as the appropriate authorities...may direct."

Guided by this statutory language, OTA has long seen its mission as being to serve as a scientific and technologic consultant to Congress, and as an agency that can advise Congress on the physical, biological, economic, social, and political effects of applications of technology. Over time, OTA has issued in-depth reports on a wide range of topics and has earned a solid reputation for thoughtful and nonpartisan competence in the analysis of topics with a significant scientific and technologic component. This reputation, in turn, has led the Congress to expand OTA's mission.

Seeking to capitalize on OTA's nonpartisan posture and thorough knowledge of scientific and technological fields of endeavor and acquaintance with the best and most experienced experts and institutions in those fields, Congress has mandated that OTA appoint some commissions and panels. These include the Advisory Panel on Alzheimer's Disease (P.L. 102-507), the Prospective Payment Assessment Commission (P.L. 98-21), and the Physician Payment Review Commission (P.L. 99-272). OTA also has been asked to review credentials of candidates for the now defunct Biomedical Ethics Advisory Committee (P.L. 99-158) and has been selected as the agency to screen candidates for the new John Heinz Competitive Excellence Award (P.L. 102-429). Finally, OTA has been involved on a continuing basis over more than the last decade in monitoring and evaluating studies on veterans (P.L. 96-151, P.L. 98-160, P.L. 99-272, and P.L. 102-585).

OTA has been given, in addition to these new functions, new mandates to help resolve issues not resolved in debate when specific legislation was enacted. Thus, for example, OTA is recently finished an examination of the pros and cons and details of implementing the Americans With Disabilities Act in intercity bus transportation (P.L. 101