Friday, 2 August 1991 Washington, DC
1. DOE WILL REVIEW SOME OF ITS HIGH-ENERGY PHYSICS SPINOFF
CLAIMS
according to Deputy Secretary Henson Moore. "Our
department has to improve its credibility," Moore said in
testimony before the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee of
the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Moore took umbrage,
however, at suggestions that DOE officials had deliberately
misled Congress on spinoffs. Rep. Jim Slattery (D-KS), an
opponent of the SSC, specifically asked about Magnetic Resonance
Imaging, which Moore had included in a list of high-energy
physics spinoffs last April (WN 19 Apr
91). The spinoff claims, which cost the SSC in terms of
goodwill from other scientists, probably weren't needed anyway; a
panel of industry representatives urged support for such basic
research projects as the SSC even if there are no spinoffs.
Meanwhile, House/Senate conferees agreed on $483.7M for the SSC
in FY 92.
2. "SON OF STAR WARS" IS ENDORSED BY SENATE--BACK TO GRAND
FORKS!
The Nunn-Warner plan to reactivate the antimissile
site in North Dakota to defend against limited attacks calls for
100 ground-based interceptors to be installed by 1996. It would
also allow tests of space-based sensors and calls for
negotiations to expand the number of sites allowed under the 1972
ABM Treaty; the Grand Forks site would protect the mid-section of
the US, but not the populous coasts. The Senate plan must still
be reconciled with the House, however, it won't be simple. The
House (WN 10 May 91) eliminated
brilliant pebbles and voted a mere $3.5B for SDI in FY 92, which
is $1.1B less than the Senate wants. Critics see the Senate plan
as a deliberate move to scuttle the ABM Treaty, but when Sen.
Carl Levin (D-MI) introduced an amendment requiring SDI to stay
within the bounds of the ABM Treaty, it passed 99-0! Is the ABM
Treaty really that popular in the Senate? Not at all. When the
opponents of the Levin amendment realized it would pass anyway,
they all voted for it on the theory that in Washington no one
will take legislation seriously if it gets a unanimous vote.
3. 60 PERCENT OF APS MEMBERS HAVE NEVER EVEN HEARD OF WHAT'S
NEW,
according to the 1990 membership survey! About one-
half of the non-student members of the APS are involved in the
traditional pursuits of basic research and teaching; physics does
a poor job of attracting women and minorities; and most of our
members favor increased involvement in public affairs. Results
of the survey will be discussed in a two-part article in fall APS
Bulletins.
4. APS OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS IN WASHINGTON SEEKS A
PHYSICIST
beginning 1 Sep 91. A PhD physicist with an
interest in public policy is needed to work with the Panel on
Public Affairs, the Physics Planning Committee and the Executive
Director of the APS Office of Public Affairs. Dr. Tina Kaarsberg,
who currently fills this position, has been selected as a 1991-92
APS Congressional Fellow. Interested persons should contact the
American Physical Society, 2000 Florida Ave. N.W., Washington,
DC. (202) 232-0189.
|
