Group calls for speedy appointments to science and technology advisory boards

A committee of The National Academies is urging U.S. policymakers to streamline appointment processes for presidential advisers and federal committees on science and technology.

Advisory committee appointments should not be politicized, and presidential appointments should be swift, according to the Committee on Science, Engineering and Public Policy in a report issued Wednesday.

In a news conference announcing the committee's findings, chairman John Porter said that "administrative and procedural obstacles" make it difficult to recruit the best and brightest scientists and engineers to the highest levels of public service to satisfy an urgent need. "Charges surfaced recently that the process of making appointments is being politicized," added Porter, a former Illinois congressman now serving as a partner in the Washington law firm of Hogan & Hartson. "It is important at this critical time that science and technology advice to the federal government be seen as impartial and independent."

Porter declined to make any specific accusations. But he said the need for reform is especially critical in light of events since the last report four years ago, including the terrorist attacks and anthrax deaths in 2001.

The report, "Science and Technology in the National Interest: Ensuring the Best Presidential and Federal Advisory Committee Science and Technology Appointments," is the third in a series that The National Academies began in 1992, timed to presidential election years. The reports have offered guidance for making the appointment process more efficient and increasing the breadth and depth of the candidate pool. "Unfortunately, little progress has been made…and many of the concerns raised over a decade ago persist today," said Porter.

In the latest report, the committee emphasizes the need for credible, trustworthy experts to offer both the president and the public critical advice in scientific, medical and technical areas from the very first days after a presidential election and throughout a president's tenure.

Two key recommendations--naming a confidential science and technology assistant to the president immediately after each general election, and making certain that advisory committee members are chosen solely on the basis of expertise-top a list of seven suggestions in the report.

It recommends that the same individual should serve as the president's confidential assistant and the director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. It also says that scientists, engineers and health professionals being considered for federal advisory committee membership should not be asked about political party affiliation, voting records or personal opinions on particular issues because the information has no bearing on the expertise they would provide.

The report also recommends that administrations cast their nets more widely to reach more women and minorities in the applicant pool for what amounts to fewer than 100 presidential appointments in science and technology. It says streamlining the appointment process for those jobs-such as by combining separate White House and Senate background checks-would reduce personal and financial burdens on nominees. To make federal advisory committee memberships more attractive, the report recommends clarifying selection criteria, disclosure requirements and conflict-of-interest rules.