View source for Office of Technology Assessment

{{Short description|United States Congress office (1974–1995)}}
[[Image:OTA seal.png|thumb|right|OTA seal]]
The '''Office of Technology Assessment''' ('''OTA''') was an office of the [[United States Congress]] that operated from 1974 to 1995. OTA's purpose was to provide congressional members and committees with objective and authoritative analysis of the complex scientific and technical issues of the late 20th century, i.e. [[technology assessment]]. It was a leader in practicing and encouraging delivery of public services in innovative and inexpensive ways, including early involvement in the distribution of government documents through [[electronic publishing]]. Its model was widely copied around the world.

The OTA was authorized in 1972 and received its first funding in fiscal year 1974.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/93/hr6691/text/enr |title=Legislative Branch Appropriation Act, 1994 |date=November 1, 1973 |publisher=U.S. Congress}}</ref> It was defunded at the end of 1995, following the 1994 mid-term elections which led to Republican control of the Senate and the House. House Republican legislators characterized the OTA as wasteful and hostile to GOP interests.

[[Princeton University]] hosts The OTA Legacy site, which holds "the complete collection of OTA publications along with additional materials that illuminate the history and impact of the agency". On July 23, 2008 the [[Federation of American Scientists]] launched a similar archive that includes interviews and additional documents about OTA.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://ota.fas.org/ |title=Office of Technology Assessment Archive |publisher=Federation of American Scientists}}</ref>

==History==
Congress established the Office of Technology Assessment with the Technology Assessment Act of 1972.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/STATUTE-86/pdf/STATUTE-86-Pg797.pdf |title=Technology Assessment Act of 1972 ~ Public Law 92-484 |date=October 13, 1972 |series=86 Stat. 797 ~ House Bill 10243 |publisher=U.S. Government Publishing Office}} ([http://www.princeton.edu/~ota/ns20/act_f.html HTML version])</ref> It was governed by a twelve-member board, comprising six members of Congress from each party—half from the Senate and half from the House of Representatives. During its twenty-four-year life it produced about 750 studies on a wide range of topics, including [[acid rain]], [[health care]], global [[climate change]], and [[polygraphs]].

===Closure===
{{Multiple image|direction=horizontal |align=right|image1=OTAShirt-Front.png|image2=OTAShirt-Back.png|footer=The front and back of a tee shirt created and worn by some staff of the OTA to express their sentiments about the intent of the 104th Congress to terminate their service while simultaneously increasing the Library of Congress' budget by an amount equal to nearly twice that of OTA's. Compare to the official seal above, and note the arm of Congress strangling the symbolic U.S.A. in the satirical version.}}

Criticism of the agency was fueled by ''Fat City'', a 1980 book by ''Washington Times'' journalist [[Donald Lambro]] that was regarded favorably by the Reagan administration; it called OTA an "unnecessary agency" that duplicated government work done elsewhere. OTA was abolished (technically "de-funded") in the "[[Contract with America]]" period of [[Newt Gingrich]]'s Republican ascendancy in Congress. According to ''Science'' magazine, "some Republican lawmakers came to view [the OTA] as duplicative, wasteful, and biased against their party."<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.science.org/content/article/house-democrats-move-resurrect-congress-s-science-advisory-office|title=House Democrats move to resurrect Congress's science advisory office|last1=Malakoff|first1=David|date=2019-04-30|website=Science {{!}} AAAS|language=en|access-date=2019-05-01}}</ref>

When the [[104th Congress]] withdrew funding for OTA, it had a statutory limit of 143 full-time staff (augmented by various project-based contractors) and an annual budget of $21.9&nbsp;million.{{cite web |url=https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/103/hr4454 |title=Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, FY1995 |date=July 24, 1994 |publisher=U.S. Congress}} The closure of OTA was criticized at the time, including by Republican representative [[Amo Houghton]], who commented at the time of OTA's defunding that "we are cutting off one of the most important arms of Congress when we cut off unbiased knowledge about science and technology."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2010/06/nader-proposes-reviving-congressional-office-of-technology-assessment/|title=Nader proposes reviving Congressional Office of Technology Assessment|date=June 2010}}</ref>

Critics of the closure saw it as an example of politics overriding science, and a variety of scientists have called for the agency's reinstatement.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/09/14/bring-back-the-ota/ |title=Bring back the OTA |access-date=2013-03-12 |author=PZ Myers |date=September 14, 2007|publisher=[[Scienceblogs]]}}</ref> Law professor and legal scholar David L. Faigman also made a strong case supporting the role OTA had played, also calling for its reinstatement.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Faigman|first=David|title=Legal Alchemy: The Use and Misuse of Science in the Law|publisher=W.H. Freeman|year=2000|location=New York City|pages=126–27, 149, 189, 199–200}}</ref>

===Subsequent developments===
While the OTA was closed down, the idea of [[technology assessment]] survived, in particular in Europe. The [[European Parliamentary Technology Assessment]] (EPTA) network coordinates members of [[technology assessment]] units working for various European governments. The US [[Government Accountability Office]] has meanwhile established a TA unit, taking on former duties of the OTA.

While campaigning in the [[2008 US presidential election]], [[Hillary Clinton]] pledged to work to restore the OTA if elected [[United States President|President]].<ref>{{cite news|author=Patrick Healy |author2=Cornelia Dean |title=Clinton Says She Would Shield Science From Politics |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/05/us/politics/05clinton.html |work=[[The New York Times]] |date=October 5, 2007 |access-date=2007-10-05}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/speech/view/?id=3570 |title=Scientific Integrity and Innovation: Remarks at the Carnegie Institution for Science |access-date=2007-10-05 |date=October 4, 2007 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071009032814/http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/speech/view/?id=3570 |archive-date=October 9, 2007 |url-status=dead }} Text of Clinton's speech to the [[Carnegie Institution]].</ref> On April 29, 2009, House of Representatives member [[Rush D. Holt, Jr.|Rush Holt]] of New Jersey wrote an op-ed piece articulating the argument for restoring the OTA.<ref>{{cite magazine |url=https://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/04/fromthefields-holt/ |first=Rush |last=Holt |author-link=Rush D. Holt, Jr. |title=Lobotomy |magazine=[[Wired (magazine)|Wired]] |access-date=2009-04-29 |date=April 29, 2009}}</ref>

In April 2010 The [[Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars]] released a report entitled "Reinventing Technology Assessment" that emphasized citizen engagement and called for performing the functions of the OTA by creating a nationwide network of non-partisan policy research organizations, universities, and science museums: the Expert & Citizen Assessment of Science & Technology (ECAST) network. ECAST would conduct both expert and participatory technology assessments for Congress and other clients. The author of the report was Dr. Richard Sclove of the Loka Institute. The report states that the drive to modernize OTA was initiated by [[Darlene Cavalier]], a popular citizen science advocate and author of the Science Cheerleader blog.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://wilsoncenter.org/topics/docs/ReinventingTechnologyAssessment1.pdf |title=Reinventing Technology Assessment: A 21st Century Model |access-date=2010-05-05 |author=Richard Sclove |date=April 2010 |publisher=[[Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100602060157/http://www.wilsoncenter.org/topics/docs/ReinventingTechnologyAssessment1.pdf |archive-date=2010-06-02 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Cavalier outlined the idea of the citizen network in a guest blog post for [[Discover (magazine)|''Discover'' magazine]]'s The Intersection.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2010/04/29/a-little-respect-involving-citizens-in-technology-assessment/ |title=A Little Respect: Involving Citizens in Technology Assessment |access-date=2010-05-05 |author=Darlene Cavalier |date=April 29, 2010|publisher=Discover|author-link=Darlene Cavalier }}</ref> She introduced the concept in an article in ''[[Science Progress (Center for American Progress)|Science Progress]]'' in July 2008.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.scienceprogress.org/2008/07/harnessing-citizen-scientists/ |title=Harnessing Citizen Scientists |access-date=2010-05-05 |author=Darlene Cavalier |date=July 7, 2008 |work=[[Science Progress (Center for American Progress)|Science Progress]] |author-link=Darlene Cavalier |archive-date=2010-03-05 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100305164839/http://www.scienceprogress.org/2008/07/harnessing-citizen-scientists/ |url-status=dead }}</ref> [[Andrew Yang]] became the first 2020 presidential candidate on April 4, 2019 to push for the idea to reestablish the OTA.<ref>{{cite tweet|number=1113862421830090752|user=AndrewYang|title=New policy #8 - Revive the Office of...|date=4 April 2019}}</ref> He did so with a detailed proposal that includes refusing to sign any budget that did not include the OTA.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.yang2020.com/policies/reviveota/|title=Revive the Office of Technology Assessment|website=Yang 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201103120516/https://www.yang2020.com/policies/reviveota/|archive-date=2020-11-03}}</ref>

In January 2019 the [[Government Accountability Office]] established the Science, Technology Assessment, and Analytics (STAA) team<ref>{{cite web |url=https://blog.gao.gov/2019/01/29/our-new-science-technology-assessment-and-analytics-team/ |title=Our New Science, Technology Assessment, and Analytics Team |access-date=2021-05-07 |date=January 29, 2019|publisher=GAO}}</ref> to take on the technology assessment mission of the former OTA. STAA developed out of a small technology assessment pilot program at GAO created in 2002,<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.congress.gov/congressional-report/107th-congress/house-report/259/1 |title=H. Rept. 107-259, 107th Congress |date=October 30, 2001 |publisher=U.S. House of Representatives}}</ref> which was elevated to GAO's 15th mission team. It launched with 49 full-time equivalent staff and has since grown to over 100.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://ash.harvard.edu/files/ash/files/293408_hvd_ash_sciecne_tech_and_democracy_report.pdf |title=Science, Technology, and Democracy: Building a Modern Congressional Technology Assessment Office |author=Zach Graves and Daniel Schuman |date=January 1, 2020 |publisher=Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation at the Harvard Kennedy School}}</ref> In October 2019, a congressionally directed report by the National Academy of Public Administration recommended increased investment in GAO and CRS to build Congress's policy capacity in science and technology.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://napawash.org/uploads/Academy_Studies/NAPA_FinalReport_forCRS_110119.pdf |title=Science and Technology Policy Assessment: A Congressionally Directed Review |date=October 31, 2019 |publisher=National Academy of Public Administration}}</ref>

In 2022, [[Jamie Susskind]] advocated for bringing back the office in order to have expertise on pressing issues like [[artificial intelligence]] and [[Internet privacy|online privacy]].<ref name=":0">{{Cite book |last=Susskind |first=Jamie |url=https://www.worldcat.org/title/on1259049405 |title=The digital republic: on freedom and democracy in the 21st century |date=2022 |publisher=Pegasus Books |isbn=978-1-64313-901-2 |location=New York |chapter=Chapter 20 |oclc=on1259049405}}</ref> [[Bruce Schneier]] also called for a similar National Cyber Office.<ref name=":0" />

== See also ==
* [[Administrative Conference of the United States]] – another federal advisory body that was defunded in 1995
{{Portal bar|United States|Politics|Technology}}

==References==
{{reflist}}

==Further reading==
{{refbegin}}
* Bruce Bimber: ''Politics of Expertise in Congress: The Rise and Fall of the Office of Technology Assessment'', State University of New York Press, 1996.
* Peter D. Blair, ''[https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/9781137359056 Congress’s Own Think Tank]'', Palgrave Macmillan, September 2013.
* {{Cite web|last1=Brooks|first1=Chuck|last2=Logsdon|first2=David|date=November 16, 2016|title=Congress had an office that gave expert tech analysis; let's bring it back|url=https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/technology/306426-congress-had-an-office-that-gave-expert-tech-analysis-lets|website=The Hill}}
* Ash Carter, Laura Manley, et al., [https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/building-21st-century-congress-improving-congresss-science-and-technology-expertise "Building a 21st Century Congress: Improving Congress’s Science and Technology Expertise"], Harvard Belfer Center, September 2019.
* Zach Graves and Kevin Kosar, [http://2o9ub0417chl2lg6m43em6psi2i.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Final-128.pdf “Bring in the Nerds: Reviving the Office of Technology Assessment”], R Street Institute policy study, January 2018.
* M. Anthony Mills, [https://www.aei.org/research-products/report/reviving-technology-assessment-learning-from-the-founding-and-early-history-of-congress-office-of-technology-assessment/ "Reviving technology assessment: Learning from the founding and early history of Congress’ Office of Technology Assessment"], [[American Enterprise Institute]], May 2021.
* M. Granger Morgan and Jon Peha, ''[https://www.routledge.com/Science-and-Technology-Advice-for-Congress/Morgan-Peha/p/book/9781936331208 Science and Technology Advice for Congress]'', Routledge, September 2003.
* Chris Mooney, [http://bos.sagepub.com/content/61/5/40.full "Requiem for an Office"], ''Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists'', September 2005 vol. 61 no. 5 40–49.
*[[Chris Mooney (journalist)|Chris Mooney]], ''The Republican War on Science'' (New York: Basic Books, 2005), ch. 5.
* Jathan Sadowski, [https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/10/the-much-needed-and-sane-congressional-office-that-gingrich-killed-off-and-we-need-back/264160/ "The Much-Needed and Sane Congressional Office That Gingrich Killed Off and We Need Back"], ''The Atlantic'', October 26, 2012.
* Daniel Schuman and Zach Graves, [https://ash.harvard.edu/publications/science-technology-and-democracybuilding-modern-congressional-technology-assessment "Science, Technology, & Democracy: Building a Modern Congressional Technology Assessment Office"], Harvard Ash Center, January 2020.
* Kim Zetter, [https://www.wired.com/2016/04/office-technology-assessment-congress-clueless-tech-killed-tutor/ "Of Course Congress Is Clueless About Tech—It Killed Its Tutor"], ''Wired.com'', April 21, 2016.
{{refend}}

==External links==
* [http://www.princeton.edu/~ota/ Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) Legacy] via [[Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs]] at [[Princeton University]]
** [http://www.princeton.edu/~ota/ns20/pubs_f.html OTA publications]
*** {{cite journal
 | author=U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment
 | year=1995
 | title=Biologically based technologies for pest control
 | journal=Ota-Env-636
 | url=http://www.princeton.edu/~ota/disk1/1995/9506/9506.PDF
}}
*** US Congress 1994. Perspectives on the Role of Science and Technology in Sustainable Development. OTA-ENV-609. NTIS order #PB95-109674. GPO stock #052-003-01396-7 [http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/ota/Ota_1/DATA/1994/9422.PDF Govinfo.library.unt.edu].
* [https://ota.fas.org/ The Office of Technology Assessment Archive] hosted by the [http://www.fas.org Federation of American Scientists]
* [https://github.com/zachgraves/futurecongress/wiki/Legislative-History-of-Technology-Assessment-in-the-U.S. Legislative History of Technology Assessment in the U.S.] hosted by [https://www.futurecongress.org/ Future Congress]
* [http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/ota/ CyberCemetery OTA coverage "established ... to provide permanent, Web based, public access"], a partnership of [[University of North Texas]] and the [[United States Government Printing Office]]
** [https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS21586.pdf Technology Assessment in Congress: History and Legislative Options], [[Congressional Research Service]] report ([[PDF]]).
* [http://www.earthops.org/ada_ota.html Psychiatric Disabilities, Employment, and the Americans With Disabilities Act Background Paper]. Behney, Clyde J. (Asst Director OTA Health, Life Sciences & Environment Division), Hall, Laura Lee, Keller, Jacqueline T. HTML converted from WordPerfect 5.1 to HTML in 1996 at [http://www.earthops.org Earth Ops Dot Org] 
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20080506025216/http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1016719314316313053&hl=en OTA Video "Meeting the Needs of Congress"]

{{USCongress}}
{{US research agencies}}
{{Authority control}}

[[Category:Agencies of the United States Congress]]
[[Category:Defunct agencies of the United States government]]
[[Category:Technology assessment organisations]]
[[Category:Life sciences industry]]
[[Category:1972 establishments in Washington, D.C.]]
[[Category:1995 disestablishments in Washington, D.C.]]
[[Category:Defunct organizations based in Washington, D.C.]]
[[Category:Government agencies established in 1972]]
[[Category:Government agencies disestablished in 1995]]