COMMENT ⊗   VALID 00002 PAGES
C REC  PAGE   DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002	.require "memo.pub[let,jmc]" source
C00010 ENDMK
C⊗;
.require "memo.pub[let,jmc]" source
.cb PROSPECTUS FOR A PRO-TECHNOLOGY POLITICS CLUB


	Anti-scientific, anti-technology and anti-rational ideologies are
very strong on the San Francisco Peninsula and have many political
manifestations - e.g. the Creative Initiative - Project Survival campaign
against nuclear energy.
.<<  The environmental movement shares many of these
.tendencies and has also been an irrational force.>>

	On the other hand, this area is one of the most important
technological centers in the world - in electronics, in integrated
circuits, and in nuclear energy.  Unfortunately, this fact has had
almost no effect on its politics other than that promoters of
development recognize that certain technologies constitute the
main opportunity for development here.

	A symptom of the fact that technology lacks political
influence is that the campaign to save the Sundesert nuclear
plant must start from scratch.  There is not one organization
that can lead in the matter.  The purpose of this prospectus
is to discuss the form such an organization might take.
Here are some considerations:

.item←0
	#. Suppose we give it a tentative title "Committee to get
more political clout for technology".  That is too long and
more frank than is customary in politics.  Other possibilities are
"Technology Information Committee", "Peninsula technology club",
"Committee on Technology and the Public Interest", and "Pro-technology"
abbreviated "Protech".

	#. There are two possibilities - a committee of people
selected for their ability to contribute time, skills and money,
and a large membership organization.  It seems to me that the
second is ultimately wanted, but the first is more likely to
be within our capabilities until some leadership develops.

	#. A big problem is that technologists and scientists
are very busy people, and few can put in the kind of time that
the anti-technological people have.  Therefore, I think the
organization should attempt to raise enough money to set up
a professionally run office that will amplify the efforts
of the scientists, engineers and technologically oriented
businessmen who will constitute the main body.

	#. An adequate initial organization might include a full time
director, a secretary - perhaps part time, some part time researchers and
assistants, a small office, and some money for publications and mailings.

	#. One objective is to get candidates with a technological
background to run for public office.  Another Mike McCormack or Harrison
Schmidt would make a large difference in Congress, and if any area should
be represented by a technologist, it is this one.  The same is true of
local and state offices.

	#. Activities should include preparing position papers, getting
signatures on statements, holding press conferences and getting
equal time for the pro-technology side of issues on radio and
TV stations and in high schools and colleges.  (The latter situation
is rather scandalous in that whenever outside speakers are
solicited, they tend to come from the anti-technology organizations).

	#. Counter-demonstrations to anti-nuclear demonstrations
seem to have a substantial payoff judging from the fact that the
fraction of publicity our side got at the demonstration against
the Diablo Canyon plant was more than proportional to the amount
of work we put in.  With better organization and little if any
more work, we could have done even better.

	#. At some time we should consider becoming a membership
organization.

Issues: I will mention issues that interest me.  However, there
is some question of whether enough consensus can be found in
the technological community on some of them.

Energy, the automobile, material prosperity in general,
expensive demonstrations of the obvious like Dial-a-bus.
the space program, barriers to innovation in medicine,
rationality about DNA, rationality about the use of computers,
the SST.
The "technology assessment" philosophy that wants every
innovation stopped until a bureaucracy has oked it is a potential
menace to innovation.

.<<	At the present time, the Brown position against nuclear
.energy is most salient issue, and the Sundesert plant is its
.focus.  I hope that the organization will be able to keep its
.non-partisan support of Sundesert distinct from the fact that
.it may be the major issue between Younger and Brown if Younger
.gets the Republican nomination.>>