l costs. These critics acknowledge the value of the weapons labs during the Cold War, but now question whether they are still necessary in a world where the trend is toward dismantling the weapons that these labs once produced. These labs are targeted as the first place where costs can be reduced. Yet, some proclaim their value; the DoEs five-year old technology transfer project is finally beginning to show some credible results. (Cortdz, 34) Supporters of these labs state that it is more an issue of paying for the long-term research these labs tackle, or allowing it to go undone.One singular factor that continues to appear throughout the research related to military R&D funding is the issue of military and civilian cooperation and collaboration. In their article in Issues in Science and Technology, Senator Bingaman and Admiral Inman state that DoD must be able to work more effectively with the commercial sector for its own sake. (84) This position was advocated some years later when Bill Clinton became president. In a speech during his campaign he commented that government can play a key role in helping private firms develop and profit from innovation. (Clinton, 1) Clinton kept this campaign promise, supporting civilian technology and dual-use technology development. This theme of public-private partnerships is echoed by Cordtz about the DoE weapons labs. He claims that under CRADAs and CAs the labs can work with private firms to continue to research and develop technology of great value. Collaboration is advocated by Wong in her analysis of opportunities within the army. She cites that the Army should adopt a policy that considers collaboration as a primary approach to achieve its R&D goals. (28)There is also debate that surrounds the idea of whether the governments R&D policy complements or substitutes private R&D investment. In their working paper for the National Bureau of Economic Research, David, Hall, and Toole e...
