25 



Those would be pointed out in the report that we submit back to 

 Congress. 



Mrs. Clayton. Could you provide your in-house research goals? 

 That would be helpful to some of us so that we could just review 

 those that you have funded so that we could have that understand- 

 ing. 



Mr. Carlson. This is the 6-year plan? 



Mrs. Clayton. Yes. If you could provide the ones that you have 

 funded, that would be helpful. 



Mr. Carlson. Certainly. 



Mrs. Clayton. Mr. Chairman, that is all. 



Mr. Stenholm. Mr. Gunderson, do you have any questions? 



Mr. Gunderson. I appreciate the opportunity and I apologize to 

 all of you for coming in late. 



One of the questions that I focused on you probably don't talk too 

 much about it. 



Why should the Federal Government, at a time when we have 

 limited resources, focus as much money as we do on buildings? 

 Isn't that really a prerogative of the land-grant institutions them- 

 selves through State budgets and university foundations? Shouldn't 

 our money be going primarily into direct research programs rather 

 than using part of it in the building side? 



How do you all respond to that? I know the traditional way is, 

 "I am here from my university and I have to defend these buildings 

 and money," but take yourself out of that role for a second. 



Mr. Carlson. I am not in that role. 



My role is the fact that we get the buildings in our appropriation 

 and then we try to handle them in the most responsible way to see 

 that they are built within the mission of agriculture and within all 

 the rules and regulations of the Federal Government. There aren't 

 facilities that we handle in our facilities program that are not ap- 

 propriated through the appropriations process by Congress. 



Mr. Gunderson. Let's take a look at fiscal year 1992, national 

 research initiative. We spent $55.9 million in buildings and facili- 

 ties. We spent $92 million on research that year. But if you go back 

 to fiscal year 1991, it was almost doUar-for-doUar research versus 

 buildings and facilities. 



We have decreased the money that many people want in the re- 

 search area. Obviously, it has been a dollar increase, but not what 

 some people would like. 



What would you say if in this fiscal environment if we said that 

 brick and mortar is not the responsibility of the Federal Govern- 

 ment? 



Mr. Carlson. Let me tell you this. I run the competitive grants 

 national research initiative. That is an area that the administra- 

 tion has put more money, and certainly I endorse that very strong- 

 ly. The faciUties programs, although they are serving very useful 

 purposes, are all put in by Congress. We do not have a request in 

 there for any facilities other than the very badly needed Agricul- 

 tural Research Service facilities. 



Mr. Gunderson. How do you define the difference between 

 building and facility? Do you have money in there for buildings but 

 not for faciUties? 



Mr. Carlson. No. 



