13 



Mrs. Clayton. I didn't have the privilege of hearing your state- 

 ment, but I would like to ask if there is any procedure in your 

 mind where we not only see the reference of agricultural research 

 being maintained, but also how we do research. The issue that I 

 am bringing is that the elitistness of certain universities having 

 the privilege of doing all the research where other institutions 

 would not have it. 



I am from the Southeast and obviously I am from a very rural 

 area where maybe only one or two — but we have nine universities 

 that could do that. 



The other part of it is that all the research related to agriculture 

 should not be university bound. So if there is a way that we can 

 not only monitor that but also encourage for our consideration and 

 for the Department's consideration a combination of research and 

 empirical data that includes both major universities, others not so 

 major, but also more importantly in the field where research hap- 

 pens, where people interact, where we learn a lot. 



That needs to happen. The Mississippi Delta Commission is ex- 

 emplary, perhaps, of the tjrpe I am speaking about. There are other 

 examples, too, where we do demographic data on just how people 

 interact in rural communities. I think that is also important. 



Mr. Brown. There is always the possibility that in any human 

 system there develops a set of priorities that don't reflect the total 

 national interest. That is, they have developed elite groups and 

 elite institutions and others who have the attitude that they de- 

 serve the most because they have some claim to expertise. 



Our concern, as Members of Congress, should be that the funds 

 that we authorize and expend should serve the national welfare as 

 effectively as possible. That means getting good research results. It 

 also means developing additional research capabilities in those in- 

 stitutions which don't currently have it. 



You will find that over the years in this committee in agriculture 

 we have sought to do that. Perhaps not as well as we should have, 

 but we are well aware of that and we have the same thing in the 

 Science Committee. We have created special programs that are 

 aimed at making sure that we have an equitable distribution of 

 funding to those regions and institutions that may not be in the 

 elite class. 



You are quite correct in asserting the importance of doing that. 



Mrs. Clayton. Thank you very much. 



Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. Stenholm. Mr. Bishop. 



Mr. Bishop. No questions, Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. Stenholm. Ms. Lambert. 



Ms. Lambert. No questions, Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. Stenholm. George, in your work both in the Science Com- 

 mittee and this committee, particularly dealing with the Depart- 

 ment of Agriculture, do you consider the site reviews which USDA 

 uses before funding a special research grant or facility to be legiti- 

 mately peer reviewed? Is it a model of something that perhaps we 

 should suggest to others to look at? 



Mr. Brown. Normally, the process of site review by an expert 

 team of some sort is a vital ingredient to the whole process regard- 

 less of whether it is in agriculture or in some other Department. 



