60 



next initiative against facilities earmarking by proposing a 

 Commission on Agriculture Research Facilities to study existing 

 agriculture research facilities, to recommend facility 

 consolidation or closure, and to suggest improvements in the 

 facilities funding system used currently. Working with Senator 

 Leahy, we enacted Section 1624, but no funding has ever been 

 provided for the Commission's operation. The next important step 

 to take in getting a handle on earmarking academic and research 

 facilities funding is to establish this Commission, something 

 that Mr. Stenholm and I advocated to the Appropriations Committee 

 this year. 



But beyond our efforts to curb earmarking, we must address 

 some of the legitimate needs that have led to earmarking. There 

 is a backlog of needed facilities modernization and construction 

 proposals that have merit. There is a need to assure adequate 

 distribution of research funding, a concern expressed by smaller 

 and "noncompetitive" schools and an argument frequently made to 

 support earmarking. This concern for proper geographical 

 distribution of funding has been clearly and articulately 

 expressed by Mr. Volkmer. There is also a need to bring some 

 institutions, such as historically black colleges and 

 universities, into the mainstream of science and technology. 

 These and a host of other research policy issues must be dealt 

 with if we are to get a handle on the practice of earmarking. 



I look forward to working with the Subcommittee in this 

 effort. My feeling is that the agricultural research system is 

 ahead of many others in having the statutory tools with which to 

 solve this problem. It is just a matter of our using them 

 wisely. 



(Attachments follow:) 



