160 



virtually all of these were perceived by the congressional 

 appropriations committees, by the state experiment stations, 

 and by agribusiness groups as efforts to centralize power in 

 the national executive branch. 



Agricultural research is important — people should have a say 

 in how money is spent. Both the House and Senate Agriculture 

 Committees have been involved in discussions over research 

 priorities. It is important to look at the facility problem, not 

 just as a capital planning challenge and political challenge for 

 that matter but also as a visual manifestation that is measurable 

 with all of agricultural research. 



IV. THE BLAME GAME 



It is fair to ask why anyone would adhere to and promote a 

 theory that he or she knows to be insufficient for solving a 

 problem. First, because such theories mask the responsibility of 

 the people involved from the outside world. Second, and of equal 

 significance, such theories help hide the confusion, frustration, 

 and hopelessness many people feel when confronting facilities 

 reform. Not knowing what to do, one must come up with a reasonetble 

 explanation for the mess and possible solutions. 



A. Argument 1; Congress is Responsible 



Interesting to this discussion, the terms "earmarking" and 

 "pork barrelling" are terms appropriated from agriculture. Both 

 are often used to describe the federal budget process, which has 

 served agriculture well. Don Hadwiger lists these positive 

 virtues: 



We should instead give considerable credit to pork barrel 

 politics for several fortunate developments in agricultural 

 research. In proliferating research locations, for example. 

 Congress has helped unlock high-potential regions such as the 



16 



