34 



ized, an in-depth study looking into this particular question, as far 

 as you know? 



Mr. Kloek. Well, what I know is that they didn't respond to our 

 letter. I don't know if they ignored it or not. 



Mr. Stenholm. How about Dr. Savage, Dr. Offutt? What's your 

 opinion of the Agricultural Research Facilities Pleinning and Clo- 

 sure Study Commission that was recommended in 1990? Is that a 

 good idea, or should we go back to the drawing board and make 

 another recommendation? 



Ms. Offutt. Well, whatever mechanism you use, it's certainly 

 appropriate to ask whether the physical infrastructure fits the na- 

 ture of the work you need to do. We know from earlier studies by 

 the National Science Foundation that agricultural research facili- 

 ties are very old and that this can create a problem in doing cer- 

 tain kinds of new science. So any kind of a systematic evaluation 

 of what you've got sitting on the ground compared to what you 

 have to do is useful. The question of how you got that done would 

 have as much to do with the nature of the agreements that have 

 to be made up here as anything. 



Mr. Stenholm. No, I imderstand that. I understand the politics 

 of it. What I'm getting at is my colleague from Wisconsin's question 

 and chastising somewhat you and everyone else that comes before 

 our committee, as I understood what he was saying. What I'm ask- 

 ing for is. Dr. Kloek obviously recommends that it was a good idea. 

 Do you agree with something along that line? 



Ms. Offutt. Yes. 



Mr. Stenholm. And my question was, if not that, what? 



Dr. Savage. 



Mr. Savage. I don't have a particular opinion on the issue. I 

 don't have an opinion on that matter. 



Mr. Stenholm. In the interest of time, I've got several other 

 questions that I'm going to submit to you in writing. 



Dr. Savage, why do you feel personally that there has been an 

 increase in esirmarks over the last 12 years? What has caused this? 



Mr. Savage. I think that there's a breakdown in agreement 

 among academic institutions that this in fact is a wrong practice, 

 and that one institution sees another institution doing it and they 

 go after it. There's a breakdown within the community. There's also 

 a general sense that facilities are deteriorating and that something 

 needs to be done. I'm not sure this is always well-expressed in 

 terms of why the Federal Government should do this and what the 

 Federsil Government's responsibility should be, but there is that 

 sense that the Federal Government does have this relationship and 

 that there should be some sort of funding. And there's just a very 

 strong needs-based concern here where other sources of funding — 

 private. State — are drying up. State budgets are having very dif- 

 ficult times, and people look to the Federal Government for these 

 kinds of solutions. So there are a number of reasons. 



Mr. Stenholm. Can each of you stay for a few more minutes? 

 Will your schedules permit you to? If you have a problem, I'll ex- 

 cuse you, but if not, I'd like to ask you — we'll go vote and be back 

 in about 5 or 10 minutes. 



Mr. Kloek. Mr. Chairman, I have a plane to catch. 



