41 



STATEMENT OF DAVID G. TOPEL, DEAN, COLLEGE OF AGRI- 

 CULTURE, IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY, AND CHAIRMAN, 

 BOARD ON AGRICULTURE, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF 

 STATE UNIVERSITIES AND LAND-GRANT COLLEGES 



Mr. ToPEL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's indeed an honor to be 

 with you this morning. My name is Dave Topel, and I'm pleased 

 to provide testimony on behalf of the National Association of State 

 Universities and Land-Grant Colleges Board on Agriculture. The 

 board is composed of representatives from agricultural experiment 

 stations, cooperative extension, agricultural international pro- 

 grams, academic programs, the Council of Administrative Heads of 

 Agriculture, 1890 universities, research and extension, forestry, 

 home economics, and veterinary boards from the Commission on 

 Food, Environment, and Renewable Resources. 



Some of the colleagues on our board could not be with us today, 

 and I'd like to present you with written testimony from Peter 

 Magrath, Monika Escher, Barbara Stowe, and Tom Vaughan. 

 Monika represents the international programs; Barbara, home eco- 

 nomics; and Tom Vaiighan, veterinary medicine. Dr. Magrath is 

 president of NASULGC, and due to schedule conflicts, he could not 

 be with us. He's sorry that he could not participate today, but he 

 has prepared a written statement that we d like to submit in testi- 

 mony. 



Mr. Stenholm. Without objection, their prepared statements will 

 appear in the record. 



Mr. ToPEL. Thank you. 



[The prepared statements of Mr. Magrath, Ms. Escher, Ms. 

 Stowe, and Mr. Vaughan appear at the conclusion of the hearing.] 



Mr. ToPEL. The NASULGC Board on Agriculture is pleased to 

 participate in the hearings on USDA priorities for research and 

 education and offers its full cooperation and expertise to the proc- 

 ess. The board views the testimony process as an opportunity to 

 strengthen and improve the Federal Government-university model 

 of interaction and collaboration which has proven so successful over 

 the past 130 yesirs. It is a unique model and is envied worldwide, 

 but it can and should be modernized to meet changing world condi- 

 tions. The Secretar/s call for a science-based USDA emphasizes 

 again the contributions of the Federal-imiversity partnership in 

 science and education, which has promoted competitiveness, en- 

 hanced rural development, and improved safety and wholesome- 

 ness of the U.S. food supply. 



The unique Federal-State partnership was bonded together by 

 sharing financial responsibilities by formula funding. The success 

 of the land-grant university system in the 21st century will depend 

 on the success of that financial bonding between Federal £uid State 

 sources. Base funding for future programs in land-grant univer- 

 sities is essential. A balance, of course, between base funding, for- 

 mula funding, special grants, and competitive grants is important 

 as a new foundation is established for the land-grant university 

 systems in research and education. 



The basic science and education functions of the USDA— -re- 

 search, extension, and education — merit close attention, and prior- 

 ities for each division should be coordinated by one agency for im- 

 proved efficiency and a more effective dehvery system. In the new 



