45 



such as food safety, water quality, waste management, sustain- 

 ability, and global marketing. 



As this transition has occurred, there's some lack of public un- 

 derstanding of the new agenda focusing on critical issues. This lack 

 of understanding leads some members of the media, national orga- 

 nizations, public ofiicials, and, yes, some of our own employees to 

 make statements that reflect the CES of the past instead of the 

 current program focus. We understand that transition results in 

 some miscommunications. The Coraerative Extension System, 

 though, has had a long tradition of effectively educating many seg- 

 ments of society in programs that relate to agriculture, families, 

 youth, and communities, and it has an extensive infrastructure 

 which can and should be used by other segments of government. 



For the future, the Cooperative Extension System continues to 

 mature as a sound, proactive, nonformal educational system dedi- 

 cated to the improvement of the hves of people by addressing criti- 

 cal issues and needs, and it continues to look to the future in hopes 

 of continuing to be recognized as a positive force for change in the 

 United States. 



Mr. Chairman, Extension's interest in the potential restructuring 

 of USDA is based upon the need to effectively fulfill the edu- 

 cational mission of a broad-based program driven by people's needs. 

 State structures deUvering cooperative Extension programs vary 

 widely, and, thus, any structure at the Federal level should focus 

 on the agency's ability to maintain effective Unkages to the State 

 programs. Moreover, we believe that there are a number of prin- 

 ciples to consider in any structural reorganization. Mission and 

 fimction should be the primary criterion for any reorganization. 



Mr. Chairman, the Cooperative Extension System has examined 

 some of the various possibilities for restructuring, and in my formal 

 statement I have included some of the comments, both positive and 

 some of the concerns, associated with each of these. The research, 

 extension, and education functions have many commonalities, both 

 in constituencies and in functional relationships. Therefore, the 

 structural relationship should support this collaboration and co- 

 operation among all relevant units both within and outside the 

 Department. 



We have submitted testimony that relates to possibilities for re- 

 structuring in which Extension Service-USDA would be a 

 subcabinet unit with regulatory and service agencies. We under- 

 stand that we are located in those communities, but would be very 

 concerned about the potential to restrict the programs to agri- 

 culture and reduce current collaboration with other Federal imits. 

 There woiild be a strong potential for reduced State and local gov- 

 ernment and clientele support if they perceive that their broader 

 expectations beyond farm programs will not be met. 



Another model would be placement similar to that in which it's 

 currently placed with science and education. There is an impor- 

 tance of science-based and user-driven research, extension, and 

 education programs. We believe that this enhances the transfer 

 and appUcation of relevant technology from the several research 

 imits within the USDA. 



If, in fact, finally, as ECOP has suggested, the Department is to 

 be restructured based upon function, then there is a possibility of 



