68 



3. 



consider attempting to earmark the National Institutes of Health 

 (NIH) or the National Science Foundation (NSF) , but who willingly 

 hire lobbyists and seek agricultural earmarks. In 1989 I produced 

 a list of academic earmarks that included agricultural projects. 

 The president of the Association of American Universities (AAU) 

 criticized the list by saying that agricultural research had a 

 distinctive "culture," where the standards of NIH and NSF do not 

 apply. Thus, one Ivy League university, noted for its decision to 

 refuse a $5 million earmark for a supercomputer, accepts amd has 

 increased is efforts to secure agricultural earmarks. Only 

 recently has the issue of whether agriculttire projects should be 

 counted as earmarks been raised within AAU. Chancellor Joe Wyatt 

 of Vanderbilt University, for exeunple, has asked his fellow AAU 

 presidents, "Is AAU's stated position in opposition to earmarks 

 undercut by toleremce for Agriculture earmarks?" In addition, 

 former AAU President Robert Rosenzweig has acknowledged that AAU 

 may have been misteOcen in limiting its condemnation of direct 

 appropriations in the agricultiire appropriations bill. 

 Unfortunately, this tolerance for agricultural earmarks that 

 Chancellor Wyatt addressed continues to be the dominant opinion 

 within the university research community. I believe this view of 

 agricultural research within academia, where pork barrel is the 

 accepted name of the geune, helps to reduce agricultural research in 

 general to second-class status within the academy. 



Moreover, the academy's green light for earmarking the agricultural 



