To Members of the NASULGC System:

Today, the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee held its annual hearing on funding for research, extension, and teaching programs within the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

USDA Witnesses:
• Merle D. Pierson, USDA Deputy Under Secretary for Research, Education and Economics
• Edward B. Knipling, Administrator, Agricultural Research Service
• Colien Hefferan, Administrator, Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service
• Susan E. Offutt, Administrator, Economic Research Service
• R. Ronald Bosecker, Administrator, National Agricultural Statistics Service
• W. Scott Steele, USDA Budget Officer

Members of the Subcommittee in Attendance:
• Henry Bonilla (R-TX), Chairman
• Tom Latham (R-IA), Vice Chairman
• Virgil Goode (R-VA)
• Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), Ranking Democrat
• Marcy Kaptur (D-OH)
• Sam Farr (D-CA)
• Allen Boyd (D-FL)

Links to Written Statements:

The hearing began with opening statements from Reps. Bonilla and DeLauro (Ms. DeLauro's remarks are especially noteworthy). Dr. Pierson also gave a brief oral statement and members of the subcommittee asked questions. Paraphrased excerpts from this Q&A session follow:

Rep. Bonilla: The subcommittee has been very supportive of ARS. In the President's Budget you propose to make significant changes to ARS "base" programs in Texas, Iowa, and other states. Why? Dr. Pierson. We've made some broad assessments and recommended changes based on relevance, capacity, quality, duplication, and priority. Dr. Knipling. These are mostly mature programs that have reached their full potential. Bonilla: What will be the effects on jobs, facilities, etc.? Knipling: There are 14 ARS labs that would be closed; 900 employees impacted. We'll seek to place these individuals at other ARS labs.

Rep. DeLauro: Why wasn't USDA included in the President's new bioenergy initiative? I understand it's a $150 million program... but none of that would go to USDA? Knipling: ARS got $1.8 million in new funds. Dr. Hefferan: CSREES is not explicitly included in the new initiative. While there are no new funds for us, we did sign a Memorandum of Understanding with the Department of Energy in November 2005 and received $10 million in funding under this MOU in January 2006. These funds are primarily for genome mapping relative to the biodiesel program.

Rep. Latham: Can you give us an update on the new ARS Animal Diagnostic Lab at Ames? Knipling: All $462 million needed for this project has been appropriated. The project is on schedule, but there may be a $9 million overrun due to increased raw material (concrete) costs. However, we will make up the shortfall by using some existing facilities. Latham: The President's research formula funds proposal (Hatch, McIntire-Stennis, Animal Health & Disease) seems like déjà vu all over again... This is a nonstarter for us, you understand?

Rep. Boyd: Is it true that you've requested $8 million for a Chinese Garden at the National Arboretum? Knipling: This is for site preparation work to receive a $30 million gift from the People's Republic of China.

Rep. Goode: Why did you cut funding for Appalachian grazing? Knipling: This program was not requested by the Administration, but it has been a good program and some base funding will continue. Goode: How familiar are you with the work being done at Virginia Tech to generate biodiesel from switch grass? Hefferan: There are four or five major crops that have little value besides energy; switch grass is one. This has been a priority under the National Research Initiative. Knipling: There is also on-going work at the ARS lab in Lincoln, Nebraska. Hefferan: Oklahoma State University as well.

Rep. Farr: I am very concerned about organic crops and plant diversity. What are you doing to maintain the diversity of our seed stocks? Knipling: The Ft. Knox for seeds is at Ft. Collins, but we also have an extensive network around the country. Farr: Are you planning to broaden that? Knipling: Yes, the President's Budget has funds for that purpose. Hefferan: We have a two-year study that will be complete by the end of this calendar year. We also have a seed consortium led by Cornell University.

DeLauro: At last year's hearing Dr. Jen said that the Administration's formula funds proposal did not originate at USDA. Did this year's proposal originate in the Department? Hefferan: There is a big difference in what we're proposing this year. We heard the concerns that were raised about collaboration, state matching funds, etc. It's a different proposal this year. It's still under the Hatch and McIntire-Stennis authorities; the state matching requirements are preserved; and the funds will still flow through the State Ag Experiment Stations. We believe that when the land-grant universities work collaboratively together -- across state lines -- both state and federal purposes are better served. The land-grant system is not supporting our proposal, but they are working with us. In sum, it's a different proposal and it has been met with a different response. DeLauro: Well, I can tell you that the members of this subcommittee will nonetheless take a long, hard look at this proposal.

DeLauro: What are you doing with respect to Avian Influenza? Pierson: Both CSREES and ARS are involved. Hefferan: CSREES has a $5 million program and linkages with ARS. Our funding supports a consortium led by the University of Maryland and Ohio State. We now have the capability to monitor all four of the major North American flyways. Knipling: While Avian flu may be a new human health issue, it has been a priority poultry issue for several years. We have a $2 million base program; received an additional $7 million in the FY 2006 Supplemental Appropriations bill; and there is a $3 million increase in ARS base funds in the President's Budget Request. We're also focused on new diagnostic methods based on genomics, vaccine development, and flyway surveillance.

Goode: Did I hear you correctly? Are the land-grant universities working with you to abolish the formula funds? Hefferan: No, many have expressed opposition to our proposal, but we've found that they are willing to discuss alternatives. One of the problems that we face is the many purposes to which these funds are directed. It makes analysis difficult. Some universities use the funds for operations, others for personnel. That's why we've suggested keeping some of these monies for state priorities while moving the remainder to multistate efforts. Goode: Will you please provide an analysis for the record of how your proposal would affect the land-grant university system? Hefferan: Yes, we will provide that to you.

Rep. Kaptur: Like Congresswoman DeLauro, I am concerned that the USDA budget doesn't include enough for bioenergy production. Don't you consider energy self-sufficiency to be a pressing national priority? I look at your budget and see a reduction of $78.5 million for bio-based fuels, including $5 million cuts at both CSREES and ARS. Your budget doesn't do anything! And, as one member, I protest!

Farr: How can we get the U.S. nursery and flower industries back on their feet? Hefferan: For one thing, we've invested heavily on genomics research into Sudden Oak Death Syndrome. Knipling: At ARS we do have a national program. Most of the research is here in D.C. at the National Arboretum. We're also working closely with industry to plan and deploy the research.

Boyd: Let's discuss Soybean Rust. What are you doing to contain this problem? Hefferan: We have a National Plant Diagnostic Laboratory Network in place. It helps us determine where Soybean rust is moving... it's important to know the path of the disease both to prepare and to know where such costly preparations are not needed. We've also got some critical long-term research underway that could help us defeat this disease down the road.

DeLauro: I have three questions about the 1890 Land-Grant Institutions. One, do you work with the 1890 institutions? Two, how have they fared recently when it comes to the NRI? And, three, is it true that the average award to the 1890s under the EFNEP program is only $24,6000? Hefferan: One, yes we work closely with the 1890 Institutions both to sustain and grow their programs. In recent years we have focused on those line items that do not require matching funds, including the facilities and capacity-building accounts. Two, as for the NRI statistics, we can provide that data for the record. And, three, in the first year that the 1890s were eligible to participate in the EFNEP program, these Institutions received $440,000 out of $61 million. However, the 1890s are seeking a new "base" and our staff is working on language to accomplish such a result. DeLauro: Please stay in close touch with us on EFNEP. We're very interested. Hefferan: We will.

Boyd: Are the land-grant universities doing research work on Soybean Rust? Hefferan: Yes, there is a strong consortium in place and they are doing lots of good work.

Fred Hutchison
Fleishman Hillard Government Relations