    [Senate Hearing 116-192]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 116-192

                           AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND
                         2018 FARM BILL IMPLEMENTATION

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                           COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE,
                            NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY

                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                         ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                 JULY 18, 2019

                                   __________

                           Printed for the use of the
               Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

           Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov/

                              ______

                 U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    39-842 PDF             WASHINGTON : 2020

               COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY

                         PAT ROBERTS, Kansas, Chairman
    MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky            DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan
    JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas               PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont
    JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota            SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
    JONI ERNST, Iowa                     AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
    CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi        MICHAEL BENNET, Colorado
    MIKE BRAUN, Indiana                  KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, New York
    DAVID PERDUE, Georgia                ROBERT P. CASEY, Jr., Pennsylvania
    CHARLES GRASSLEY, Iowa               TINA SMITH, Minnesota
    JOHN THUNE, South Dakota             RICHARD DURBIN, Illinois
    DEB FISCHER, Nebraska

                 James A. Glueck, Jr., Majority Staff Director
                    DaNita M. Murray, Majority Chief Counsel
                        Jessica L. Williams, Chief Clerk
                   Joseph A. Shultz, Minority Staff Director
                   Mary Beth Schultz, Minority Chief Counsel

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------

                            Thursday, July 18, 2019

                                                                       Page

    Hearing:

    Agricultural Research and 2018 Farm Bill Implementation..........     1

                                  ----------

                        STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY SENATORS

    Roberts, Hon. Pat, U.S. Senator from the State of Kansas,
      Chairman, Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry....     1
    Stabenow, Hon. Debbie, U.S. Senator from the State of Michigan...     3

                                    WITNESS

    Hutchins, Scott, Ph.D., Deputy Under Secretary, Research,
      Education, and Economics, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
      Washington, D.C................................................     5
                                  ----------

                                    APPENDIX

    Prepared Statements:
        Hutchins, Scott, Ph.D........................................    26

    Document(s) Submitted for the Record:
    Stabenow, Hon. Debbie
        Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, prepared
          statement for the Record...................................    36
        American Statistical Association, prepared statement for the
          Record.....................................................    38
        Catherine E. Woteki, Ph.D., prepared statement for the Record   102
        Gail A. Buchanan, prepared statement for the Record..........   105
        Jeffrey J. Steiner, Ph.D., prepared statement for the Record.   128
        Katherine Smith Evans, prepared statement for the Record.....   131
        Sonny Ramaswamy, prepared statement for the Record...........   133
        Susan Offutt, prepared statement for the Record..............   136
        Union of Concerned Scientists, prepared statement for the
          Record.....................................................   138

    Question and Answer:
    Hutchins, Scott, Ph.D.:
        Written response to questions from Hon. Pat Roberts..........   144
        Written response to questions from Hon. Debbie Stabenow......   148
        Written response to questions from Hon. Charles E. Grassley..   159
        Written response to questions from Hon. John Thune...........   159
        Written response to questions from Hon. Patrick Leahy........   164
        Written response to questions from Hon. Sherrod Brown........   167
        Written response to questions from Hon. Michael Bennet.......   171
        Written response to questions from Hon. Tina Smith...........   172
        Written response to questions from Hon. Richard Durbin.......   175

            AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND 2018 FARM BILL IMPLEMENTATION

                                  ----------

                            THURSDAY, JULY 18, 2019

                                           U.S. Senate,
             Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:28 a.m., in
    room 328A, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Pat Roberts,
    Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
        Present: Roberts, Boozman, Hoeven, Ernst, Hyde-Smith,
    Braun, Perdue, Grassley, Thune, Fischer, Stabenow, Leahy,
    Brown, Klobuchar, Casey, and Smith.

     STATEMENT OF HON. PAT ROBERTS, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF
    KANSAS, CHAIRMAN, U.S. COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION, AND
                                FORESTRY

        Chairman Roberts. Good morning. I call this meeting of the
    Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry to
    order.
        Over two years ago, we kicked off the 2018 Farm Bill, and
    that whole process by holding a hearing at Kansas State
    University, our land grant institution in Manhattan, Kansas.
        A few months later, we held a hearing in this room, where
    we heard from the United States Department of Agriculture
    officials, representatives from research institutions, and
    agricultural producers. We heard about the critical role that
    agricultural research has played throughout our Country's
    history. We also heard about the research priorities for the
    2018 Farm Bill.
        The needs are certainly great. Every day our producers
    encounter extreme and unpredictable weather, pests, and
    disease, just to name a few. Researchers and institutions
    tasked with addressing these challenges are asked to do so with
    minimal Federal resources and an aging infrastructure.
        The United States produces the safest, most affordable, and
    abundant food and fiber in the world, ever.
        In crafting the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018, the
    distinguished Ranking Member Deborah Stabenow and myself along
    with members of this Committee recognized that we had to
    continue to build on the strong history of agricultural
    research in the United States.
        With the enactment of the bill, the primary Department of
    Agriculture Research, Education, and Extension authorities were
    reauthorized, including the Agriculture Research Service and
    the National Institute of Food and Agriculture.
        Land-Grant University formula funds, including the Hatch
    Act, Smith-Lever, McIntire-Stennis, and Evans-Allen were
    extended, and competitive grant programs were included to
    support research facilities and equipment improvements.
        Provisions were included to bring equity to 1890 and 1994
    institutions. The Farm and Ranch Stress Assistance Network was
    reauthorized and strengthened to support the mental health of
    farmers and individuals facing highly stressful working
    conditions.
        New authorities were established, including the Agriculture
    Advanced Research and Development Authority, AGARDA. It was
    modeled after authorities at other agencies, including DARPA
    and BARDA, which allows the USDA to carry out advanced research
    and development of qualified products, technologies, and
    research tools.
        During the Farm Bill process, budgets were tight, and many
    difficult choices were made in an effort to negotiate a bill
    that provides certainty and predictability.
        Notably, the Research title was one of the few in the Farm
    Bill to receive an increase in mandatory funding over the life
    of the bill. In fact, it included nearly $800 million in
    mandatory funding over five years for research programs. That
    is a big investment, a needed investment.
        I am very proud of the bipartisan effort to support
    agricultural research and the Agriculture Improvement Act of
    2018, and I know the Ranking Member shares that pride.
        This morning I look forward to hearing an update from the
    Department about the implementation of these updated and new
    provisions.
        I am also interested to hear about the status of other
    efforts related to Research, Education, and Economics, the REE
    mission area, including the relocation of the Economic Research
    Service, ERS, and NIFA to the Kansas City Region.
        My home State of Kansas has a strong history of
    agricultural research, including Kansas State University, the
    National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility currently under
    construction, and the broader Animal Health Corridor,
    stretching from Columbia, Missouri, to Kansas City on the way
    out to Manhattan. The relocation of ERS and NIFA to this region
    would allow these agencies to access the many existing
    resources and benefits of the region.
        Research and analysis are essential to the work that the
    Department does for producers and for the agricultural economy.
    With any significant structural change, it is vital that we
    ensure the research mission remains intact and is supported and
    strengthened for this Nation's growers. For instance, we need
    to ensure that the Department continues to produce quality
    analytic reports, without delay, during this transition.
        From the onset of the Farm Bill process, agricultural
    research was something every member could unite behind and
    support. This is true regardless of what State each member
    hails from or what crops are grown there.
        This bipartisan, bicameral support for agricultural
    research will continue and is key as we seek to keep working
    together to strengthen U.S. agriculture.
        I now recognize the distinguished Ranking Member, Senator
    Stabenow, for her remarks.

    STATEMENT OF HON. DEBBIE STABENOW, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE
                              OF MICHIGAN

        Senator Stabenow. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and
    thank you very much for holding what is a very important
    hearing.
        Before giving my opening remarks, I want to put into the
    record, with your agreement, testimony from a number of groups
    and individuals regarding the relocations of ERS and NIFA. This
    includes statements from organizations representing
    researchers, agricultural economists, and former USDA
    researchers from both Republican and Democratic
    administrations. So I would ask submission.
        Chairman Roberts. So ordered.

        [The following information can be found on pages 36-143 in
    the appendix.]

        Senator Stabenow. Thank you very much.
        Thank you very much for the hearing, as I indicated, and I
    share the Chairman's commitment to what has been really a
    source of pride for us in terms of support for not only
    traditional agriculture but the new foundation that we have now
    had in place for two Farm Bills that we worked together on.
        Dr. Hutchins, welcome back, and thank you for being here.
    Agricultural research has always been the heart of the
    Department of Agriculture since its beginning, and you have a
    very important responsibility at a very challenging time, in my
    judgment.
        In 1862, President Lincoln created the USDA with the
    mission to procure, propagate, and distribute agricultural
    knowledge. That strong foundation created our modern system of
    land-grant universities, including, Mr. Chairman, our alma
    maters of Michigan State and Kansas State.
        It has also led to breakthroughs that have made our farmers
    more productive, more profitable, and more resilient.
        The development of the first hybrid corn seeds have
    resulted in better yields in many types of crops. Extension
    specialists helped farmers utilize crop rotation to replenish
    soil after the Dust Bowl.
        USDA studies have made wheat more resistant to drought and
    disease, developed more nutritious rice varieties, and improved
    vaccines to prevent foot and mouth disease.
        Even off the farm, a wide variety of interesting research,
    important research. Ag research has enhanced the life for all
    Americans, improving the disposable diaper, making the U.S.
    military uniforms resistant to mosquitos, and developing better
    turf for NFL fields so that my Detroit Lions can tear up the
    Chairman's Kansas City Chiefs without tearing up the grass.
        Even with these great innovations----
        It is my opening statement, Mr. Chairman.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Stabenow. Even with these great innovations, we
    consistently hear we need more research and a broad array of
    research, not less. That is why the bipartisan 2018 Farm Bill
    increased funding for USDA research efforts in animal disease,
    specialty crops, urban agriculture, organics, and expanded
    public-private partnerships in the Foundation for Food and
    Agriculture Research.
        Unfortunately, the bipartisan commitment to agricultural
    research, which started over 150 years ago, is now at risk. I
    am deeply concerned that this administration is undermining the
    foundation of the USDA's scientific research mission.
        The administration's haphazard decision to relocate two
    critically important research institutions--the Economic
    Research Service and the National Institute of Food and
    Agriculture--will affect real people who rely on the USDA
    services and hamper its capacity to support farmers, families,
    and rural communities for years to come.
        And for what? For what? It is still unclear to me what
    problem the USDA is trying to solve with this move, but we can
    see the problems and the risks related to this move.
        The administration is requiring employees to uproot their
    families and move by September 30th, even though they have not
    secured a permanent office space. There are questions about
    their authority and budget for the relocation. According to the
    USDA, at least 63 percent of employees directed to move will
    leave instead of relocating, 63 percent or more. That is on top
    of extremely high current vacancy rates at these agencies.
        Rebuilding an entire workforce will take time. In the
    interim, these agencies will not have the capacity to do their
    important work.
        The USDA will also lose irreplaceable expertise. For
    example, the USDA is losing Vince Crawley, an army veteran
    originally from Indiana, whose work publishing reports is
    critical to expanding export markets, supporting transparent
    commodity prices, and strengthening rural economies.
        The USDA is losing Jeffrey Steiner, one of the Nation's
    leading experts on hemp research, which we are doing a hearing
    on this as we move forward, the leading expert on hemp research
    whose knowledge would have helped develop new markets for hemp,
    which was legalized in the Farm Bill.
        The USDA is losing Tim Steinberg, whose economic research
    supports rural manufacturing and business innovation. His
    critical work on the competitiveness of rural America will shut
    down on September 30 because no one else in the Department is
    qualified to work with this confidential, highly sensitive
    data.
        There are hundreds more stories like these that we could
    share, the knowledge that we are throwing away and the
    expertise we are throwing away with this move.
        It is no wonder that leading scientists, land-grant
    universities, former USDA officials from both sides of the
    aisle stand in staunch opposition to this move.
        Now, the administration could keep these experts from
    leaving by giving employees the flexibility to continue their
    important work here until at least a permanent location is
    ready. The administration could extend the deadline for
    researchers to decide whether they will leave their jobs or
    relocate themselves and their families to a new city over a
    thousand miles away.
        Instead, the administration is forcing out its employees
    with rushed, politically calculated ultimatums designed to
    derail important agricultural research, and I do not say that
    lightly.
        This relocation fits a troubling pattern of this
    administration undermining the important work of the USDA,
    including critical research our farmers need to address the
    impacts of the severe weather caused by the changing climate.
        Congress has resoundingly rejected multiple budget
    proposals that would have cut USDA economic research by 50
    percent, rejected, both sides of the aisle. I am concerned that
    this so-called relocation is an attempt to go around Congress
    and to carry out the steep reductions in capacity and research,
    anyway.
        It is clear to me that this is not a relocation; it is a
    demolition. It is a thinly veiled, ideological attempt to drive
    away key USDA employees and bypass the intent of Congress.
        I urge the administration to stop this and salvage what
    valuable expertise is left. This decision does far more than
    hurt USDA employees. If this chaotic plan is not stopped, our
    farmers, our families, and rural communities will be the ones
    that suffer in the long run.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Roberts. I will remind members of the Committee,
    time is very limited. We have votes at 11:30. That is most
    unfortunate, given the issues that are concerned.
        I would like to welcome our witness before the Committee
    this morning. Dr. Scott Hutchins is the Deputy Under Secretary
    for Research, Education, and Economics, REE, at the Department
    of Agriculture. Prior to working at the Department, Dr.
    Hutchins held a variety of roles in the Agricultural Research
    and Development, most recently as the Global Research
    Development Leader of Corteva Agriscience, the agricultural
    division of Dow-DuPont.
        He received his bachelor's degree in entomology from Auburn
    University, a master's degree from Mississippi State
    University, and his doctorate from Iowa State University.
        Notably, Dr. Hutchins last testified in this room in
    November after he was nominated to serve as the Under Secretary
    for Research, Education, and Economics, and his nomination was
    reported out of this Committee on a voice vote for a second
    time on May 14th.
        Welcome back to the Committee, Dr. Hutchins. I look forward
    to your testimony.

      STATEMENT OF SCOTT HUTCHINS, Ph.D., DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY,
        RESEARCH, EDUCATION, AND ECONOMICS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
                     AGRICULTURE, WASHINGTON, D.C.

        Dr. Hutchins. Thank you. Good morning, Chairman Roberts,
    Ranking Member Stabenow, and members of the Committee. Thank
    you for the opportunity to discuss agricultural research and
    implementation of related provisions in the 2018 Farm Bill.
        The Research, Education, and Economics Mission Area at USDA
    is an incredible team and powerful force for the good of U.S.
    agriculture.
        The REE Mission Area is comprised of four agencies: the
    Agricultural Research Service, the Economic Research Service,
    the National Agricultural Statistics Service, and the National
    Institute of Food and Agriculture.
        I will offer a few updates on each followed by some
    comments on some current topics.
        ARS, or the Agricultural Research Service, under the
    leadership of Dr. Jacobs-Young, is the primary intramural
    research agency for USDA. ARS has as long track record of
    scientific breakthroughs that benefit U.S. producers,
    consumers, and ARS is also one of the two USDA agencies, along
    with APHIS, responsible for the stand-up and management of the
    National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility, NBAF, in Kansas.
        Just recently, with Chairman Roberts joining, I was pleased
    to cosign with Under Secretary Ibach a memorandum of agreement
    with the Department of Homeland Security to enable the transfer
    of responsibilities to USDA.
        ERS, or the Economic Research Service, currently led by
    Acting Administrator Leibtag, continues to be a trusted source
    of high-quality and objective economic research to inform and
    enhance public and private decision-making. Recent ERS reports
    have highlighted trends in sales and development of veterinary
    antibiotics, a slowing of retail food price inflation, food
    loss amounts at the farm level, and additionally, ERS has
    provided studies showing the impact that agriculture has on the
    larger economy. They have modeled shifts on the impact of
    climate on farm productivity and balance of public versus
    private R&D sector investment.
        NASS, or the National Agricultural Statistics Service, led
    by Administrator Hamer, provides timely, accurate, and useful
    statistics and service to U.S. agriculture. They conduct
    hundreds of surveys each year and produce reports for the
    entire agricultural sector, including production and supplies
    of food and fiber, prices paid and received by farmers, farm
    labor and wages, farm finances, chemical use, and changes in
    the demographics of U.S. agriculture.
        Earlier this year, we were proud to have the opportunity to
    provide NASS's largest and most visible report, the Census of
    Agriculture.
        NIFA, or the National Institute of Food and Agriculture,
    under the leadership of Dr. Angle, is USDA's extramural
    research agency providing funding and leadership to support
    research, education, and extension programs that address
    national agricultural priorities and transformative practices.
    NIFA primarily does this through competitive and formula
    grants.
        An additional aspect of NIFA is the support workforce
    development in agriculture, including the 4-H organization. In
    2018, NIFA-funded programs supported over 104,000 students
    through recruitment, retention, and curriculum development and
    faculty development. Through 4-H, NIFA supports a new
    generation of community leaders.
        The Office of the Chief Scientist serves to coordinate all
    four agencies on certain topics and also supports all of USDA
    via the Science Council. The council facilitates cross-
    departmental scientific coordination and includes the important
    function and oversight of scientific integrity.
        With regard to the 2018 Farm Bill implementation, first let
    me congratulate this Committee and particularly Chairman
    Roberts and Ranking Member Stabenow on the timely and positive
    bill in support of U.S. agriculture.
        REE held a special listening session on March 21st of this
    year to begin the process of Farm Bill implementation with all
    the REE leadership present. While each of the four REE agencies
    and the Office of the Chief Scientist are included in the Farm
    Bill, the vast majority of the provisions pertained to NIFA,
    and I am pleased to report that, thus far, NIFA has addressed
    the key expectations of the legislation that are funded. We are
    aggressively implementing it across the Department.
        With regard to relocating the ERS and NIFA agencies,
    Secretary Perdue announced in June that ERS and NIFA will
    relocate to the Kansas City region after a long deliberative
    process. The Kansas City region is a vibrant urban center in
    the Heartland, a growing agricultural hub, and a home to
    considerable Federal workforce already. Long-term savings, the
    ability to attract top agricultural talent and proximity to
    numerous agricultural constituents will enhance the mission of
    these agencies in the long term.
        USDA is fully committed to seeing NIFA and ERS thrive as
    mission-critical agencies, and in fact, we will welcome six
    brand-new ERS employees to Kansas City this coming Monday.
        In conclusion, thank you for the opportunity to be with you
    today. I respect the role this important Committee plays in the
    success of the REE mission and look forward to answering your
    questions.
        Thank you also for the unwavering bipartisan support that
    this Committee has always shown for the critical missions of
    research, education, and economics. On behalf of U.S.
    agriculture, it is an honor to support the USDA mission to do
    right and feed everyone.
        I am happy to answer your questions.

        [The prepared statement of Dr. Hutchins can be found on
    page 26 in the appendix.]

        Chairman Roberts. Thank you, Doctor.
        I want to remind everybody that has just come to the
    Committee, time is very limited today. We have votes at 11:30.
    We will let the floor know that if we are here still in session
    that we will wait for maybe 14 minutes to expire or something
    like that, but I am going to enforce the 5-minute rule. I think
    I have kept mine under five.
        [Laughter.]
        Chairman Roberts. So I just want to encourage people to be
    brief if they possibly can. I know there is a lot of concern
    with regards to the relocation issue.
        I thank the distinguished Member for asking unanimous
    support for questions to be submitted for the record on many of
    the concerns people have. I know that the Department will
    respond. I will make sure of that, along with the distinguished
    Ranking Member.
        Doctor, the research title, the 2018 Farm Bill, was truly a
    bipartisan collaboration for members of this Committee and
    others throughout the Congress. One example of this
    collaboration is the new Agriculture Advanced Research and
    Development Authority, or AGARDA.
        The Ranking Member and I worked closely on this authority
    to provide the Department with a new set of tools to promote
    and ensure innovation with private entities for research, and
    development solutions.
        Dr. Hutchins, how does the USDA envision utilizing this new
    authority to complement your mission to advance research and
    develop the tools necessary to protect our U.S. food supply?
        Mr. Hutchins. Thank you for the question, Mr. Chairman.
        AGARDA presents a truly unique opportunity in agricultural
    science. Much like the DARPA and the ARPA-E in other
    Departments, this proposed program provides the ability to
    partner in unique ways with private entities to allow USDA and
    Ag Research to stay on the cutting edge with technology.
        We would envision within USDA and REE, AGARDA operating
    similarly in these other agencies, and once we stand it up, we
    would love to collaborate with those agencies and understand
    how best practices could be incorporated.
        I would be particularly excited to see what we would be
    able to do if the potential collaborations that would transpire
    between the private sector and the public sector would turn
    out, as an example. NBAF would be an excellent role model for
    that.
        Unfortunately, at this point in time, AGARDA was not funded
    in the fiscal year appropriations, but we stand ready and
    excited to stand this up and to participate and bring it to
    life as you have envisioned it.
        Might I add, on a broader point, I believe the U.S. needs a
    more comprehensive ag innovation strategy, one that
    incorporates not just the capabilities and the contributions
    that can come from the public sector but also one that can come
    from the private sector so that we can benefit from a total
    integration of efforts to stay ahead of the challenges that we
    face, including climate change.
        Issues along these lines have demonstrated that the private
    sector is funding, through recent ERS reports, three times what
    the public sector is funding. So it becomes important for U.S.
    agriculture truly to synergize and partner in this way to make
    sure that we get the most bang for the buck, if you will, from
    our investments that we are enabled to have.
        Chairman Roberts. Doctor, the National Institute of Food
    and Agriculture, NIFA, and the Economic Research Service, ERS,
    provide valuable research and data that producers and industry
    stakeholders rely on. The external Research Extension and
    Education programs operated through NIFA supports producers and
    consumers in communities all across our Country. ERS provides
    valuable data, research and reports on several items such as
    U.S. farm income, not where we want that to be, commodity cost
    and returns, and monthly commodity outlook reports, which we
    are waiting on the last report here in just a few short days.
        Could you assure me, Dr. Hutchins, that these critical
    reports will not be delayed within the transition occurring
    with the ERS?
        Mr. Hutchins. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Yes, I can assure you, and more so, I assure you that we
    will seek more opportunity to expand the research and the
    influence of ERS through the use of considerable cost savings
    from this move. That is our goal. Our intention is to make this
    and our desire to make this, and the recognition is to make
    this an opportunity for us to allow this agency to grow and to
    be sustainable in the long term. It is a very important aspect.
        Now, if I could add, with regard to my role with this
    project and the role that we are currently in, when I was with
    this Committee last time, I was asked about these topics, and I
    indicated to you that I believe that the goals that the
    Secretary had for this were the right goals. I still believe
    that.
        As we move forward, there are really two key primary and
    focus areas that I am aligned on. One is to support our
    employees. This is a difficult move. Any move is difficult. I
    have done these moves in my professional life over time. They
    are very, very difficult, and so what I have realized through
    those experiences is that we need to support our employees in a
    number of ways. That includes continuous communication. It
    includes being as decisive as we can on various aspects of
    things, and it means supporting them in every way possible.
    That means the employees that are choosing to relocate as well
    as the employees who are choosing not to relocate.
        The second aspect of this, which is more to your point, I
    think, is to ensure the continuity of mission, and I have given
    my assurances to the Secretary and all who have asked that we
    will continue this mission. We will have a difficult time. As I
    have said to others, I am not trying to sugarcoat the
    difficulty that this will post, but we are actively working
    with the Office of the Secretary and with all the agencies that
    can contribute to ensure continuity of mission.
        ERS' economists are rock stars, and I have described them
    as that. The work that they do is tremendous, and so we have
    every intention--and I do give you my assurance--that we will
    maintain that capability.
        Chairman Roberts. Senator Stabenow?
        Senator Stabenow. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and again, thank
    you, Dr. Hutchins.
        I realize that you were not here at the beginning when this
    decision was made, but it is in your lap now. You are in
    charge, and it is incredibly important what decisions are made
    and how they are made.
        I agreed with you that the mission is the focus in making
    sure we are not losing the important service and mission
    provided to farmers and families in rural communities.
        There is a huge problem according to the USDA. Sixty-three
    percent of the employees directed to move will leave instead of
    moving, and USDA will fire employees that do not relocate by
    September 30th.
        So far, ongoing hiring efforts have resulted in four
    employees, four employees being ready to start in Kansas City
    next week, four.
        Furthermore, the Government Services Agency says the
    permanent office space for these agencies will not likely be
    ready for a year. So my question is, What is the rush? Why is
    USDA so fixated on moving or firing everybody by September
    30th?
        Mr. Hutchins. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
        I would not describe it as a rush. Through the
    communication process that we have had with the employees from
    the earliest days--and I have personally participated in
    monthly and sometimes even weekly all-hands meetings--at
    present time, we are communicating weekly through newsletters
    and through communication mechanisms.
        We are working constructively as best we can through the
    process with the unions that represent both aspects of it.
        What the employees have told us loud and clear throughout
    this process, which has been a long process--I mean, it was
    announced last August, and now it is July--is we just want to
    know when and where. Give us a date, and give us a location.
        So we went through a very long deliberative process. It was
    very much open in communication with your staffs to identify
    that, and we are staying true to that plan.
        We have provided a city. It is a fantastic city. Kansas
    City has been so opening and welcoming to the opportunities
    that we have here, and I will not try to sell the city. I
    suspect someone else in this room could do that better than I,
    but the----
        Senator Stabenow. Well, if I might just interrupt.
        Mr. Hutchins. Sure.
        Senator Stabenow. First of all, next to Michigan, I love
    Kansas. So this is not about Kansas City.
        June 13th, I understand is when employees knew they were
    going to Kansas City. June 13th. That is a little over a month
    ago that they knew that, and so that is my concern.
        To just add to that and let you respond, I understand that
    Secretary Perdue had a conversation with Senator Van Hollen,
    which he said he would consider employees doing telework during
    the transition, and I am wondering if you will agree to let
    current employees work in their current location until the
    permanent facility is ready in Kansas City.
        By the way, there is still a lot of vacant space here in
    D.C., where they could work during that transition.
        Is that something that you are willing to do?
        Mr. Hutchins. Senator, two points. One is through the
    communication process with the employees, that every time we
    had indicated that once a city is identified, it would be a 30-
    day decision period. So we stayed true to that. We actually
    provided 32, if you count.
        The second point, with regard to the telework and the rest
    of it, those are all demands and requests that have come from
    the union, and so those will be part of that negotiation
    process with the two agencies. That process actually begins
    tomorrow, is the first meeting between the union and with the
    agency.
        Senator Stabenow. So tomorrow is the first meeting with the
    union. So you have not yet met with them, but tomorrow is the
    first meeting?
        Mr. Hutchins. Well, I will not be meeting with them because
    their agreement, their process is with the actual agency.
        Senator Stabenow. I understand. Okay. Tomorrow is----
        Mr. Hutchins. By agreement of both sides, tomorrow is when
    that process begins.
        Senator Stabenow. Gotcha.
        Let me just quickly move through here timewise. I assume
    that you are as concerned as we are about unnecessary brain
    drain, with 63 percent of the people have said they are not
    going to be moving, and you basically gave 547 employees 30
    days to decide if they were going to move halfway across the
    country and take their families.
        Right now I understand there is enough space for 270
    employees in Kansas City.
        Given time, I want to ask one other important question,
    though. Recent press reports, including a new article published
    today, suggest that USDA has taken steps to suppress public
    release of the agency's work related to climate change.
        I am very proud of the fact that this Committee did a
    thoughtful bipartisan--it may have been the first thoughtful
    bipartisan--Senate hearing on climate change and how farmers
    can be a part of the solution going forward, which is
    absolutely critical.
        You addressed the downplaying of climate research in your
    testimony, and in a letter you sent to me yesterday, I
    appreciate the response. However, this morning's story suggests
    that senior Trump officials also held back an agency-wide
    Climate Science Plan slated for public release in late 2017,
    which we certainly could have benefited from.
        Let me just ask this. At this point, in terms of
    publicizing the work of agency researchers and so on, will you
    commit to provide this committee with all studies related to
    climate change that have involved USDA researchers and were
    published after January 21, 2017?
        Mr. Hutchins. Thank you, Senator.
        May I clarify and ask are you talking about the research
    studies?
        Senator Stabenow. I am talking about all the research
    studies that have been done, everything the USDA has done with
    public money, the universities and so on. We know there is a
    lot of work, really important work, that has been done, and we
    need to have that information.
        Mr. Hutchins. Yes, ma'am. That is all in the public domain.
        Just as an example, if you look at the ramp-up rate of
    climate research through NIFA, from 2016 there were 964
    reports, if you were to use Google Scholar, as an example. In
    2018, there were over a thousand, and we are on target or on
    pace in 2019 to have over 1,200.
        The climate work focus, primarily in my context on
    adaptation and mitigation, is expansive and robust, and we
    would be more than happy----
        Senator Stabenow. Does that include, though, the public
    release of the agency-wide Climate Science Plan that was
    referred to in the press today?
        Mr. Hutchins. The plan that was referred to in the press
    was an internal document in order for us to design and
    implement all aspects of this overall research program. It was
    not ever intended to be released to the public. No problem with
    it being released to the public because it really signals very
    clearly all the work that is being done, and all the work that
    is in that document is actually being done. That is our
    guidepost, and that is what we were using to develop our
    research program.
        Senator Stabenow. I look forward to receiving that. Thank
    you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Roberts. Again, we have limited time today. We are
    like King Tut. We are pressed for time. We have votes at 11:30.
    We can hold it off until about 11:45. Questions for the record
    will be available, and the Chair will have to enforce the 5-
    minute rule. Thank you.
        Senator Boozman?
        Senator Boozman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for
    having the meeting.
        We have got a lot of concern, disagreement, but I think
    that the one thing that we can all agree on is that, as a
    nation, we must continue to invest in ag research and the
    future of agriculture.
        We can look at Arkansas, for example, and how far we have
    come in Arkansas. We can take rice, for example. From 1980 to
    2015, rice yield per acre increased by 62 percent. Over the
    same time, the water use associated with growing rice decreased
    by 52 percent. Soil loss decreased by 28 percent, and energy
    use decreased by 34 percent. None of this would have been
    possible without the innovation that has come about from the
    research and technology.
        Ag research will become even more important so that we can
    feed and clothe 9 billion people by 2050 on the same amount of
    arable land, essentially, that we have today.
        So I guess the question is, Dr. Hutchins, understanding the
    challenges that agriculture will have to overcome as the global
    population grows, what do you see as the most important
    research areas to focus on in both the short term and long
    term?
        Mr. Hutchins. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
        One of the things that we have done with the leadership
    team with REE is to identify one of the primary themes of
    research and focus and impact and influence that we really need
    to have for U.S. agriculture, and if I can, I will just briefly
    overview those.
        The first is sustainable intensification, and this would
    capture a lot of the things that you have just listed. It is
    the opportunity for us to really focus in a sincere and
    expansive way on soil health, an opportunity to focus on water
    conservation and water quality, and the opportunity really to
    take advantage of the tremendous digital revolution that is
    happening today within agriculture. All of that will allow
    farmers to not only be more productive but clearly more
    profitable as they are able to maximize the inputs that they
    put forth. So that is one of the key themes.
        By the way, as we do soil health and these other things,
    that will have very positive impacts on carbon sequestration
    and on overall greenhouse gas production.
        The second piece, if I could just do one more, the second
    piece is actually ag climate adaptation, and that is another
    key theme that we have where we are investing well over $100
    million of research just in that theme.
        Senator Boozman. We in Arkansas benefit from several
    research universities, which has been so, so important. One of
    these, the University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff, is an 1890's
    institution. UAPB is especially important to Arkansas'
    aquiculture industry, as they are a leader in aquiculture
    research.
        In the Farm Bill, there were several provisions regarding
    the 1890's institutions. Could you update us on the
    implementation of those provisions?
        Mr. Hutchins. Yes, sir. There were a number of them in the
    context of scholarship programs, for example, and the USDA
    hosted a tremendous event where they outlined and demonstrated
    with bipartisan support how that program was being stood up and
    put forth.
        The 1890 institutions overall are very highly supported by
    the Secretary as well as by the Department, and all of the
    provisions that are within that for both the individual ones as
    well as the others are being implemented with speed and rigor
    to ensure that the intent of this Committee and the intent of
    the 1890 institutions is fulfilled.
        Senator Boozman. Good. We appreciate that, and I think I
    can speak for the Committee that I think this is something that
    is very, very important that we do that with as much speed as
    possible. If you need any help in that regard, be sure and let
    us know.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back on time.
        Chairman Roberts. That helps.
        Senator Smith? Oh, pardon me. Senator Leahy?
        Senator Leahy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good to see you.
        Chairman Roberts. Good to see you too.
        Senator Leahy. I try to keep an eye on you when I am not in
    the room.
        Chairman Roberts. Yes, I know that. I do not look at your
    picture. They have a hypnotizing effect on me.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Leahy. I am concerned, Doctor, listening to some of
    the discussion here. I remember in a previous administration,
    the head of one of our environmental agencies kept
    reorganizing, reorganizing, and reorganizing so that they would
    never have to do anything, enforce the environmental laws. A
    Republican Senator called her on that, and that was Robert
    Stafford of Vermont.
        When I look at the Department's planned relocation of ERS
    and NIFA, I do not see where it has any merit or justification.
    I believe it really undermines the mission of both agencies. I
    am saying that with New England understatement.
        The move has already dealt a significant blow to the
    Department's scientific and economic research capacity, and
    many employees within these agencies will tell you, honestly,
    they feel this is the intent, to undermine the research
    capacity.
        Further, though, USDA failed to submit with its 2020 budget
    justification reporting all the costs and benefits for the move
    as well as a detailed analysis of any research benefit of a
    relocation. Those are required, and as Vice Chairman of the
    Appropriations Committee, I am well aware of this. They are
    required by Congress to the enacted fiscal year appropriations
    bill. That is a requirement which USDA totally ignored and
    violated.
        On the contrary, USDA requested $15.5 million for ERS
    relocation, even at the same time they are proposing a $26
    million cut in the agency. You know, it is Kafkaesque.
        The final thumb in the eye, the USDA sent the
    Appropriations Committee a reprogramming request just 6 days
    prior to publishing its intent in the Federal Register. That
    violates the 30 days that is required. It is like you guys do
    not even care what the law is.
        Congress is irrelevant, including the appropriators and the
    authorizers.
        So let me ask you. Insofar as you are ignoring
    congressional mandates, not following the law, Doctor, let me
    ask you this. Yes or no. Will you submit to the committees of
    jurisdiction all analyses related to relocation, including the
    full report by Ernst & Young on which USDA's cost-benefit
    analysis released last month was based? Yes or no.
        Mr. Hutchins. Yes, sir. We have released and published and
    made public the cost-benefit analysis prepared by Ernst &
    Young.
        Senator Leahy. What cost-benefit analysis was conducted
    prior to the Secretary's August 2018 announcement they would
    relocate the agencies?
        Mr. Hutchins. Senator, I did not join USDA until January of
    this year.
        Senator Leahy. I understand that.
        Mr. Hutchins. So I really do not know what was prepared for
    this.
        Senator Leahy. Okay. Will you--yes or no. Will you find
    what cost-benefit analysis was conducted prior and supply it to
    this Committee?
        Mr. Hutchins. I will inquire with the Secretary as to what
    is available.
        Senator Leahy. So you cannot give us an answer that you
    will?
        Mr. Hutchins. I do not know what is available, sir, but I
    will do all that I can to provide what is available.
        Senator Leahy. Well, was all that was provided, did you
    give us all that was provided, or did you give us just a
    summary?
        Mr. Hutchins. We provided all that exists for the cost----
        Senator Leahy. It was not a summary. It was all that
    exists?
        Mr. Hutchins. The summary captured all of the----
        Senator Leahy. Oh, so you gave a summary. You did not give
    all?
        Mr. Hutchins. No, sir. We provided it all, and in the
    summary, it referenced all the data and all the information
    that went into that. So it was the cost-benefit analysis. I
    would be happy to----
        Senator Leahy. So that is available? All that data is
    available to the Committee?
        Mr. Hutchins. Yes, sir.
        Senator Leahy. So we should be able to get the prior, prior
    to your time there also?
        Mr. Hutchins. I will inquire on your behalf.
        Senator Leahy. If Congress does not provide relocation
    funds in fiscal year or blocks funds from being used for such a
    relocation, will USDA follow the law, as enacted by Congress?
        Mr. Hutchins. USDA, from my standpoint, always follows the
    law and has deep respect for how it is created and how it is
    implemented.
        Senator Leahy. Well, then watch what we put because if we
    put that, you are going to have to.
        Lastly, EFNEP, that in the 2019-enacted appropriations
    bill, Congress called for a pilot expansion to provide
    evaluation and improved food resources. What has USDA done to
    implement these instructions in the fiscal year law, and would
    a land-grant institution with an established EFNEP program be
    well positioned to undertake the pilot?
        Mr. Hutchins. Yes, sir. The Agriculture appropriations
    report included language encouraging the Secretary to support a
    special pilot extension of EFNEP, and NIFA at present is
    assessing how to incorporate that into further effectiveness of
    that program.
        I might also add for that program, I had the honor to
    address that group and visit with that group earlier this year.
    Their mission and their focus is just tremendous, and so----
        Senator Leahy. I agree with you on that.
        Mr. Hutchins. What they do is something that we absolutely
    want to encourage, and we will make every effort from our
    standpoint to ensure that that pilot is successful.
        Senator Leahy. I can find you a good land-grant institution
    to do it.
        Thank you. Mr. Chairman, it is so nice to be here with you.
        Chairman Roberts. Well, thank you, sir. You are only about
    40 seconds overtime. This is of great concern to me because it
    did not give me enough time to congratulate you on your
    16,000th vote on the floor of the U.S. Senate. I will tell you
    in private how many times I voted with you.
        Senator Leahy. I have the list on a small card here.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Leahy. On the Farm Bill, we have always voted
    together.
        Senator Stabenow. That is right.
        Chairman Roberts. That is correct, and that is the most
    important thing.
        Senator Braun?
        Senator Braun. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Acknowledging the comments of Senator Stabenow and Leahy, I
    think those are valid, but I would also cite a few things. One,
    I am glad we are relocating to Kansas City. It is in the middle
    of the Farm Belt. I am a farmer, a tree farmer, involved with a
    lot of farmers, and I think it makes sense to be in the middle
    of where the bread basket is.
        When it comes to the talent pool, I have got to believe
    there is more of it in the universities that specialize in ag
    in that area as well.
        Then what is normally not talked about here would be can we
    lower the cost of operation in a place like that, and I am
    almost certain that it will be lower cost of doing business in
    Kansas City than D.C.
        I am looking forward for you to carry out this smooth
    transition, what you think can be done.
        I want to get to a question of what your agency is all
    about. African swine fever, foot and mouth disease, wheat stem
    rust, all examples of current threats to global agriculture
    that know no borders. I am sure there are others as well.
        Where are you at on diseases like that, and are we making
    headway, or are we being overwhelmed by more of them that seem
    to crop up every year?
        Mr. Hutchins. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
        The answer is that we are making headway on many, and as an
    entomologist, I am familiar with the whole concept of invasive
    species and those kinds of difficult topics.
        We are making headway on a number of those, but there will
    always be more. We are in a global travel situation, and so
    there is always a risk. APHIS does a fantastic job, but there
    is always a risk of more. We always have new challenges. We
    have them in all parts of the country.
        Growers every year face some sort of new challenge or
    outbreak. Much of that is stimulated by some sort of current
    weather pattern or what have you, but I can tell you with
    confidence that the Agricultural Research Service and NIFA
    both--and NIFA working more recently and locally through all of
    the great land grants in this country--are doing world-class
    science and making tremendous efforts. If you combine that with
    the great system we have of cooperative extension, it allows us
    to get that research. It allows us to get those advancements
    and those discoveries into the hands of our farmers quickly
    enough so that they can respond and minimize any losses from
    those kinds of pests.
        Senator Braun. So, as a tree farmer, does forestry, which I
    think in Indiana has almost twice the financial impact of row
    crops, which many people do not realize that--and I am sure
    that varies by State somewhat. Emerald ash borer, Japanese
    stiltgrass, tree of heaven, and most of that stuff has arisen
    in the last 10 to 15 years. Some of it, like Japanese bush
    honeysuckle, is so prevalent that most people do not even know
    it is not a native. Are we spending as much time and effort
    there when in many States, forestry has more impact than
    agriculture in the sense of row crops? Are we putting resources
    to that as well?
        Mr. Hutchins. Thank you, sir, for the question.
        Two things I would point out. One is the Forest Service,
    which is not part of this mission area, has its own R&D
    organization that is focused specifically on a lot of those
    diseases, insects, and so forth associated with forestry, but
    we work very closely together.
        So a lot of the basic biology, the basic information, and
    the control methods for pests like Emerald ash borer, which has
    cost me a number of ash trees myself, is collaborative.
        In fact, we use within our leadership team--we utilize the
    R&D leader for the Forest Service as part of our leadership
    team.
        So we are doing all we can to coordinate, and we do include
    the ecosystems, the forest ecosystems as part of our mandate
    and part of our challenge.
        Senator Braun. Thank you. Good luck in your transition to
    Kansas City.
        Mr. Hutchins. Thank you, sir.
        Senator Braun. I yield back.
        Chairman Roberts. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Klobuchar?
        Senator Klobuchar. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you for being here, Dr. Hutchins.
        I have already expressed my concern, and Senator Stabenow
    focused on that in her questions about this relocation.
        Do you truly believe that you are not going to lose
    significant expertise in areas of research, agricultural
    research, Dr. Hutchins, with this move?
        Mr. Hutchins. Thank you for the question.
        Ma'am, I have never suggested that we would not lose
    expertise. I have been part of some major moves in the past,
    some large mergers and so forth, and they are never easy. There
    is always a large attrition with that, and there are good
    personal reasons for that. People are making choices.
        In this particular situation, every employee has been
    offered a job. I have never been through one of these where
    there was no workforce reduction in the context of mandated. So
    the opportunity is there.
        The numbers that came from this were not at all unexpected.
    We expect that for these kind of moves. We will be working
    desperately and deliberately to make sure, as Chairman Roberts
    has requested, that we do not drop the ball on the mission in
    the short term, but I want us to keep an eye on the long term.
    I want us to keep an eye on what the next version, with the
    expertise that we are retaining, how we build on that and how
    we take these agencies to the next level.
        The Secretary has committed to reinvest some of these
    considerable savings, $300 million nominally over the first
    least period, in order to allow us to grow these agencies, grow
    their impact, and grow their influence and expand the research
    capabilities.
        Senator Klobuchar. Just as we are out of time with climate
    change and climate science where this research is just
    important across the Government, and last month I wrote to
    Secretary Perdue with concerns about a news report that
    detailed the suppression of scientific studies conducted by the
    Agricultural Research Service related to the effects of climate
    change on agricultural production. This is having been seen in
    the Midwest the flooding that we are having and the broken
    levees and farmers that are no longer able to produce because
    their cropland is under water. We are having huge problems
    right now in Minnesota.
        Dr. Hutchins, can you elaborate on how the Department
    determines which type of research projects to publicize as
    opposed to just get them done?
        We have had an issue where a lot of this climate research
    seems to come out on late Friday afternoons, where maybe people
    will not notice it, not just out of USDA but out of other
    agencies, when I think we should be highlighting this as we
    look at solutions to what is an obvious crisis that is not
    happening in 100 years. It is happening now.
        Can you talk about how the Department determines which type
    of research projects to publicize?
        Mr. Hutchins. Thank you for the question.
        I can certainly provide you with an overview of that.
        First of all, with 5,000 publications coming just out of
    ARS alone across a number of topics, we need to look at which
    ones really will set the stage. We have over 450 research
    publications just in the climate area from just ARS, not to
    count the thousand that are sponsored by NIFA.
        So what we are looking for is a standard that says is there
    something new and novel here, is it most relevant to U.S.
    growers and U.S. agriculture, and is it something that we could
    ultimately translate and take to a point where we can reduce it
    to practice?
        I have returned a response to your letter. I do not know if
    you have seen that, but that particular publication that was in
    question was specifically focused on rice varieties in China
    and Japan. So it did not meet the standard relevant to U.S.
    rice growers. It focused on the concept of nutrition. There
    were 18 varieties evaluated. Two of those varieties clearly
    showed a reduction in vitamin B. Two of those varieties showed
    an increase in vitamin B, and 16 had no change.
        So we looked at that and said that it is not as conclusive
    with the type of promotion that was being suggested. It has
    nothing to do with climate change. It simply has to do with
    what we felt like the promotion of that did not meet the
    standard.
        There will be many other articles and many other studies
    that we will promote that meet those other standards.
        Senator Klobuchar. Okay. Because I just know there have
    been a number of these studies that have been kind of, in my
    mind, deep-sized, and it is not just at USDA. I think that, as
    a whole, the administration is not dealing with climate change,
    and we are losing time by not dealing with it.
        Questions were asked by--and I will not go on here--by
    Senator Braun about animal and plant diseases, and I worked to
    include several animal disease provisions in the 2018 Farm
    Bill. How are you working to better deliver research solutions
    that combat these disease threats?
        Mr. Hutchins. Well, one of the, I think, outcomes of a
    shifting climate or a warming climate is that there will be, I
    think, an additional increase, a range change, if you will, in
    terms of some of these diseases and so forth.
        One of the key areas of focus under this area I had
    mentioned previously of sustainable intensification is really a
    deep understanding and development of management tactics that
    are practical and useful, both short term and long term, in
    terms of dealing with these kinds of diseases. Some of them are
    an annual basis. Some of them, we would need to be able to deal
    with, with biological control and other kinds of things.
        Rest assured that it is a primary area of focus for both
    ARS and NIFA to give our growers the opportunity to manage
    their pests.
        Senator Klobuchar. Okay. Thank you very much. I will submit
    some more questions on the record.
        Mr. Hutchins. Thank you. Thank you.
        Chairman Roberts. Senator Grassley? Mr. Chairman?
        Senator Grassley. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and
    welcome, Dr. Hutchins.
        Senator Braun brought up about diseases, et cetera. I would
    like to zero in on something that affects pork producers in
    Iowa, and they are concerned about the potential of African
    swine fever coming to the United States. Could you give me an
    update specifically on that disease, the Department's efforts
    to research methods to detect and treat African swine fever?
        If you were in another Department, Homeland Security, I
    would ask you to do what you are doing to keep it out of the
    Country.
        Mr. Hutchins. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
        The entry of that horrible disease is really under the
    purview of APHIS, and they are doing a fantastic job getting
    ahead of things in terms of making sure everything is in place.
    They have intercepted a number of shipments that should not be
    coming in because they could be potentially contaminated.
        To your point with regard to research, that is really a key
    priority for our organization to develop a vaccine in
    partnership with the private sector and make sure that our
    farmers never have to deal with what a large part of the world
    is dealing with today. So that is a primary focus.
        The completion and utilization of the NBAF facility,
    referenced earlier, is going to be front and center in our
    ability to do that work, which is presently being done, for
    example, in Plum Island and a number of areas.
        That is an excellent example of how one disease can
    radically change and alter a significant commodity such as our
    pork producers rely on. Over $200 billion are some of the
    estimates, depending on how long the outbreak would last.
        Senator Grassley. Okay. My next question is a provision in
    the Farm Bill calling for the development of Genome to Phenome
    research program at NIFA. The intent of the program is to
    better understand how plant and animal genomes interact with
    particular environments to control crop and animal growth in
    order to stabilize and increase our yields. Can you give an
    update on the Department's effort so far to implement the
    project?
        Mr. Hutchins. Senator, that theme, that area of Genome to
    Phenome, is a fantastic opportunity for us in a number of ways.
    You had mentioned plants and animals, but also, let us not
    forget microbes. That opportunity to use technologies in that
    way and to make that resolution is going to be, in some ways,
    at the core of the soil health approach with the soil
    microbiome.
        From our standpoint, what we are looking to do is be able
    to understand how that links together the ability to predict
    performance through phenome. It is critical to understanding
    how plants and animals and microbes will respond, for example,
    to climate.
        The current 2018 Farm Bill authorizes $40 million for the
    program. However, no discretionary funding has been
    appropriated to this effort. We would love to be able to stand
    that up and to incorporate that within our research programs,
    and I would also add, because I know there is tremendous
    capability in Iowa, to be able to use this as another example
    of how we partner with the private sector in order to make
    larger advances than we might be able to on our own.
        Senator Grassley. I will submit two questions for answer in
    writing and yield back my time.
        Chairman Roberts. Senator Casey?
        Senator Casey. Chairman Grassley just put pressure on all
    of us, so I will try to comply.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I want to start with a Federal employee, the story of a
    Federal employee. Often in this town, Government workers are
    the subject of denigration, not commendation. We do not talk
    about their work enough, and so I want to try to give you one
    example and then use that as a predicate for my question for
    Dr. Hutchins.
        This is a story of Catherine Greene. She is senior
    agricultural economist at the Economic Research Service, which
    we know here in the hearing as ERS. She has been there for more
    than 30 years.
        In the 1980's, Catherine Greene initiated the first ERA
    outlook reporting on U.S. organic production. It seems like a
    long time ago.
        Since then, Catherine has initiated dozens of ERS and USDA
    projects, collaborating across every single agency of USDA to
    provide publicly available data, research, and information to
    U.S. producers interested in organic production and marketing.
        Catherine Greene is unable to relocate to Kansas City.
    Further, three of the young economists Catherine has trained
    for several years have already resigned rather than be
    relocated.
        Catherine Greene expects most of the institutional
    knowledge on organic agriculture will be lost when she is
    forced to retire.
        Sometimes we do not put a premium on or pay attention to
    the fact that in one agency of the Federal Government, you can
    have thousands of years of combined expertise and experience.
        So, Doctor, I have two questions on this subject. One is
    about attrition rates, and the other is about lost capacity.
    The first is, What is the expected attrition rate for employees
    working on organic agriculture in ERS? That is question one,
    and question two is, How do you anticipate the lost capacity of
    employees like Catherine Greene, who has spent 30 years
    developing expertise, to impact the agency's ability to provide
    accurate and timely data to organic producers? So if you could
    answer both questions.
        Mr. Hutchins. Thank you for the question.
        Two things. First, with regard to Catherine, we would love
    for Catherine to join us, if she would. We have offered roles
    to everyone in those two agencies, and we would be delighted to
    have her take that opportunity.
        With regard to the organic ag and the specific capabilities
    in that space, sir, I would have to get back with you on that.
    There are dozens of particular areas, and I do not have right
    in front of me today what the specifics are for that. I would
    certainly commit to do in that particular area, as you had
    requested.
        I am sorry. The third?
        Senator Casey. On the lost capacity, you will have to get
    back to us?
        Mr. Hutchins. Yes, for that specific area.
        Senator Casey. Okay.
        Mr. Hutchins. In an overall capacity standpoint, we are
    putting together a strategy that allows us to take advantage of
    a number of short-term and long-term aspects. We have a very
    aggressive hiring plan for vacancies in both of these.
        As I indicated in my opening remarks, six new ERS employees
    start to work in Kansas City on Monday.
        We also will be looking at several employees who cannot
    move for personal reasons, have approached us to see can we
    work after the date in some sort of contractual capacity or in
    some agreement like that.
        Universities have contacted us and asked us, ``We can help
    support you,'' and so forth.
        So a lot of groups at this point are starting to rally
    together to see how we can make sure we do this, and the
    commitment I have made to this Committee is that we will put
    all of those pieces together. We will not drop the ball on any
    of these, both of these agencies, and we will build them for
    the future.
        Senator Casey. The point I make is, look, I am just talking
    about organic production, one part of the responsibility of
    USDA, and we want to make sure that those organic producers,
    those organic farmers have accurate and timely data.
        It stands to reason that when you have a group of people
    that have accumulated all this experience that the likelihood,
    the high likelihood, is there is going to be a drop-off in
    terms of providing that information. So if you can get us that
    answer, we appreciate that.
        Mr. Hutchins. Yes, sir.
        Senator Casey. The second part of it was what I had asked
    first about the attrition rate for those working. What is the
    expected attrition rate for those working in organic
    agriculture at ERS?
        Mr. Hutchins. Again, I do not have the attrition rate for
    the organic agriculture aspect of ERS. I can get that back to
    you.
        Senator Casey. If you can get those in writing to us.
        Mr. Chairman, I will submit a second question for the
    record. Thank you.
        Chairman Roberts. I thank the distinguished Senator.
        Senator Hyde-Smith?
        Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I commend
    you and our Ranking Member Stabenow for a job well done for the
    2018 Farm Bill. That was such a success. The research, in
    particular, was very good to me. Our commitment to the ag
    research is one of the reasons Under Secretary has remained a
    global leader, as we well know, in ag production.
        I am really proud of the important research conducted at
    the Agricultural Research Service, the ARS, in Stoneville,
    Mississippi, as well as at our public universities. I think you
    guys are doing a great job there.
        Dr. Hutchins, first of all, thank you for appearing before
    the Committee today. You have done a fantastic job.
        One of the things I want to ask about is the chronic
    wasting disease, CWD. It is a fatal disease that affects white-
    tailed deer and several other members of the deer family, very
    important in Mississippi, and there is still a lot to learn
    about the cause, the spread, and the management control of CWD.
        It has made its way to Mississippi, and I am really
    concerned about the impact it could have because we have a
    billion-dollar industry there of deer hunting. A large area of
    our State has been flooded, more than 500,000 acres for more
    than 6 months, and it is confining the deer to a very small
    area in the levees, which obviously would be facilitating the
    spread of chronic waste disease.
        So a provision of the 2018 Farm Bill lists CWD as a high-
    priority research and extension initiative and for very good
    reason.
        The land-grant universities in the Southeast, such as
    Mississippi State University, which you are quite familiar
    with, we have established white-tailed deer research programs,
    colleges of veterinary medicine, and technical and scientific
    expertise relevant to CWD.
        We are in pretty good position there, but as you proceed
    with the implementation of the 2018 Farm Bill, will you commit
    to ensuring that CWD is, indeed, treated as a high-priority
    research and extension initiative, and would you work
    continuous, as you have done such a great job, with land-grant
    universities in the Southeast that are well positioned to join
    the efforts and combat in many research programs on CWD?
        Mr. Hutchins. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
        Great to see you. The last time I was at the Committee, I
    think you were in the process of winning your election, so nice
    to see you and nice to see someone from Mississippi State. That
    was a great place to go.
        To your question, what I can tell you is that chronic
    wasting disease was added to the high-priority research and
    extensions initiatives in the Farm Bill. There is no funding
    there, but we are gearing up to make sure that we support all
    of these efforts.
        The issues with chronic wasting disease are very
    challenging technically, but we can overcome those. NIFA has
    funded a study at Iowa State University to attempt to find a
    skin test for the disease. The incubation period for this
    disease is two to four year. That makes it particularly
    challenging from a technical standpoint, but if we develop a
    rapid, consistent testing regime, we think that we can have a
    significant impact.
        ARS is currently investigating the pathobiology, genetics,
    and detection of the transmissible aspects of it. It is a
    spongiform encephalopathy, TSE, that affects not just deer but
    elk and moose. So it is a very significant disease and
    challenge for us that we want to contribute and we will
    contribute to the solution and partnership with the land
    grants.
        Senator Hyde-Smith. Fantastic. Thank you very much, and Go
    Dawgs.
        Mr. Hutchins. That is right. Hail State.
        Chairman Roberts. I thank the Senator.
        Senator Hoeven, with the admonition, of course, that we
    have started the vote. Not to pressure you.
        Senator Hoeven. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
        I will try to keep it moving along here.
        I do want to ask. North Dakota is the Nation's top producer
    of canola, and so we included some--in our NIFA funding, we
    want to see research for canola. So does NIFA intend to make
    canola eligible for the program, and can you share a timeline
    for when that action will be completed?
        Mr. Hutchins. Senator, I am aware of a Hard Red Spring and
    Durham Wheat Laboratory involvement within North Dakota. I
    would need to get back to you with the specifics of that
    particular question, and I would be happy to do that ASAP.
        Senator Hoeven. Good, because we are going to want to work
    with you to make sure that that research is included as part of
    NIFA.
        Mr. Hutchins. Absolutely.
        Senator Hoeven. So I will look forward to working with you
    on that.
        Also, how about in the sugar beet area? We provided a
    million-dollar increase in sugar beet research funding. Is that
    one that you can comment on, or should we follow up on that one
    later too?
        Mr. Hutchins. Well, I will to follow up with some details,
    but I can assure you that sugar beet research in a number of
    areas is a high priority for us. We are actively engaged in
    that within the ARS as well as NIFA.
        Senator Hoeven. Good. How about chronic wasting disease?
        Mr. Hutchins. Yes, sir. We just spoke about that in
    Mississippi, and I know it is much broader than Mississippi.
    Certainly, it is identified as a priority, and we are working
    in both intramural and extramural research efforts and
    partnering to address that. It is a challenging--it is a real
    challenging disease.
        Senator Hoeven. How about the U.S. Wheat and Barley Scab
    Initiative?
        Mr. Hutchins. The U.S. Wheat and Barley Scab Initiative is
    on track, and the ARS researchers in Fargo have transferred a
    number of major genes for that resistance for common wheat and
    to durum, using multiple backcrosses in selection. So I have
    got a bit of an update on that, but as with the others, I would
    be happy to give you as much detail from our subject-matter
    experts as you desire.
        Senator Hoeven. Good. We will look forward to working with
    you on those initiatives and others. I personally am a huge fan
    of ag research. I think it is unbelievable what we have done,
    both through ARS and NIFA, and we are very committed to funding
    that ag research and working with you on these and other
    initiatives.
        Mr. Hutchins. Thank you, sir, and I would just add to that.
    We are in a renaissance period right now with ag research and
    in agriculture more broadly. So we look forward to being part
    of the next era to make sure that U.S. agriculture is the most
    competitive.
        Senator Hoeven. Thank you.
        Now out of deference to our outstanding Chairman and the
    fact that we have a vote on the floor, I will yield the rest of
    my time.
        Chairman Roberts. Thank you very much.
        That will conclude our hearing today. Thank you to our
    witness for taking time to discuss agriculture research, the
    2018 Farm Bill, and relocation.
        To my fellow Members, we ask that any additional questions
    you may have for the record be submitted to the Committee Clerk
    in 5 business days from today or by 5 o'clock p.m., next
    Thursday, as of Thursday, July the 25th.
        I want to at least emphasize one other point. Employees had
    until July 15 to make a decision. Employees do have until
    September 30 to report to their new location. I hope they take
    advantage of that. There is a huge welcoming committee from
    both Missouri and Kansas to any employee that would visit.
        Thank you.
        [Whereupon, at 11:38 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.]

    =======================================================================

                                A P P E N D I X

                                 July 18, 2019

    =======================================================================

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    =======================================================================

                       DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

                                 July 18, 2019

    =======================================================================

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    =======================================================================

                             QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

                                 July 18, 2019

    =======================================================================

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]