But the truth is this: The federal government is going to spend this research money whether it comes to Mississippi or not. Some criticize Congress for directing portions of it to particular projects rather than allowing it to go through "competitive" processes within the bureaucracy of the executive branch.
In these "competitive" processes, at the end of the day a human being with biases is making the decision on where to send the money. You're an idiot if you think MSU gets a fair shake in these "competitions." In academia, like anywhere else, the haves continually give reach-arounds to each other while universities with "Mississippi" in their names are laughed at no matter how good or efficient their research is. Thanks be to Thad Cochran for understanding this and having the balls to tell the bureaucrats to suck it. If you don't think the congressional earmark process is competitive, you have to consider that probably less than 5% of earmark requests by congressmen ever actually get funding.
Not only that, but Mississippi leverages its federal funding to create jobs. CAVS at MSU helped bring in Nissan and Toyota, period. Do you think that research at MIT or Johns Hopkins is being leveraged to that degree? Where is there a greater impact. Which university values their federal dollars more? Where are those federal dollars used not only to solve federal problems, but also to create good paying jobs in a state that doesn't have them? People from all 82 mississippi counties have come to work at Nissan. That tells you how desperate Mississippians are for job stability, health insurance, retirement, etc.
So New York Times, Clarion-Ledger. Shove your "pork-barrell" stories up your ***. The Constitution gives Congress control of the federal purse. Congress understands the needs of the people who elect them. Career cubicle-bound bureaucrats in anywhere Maryland do not. This is the most over-politicized issue of our time.</p>
