Dr. SHANNON. I am sure Dr. Frederickson can give a precise figure but in terms of all of the medical research in the Nation, a combination of all private agencies and endowments contribute about 10 percent of the total.

Mr. SMITH. Is it insignificant?

Dr. SHANNON. Well, sir, relatively small.

This presentation was to give you some idea of the scope of our operations.

Mr. FLOOD. Anybody who can talk as well as you can should not read a script.

Dr. SHANNON. I am more than a little emotionally involved in this and have been for some while.

Mr. FLOOD. You are not a very emotional type, at least not demonstrably.

I have some general questions to ask you. I will not go into details until we get to the individual institute directors.

GUIDELINES USED IN ARRIVING AT BUDGET ESTIMATE

Were any general guidelines used in arriving at the amount of the 1968 budget for your Institutes? What kind of guidelines did you use? Dr. SHANNON. Well, in the initial preparation of the budget, Mr. Flood, we were asked to be reasonable and hardheaded and asked to realize

Mr. FLOOD. Who asked you to be reasonable and hardheaded?
Dr. SHANNON. The Department.

Mr. FLOOD. Did the Secretary ask you to be reasonable and hardheaded?

Dr. SHANNON. Through Mr. Kelly, yes.

Mr. FLOOD. Did they say "keep off the grass" or "keep off the grass positively"?

Dr. SHANNON. No, sir, they said precisely what I have stated, and the interesting thing is that in their initial submission to the Bureau of the Budget they included most of our requests. Obviously it was their feeling that our requests were not inordinate.

Mr. FLOOD. What are the guidelines?

Dr. SHANNON. I do not think we had specific guidelines, did we, Mr. Cardwell?

Mr. CARDWELL. No. Generally we indicated to all our operating agencies and the National Institutes of Health that this would be a tough budget year and that they should be prepared to rank their requirements by priority.

Mr. FLOOD. Did you ask them to read the election returns?

Mr. CARDWELL. In effect we did, yes.

Mr. LAIRD. Did they rank all their programs and requirements by priorities? This is a new thing. I am glad to hear this but this is the first time it has been done.

Mr. CARDWELL. We developed two budget levels this year. One was in keeping with an extraordinarily tight budget. We presented this to the Bureau of the Budget and to the President. We also developed a second budget which in the Secretary's view would, if the President could identify additional funds, reach into areas of higher priority. We did this for each operating agency and for the National Institutes of Health.

Mr. FLOOD. That is good.

Mr. LAIRD. It is very good. I hope we can see the guidelines.
Mr. FLOOD. That is a real guideline.

HIGH AND LOW BUDGET FOR EACH APPROPRIATION OF THE DEPARTMENT

Mr. LAIRD. Can we have that priority list submitted for all programs of the Department and have it put in the record, Mr. Chairman? Mr. FLOOD. Yes.

(The information referred to follows:)

Summary of high and low dollar budgets, fiscal year 1968

FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION

Difference between President's budget and low budget submitted by operating agencies

Activity

dent's
budget

Summary of high and low dollar budgets, fiscal year 1968-Continued

OFFICE OF EDUCATION

Elementary and secondary educational
activities:

78-317-67-pt. 5-3

+7,000 Continues program at about 1967 level; requires extension
legislation.