Source: POLITICO'S MORNING AGRICULTURE, 5/6/19

Perdue's relocation plan for the agency, which some ERS members believe is retaliation for reports that are unflattering to Trump administration policies, has triggered a brain drain at ERS, your host writes today.

A steady flow of veteran researchers has left ERS in recent months, including six economists with more than 50 years of experience who left on one day in late April.

The number of non-retirement departures from ERS so far in fiscal 2019 is on track to be more than twice as high as the previous three-year average, according to data collected by employees.

Some current and former ERS economists told POLITICO they view the relocation as a form of punishment for the agency's findings that don't always align with Republican arguments on issues from taxes and trade to farm subsidies, food stamps and the environment.

"Some of the topics we were doing research on, the administration didn't appreciate some of our findings, so this is retaliation to harm the agency and send a message," said one ERS employee who asked not to be named to avoid retribution.

Others said it's an end-run around Congress, which has rejected Trump's budget proposals to cut ERS funding, reduce staff levels and end "low priority research."

Perdue and other supporters have touted the ERS and NIFA relocation as a way to save taxpayer dollars, bring the agencies closer to major farming regions and attract talented researchers that might be put off by D.C.'s high cost of living.

The secretary has also pushed back on criticism that the move will jeopardize scientific integrity, claiming that bringing ERS under the control of USDA's chief economist will make interference "less likely." (His office declined to provide separate comment about an increase in turnover or claims of political interference in the agency's work.)