This was in fact I think the earlier model at least implicitly: scientists were hired and tenured by the institution, with the understanding that their job was to teach and do research. The institution-level nature of things ensured a kind of distributed, local funding of researchers. There wasn't a need to "move things to the states" because that's were things were at for the most part, and grants were seen as a way to fund research projects.
Now, however, institutions sort of exist as franchises or satellite branches of the federal government. So tenure is often seen as heavily dependent on funding with indirect costs, which generally comes from federal grants. The locality doesn't exist so much anymore because the local institutions have basically decided that the researcher is there to make them money, not that they pay the researcher to do research.
I don't necessarily disagree with the author of the article, it's just that I'd argue things have gone so far off the rails that we don't necessarily recognize when proposals are for something that in some respects is a return to how things used to be.
Regardless I think there's important things in the piece to think about. The basic focus — the lack of change in academics despite overwhelming evidence of its problems — is critical.
Now, however, institutions sort of exist as franchises or satellite branches of the federal government. So tenure is often seen as heavily dependent on funding with indirect costs, which generally comes from federal grants. The locality doesn't exist so much anymore because the local institutions have basically decided that the researcher is there to make them money, not that they pay the researcher to do research.
I don't necessarily disagree with the author of the article, it's just that I'd argue things have gone so far off the rails that we don't necessarily recognize when proposals are for something that in some respects is a return to how things used to be.
Regardless I think there's important things in the piece to think about. The basic focus — the lack of change in academics despite overwhelming evidence of its problems — is critical.