2. Measure faculty performance - research, teaching, etc
3. Good teaching?
Almost immeasurable!
Clearly the publish or perish system needs to be changed somehow. There has to be incentive for doing research that gives a thumbs up or down to past claims. If you're going to do it, it's on your own nickel. You would never get funding to do something so “negative”. As with everything you get what you provide incentives for even if its unforseen consequences. The “checking claims” part of science doesn't really have an incentive!
What is the historical picture of funding basic research? Would like your perspective.
The recent history is
1) WAR funded a lot of basic research.
2) a clear identifiable goal like the moon.
As to funding, I remember Govt gave lumps sums to National Science Foundation to go through peer review process. Then it was found that was too political and congress decided to fund research directly through legislation. That fixed it. What problem were we talking about?