The motto in academia used to be Publish or Perish. Since the advent of government funding of research, this has become Get Funded or Get Out.
Research universities tell newly-hired assistant professors in the sciences and engineering that they must bring in a certain level of federal funding (say, $500,000 per year) or they can expect to be looking for work elsewhere. (Heaven help you if you prefer to teach rather than do research—they can hire part-timers to teach.)
Note that I wrote federal funding. For some reason, a dollar from the National Institutes for Health (NIH) or the National Science Foundation (NSF) counts more than a dollar from a private source.
All of this gives the federal funding agencies tremendous power to set the agenda for for research and development in the universities. Researchers know that they have a better chance of getting funded if they tailor their research to the interests of the federal government.
I have been told by project directors at NSF that they do not want to fund "risky" or even "novel" research. They prefer to give money to researchers who have a "proven track record." That means researchers who have a publication record in an approved field. It helps to be associated with an established research institution. It also helps to have contacts at the funding agencies, preferably former students and colleagues who will look favorably upon one's grant applications.
Unfortunately for Duesberg, he has run afoul of the scientists who control the review process at the funding agencies. I doubt he has many friends or former students at those agencies who can steer funding his way. He has tenure, so U. C. Berkeley cannot fire him merely for not bringing in money; but the administrators there can find ways to make his life miserable.
I think a strong case can be made for getting the federal government out of the business of funding research—after we get them out of the business of funding health care.