Thank you for inviting me to participate in this meeting on strategies for U.S. competitiveness. You have asked me to comment on the status of relevant legislative initiatives.
At the outset, I would stress that competitiveness is not a partisan issue; it’s a practical one.
Unless we maintain our edge in innovation through a strong science and technology enterprise, the best jobs may soon be found overseas, instead of in our communities. Today's children may grow up and have a lower standard of living than their parents.
Providing high quality jobs for hard-working Americans must be the first priority - and in order to accomplish that, we must be proactive.
Last year, I joined Science Committee Chairman Boehlert and Senators Alexander and Bingaman in asking the National Academies to carry out an assessment of our ability to compete and prosper in the 21st Century.
And more importantly, we asked that the Academies identify the key actions necessary for success.
You all are familiar with the subsequent report, Rising Above the Gathering Storm. It charts a course forward that will help create a vital, robust American economy with good paying jobs for our citizens.
This report was the product of a panel of business and academic leaders, ably chaired by Norm Augustine. The work of the Augustine Committee was neither partisan nor narrow, and the Nation would be well served to follow their policy advice as closely as possible.
The report outlines a number of specific actions we can take to improve the innovation environment in the U.S. Many of these recommendations are familiar because they have been advocated by other blue-ribbon committees - such recommendations as increased funding for basic research, improvements to K-12 science education, and more scholarships and fellowships for science, math and engineering students.
This report highlights that our current Federal R&D investment strategies are not up to meeting the global competitive challenge of the 21st Century. The recommendations represent a challenge to the Administration and to Congress to take action now.
That's why I introduced three pieces of legislation last December that take the Augustine report’s recommendations and create programs to implement most of them in the areas that fall under the Science Committee’s jurisdiction:
- H.R. 4434 focused on ensuring that our science and math teachers are well grounded in their subjects and equipped to teach using best educational practices.
- H.R. 4596 focused on affiriming and increasing our commitment to long-term research, including support for graduate students and early career researchers.
- H.R. 4435 focused on speeding the process of transforming new energy technologies for practical use by creating a new office at the Department of Energy based on the successful DARPA model.
My purpose in drafting these three bills was to introduce something quickly based solely on the Augustine report’s recommendations and using the National Academy of Sciences’ original cost estimates.
I was not wedded to the specific language of these bills and expected modifications and improvements as the legislative process advanced. I simply wanted to build forward momentum for dealing with these issues during this Congress.
Unfortunately, my Republican colleagues elected to move at a slower pace. But they finally produced bills of their own this month that were marked up by the Committee two weeks ago.
The Republican bills were somewhat narrower in scope than my bills and were much less generous in authorized funding levels.
Following extensive negotiations with the majority, I believe that the version of the two bills that finally emerged from Committee, H.R. 5356 and H.R. 5358, are improved in both respects.
One topic not covered in these bills is the proposal to create a DARPA-like agency within the Department of Energy. I hope to see this addressed at a Committee markup on energy legislation scheduled for tomorrow.
The Gathering Storm report states that "laying the foundation for a scientifically literate workforce begins with developing outstanding K-12 teachers in science and mathematics". I believe the report got it exactly right and has identified teachers as the first priority.
Therefore, I am pleased that H.R. 5358, as reported, will implement the top priority of the Academies’ report, which is to put in place effective teacher training programs for new and in-service science and math teachers.
The modifications we make to the NSF Noyce scholarship program will transform it into much more than a scholarship program.
- It will spur reform to change the way colleges and universities educate new science and math teachers.
- Teachers who emerge from the program will combine deep knowledge of their subject with expertise in the most effective practices for teaching science or math.
- The new teachers will also receive mentoring and support during the critical early years of their teaching careers, when teacher attrition is known to be high.
Finally, the program is authorized at a level that would enable it to meet the goal of producing 10,000 highly qualified science and math teachers each year within the President’s 10-year goal of doubling the NSF budget.
In short, the bill now implements the highest priority of the Rising Storm report.
In addition, H.R. 5358 strengthens NSF’s major K-12 education program involving partnerships between universities and school systems. Emphasis is placed on professional development opportunities for practicing teachers, including support for master’s degree programs and teacher institutes.
My biggest concern going forward is that the education component of the President’s American Competitiveness Initiative focuses most of its attention on the development of math curriculum and places the new funding solely at the Department of Education.
I believe that this approach is taken mainly to enhance the math education component of No Child Left Behind. While this is important, it is different from addressing the broader science and math education needs the Rising Storm report so ably highlighted.
The other problem with the President’s proposal is that once new funding flows to the Department of Education’s math curriculum program, it will be hard to make a case for any additional new money to fund the key science and math education improvements proposed by the Augustine panel and included in the Science Committee’s legislation.
I also strongly believe that NSF is where this work should be done. NSF’s long history of accomplishment in this area, its close relationship with the best scientists and engineers in the nation, and its prestige cannot be duplicated by any other Federal agency.
I am concerned that the Foundation is not only excluded from the President’s education initiative but would see its K-12 science and math education budget under the FY 2007 request reduced by 47% below the FY 2004 level.
The Government-University-Industry Roundtable is holding this meeting today to identify ways it can help to improve U.S. competitiveness.
I suggest one important activity would be to help make policy makers - particularly in the White House - aware of the valuable expertise and history of accomplishment NSF brings to improving K-12 and undergraduate STEM education.
We need your help to make the case that NSF should have a central role in any Federal effort to improve science and math education in the nation’s schools.
The other bill reported by the Science Committee, H.R. 5356, addresses several of the Rising Storm report recommendations for supporting basic research and supporting the professional development of science, mathematics, and engineering faculty at the beginning of their careers.
Research programs are authorized at both NSF and the DOE Office of Science that are targeted for early career researchers. The programs authorized provide the multi-year support that is necessary for new faculty to become established researchers.
Also, the programs will encourage the kind of high-risk, fundamental research that leads to technological breakthroughs.
I am pleased that the bill includes a robust funding authorization for the Major Research Instrumentation program at NSF, which was part of my original bill.
This is a valuable program that supports the acquisition of major items of research equipment and instrumentation that exceed in cost what can be obtained through normal research awards.
Our two bills have not yet been scheduled for floor action in the House. Chairman Boehlert has been consulting with his leadership on when and how to move the bills, and it is possible this will happen during the coming week.
In the Senate, several bipartisan bills have been introduced, beginning with three bills, called the PACE bills, introduced by a group of Senators led by Sen. Domenici and Sen. Alexander. The PACE bill that is focused on the Department of Energy, S. 2197, has been reported by the Energy Committee.
The Senate Commerce Committee subsequently developed and reported a bill, S. 2801, which also contains a number of the Augustine report recommendations.
I understand that it is possible that the two Senate bills that have been reported could be combined and moved as a package to the Senate floor this year.
A final competitiveness bill, S. 3483, again with provisions related to the other two and in the jurisdiction of the Health, Education Committee, was recently introduced, and it may be marked up and added to the mix.
The way forward is cloudy, but progress is still possible, even in this short legislative year. My preference would be for the Science Committee bills to pass the House first and be used as the vehicle for the Senate.
This approach would ease the jurisdictional conflicts that could occur in the House if the PACE bill were to come over first. My counsel estimates that the PACE bill in its current form would be referred to as many as 10 committees in the House.
There seems to be a general agreement that we need to take action sooner rather than later. I have believed all along that the Augustine report is the best place to start.
When I introduced my bills last year, I said that they were a starting point. I want to make clear that I want to work with anyone in the House or Senate in moving this agenda forward.
I ask for the support of the Government-University-Industry Roundtable and that of your colleagues in spreading the word on the importance of implementing the Augustine panel's good ideas.
The question is this: are we willing to invest in our children's future? I certainly am.
We know what the problem is, and we have solutions. What we need now is the will to stop talking and start taking substantive action.
