[Senate Hearing 117-824]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 117-824
COMMERCE, JUSTICE, SCIENCE, AND RELATED
AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR
2023
=======================================================================
HEARINGS
BEFORE A
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
on
H.R. 8256/S. 4664
AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENTS OF COM-
MERCE AND JUSTICE, AND SCIENCE, AND RELATED AGENCIES FOR
THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2023, AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES
__________
Department of Commerce
Department of Justice
Departmental Witnesses
Federal Bureau of Investigation
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
National Science Foundation
Nondepartmental Witnesses
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
46-647 PDF WASHINGTON : 2024
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
PATRICK LEAHY, Vermont, Chairman
PATTY MURRAY, Washington RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama, Vice
DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California Chairman
RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky
JACK REED, Rhode Island SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine
JON TESTER, Montana LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon ROY BLUNT, Missouri
CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware JERRY MORAN, Kansas
BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West
JOE MANCHIN, III, West Virginia Virginia
CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana
MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi
MIKE BRAUN, Indiana
BILL HAGERTY, Tennessee
MARCO RUBIO, Florida
Charles E. Kieffer, Staff Director
Shannon Hutcherson Hines, Minority Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire, Chairman
PATRICK LEAHY, Vermont JERRY MORAN, Kansas, Ranking
DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California Member
JACK REED, Rhode Island LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine
BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina
JOE MANCHIN, III, West Virginia JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon Virginia
JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana
BILL HAGERTY, Tennessee
MIKE BRAUN, Indiana
RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama, (ex
officio)
Professional Staff
Jean Toal Eisen
Michael Bednarczyk
Jennifer Eskra
Blaise Sheridan
Brian Daner (Minority)
Allen Cutler (Minority)
Matt Womble (Minority)
Administrative Support
Angela Caalim
Sydney Crawford (Minority)
C O N T E N T S
----------
hearings
Tuesday, February 1, 2022
Page
Department of Commerce........................................... 1
Tuesday, April 26, 2022
Department of Justice............................................ 57
Tuesday, May 3, 2022
National Aeronautics and Space Administration.................... 113
National Science Foundation...................................... 113
Wednesday, May 11, 2022
Department of Commerce........................................... 167
Wednesday, May 25, 2022
Federal Bureau of Investigation.................................. 223
Wednesday, June 22, 2022
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.......................... 263
----------
back matter
Departmental Witnesses........................................... 303
U.S. Department of Commerce..................................
307........................................................
U.S. Department of Justice...................................
310........................................................
List of Witnesses, Communications, and Prepared Statements....... 451
Nondepartmental Witnesses........................................ 312
Subject Index:
Department of Commerce....................................... 455
Department of Justice........................................ 456
Federal Bureau of Investigation.............................. 457
National Aeronautics and Space Administration................ 457
National Science Foundation.................................. 457
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative...................... 458
COMMERCE, JUSTICE, SCIENCE, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2023
----------
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 2022
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 2:30 p.m., in room SD-192, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeanne Shaheen (Chair) presiding.
Present: Senators Shaheen, Leahy, Reed, Coons, Schatz,
Manchin, Van Hollen, Moran, Murkowski, Collins, Boozman,
Capito, Hagerty, and Braun.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
opening statement of senator jeanne shaheen
Senator Shaheen. Good afternoon, everyone. Hopefully you
are all awake. Madam Secretary, so nice to have you join us
today.
And let me just point out that we are going to be taking
questions in order of seniority. We have got a hybrid, so we
may have some folks coming virtually, but we are going to do it
in order of seniority. And that way we don't have to worry
about when people signed on to the virtual screen. So very nice
to be here with my Ranking Member, Senator Moran; and with the
Chairman of the Appropriations Committee, Senator Leahy, and my
neighbor, so nice of you to join us this afternoon.
The Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related
Agencies will officially come to order. And we welcome everyone
to today's hearing.
I had a chance last week, when I was in New Hampshire, to
meet with the New Hampshire Municipal Association, to hear from
towns all over the State about their pressing infrastructure
needs. And I am sure it will come as no surprise to anyone here
that the list communities have is very long, but at the top of
that list is access to reliable, affordable Internet.
And New Hampshire, like in every other State around the
country, you can't fully participate in American life without
reliable, high-speed Internet. Just ask the parent of any
school-aged child about navigating schools during the pandemic,
ask any small business owner, or anyone trying to schedule a
visit with their local doctor.
The pandemic lay bare what has been true, that broadband,
like water and electricity, is a necessity. And I know that we
all heard stories from families in our States about having to
go to McDonald's to get access to the Internet because their
kids couldn't get access for school.
By some estimates, more than 40 million Americans don't
have access to broadband. Those without access are
disproportionately low-income individuals, and in a country
like the United States, this just should not be the case.
In November, the President signed into law the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, a landmark bill that
invests $65 billion to expand broadband in our country. And of
that amount, nearly $50 billion will be administered by the
National Telecommunications and Information Administration, or
NTIA, within the Department of Commerce, and under the
jurisdiction of this subcommittee, a fortunate occurrence for
all of the Members of the subcommittee, and one that my Ranking
Member pointed out to me very early.
Together, these programs will be used to deploy broadband
to unserved and underserved locations, create more low-cost
broadband service options, install middle-mile infrastructure,
and address the digital equity and inclusion needs in our
community. I think it is worth pausing to note that this bill's
passage is due in no small part to the tireless work of many of
the Members of this subcommittee. In particular, our Ranking
Member, Senator Moran, as well as Senators Manchin, Collins,
Coons, Murkowski, Graham, and Capito, I think all deserve
recognition as they all participated in the group effort to
negotiate this law.
I especially like to thank Senator Collins who led the
bipartisan broadband working group with me.
And also would be remiss not to thank you, Madam Secretary,
because without your leadership, and your consistent engagement
with us, we would not be here today. So thank you very much.
There is still so much more work to do, as we all know, and
as you can expect, my colleagues and I on the subcommittee are
eager to see this money get out the door and to our States. We
know the release of the Federal Communications Commision's
broadband maps. I recognize that is not within your direct
control, but we look forward to hearing an update from you
about the mapping process and when you think those will be
ready.
Beyond questions of timing, I have also heard questions
from my State about the difficulty in navigating so many
Federal and State broadband initiatives. These programs often
overlap and they have different requirements. Cities and towns
across New Hampshire are looking for assurances that there will
be effective coordination amongst States and the various
Federal agencies administering broadband programs. That
coordination will be very important to serve more people and
stretch our dollars further.
We also know that creating low-cost options for reliable,
high-speed Internet is crucial. We look forward to hearing how
the Department plans to work with States to develop these
proposals as mandated by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
These challenges are just the tip of the iceberg, but I
would like you, Madam Secretary, to know that we on the
subcommittee stand ready to assist the Department as it
executes these investments. We all know the stakes. Effectively
managed it is no exaggeration to say that these investments
will transform the lives of tens of millions of Americans.
Madam Secretary, we know you understand the stakes as well, and
we very much look forward to your testimony this afternoon.
With that, let me recognize the Ranking Member, Senator
Moran, for his opening remarks.
opening statement of senator jerry moran
Senator Moran. Senator Shaheen, thank you. Thank you very
much for convening this hearing. It is timely. I am pleased
that we are doing this in advance of the decisions that NTIA
and the Department of Commerce will make, as they execute the
authorities that we have granted them in the bipartisan bill.
And I appreciate, always, when I see an appropriation
subcommittee and an appropriations committee engaged in
overseeing the activities of the agencies in departments that
we fund.
And Secretary Raimondo, I welcome you to this, your first
appearance before the CJS Subcommittee in 2022, and I look
forward to working with you in this New Year. I think your
insight as a Governor, a former Governor, is something that
will be of great value in this particular arena. But in many
aspects of the job you hold at the Department of Commerce.
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act gives the
Department authority over $48 billion in taxpayer dollars for
broadband programs. These programs cover everything from
enabling States to connect unserved areas, to furthering
connectivity for Tribes, to strengthening the backbone of
infrastructure that will make our goal of increasing access
possible.
The Department is at the forefront of this once-in-a-
generation investment. And I really do hope that this is the
time in which we are done saying, this is the moment in which
we are going to get speed and interconnectivity to places that
are underserved and unserved in this country. We cannot
continue to have new programs, additional billions of dollars
over, and over, and over again, while our constituents, while
America waits for the valuable use of the Internet.
Despite the significant funding allocated for broadband
deployment, it will still be a challenge to meet those goals.
We must make certain that Federal funds are well coordinated,
and do not contribute to overbuilding of existing networks
while some Americans would continue to lack access to broadband
altogether. I hear often from Kansas broadband providers about
the various challenges facing them when it comes to deployment.
One provider told me recently that a group of 19 families
in rural Ellsworth County, Kansas, have been asking for service
to be built out to their farms for years, with the promise that
they would subscribe to that service. Unfortunately, the area
remains a ``pending'' location under the FCC's Rural Digital
Opportunity Fund. The RDOF highlights the challenges that when
we pass legislation, it still doesn't mean that broadband shows
up in places across our States.
It highlights the challenges that States face on working to
plan to reach the unserved, and they wait upon updated maps and
attempts to navigate the myriad of broadband programs that the
Chair mentioned.
I recently had a conversation with Stanley Adams, he is the
director of the Kansas Office of Broadband Development.
Implementation of these programs is going to be an enormous
challenge. My goal in having a conversation with him, and our
conversation with you today, is to see if we can't get those on
the ground involved with those who are making decisions about
how the deployment should occur.
Having said all those challenges, I am excited about this
opportunity. A significant reason I asked Kansans to give me
the chance to represent them was a belief in rural America. And
one of the components of taking care of rural America to see
that it has a bright future is the access to broadband.
Fundamentally, the Department needs to be a partner, and
NTIA must work to understand the situation on the ground in
Kansas, and in each State. NTIA will play a significant role in
certifying that families across rural Kansas, and other rural
areas, maybe, those are words that are written on a piece of
paper; it is rural Kansas, but it is also many other places
that we wouldn't consider rural. The core parts of cities in
Kansas and across the country are in desperate need of
broadband as well.
We know that each State will have its own unique problems.
The challenges in Kansas might be different than the challenges
in New Hampshire, but whatever those differences are, Senator
Shaheen and I will overcome. And we will see that our goal of
broadband access is the same.
Both NTIA and States will need to ensure they have the
right people to provide expertise, ensure an effective,
complete build out, and oversee the significant investments for
the day. A lot of work to be done, NTIA I am sure will be
challenged by the scope and scale, but all of this must be done
right, and that resource is applied appropriately and
effectively.
Please know that I stand ready to work with you as we
connect the Nation. I thank you for being here today.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Moran.
Chairman Leahy, would you like to make any remarks before I
call on the secretary?
Senator Leahy. No. I am just--I am interested in hearing
it. I am one of those who live in a rural area, on a dirt road,
5 miles from our State Capitol Building. And through our days
of my broadband, I pay the highest amount, now that there is--
there are actually some days it works, not often, but some
days, and are mainly because the company doesn't give a damn
about ``last-mile'' stuff. But we will get into that.
Senator Shaheen. Okay. I thought maybe you were here to
give us an update that we have an agreement on Omnibus. No.
Senator Leahy. I will tell you about that after.
[Laughter.]
Senator Shaheen. Okay. All right; Secretary Raimondo.
STATEMENT OF GINA RAIMONDO, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF
COMMERCE
Secretary Raimondo. Good afternoon. Good afternoon, Chair
Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, Members of the Committee, thank
you for having me. I am looking forward to this discussion, and
it is nice to see you all in person.
As the Chair said, very eloquently, too many families all
across America can't afford the cost of broadband service, or
as the Chairman just said, they live in areas that don't have
access to high-speed Internet. And gaps in broadband mean gaps
in opportunity, fewer opportunities to learn, and work from
home, to visit the doctor, to stay connected with family and
friends.
Achieving an equitable future means ensuring that all
homes, all businesses, have high-quality connections at
affordable prices, and that users have the devices and digital
skills they need for meaningful use. The truth is, our economy
cannot fully recover unless all Americans can fully
participate.
That is exactly why President Biden set an ambitious goal
when he entered office. That goal is crystal clear. Connect
every American through affordable, reliable, high-speed
broadband.
I, too, would like to thank the Members of this Committee,
both Democrat and Republican, who worked with us to negotiate
the broadband provisions of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
I specifically want to thank you Madam Chair, Senator
Manchin, Senator Collins, Senator Murkowski, and every member
of the Committee. I have worked with each and every one of you
to negotiate this. And I cannot thank you enough for your
cooperation, and making this a reality, because of your work
and your commitment, bipartisanship, this law provides $65
billion to deliver reliable, high-speed Internet to every
American, lower the cost of Internet, and close the digital
divide.
Of those funds, as Ranking Member Moran said, $48.2 billion
are allocated to the Commerce Department's National
Telecommunications and Information Administration, NTIA.
Specifically, that law provides: $42.5 billion for the
Broadband Equity, Access & Deployment Program, which I will
refer to as BEAD in this testimony; $2 billion for Tribal
broadband grants; $2.75 billion from the Digital Equity Act,
and $1 billion specifically for middle-mile connections to
build the high-speed backbone.
Our goal at the Commerce Department is to make certain,
that at the end of our work, every single household, small
business, farm, family, and student in America has access to
affordable, reliable, high-speed broadband. And we are focused
on getting this done right, and giving States the flexibility
they need to ensure that this benefits everyone in their State.
As the Ranking Member mentioned, I am a former Governor,
and I live this. I live this. The needs of Rhode Island for
broadband are different than Kansas or New Hampshire, or Maine,
or Vermont, or Delaware, or West Virginia, it is different. And
so, we have to have flexibility to get the job done. In many
rural communities there is no broadband, no fiber, it doesn't
exist. So, in that case, our task ahead is to lay the
infrastructure and ensure people, in even the most rural
corners of the country, can get online.
In urban areas, it is a different set of challenges. On
Tribal lands, a different set of challenges. So the way we are
administering this program is with great flexibility, and the
law, as conceived, has built-in flexibility to allow us to
address each State's specific needs. If I deliver no other
message today, I want to be clear there is--we do not have a
one-size-fits-all approach, because I don't believe that would
be successful.
We are going to work hand-in-glove very closely with your
States to fund projects that will make the greatest impact and
achieve universal broadband access and affordability. This
unprecedented investment, in closing the digital divide,
requires input from a wide range of voices to assist our design
and implementation of the new grant programs. I cannot say this
enough, stakeholder engagement is absolutely vital to getting
this done.
And thanks to the historic and bipartisan investments that
you have made and enabled, we are moving towards our goal of
connecting all Americans to affordable, high-speed broadband.
We all know that for our economy, businesses, and workers to be
competitive in the 21st century economy, we have to get this
done.
So, like many of you, I am eager to work with you. That
Ranking Member Moran is exactly right; this will not be easy,
this is detail-oriented, this is a complicated implementation
hurdle. We, together, in partnership with States, and Tribes,
and stakeholders we will get this done, and fundamentally close
the digital divide in America. So thank you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Secretary Gina Raimondo
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and members of the
Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss the broadband
funding in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, better known as
the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
Too many families can't afford the cost of broadband service, and
too many families live in areas where they can't access high-speed
Internet.
Gaps in access mean gaps in opportunity: fewer opportunities to
learn and work from home, remotely visit doctors, or stay connected
with family and friends. Achieving an equitable future means ensuring
that all homes and businesses have high-quality connections at
affordable prices, and that users have the devices and digital skills
needed for meaningful use.
Our economy cannot fully recover unless all Americans can fully
participate.
This is why President Biden set an ambitious goal when he entered
office: connecting every American through affordable, reliable, high-
speed broadband.
I want to thank the many members of this committee--both Democrat
and Republican--who worked with us to negotiate the broadband
provisions of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, specifically you,
Madam Chair, Sen. Manchin, Sen. Collins, and Sen. Murkowski.
I'm proud that the broadband provisions of the bill ultimately
helped it to pass with significant bipartisan support.
Thanks to your work, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law provides $65
billion to deliver reliable, high-speed Internet to every American,
lower the price of Internet service, and help close the digital divide.
Of those funds, $48.2 billion is allocated to Commerce's National
Telecommunications and Information Administration.
Specifically, the law provides:
--$42.45 billion for the Broadband Equity, Access & Deployment
Program (BEAD). The program will award grants to states and
territories to fund high-speed affordable broadband for
households and businesses that currently lack access to such
services.
--$2 billion for Tribal broadband grants, tripling the funding for
NTIA's existing Tribal Broadband Connectivity Program.
--$2.75 billion to fund the Digital Equity Act. This provides NTIA
with funding for three grant programs to promote digital
inclusion and equity for communities that lack the skills,
technologies, and support needed to take advantage of broadband
connections.
--$1 billion for middle-mile connections to build a high-speed
backbone to help reduce the cost to serve households,
businesses, and anchor institutions.
Today, I'm grateful for the opportunity to update you on our
progress as we prepare to launch these programs in a little more than
100 days.
We want to ensure that broadband deployment is successful and
affordable in every corner of the country, in every type of community,
and for your constituents.
Our goal at the Commerce Department is to make sure that every
small business, farm, family, and student in America has access to
affordable, reliable, high-speed broadband.
We're focused on getting this done right and giving states the
flexibility they need to ensure this benefits everyone.
In Rhode Island, where I come from the challenge there is less
about physical broadband infrastructure and more about ensuring
affordability. It does no good to live in a location where broadband is
available if you can't afford to get it.
Many rural communities, on the other hand, have no broadband. Our
task ahead is to lay the infrastructure and ensure people in even the
most rural corners of our country can get online.
Essentially: it doesn't make sense to address Kansas challenges
with Rhode Island solutions. That's why the law has built-in
flexibility to address each states' specific needs.
Under the law, each state will get a minimum of $100 million, and
the remaining money will be allocated by need, based primarily on the
number of unserved households.
States will be given initial planning funds that they can use to
develop a five-year action plan, in collaboration with local and
regional entities, to cover everyone in their state.
We're going to work with your states to fund projects that will
make the greatest impact and achieve universal broadband access.
This unprecedented investment in closing the digital divide also
requires input from a wide range of voices to assist our design and
implementation of the new grant programs.
Stakeholder engagement is critical to getting this right.
Over the past 2 months, NTIA has held three virtual, public
listening sessions to help inform the development and implementation of
the broadband programs in the law. We've met with state and local
governments, non-profit and civic organizations, higher education
institutions, and industry.
Last month, NTIA issued a request for comment to gain further input
into the program design, policy issues, and other implementation
considerations for the programs launching this year. Comments are due
on February 4.
This work builds on prior broadband programs, including the three
grant programs funded by the bipartisan Consolidated Appropriations Act
for fiscal year 2021.
The largest of these is the Tribal Broadband Connectivity Program
(TBCP), which will award nearly $1 billion to expand broadband access
and adoption on Tribal lands.
We received nearly 300 applications from across the country ? from
large infrastructure projects to small Internet-adoption programs. The
requests amount to more than $5 billion in funds--a strong signal of
the intense need for broadband investments in Native American, Alaska
Native, and Native Hawaiian communities.
As I mentioned, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law appropriated an
additional $2 billion for the TBCP. Last month, NTIA conducted a Tribal
Consultation to receive input on this funding.
The Connecting Minority Communities Pilot Program will direct $268
million toward expanding broadband access and connectivity to eligible
Historically Black Colleges or Universities, Tribal Colleges or
Universities, minority-serving institutions, and nearby anchor
communities.
NTIA has received over 200 applications, resulting in more than
$833 million in funding requests for the purchase of broadband Internet
service and equipment, among other project goals.
Finally, the Broadband Infrastructure Program will direct $288
million in grant funding toward the deployment of broadband
infrastructure.
NTIA received over 230 applications, totaling more than $2.5
billion in funding requests across 49 states and U.S. territories.
We expect to make the awards for this program later this month.
Thanks to the historic and bipartisan investments you have made,
we're moving towards our goal of connecting all Americans to
affordable, high-speed broadband.
We know that for our economy, businesses, and workers to be
competitive in the 21st century economy, we need to get this done.
I'm eager to work with you in the months ahead and look forward to
answering your questions about the vital work being done at the
Department of Commerce to close the digital divide.
Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you very much, Madam
Secretary. We will now have a round of 5-minute questions. And
as I said, we will go in seniority order on the Committee, with
some people coming virtually. I will begin.
As we all referenced in our opening statements, this is
funding that we want to see get out the door. And the timing is
really going to be dependent on a number of things, but you
mentioned the Broadband Equity Access and Deployment, the BEAD
Program, which is really dependent on the creation of those FCC
maps. And the concern that we have in New Hampshire is not just
when that is going to happen, but also how accurate those maps
are going to be.
And I can tell you, previous maps that we have seen in our
State, and I am sure everybody has a similar story, have not
been accurate. They have not shown where the dead spots are,
and where the coverage really needs to be.
So can you speak at all--recognizing that this is not your
direct area of responsibility--but can you speak to what is
happening with the FCC, in completing those maps, because so
much of what needs to happen depends on when we get those and
how accurate they are going to be?
BROADBAND EQUITY ACCESS DEPLOYMENT (BEAD) MAPPING
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. So as you say, the maps are vital.
I mean, Senator Moran mentioned over-building. The mission
here, as explicitly laid out in the statute, is to prioritize
the unserved. At the end of this, shame on us, on me, if there
is any one unserved left. So, the maps will tell us who is
unserved and who is underserved. And that is why we can't
deploy any of this money until we have the accurate maps.
As you say, this is in the purview of the FCC. I will tell
you we are in constant communication with the FCC. I have
spoken with the Chairwoman myself, I have met with her. Alan
Davidson, newly confirmed--thank you--is already in contact
with her.
They represent that probably summer, you know, this summer,
they will have the maps. I will say this, I do have confidence
they will be, more accurate than in the past. The past, they
have been broad by census tract, these are down to the
household, and we are incorporating our census data from the
Commerce Department into the maps. But for a more detailed
answer, I would refer you to the Chairwoman of the FCC.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. I appreciate that. Obviously
one of the other aspects of that is what the challenge process
might be, if there is concern about accuracy. Can you speak to
what the Department is thinking about in terms of any kind of a
challenged process for those?
Secretary Raimondo. I think that--you know, again, that
this really is in the FCC's purview. Our role is take the maps,
run it through the statutory formula, get the State allocation,
and then run the program. But I think there will have to be
some, you know, challenge process simply because, as I said
before, we do have to listen to every stakeholder, and it is
$65 billion.
Senator Shaheen. Mm-hmm.
Secretary Raimondo. Like, I have told my team yes, you have
to go fast, but you really have to get it right.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. I appreciate that. As I
said in my opening remarks, sort of jokingly, but it was
serious, because in drafting this legislation we did choose the
NTIA to lead the program because of its crucial coordination
role with other Federal agencies, and particular with the FCC,
with the USDA, NTIA maintains regular contact with States
through their State broadband offices.
So how does the NTIA plan to address those coordination
issues? And can you assure States that there will be some
opportunity for input as you are developing these plans?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes, absolutely. So a few thoughts: It
is true, as you say, the USDA has some money here, Interior
does, Treasury does, we do. Our goal is to the extent possible,
have NTIA be like a one-stop shop. We cannot be asking
Governors, and mayors, and Tribal leaders to deal with the
alphabet soup of government. We have to make it easy. So the
way we plan to do this is we are going to have a single-point
person at NTIA in charge of every State, one person. So I know
when I want to know everything about New Hampshire, I go to the
New Hampshire person.
Right now we are in the middle of intense stakeholder
engagement. In fact, we have a request for comment, which is
open right now. I spent the weekend with the Governors at the
Governors Association, the weekend before with the mayors at
the Conference of Mayors, we are doing everything we know how
to do to encourage robust stakeholder engagement. The last
thing I will say is, the way this is going to work is every
State has to give us a State plan, which will be made public.
We are requiring them in that plan to lay out all the Federal
monies they are using for broadband so we can see it all in one
place.
Senator Shaheen. Great. Thank you. I am out of time; I have
lots more questions, but I know that many of my colleagues will
get to those.
So Senator Moran.
Senator Moran. Chair, thank you.
Secretary Raimondo, let me talk about the funding formula.
The initial Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD)
Program has an initial $100 million to each State, followed by
an amount to be determined by unserved areas in the State, the
purpose of the formula is to provide the States with the most
unserved areas with the most funding, something I fully agree
with.
One issue that I foresee is the uncertainty regarding
whether currently unserved areas are still going to be
considered unserved, if a separate Federal broadband program
like the FCC's Rural Digital Opportunity Fund has awarded
funding for those areas, but a network has not yet been built
out, creates the risk that some States could lose out on a
significant of money as RDOF awards cover broad swaths of some
of those--some of our States.
The risk is compounded if previously identified projects
ultimately fail--fails to deliver the money, RDOF money. So a
concern I raise with you is: Does RDOF, where they intend to go
but have not gone, does that eliminate that area from being
unserved? Will there be--maybe there is a response from you
before I go on. Maybe it is just an issue to raise with you.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Yes. So you are saying RDOF is
supposed to have covered these areas hasn't yet, will they be
counted as served in the map?
Senator Moran. Right; if those areas or those States get
left out, because RDOF may do something.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
Senator Moran. And hasn't done something. And I guess if
the--if the word is they may do something, it is also they may
not do something.
Secretary Raimondo. Right, right.
Senator Moran. We need to make sure that those broad swaths
of areas of States across the country are not excluded.
BEAD FUNDING
Secretary Raimondo. I understand. First of all, I agree
fully and completely. Again, my job is to make sure everyone is
covered at the end of this. By the way, this is exactly why we
are doing so much stakeholder engagement, and why we are
obsessed with getting to people on the ground, which is what I
told the Governors. I have to look into this and talk to the
FCC and get back to you. And I promise you I will do that. My
staff will follow up with you.
By the way, it is exactly the sort of excruciating detail
that we are in the middle of figuring out, which is why these
engagements and request for comment are so important.
Senator Moran. It is a reason I am so pleased Senator
Shaheen has called this hearing now.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Yes, yes.
Senator Moran. Instead of after the fact.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. I would say many of the policy
decisions, of which there are many, we are in the process of
figuring out how to implement, and that is why we are doing
this request for comment now. So I will follow up.
Senator Moran. Somewhat related to that, my comment and
your follow up is, does the Department plan to calculate the
funding allocations to States using any criteria beyond the
size of the unserved population?
Secretary Raimondo. So the formula is, as you know in the
statute, unserved, there is a 10 percent set aside for places
that are hard to reach, and that are expensive, so that is
additional on top of--on top of the formula. And then we have
the digital equity grants on top of that, and then the middle
mile on top of that.
Senator Moran. I think my--my question just to plan in your
mind is, do I need to be concerned, or that there is some
definition of unserved beyond unserved, and maybe we will see
how that, I mean----
Senator Murkowski. Alaska.
Senator Moran. Alaska, just totally unserved, right?
Senator Murkowski. But it is one State, you know. Okay,
yes.
FUNDING ASSISTANCE TO STATES
Senator Moran. So we want to make sure that unserved means
that really it is unserved. Let me, before I lose my time, and
I hope to have an opportunity to ask some additional questions.
I am going to tell you the Kansas Broadband Development
Office--and that is the person that I think will be your point
person in Kansas--they have a staff of two, and their ability
to have the resources necessary early on to do their job is
important.
The law outlines that--how these offices can receive an
initial amount of funding, and dictates that the Department
aids these offices throughout the process of applying for a
grant and executing the program. Any explanation on what the
department already plans to do to support State broadband
offices during deployment? And how can NTIA allocate its
resources to prepare to meet what will be a significant demand
for technical assistance from the States?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Thirty-six States have broadband
offices, and they vary significantly in quality. The good news
is NTIA has a long history of working with these States, and
has a pretty good feel for who needs more technical assistance.
The way we are going to do this program is we are aiming
towards a May 16 Notice of Funding Opportunity. After that the
State has to give us a letter of intent that they want to
participate. Then there is a $5 million planning grant, and
that will then begin heavy technical assistance. And if you are
telling me, Kansas only has a couple of people I would think
that $5 million and heavy technical assistance will help shore
them up.
Senator Moran. But they are very high quality people.
Secretary Raimondo. I am sure they are. Yes.
Senator Moran. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Secretary Raimondo. I will be happy to follow up. And we
are out of time. I would like to visit with you, and get the
details of this.
Senator Moran. Wonderful. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Senator Leahy.
Senator Leahy. Thank you, Chair Shaheen.
Governor--I keep finding myself calling you governor. Madam
Secretary, I am delighted to have you here. I think you heard
that--in your State, and actually every one of us heard in our
States during the pandemic, with schools being closed, work
being done remotely, and all that. Then we had in just 1-year's
time, we had probably a 10- or 15-year change in society on how
we needed broadband.
We have a system in Vermont called Communications Union
Districts, CUDs, which allows communities near each other to
band together, so they can identify, they can finance, and
fulfill local broadband infrastructure needs. And currently 206
Vermont municipalities belong to one or more of these CUDs,
which is 64 percent of the State's populations, and is 91
percent of the unserved locations.
And it has been seen as a pretty good model of how you
create a community-owned entity to deliver broadband. Now, how
can these Vermont CUDs benefit from the broadband provisions in
the infrastructure law? And I ask that because you have rural
areas that do not have extensive financial histories. How can
they plug in and be able to use these new programs?
BEAD FUNDING TO VERMONT
Secretary Raimondo. Thank you. So as I said in the
beginning, the reason this program is structured this way is
because there is no one size fits all. And in rural Vermont we
are going to have to have a different solution than in urban
Rhode Island. Nonprofits, municipally-owned co-ops or utilities
are all eligible for these funds.
So your State will have to put together a State plan, which
we will have to approve, and based on what you are saying, it
sounds like though the Communications Union Districts would be
included in the State plan, and depending on the details, could
be eligible for funding.
We are trying to encourage competition, so we are asking
every State to have a competitive process. We are requiring
every provider who gets money to deliver an affordable plan.
And I think in a lot of rural places, it will be the, you know,
co-ops and municipalities that get the money.
Senator Leahy. Yes. I look at the fact. On the many, many,
many, many, many times that my broadband service is not
working, I can get in the car and drive 5 miles to my office in
Montpelier and have perfect broadband. But not everybody can do
that. If you are a child home from school, you can't.
Inaccurate broadband maps have hindered our ability to build
out our broadband infrastructure for years, if not decades.
We tried to update our data map. Would your Department
consider devising a mechanism that allows States to harmonize
data maps? So States like Vermont don't lose any strategic
advantage, use money with confidence by utilizing State maps
that already exist?
Secretary Raimondo. Well, I would say this. Now States
should be looking at their maps, you know, getting ready,
getting their teams ready, making sure the permitting in the
State doesn't get in the way, but the maps that we have to use
will be the FCC-produced maps.
Senator Leahy. Well, we should talk more about that,
because I want to make sure that these are accurate everywhere.
I mean, whether it is obviously in Rhode Island, in New
Hampshire, or Vermont, or Kansas, or anywhere else, because you
have the last-mile broadband infrastructure that is a
significant obstacle. And most our rural areas lack adequate
access.
The $65 billion made broadband available, including $42.5
billion for State broadband deployment, we need coordination of
maps. I don't expect you to have the magic answer right now,
but coordination of maps that work, and everything else, and
some way of facilitating this last mile.
Secretary Raimondo. Mm-hmm.
Senator Leahy. As I said, I can drive five miles from my
office, and have something that works every time. But if you
are a child in school, and what not, or an employee or
something like that, you can't do that.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. I agree fully and completely. And
hopefully, you know, the reality is in a lot of these places it
hasn't made economic sense for the ISPs to do that, and that is
the whole point of using this money to make sure the last mile
is covered everywhere. So I will look forward to following up
with you.
Senator Leahy. Thank you. Well, we will continue to work
with your office. And again, it is a delight to see you here.
Thank you very much.
Secretary Raimondo. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Leahy.
Senator Murkowski.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Welcome Madam Secretary. Good to see you. Thank you for all
you are doing, and for being so responsive on so many of the
issues that we have had discussions about. So you are talking
about the mapping and the last mile, as we have had many
discussions in Alaska. So much of our concern is with the
middle-mile infrastructure.
Secretary Raimondo. Mm-hmm.
BEAD FUNDING TO ALASKA
Senator Murkowski. And you know, we have got good support
within the infrastructure bill, a billion to deploy middle-mile
projects. So we are excited about that. But a couple of
questions on that, one specific to the mapping. I have got a
little bit of concern about the mapping requirements versus the
timeliness of getting funds out the door.
Everyone wants to get the money out the door, but making
sure that we have actually accurate maps I think is going to be
critical, particularly for us in ensuring the intent of the law
to serve the unserved before the underserved is met.
And so it is going to take a little bit of time to do it
right. We understand the urgency, but what I am hoping is that
we can get some assurance that NTIA is going to be sensitive to
the diverse needs that we have in different States to get to
the right solutions here. And you know, maybe this requires a
little bit of flexibility, a little bit of interagency
coordination, but we would hope that you are understanding some
of the challenges that we face in a State like Alaska.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes, I do. I mean, you and I have
spoken about this. Alaska is unique, having said that most of
all these States are, but I understand the massive geography,
the difficult topography, not that many people. We are not
going to put the money out before we have the maps.
Senator Murkowski. Okay.
Secretary Raimondo. We won't, we can't. You know, as I
said, there will be the $5 million planning grant, and we will
get to work, but we can't let the money flow until we have the
maps.
Senator Murkowski. And I appreciate what you have shared,
but I also know that I am going to have people back home that
are going to be panicked, because they are going to see other
regions of the country that might be receiving awards first and
figure, wait, we are going to get left behind again. What we
want to be able to assure is, we are moving with urgency, we
are doing--we are getting the accuracy that we need for this
mapping, and again, we are paying attention to this middle
mile.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes, I understand. Well, we will do
more stakeholder engagement. I mean, I think there is no
substitute for communication, and continuing to communicate
with the message that you say. I will say that, you mentioned
there is the billion dollar set aside for middle mile, which is
true, but Alaska can choose to spend its BEAD money on middle
mile as well. So if the Alaska broadband plan identifies middle
mile as the biggest problem, I would expect they will use much
of their BEAD money to build out middle mile. Plus, like you
said, the middle mile.
Senator Murkowski. Yes. Let me turn to Tribal broadband,
and the connectivity program. I am going to submit for the
record, a letter that the Alaska delegation sent to you, Madam
Secretary, regarding the Alaska-based projects that are under
consideration for the Tribal Broadband Connectivity.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Murkowski. You mentioned that there was $980
million in funding. This program had over $5 billion in
application by the deadline last September. We have got an
additional $2 billion in funding through the infrastructure
bill, but obviously the need is extraordinary out there.
So I am hoping that you can answer just a few procedural
questions here: With the additional $2 billion that is coming
for the Tribal Broadband Connectivity Program (TBCP), do
projects that have already been approved for funding that
haven't yet received any money, do they need to resubmit their
applications? And if so, how are you communicating that with
folks? Do you additional staff that you have added? How are
you--how are you letting people know about the availability
here?
TRIBAL CONNECTIVITY FUNDING PROCESS
Secretary Raimondo. So we are still figuring out the
specific answer to your question, which is: Do they have to
reapply?
Senator Murkowski. Right.
Secretary Raimondo. I think there is a lot of sense in
making them not reapply, for the reasons that you said, but we
are going through it, and I will have an answer shortly. We
think we are going to have to hire over a hundred people at
NTIA to administer all of these programs. And as you said,
there will be a single point person on Alaska. So we will have
to stay in close touch with them.
But you are right. I mean, I will say this. The $2 billion
maps with the $1 billion. So the money is for the same kinds of
things.
Senator Murkowski. Right.
Secretary Raimondo. And so we are looking hard at saying,
you don't have to reapply, and doing it on a rolling basis,
which is what we are doing with the $1 billion.
Senator Murkowski. That would be helpful if we can just be
in contact on that. And I am assuming that you are coordinating
with other Federal agencies, whether it is USDA, or others.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
Senator Murkowski. Or others, who have also got broadband
funding. As again, we had a lot of Tribal set aside, so how we
are working to make sure that everybody is in sync, is
important.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Yes. Thank you. We have, so you
know Mitch Landrieu is working in the White House. We have a
task force on exactly this. I meet regularly with Tom Vilsack
and Deb Haaland, our teams do, to do what you are saying.
Senator Murkowski. Super, thank you. Thank you, Madam
Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Senator Reed.
Senator Reed. Thank you, Madam Chair. Welcome, Madam
Secretary.
Along with the funding for broadband programs themselves,
in the Infrastructure Act, we set aside funds for administering
the programs. In fact, your response to Senator Murkowski about
how many people you are going to have to hire, underscores
that. But if we have to live under a full year continuing
resolution, how might this affect the roll out of the program?
FUNDING UNDER A CR
Secretary Raimondo. Yes, thank you for the question. So in
this particular program I don't think that there will be huge
disruption because the program has been funded, $45 billion for
the entire program. I will say, though, I appreciate the
question because it would be very significantly disruptive to
much of the rest of the work that the Department does, and work
that you all care about.
So--we wouldn't receive additional funding to support next-
generation of weather, climate, and space, weather satellites,
I know you all care about climate change deeply. We wouldn't
have additional money for the desperately needed cybersecurity
upgrades that the Department needs, and to mature cybersecurity
practices across the Department, we wouldn't have the money to
support the 2022 economic census, the absence of which could
reduce the census quality, which has great impact. We wouldn't
have the money to improve the National Weather Service's
Integrated Dissemination Program, which delivers forecasts,
watch, and warning information for public emergencies.
So it would be very significant and disruptive to things
that, in some cases are, you know, lifesaving, when it comes to
predicting these severe weather events.
Senator Reed. Well, thank you, Madam Secretary. There are
multiple aspects of broadband. One is the technical aspect of
having access to it. The other issue is being able to pay for
it. And we realize in communities like Central Falls, and
Olneyville, and I could list too many more.
AFFORDABLE CONNECTIVITY PROGRAM AND DIGITAL EQUITY GRANTS
Secretary Raimondo. Now he is talking my language.
Senator Reed. I know, I know. So how can programs like the
Affordable Connectivity Program, and the Digital Equity grants
created by the Act help low-income families get connected, and
make the most of these connections?
Secretary Raimondo. Thank you for asking the question.
Affordability is just as important as access, because what good
is it to have broadband in your neighborhood if you can't
afford it? What good is it, if it is in the Community of
Central Falls, but there is no hookup to your, you know,
housing subsidized high rise? It is no good.
So we are very serious about affordability. First of all,
every plan, every single ISP who receives any money from this
must certify to us that they offer a low-cost plan. And we are
going to define low-cost plan in a way to make sure it is
really low cost. Now, the FCC has the affordability program
that you mentioned, which is a $30 voucher.
Senator Reed. Mm-hmm.
Secretary Raimondo. So as we define low cost, we know that
means ``free'' for some people, so we are going to be looking
at that $30 number. We are going to work very closely with the
FCC to get that affordability program working, or encouraging
States to advertise it. And then on top of that, as you say,
there are the Digital Equity grants, I think in a place like
Rhode Island, which I happen to know very well, pretty much
everyone has fiber. You know, there is no rural Rhode Island,
so----
Senator Reed. Block Island.
Secretary Raimondo. Okay, Block--fair enough, fair enough.
But, you know, relative to Maine or Kansas. But in any event, I
think the money will be used for providing hookups to the
apartment building, providing computers for kids, providing
laptops, providing digital literacy skills; and so, I think all
of that goes to affordability in a way that will make sure this
is not just accessible, but affordable.
STATE PREPARATION FOR FUNDING
Senator Reed. Finally, quickly, what should the States and
other entities that are going to be beneficiaries to the
program, what should they be doing now for successful
applications?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. They should be shoring up their
broadband offices. You know, every State should be looking at
their broadband office. They should be looking at their
permitting policies to make sure that we can smoothly lay the
fiber and do the construction work we need to, they should be
thinking about job training programs. We are going to have to
train a lot of people.
We think we are going to create over 100,000 jobs across
the country with this. They should be doing stakeholder
engagement, you know, going to Block Island and finding out
what really are the issues. And they should be talking to us,
calling us to ask questions so we can provide technical
assistance.
Senator Reed. Thank you, Madam Secretary. Thank you, Madam
Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Reed.
Senator Collins.
Senator Collins. Thank you. Madam Chair. First of all,
Madam Secretary, welcome.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
Senator Collins. And I want to reiterate my appreciation
for your extraordinarily hard work with Senator Shaheen, and
myself, as well as other Members of the Committee, as we
finalized the broadband provisions of the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Bill last year. I think the three of us spent
endless hours negotiating, and it was indeed a pleasure to work
with you.
The State of Maine is ready to go. And the obstacle is an
issue that is already been brought up by Senator Shaheen, and
others. And that is that the FCC must complete its overhaul of
the broadband coverage maps. And that is really important
because the current, woefully inadequate FCC maps, would lead
to an inaccurate allocation of funding, and overbuild building.
The reason I am concerned, and signed a letter that the
Ranking Member, Senator Moran, circulated is that the Treasury
Department, which has jurisdiction over of the American Rescue
Plan broadband money recently issued a final rule that removed
a requirement that the funds be targeted to unserved and
underserved areas. Can you give us an insurance today that
Federal funds that we provided through the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Bill will be prioritized to unserved, and then
underserved areas?
FUNDING PRIORITY: THE UNSERVED AND THE UNDERSERVED
Secretary Raimondo. I can. The Bipartisan Infrastructure
Law which, as you say, we worked hard to negotiate, provides a
crystal-clear framework to prioritize unserved then
underserved. And so, yes, that is the way we will do it. Also,
I share, you know, you mentioned overbuilding. I mean, it is
vital that we first get broadband to everybody, and we are
going to do that so that we don't run the risk of, quote/
unquote, ``overbuilding and running out of money.''
Senator Collins. Thank you. There are two other issues not
directly related to this hearing, but under your jurisdiction,
that you probably will not be surprised that I am going to
bring up to you today. One has to do with the duties and
tariffs on softwood lumber. In November of last year the
Commerce Department, approximately, doubled the final duty
rates on imported softwood lumber from Canada, increasing the
rate to 17.9 percent. And that applied to sales made in 2019.
Just yesterday, Commerce announced an 11.64 preliminary
duty rate for sales made in 2020. Now, that is a reduction in
tariff rates, but I am still concerned that these high rates
will hurt a lot of home building in Maine, and Maine
businesses, many of which work very closely with their Canadian
partners at sawmills right across the border.
And it obviously also affects the availability of
affordable housing for millions of Americans. We used to have a
Softwood Lumber Agreement with Canada. It expired in 2015. What
is the Commerce Department doing to restart those negotiations
to bring stability to this market, help make homebuilding more
affordable for Americans, and reduce tensions with Canada?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Thank you for the question. I am
not surprised. I admire your advocacy. So, in this regard, the
Commerce Department's role is relatively limited in so far as
the assessment of these duties is largely, you know, formulaic
and mathematical. And we operate in a quasi-judicial capacity,
applying the formula to assess the duties.
I have, you know, reached out to USTR after our last
conversation. And you know, do support efforts to find a more
lasting solution to this problem, because as you say, you know,
whatever we do with the AD/CVD cases, it is temporary.
Senator Collins. I know my time has expired. I do hope we
will do a second round.
Senator Moran. I don't have control over that but I, too,
hope we do, because I have some tariff questions to ask myself.
And maybe, Senator Collins, we can talk to the Chairwoman and
see if we can have our trade ambassador in front of the
Committee before long as well.
Senator Coons.
Senator Coons. And thank you, Senator Moran. As you can
tell, Madam Secretary, this is a wonderfully collaborative
Committee that has gotten a lot of good work done under the
leadership of both parties. Over the last couple of years, it
has been a real joy to serve on this subcommittee. I am
grateful for your focused and effective leadership of the
Department at this moment of historic investment, in making
sure that Americans, Delawareans, Rhode Islanders, many others,
have access to broadband. Like the State of Rhode Island,
Delaware has areas that, I would argue, are genuinely rural,
like Block Island.
We have about 11,600 Delaware families that have no access
to Internet services broadband at all, but we also have
significant urban areas where affordability is the key issue. I
look forward to staying in contact with you. You raised a
number of issues, permitting, and the permitting process in
rural areas, skills for installers, servicers, and so forth,
and how we are going to update that, and making sure that
between what the Department does, and what FCC does, that we
produce a result that is genuinely affordable.
Let me just briefly ask. Do you think making structural
investments that reduce cost, rather than providing monthly
value vouchers is going to be important to ensuring
affordability for the long term?
ENSURING LONG TERM AFFORDABILITY
Secretary Raimondo. I do. I think it is a combination. As I
said, affordability is non-negotiable because if it is $100 a
month for broadband, it might as well not exist. You can't
afford it. I think it is hard to generalize because it is
different in every place.
Senator Coons. Yes.
Secretary Raimondo. So in some places affordability,
fundamentally means laying the fiber and, you know, subsidizing
the companies to lay the fiber in places that it doesn't exist,
so that it will be affordable.
Senator Coons. I look forward to working with you on that.
I couldn't agree more with our President's statement that the
economy can't fully recover until all Americans can fully
participate. As you know, developing a critical technology like
broadband, making progress towards 5G, and some day 6G,
requires voluntary standard-setting activities, and the
patents, and robust IP protection that underlie them to
encourage investment in R&D.
I want to make sure we aren't taking steps that would
weaken the patent system. We have worked well together on
advancing a balanced nominee to run the patent and trademark
office. USPTO, NIST, and DOJ Antitrust have recently published
a proposed revision to the existing policy on remedies for
standard essential patents that I think harms our national
security interest, global competitiveness, and threatens to
harm the patent system.
I hope you can commit that we will ensure participation by
Senate-confirmed leadership at NIST and PTO, and adequate
consideration of these sort of balance of equities moving
forward. Is that your inclination, Madam Secretary?
Secretary Raimondo. Absolutely. You and I have discussed
this. These are complicated and vital issues. I am hopeful very
soon we will have the Senate-confirmed Head of the USPTO.
Senator Coons. Me too.
Secretary Raimondo. And I think she will be terrific
engaging with us to figure this out.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Madam Secretary. Let me, last
point if I can. I am really excited that the House is taking up
their version of the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act. I
think getting the Innovation and Competition Act out of the
Senate with a robust bipartisan vote was one of the most
significant things we did last year.
Secretary Raimondo. Mm-hmm.
Senator Coons. And I am particularly pleased, the House
version includes $52 billion in the CHIPS for America Fund,
which would be a key boost to manufacturing, and our capacity
to do advanced manufacturing for semiconductors. Can you just
briefly help us understand, in a concrete and direct way, how
the passage of that bill by the Congress, and the enactment of
it, by signing into law by the President, will actually improve
our ability to compete with China and strengthen our
manufacturing base here at home?
CHIP MANUFACTURING IN AMERICA
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Thank you. I cannot overstate how
important it is. Right now the United States of America does
not produce on our shores, any leading edge, more sophisticated
semiconductors, zero. We rely upon Taiwan for 65 percent of
those.
I mean, need I say more? Those are the CHIPS we need in
military equipment, high-end computing, communications
equipment, and we are utterly dependent on one company in
Taiwan.
Senator Coons. Mm-hmm.
Secretary Raimondo. So I am out of time. We could go on
extensively. I won't. It is a huge national security need, and
I am very hopeful the House passes it this week.
Senator Coons. I appreciate your clarity.
Secretary Raimondo. And I hope it is bipartisan.
Senator Coons. I hope so too. I look forward to working
with you on it. And I appreciate your clarity. Thank you.
Senator Moran. Senator Boozman is next, followed by Senator
Capito, but I would guess that they are--I don't think they are
on--appearing by technology. So I call on Senator Hagerty.
Senator Hagerty. Well, thank you, Ranking Member Moran. I
appreciate that. And Secretary Raimondo, it is good to see you
here; thank you for being here today.
Broadband deployment is very important to my home State of
Tennessee, particularly in our rural areas. And I know that my
colleagues have had many discussions with you about that. I
would like to shift then to another area that is related to
that, and it has to do with our competitiveness with respect to
chip technology. And I hear a great deal about our chip
shortage at home.
I think that you are an advocate of making certain that we
are competitive in that arena. And what I would like to speak
with you about is the Federal regulatory burden that has to do
with permitting chip manufacturing here in the United States.
My colleagues have passed legislation that has put a
significant amount of money in place to support manufacturing,
but the process itself is something that is quite concerning to
me.
When I learned about the chip manufacturing shortage, I
actually undertook to call the leaders of chip manufacturers
around the world. Some of them came to see me, others just
spoke with me by phone, but when I asked them what stands in
the way of manufacturing here in the United States, one of the
greatest obstacles is the timeline for permitting here in
America.
And as I talked to them about it, they underscored the fact
that the rate of technology development in their industry is so
rapid that they can't accommodate a long Federal regulatory
permitting timeline. And I have a feeling that you probably
feel the same way about this, that you would like to see us
have a more concise, predictable, and effective regulatory
process. Is that correct?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. So I certainly agree with you that
we need to have a hard look at permitting, because in many
cases for these sophisticated projects, it could take years and
we don't have years.
Senator Hagerty. Mm-hmm.
Secretary Raimondo. So I am interested to learn more and do
more on how we can, as you say, streamline the process.
Senator Hagerty. I think we have a great opportunity to
work together. I heard the same thing about the process being
denominated in years, and again, the rate of technology
development just doesn't accommodate that. It makes us not
competitive with these projects here in America.
Secretary Raimondo. Exactly.
Senator Hagerty. So I have very recently introduced
legislation with Senator King, and with Senator Portman, to
expand the existing FAST-41 permitting process. It is a Federal
permitting coordination program, and we expanded it to cover
key technologies, including semiconductors, chips.
I think that the FAST-41 Program has been successful
improving the Federal agency permitting process for
infrastructure projects. And it was recently made permanent in
the infrastructure bill just passed. And my bill will allow for
key technologies, like semiconductor manufacturing, to fall
into that same framework, and using the existing Federal
program that is in place to help then, deal with the permitting
process.
That bill just recently passed the Senate unanimously, 99
of my colleagues joined me; so I am hopeful that it will pass
the House very soon, and that we will get it to the President's
desk for signature.
So I would love to get your commitment, Secretary, to take
a look at the legislation that we are--that we are passing, and
hopefully get your involvement in making it effective.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. I do commit to looking at it. It
sounds very interesting. I share the concern for the problem,
and I will look at it and get back to you.
Senator Hagerty. Yes. I appreciate that. And I think we
will find some great opportunity to make some real improvements
here for America. On a related topic, in December of 2020, the
Commerce Department took an important step to protect our U.S.
national security, and our economic security. When it added
China's Semiconductor Manufacturing Corporation, SMIC is how it
is usually called, to the Commerce Department's entity list.
COMMERCE DEPARTMENT ENTITIES' LIST
That is the list that restricts foreign entities from
accessing certain key U.S. technologies, as you know. The
Chinese Communist Party considers SMIC to be one of China's
national champion companies. SMIC has got very close ties to
the Chinese Military, moreover SMIC and Huawei, reportedly,
maybe teaming up to build a $10 billion chip fab facility.
Other Federal departments have noted that companies
continue to export important U.S. technologies to SMIC, because
the entities' list restrictions on SMIC are phrased too
narrowly.
In October of 2021, Reuters reported that the Commerce
Department disclosed to Congress 188 licenses valued at nearly
$42 billion that were green-lighted for semiconductor
manufacturing were for SMIC.
And yesterday, Senator Cotton and I sent a letter to you
urging your department to close the loophole, to broaden the
parameters so that we can shut this loophole down. And I would
look forward to working with you on getting those loopholes
closed, to ensure that the entity listings really accomplish
their intended purpose, and prevent Chinese Military access to
our key technology. So I would ask you to work with us to deal
with these foreign suppliers that may be undercutting the
situation.
Secretary Raimondo. May I reply, yes?
Senator Shaheen. Please.
Secretary Raimondo. So I haven't seen the letter, but I
will read it.
Senator Hagerty. I understand. Yes.
Secretary Raimondo. And get back to you.
Senator Hagerty. Mm-hmm.
Secretary Raimondo. I share your deep, deep concern with
doing everything we can to deny China our technologies; in
fact, since I have been Secretary, we have added 81 new Chinese
companies to the entity list, and they are effective. You know,
in the time that we have put Huawei on the entity list, their
revenue has been down by 30 percent.
Senator Hagerty. Mm-hmm.
Secretary Raimondo. So I am out of time. I will look at it,
your letter, and you know, get back to you.
Senator Hagerty. Thank you for looking at that with us. I
think we have some room to improve there. And I think if you
look at these two steps that we have discussed, making it
easier to permit chip manufacturing here in America, and making
it tougher for China to access our technology will have a very
significant impact on the national security.
Secretary Raimondo. Excellent. Thank you.
Senator Hagerty. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Senator Schatz.
SUBMARINE CABLES FOR CONNECTIVITY
Senator Schatz. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Secretary, for
being here. I know that you understand the unique
communications challenges that Hawaii, in particular, faces. We
are the most isolated, populated place on the planet. And of
course we rely on submarine cables for connectivity to the rest
of the country, and the rest of the world. But also we rely on
submarine cables for connectivity within the State. And that is
an important distinction to make, as we think about definitions
in the infrastructure bill and elsewhere.
And that is why Congress made sure that submarine cables
are an eligible expense for middle-mile broadband in the
Infrastructure Bill. Can I count on you to work with NTIA and
my office to meet Hawaii's broadband needs, which are
understandably different, but sometimes take 3 or 4 extra
minutes to explain?
[Laughter.]
Secretary Raimondo. Absolutely, yes. In fact, I was with
Governor Ige this weekend. I spoke to the Governors about
broadband, and he brought this up specifically, and I expect
that this will be in Hawaii's plan through the BEAD, you know,
process. But absolutely we will work with them.
TRIBAL CONNECTIVITY FUNDING
Senator Schatz. Thank you very much. As Chairman of Indian
Affairs, I appreciate that the department has been working hard
to implement the first round of funding for the Tribal
broadband connectivity program, but there are still challenges
in pushing the money out quickly enough, and with the
flexibility needed for the unique needs on the ground. What
have you learned from the first round? And what can Congress do
to ensure that funds in this coming round are issued as quickly
as possible?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Thank you for the question. And I
acknowledge that we are a little bit behind on those Tribal
deadlines, but as I said to the Chair, our mantra is, ``Get it
right.'' What have we learned? We learned that we had to cure
about 70 percent of the initial applications from Tribal
communities, which means a lot of technical assistance, and
that takes time.
And so, we do that, we have learned how to do it, but it
does take time, and we want to make sure if everyone is going
to participate, we want to give the Tribes a chance to get the
money, which means we have to help them improve their
proposals.
Secondly, we have learned that you have to really do
stakeholder engagement because the needs and conditions in
Tribes are just different. And so, we have to get out in front
of it and listen even more. I will also say, on a personal
level, I have learned just how heartbreaking this is. 50
percent of people on Tribal lands have no broadband, and I have
heard people tell me stories of a teacher having to get in her
car and drive school worksheets once a week to the kids,
because otherwise they couldn't go to school at all. So we are
very deeply committed to it.
Senator Schatz. Thank you. And I think a couple of
thoughts. First, Tribal consultation, consultation with native
peoples, because the people of Hawaii are not a federally
recognized Tribe, but still have trust obligations under--under
Federal law. But Native consultation is the key principle here,
and it could be turned into a kind of TA, and that is fine. But
it does seem to me that the consultation on the frontend is
both logistically smart, but it is also consistent with Federal
policy, which is to enable Tribal consultation, and the sort
of, ``nothing about me without me'' and understanding that some
of these Tribes have extraordinary resources, and no problem to
apply for a Federal grant.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes, yes, yes.
Senator Schatz. Some of them don't. Some of them, the
librarian is the sheriff, is the--you know, and people are
trying their very best to do multiple jobs in extraordinarily
difficult circumstances. So I appreciate your attention to
that.
COASTAL RESILIENCE AND HABITAT FUNDING
Let me finish with NOAA. I really appreciate your passion
for oceans. We share that passion, only one of us is from the
Ocean State. And so I really appreciate the work you are
willing to do. The Infrastructure Bill has $1.3 billion over 5
years for Coastal Resilience and Habitat Funding.
If you can just give me a couple of thoughts about how you
are thinking about that? And then specifically, to the extent
that it is infrastructure, how you are going to work with DOT,
and the Army Corps, and think through, you know, green
infrastructure, not as a slogan but as, for instance, a better
coastal inundation prevention strategy, than some of the stuff
that the Army Corps is doing in the first instance.
And that this idea of ecosystem services is not some pie-
in-the-sky, you know, conservationist term, it is actually a
pretty smart way to manage risk if we do it right. So could you
give me your thoughts on that?
Secretary Raimondo. I mean, you said it much better than I
ever could. And in this respect, we have the 18 programs
related to costal resiliency, which are vastly oversubscribed,
well run through our existing NOAA offices, hugely
oversubscribed. So, this additional money we plan to run
through the existing NOAA program offices and meet the need
that previously has gone unmet.
We are targeting, you know, summer to start getting this
money out the door, but it is intended to do what you said. You
know, and I did see this in Rhode Island. Like, resiliency, and
adaptation, and planning is--you know, communities know how to
do it. They do--they need our help and our money to do it.
Senator Schatz. Thank you very much.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Schatz.
Senator Manchin would like to ask questions, right now he
is still in an energy hearing, but both Senators Collins,
Moran, and myself have expressed an interest in a second round.
So we will go ahead with that. And when Senator Manchin comes
on, we will go to him for questions.
JOB CREATION FOR INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMS
I would like to pick up first on the workforce question,
because you pointed out you are going to need to hire over a
hundred people just in NTIA to administer the infrastructure
programs. So I have heard that in New Hampshire, as we are--as
communities are thinking about how to make better use of the
funding that is coming in from the infrastructure proposal. And
as we think about how do we get all of the workers who are
going to execute the BEAD Program: How are we going to get the
small businesses that are going to provide the ISP companies
that we are going to need?
So can you talk a little bit about your thinking on this?
And how you see us being able to ramp up to do that; because in
States like New Hampshire, that is a huge challenge?
Secretary Raimondo. So let me try to answer it and make
sure I am answering that question. As I said earlier we--our
number suggests, we think we can create between 100,000 and
200,000 jobs in deploying the $65 billion. And that is across
the map, you know, construction jobs, technician, technical
jobs, everything that you have said.
As a result, we are allowing for flexibility for States to
use their BEAD money to do, for example, apprenticeships, job
training, recruiting, for exactly this reason. So we are
encouraging States, and the digital equity money as well, the
additional money. So we are encouraging States when they are
putting together their plan, it is not just about laying fiber,
it is about: What are the workforce needs that you will have?
And what are the, you know, worker training and other
initiatives that you are going to invest in, in order to meet
those needs?
Senator Shaheen. And are you going to be providing any kind
of guidance, modeling, examples, and how do you envision
working with the SBA, for example, who is going to be
important, I would think, in helping some of those small
businesses to develop, who can actually be in charge of hiring
the workers to do the deployment.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. So again, I keep saying technical
assistance, but I can't say it enough. I mean, this is going to
be very important. We are hiring 120 people in NTIA to do just
this program. That is in addition to what they already have,
that is in addition to the other resources in Commerce. We are
going to have to really, in a very hands-on, granular way, work
with States, absolutely provide them support. We are having
community of practice meetings, we are sharing best practices,
we are going to loop in the Labor Department, and offer
guidance and help with, how to do apprenticeship programs, et
cetera. We have already started to do that, but it is that,
that will be a huge--that is what we have to do.
Senator Shaheen. I am really pleased to hear that because I
think that is going to be one of the biggest challenges of this
program.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. By the way, I will say, I think
there is a huge opportunity here for women and people of color,
because if you look at who traditionally does these kinds of
jobs----
Senator Shaheen. Oh, absolutely.
Secretary Raimondo. It is disproportionately, not women and
people of color. And so deploying this much money, and creating
over 100,000 jobs, it is also about equity, and I am passionate
about this piece of the work.
MAXIMIZING FUNDING EFFICIENCY FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
Senator Shaheen. Great. That is great to hear. I talked
about talking to our Municipal Association in New Hampshire,
and one of the questions that I got was, and I think maybe you
and I talked about this a little bit, but that is how States
local governments can maximize efficiency as they are looking
at the funding that is coming in.
For example, we have a lot of communities that are going to
be using the water and sewer money, they are going to be
looking for the broadband money, they are going to be looking
for transportation funding. And for a lot of those, they are
going to traverse the same route.
Secretary Raimondo. Mm-hmm.
Senator Shaheen. So their question was: How can we
coordinate those activities so that we know the money is coming
so we can plan to do? If there are pipes and lines going to a
certain area so that we can plan to do that digging all at
once.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. So this is a real challenge. As I
said, the President has a task force which is led by Mitch
Landrieu. We meet weekly trying to coordinate on our end to
avoid exactly what you are talking about. And you know, as I
say, we are already meeting weekly, we are reaching out, we are
trying to make it one-stop shop, I don't think there is a
silver bullet on this. I think it is about being vigilant and
in constant communication with these States.
And now, somebody asked: What can Governors be doing now?
This was my message to Governors: Like, figure out how we
change permitting now. Or we don't want to be ripping up the
same road 3 times in a year. You live that as Governor too. So
we are asking Governors to start planning now to avoid some of
these issues.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
Senator Braun.
GOVERNMENT SPENDING
Senator Braun. Thank you, Madam Chair. Good to have this
discussion. I know when I travel, all the 92 counties in
Indiana, I hear three themes constantly, workforce, we are not
here to talk about that, affordable housing, and rural
broadband. And that is not to mention what I think is probably
the biggest issue we should be grappling with. And it is the
high cost of health care, because in running my own company, it
was the thing that ended up coming into the C-suite because it
never seems to get any better.
I think that is because we got a very uncompetitive health
care industry. Let us focus here. Let us focus on
appropriations. Let us put a little context into the whole idea
of appropriating.
Since I joined the Senate we have appropriated more dollars
outside of the appropriations process in this Committee than
within it. This includes more than $3.8 trillion we spent on a
bipartisan COVID bill, $1.9 trillion on ARPA. Additionally, the
Infrastructure Bill increased discretionary spending by $415
billion over the previous highway funding baseline, adding a
net deficit of $256 billion.
Put this in context, when it came through '08/'09, we spent
$800 to $900 billion. And that was a real systemic, economic
issue. And that seems like chump change in this day and age. I
think the process is broken. We don't do regular order. I mean,
we are talking about continuing resolutions because we have not
had the ability and the political will to get this done by
September 30 of 2021.
I mean, it is a system that has just gone completely out of
control. And I will put one other doozy in there. Just a little
over 3 years ago, we were $18 trillion in debt, now we are
nearly 30. And I think the American public needs to realize
that coming out of World War II, the highest percentage of debt
we had ever taken on as a country. We were savers. We were in
investors. We paid all of that off and built the interstate
highway system.
That seems like a big story of fiction now when we have
built in a trillion, now close to $1.5 trillion structural
deficits, largely driven by the gimmick of the biggest things
we spend money on here, would be not on discretionary, but non-
discretionary. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, other
things we so kind of ingeniously put on autopilot and don't do
budgeting regular order anymore.
What do you think needs to be done? We need rural
broadband. We would be much smarter block-granting that to the
States, because do you know what they do? They have balanced
budget amendments. Do you know what they do? I was on the
Budget, or on Ways and Means, and Roads and Transportation in
Indiana for 3 years, you always make your ends meet because you
are either statutorily, or by constitution, have to do it.
I would like your opinion, not on broadband. How do you get
this back into balance, when in my 3 years here, so many people
come to this institution wanting more, and don't even realize
that the worst news is down the road? When the Medicare Trust
Fund goes completely bust in 4-and-a-half years, after paying
into it since the '60s, Social Security in 10 or 11 years,
actuarially we have known it all, we have no political will.
I think someone in this room told me that in one of our
first budget meetings that is what we lack mostly. I would like
your opinion. You are in the midst of it. We are feeling no
current pain. How do we get this institution back into a
respectable place where people can count on it in the long run?
Secretary Raimondo. Well thank you, Senator. I would say,
as a Governor, I had to balance the budget every year, and run
a State every year, and balance the budget. And so I have had
that experience. I will also say 2008/2009, the economy
struggled, people really struggled for 10 years after that. I
was a Governor in the wake of that. And for years we had to
make cuts because that stimulus wasn't quite big enough. And so
that is why President Biden has really been leaning forward to
say let us make investments.
The issue that I am here to talk about, broadband, I don't
think of it as spending money, I think about it as investing. I
used to run a business too. These are investments, whether you
are investing in roads, or bridges, in broadband, childcare so
women can work. These are productivity-enhancing GDP, improving
worker, enabling investments. I am all for accountability, I am
all for responsibility, I am all for transparency, but I do
think we need to invest in growth.
Senator Braun. Real quickly, because time has expired, not
by much, we generally go beyond this. But you are correct, a
return on a tangible investment makes sense, but you have got
to remember what it is driving our current deficits would not
be for tangible investments like infrastructure that you are
referring to.
When you start making the argument that an intangible
investment is somehow part of what we need to do. That is more
what I would call, spending. You need to do some of that. The
thing that kept your State's finances in order was probably
your good stewardship along with some really good guardrails.
And until we have that here, your job is going to be very
tough. Future generations, I think, have a lot to worry about,
about what this looks like 5 to 10 years down the road. Thank
you.
Secretary Raimondo. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Braun.
Senator Van Hollen.
COMPETITION AND AFFORDABILITY
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Welcome Madam Secretary, and thanks for your good work.
Secretary Raimondo. Nice to see you.
Senator Van Hollen. Nice to see you. And we appreciated in
Maryland, Deputy Secretary Graves' recent visit to Baltimore.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
Senator Van Hollen. Where he met with Maryland's four
HBCUs. All of them have applied for the Connecting Minority
Communities Pilot Program, and we are working with them on
those applications. We are also pleased that he joined us in
Howard County where their Economic Development Authority put
together a consortium that is a finalist in the Build Back
Better Regional Challenge, to create a cybersecurity focused
workforce pipeline. So thank you for the Department's attention
on all of these ongoing efforts.
And I was listening to your testimony, thank you for the
work you are doing on the broadband front, high speed Internet.
The State of Maryland is already using $300 million from the
American Rescue Plan for that purpose around the State, as are
a number of our municipalities, including Baltimore City.
But the additional funds in the Infrastructure
Modernization Program will help us all finish the job. And I
wanted to delve a little bit more into the affordability part
of access to high-speed Internet, because we know you need a
tablet, you need a reliable connection, but you need to be able
to afford it.
Secretary Raimondo. Mm-hmm.
Senator Van Hollen. And in many places in Maryland, a
community might have a single provider where services are just
unaffordable at the end of the day. You have monopoly provider,
no competition, and the prices are too high for many families.
And the middle-mile program can, I think, help relieve that
issue. And I heard you in response to Senator Murkowski's
question; make the point that a State could choose other
resources in the BEAD Program for that purpose. Is that right?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes, absolutely, yes.
Senator Van Hollen. Right. And would you agree that if we
are going to invest billions of dollars in building out our
broadband infrastructure, that at the end of the day it does
have to be affordable for everybody so that we are not having
to come back, and provide new, fresh subsidies so people can
afford the service?
Secretary Raimondo. Absolutely. Yes. As I have said
earlier, affordability is core, it is of no use to you or your
family to have Internet for $80 a month, $100 a month, and we
are going to have to look at this. We are requiring competition
in every--in every State plan--in every State they have to have
competition. We are hoping that the money we are providing,
which could be to utilities, co-ops, middle-mile providers,
nonprofits will encourage more competition.
We are requiring everyone--every ISP provider who gets any
of this must provide an affordable plan. So that is key. You
are not going to get anything if you don't prove to us you have
an affordable plan. And then finally we will be working with
the FCC and their affordability program. It used to be the EBB,
the Affordable Connectivity Program, which is $30 a month to,
you know, combine our efforts with their efforts.
Senator Van Hollen. Well thank you, Madam Secretary. Your
response sort of anticipated my next question. So these funds
will be available to all entities, to nonprofit entities, to
public entities, the private entities in order to create
competition. And what, for example, let us say a private entity
was going to receive some of these funds, a condition of
receiving these funds would be to agree upfront to affordable
prices being charged?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. They will not be eligible to
receive any of this money unless they first prove to us, NTIA,
that they are going to be offering an affordable plan.
GRANT AND STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Madam Secretary. My last
question just relates to the NTIA grants, and the BEAD Grants.
As you know, they are channeled through States. You were a
Governor. You know that sometimes municipalities or counties in
Maryland feel that they are not at the table when the State
makes those decisions.
Secretary Raimondo. Mm-hmm.
Senator Van Hollen. Can you provide some assurances that
the monies that flow through the States, and sub-granted to
counties that--that counties and municipalities will be engaged
up front in that process. That it is to say, a coordinated
process, not a top-down process.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Yes, I can. I have also lived
that. We are requiring a lengthy, extensive stakeholder
engagement, and requiring States to prove to us, and show us
exactly what that stakeholder engagement was. So first they get
a planning grant, and with that planning grant, they have to do
a certain amount of stakeholder engagement, including with
municipalities, including with consumer advocates, including
with ISPs. And we are going to be the arbiter of whether it was
enough engagement.
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Secretary.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Senator Capito.
Senator Capito. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you for
being with us here today, and thank you for your constant
communication with me. Personally, as this was developing, I am
obviously really excited about it.
SERVICE CONCERNS
About 10 days ago, I launched a project through my office
called Share Your Story. And I asked, in anticipation of all
the money coming into the State, and some of the misspent funds
from the BTOP Program in 2009.
Secretary Raimondo. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm.
Senator Capito. Don't want to make that mistake again. I
think you and I talked about that. So amazingly, I have got 902
stories.
Secretary Raimondo. That is great.
Senator Capito. These are from people all over the State of
West Virginia that are talking about where their issues are
with their broadband service. We have heard from schools, we
have heard from a school superintendent who can't even conduct
business at his own home. He has to go back to the school in
the middle of the night if something comes up with the school
system; businesses, but mostly individuals. They fall into a
packet of unserved, yes, so you think: Well, how are they
contacting you? Maybe the service at work, or something like
that.
Secretary Raimondo. Mm-hmm.
Senator Capito. Underserved or service promised
undelivered, you know, certain speeds promised, you are paying
for this but you are not getting it. And other things are sort
of regional, where certain areas that are more rural, or less
populous, have less service, or less availability. And then
some providers, who will remain unnamed, were highlighted in
this. So I am planning to use this to----
Secretary Raimondo. You can tell me later who they were.
Senator Capito. Pardon.
Secretary Raimondo. You could tell me later who those
providers were.
Senator Capito. I can tell you. And so I am planning to use
this data that we are re-contacting everybody, and use this
with my Broadband Council to help them fulfill their mapping as
they are moving out, because I was surprised, it was such an
overwhelming response, and very pleased. So it is called
www.capito.senate.gov/shareyourstories.
TIMELINE FOR SERVICE MAPS
And so I want to talk about something just really detail
here, oriented. You said maps by the summer, in your comments--
your written statement--you said that: We are prepared to
launch these programs in a little more than 100 days, because
as we get to share our stories, people are saying: Yes, you
have talked about how you are going to get us broadband, when
is this coming, because there is such an appetite?
Secretary Raimondo. Mm-hmm. Yes, yes, yes.
Senator Capito. So could you line out a little bit more of
the timeline?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
Senator Capito. Just briefly. Yes.
Secretary Raimondo. So first of all, we would like to get
the info from you to Share Your Stories.
Senator Capito. We will.
Secretary Raimondo. Because as I said, we are deep into
stakeholder engagement at the moment.
Senator Capito. Good.
Secretary Raimondo. So listen, this will be a challenge
because this is the way it is going to work. Right now we are
doing our request for comment trying to get what we can.
Senator Capito. Yes.
Secretary Raimondo. We are charging towards the goal of
second week of May, third week of May, to put out the Notice of
Funding Opportunity. So that is kind of the starting gate for
the States.
Senator Capito. Okay.
Secretary Raimondo. Mid-May starting gate, apply. They will
let us know if they want to apply. I am sure they all will.
Then we are going to provide them with a $5 million planning
grant, but the--and then they start working on their State
plan. And it will take them time, it will take them months to
do their State plan. They have to do stakeholder engagement
that takes months. I was with the Governors the other day--
Senator Capito. Does the stakeholder engagement have to
begin in May? Can they be doing that now?
Secretary Raimondo. They should be doing it now, but they
can do it now. They can do it now, yes, they can and they
should.
Senator Capito. Okay. Forms the document and--
Secretary Raimondo. Exactly, exactly. But, you know, I was
with the Governors on Saturday, and they are like: We are ready
to go now. We want our money now. I am like--
Senator Capito. Right.
Secretary Raimondo [continuing]. Respectfully you're not.
Have you checked this box on permitting? Have you checked this
box on building out your broadband office? Have you really done
consultation with the Tribes, and the ISPs, and the
municipalities; but here is the nut of it, Senator. We need the
FCC to produce the maps--
Senator Capito. Right.
Secretary Raimondo [continuing]. Before we can even run the
formula to figure out how much money every State has.
Senator Capito. Right.
Secretary Raimondo. And I don't know. I mean, the FCC
Chairwoman testified to June, they are telling us summer. I
hope it is summer, and if it is, then we can get to work
thereafter.
Senator Capito. Yes. I mean, obviously sooner, and the
sooner the better, you know that. I mean, you know the--but we
want to do it right. We want to do it accurately.
I know there have been a lot of questions on this, and
certainly in the Share Our Stories I saw this, and I alluded to
it. There are areas that are sort of in the fine line of
underserved and unserved. They may have availabilities but it
is a--you know, a $200 a month satellite availability that in
the mountains of West Virginia, a lot of times people are
getting kicked off or other things.
Secretary Raimondo. Mm-hmm.
Senator Capito. So I was supposing that you were going to
be planning for those gray areas. I think Senator Moran was
sort of getting to that in his question.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. So you know, we look at the
speeds, below 25/3 is unserved.
Senator Capito. Right.
Secretary Raimondo. Below 120 is underserved. We are also
going to rely on the Governors in the local broadband offices.
Senator Capito. Mm-hmm.
Secretary Raimondo. I mean, they know. They know.
Senator Capito. Right.
Secretary Raimondo. In West Virginia, you know.
Senator Capito. Right.
Secretary Raimondo. Where is it spotty? Where is it
insufficient? And so that is why we are asking these States to
put together plans. And we are relying on the States to tell
us: Hey, I don't care what your maps say. I am telling you this
cluster has poor service. And that is why we want to use our
money to connect this cluster, or run fiber there.
Senator Capito. Yes.
Secretary Raimondo. And a lot of what you are talking
about, those technologies, they probably need fiber--
Senator Capito. Right.
Secretary Raimondo [continuing]. Which is what we are doing
here so it is high quality.
Senator Capito. Right. All right; I think my time is up,
unfortunately. I had about 20 more questions.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Senator Moran.
Senator Manchin. Hello.
Senator Shaheen. Senator Manchin.
Senator Manchin. Right. I think it is my turn.
Senator Shaheen. We didn't know you were--
Senator Manchin. Is it?
Senator Shaheen. We didn't know you were on.
Senator Manchin. I just left the other meeting to come here
to be on this, and it is such an important issue. And I heard
Shelley talking some things, and I can take it at the same
level, but you know, we have a lot of concerns. So is it my
turn?
Senator Shaheen. Yes.
Senator Manchin. Okay.
Senator Shaheen. Wait a minute, before you start. Let us
see if we can figure out what is going on with the system.
[Discussion off the record.]
Senator Shaheen. Joe, you are on.
Senator Manchin. Okay. Okay, Jeanne, thank you so much. I
appreciate. I know, I know that we thought we had hooked up,
but anyway.
INSUFFICIENT MAPPING AND COVERAGE
Let me just, Secretary Raimondo, thank you for being here.
Let me take you back a ways, on how this all came about. In
October 2016, I brought Chairman Wheeler, because they kept
telling us we were covered. I know Shelly has gone over. We
both have been on top of this and trying to make this work
because I couldn't figure out why they were saying: Oh no, your
maps are covered, your maps are good. You are covered in this
area.
So I brought Chairman Wheeler to Tucker County and we were
brought at the vocational school and he said--he was there, and
it was showing that we had good coverage in this area with the
maps that the FCC had.
So I told him at that time, I said: Why don't you go back
to your office and check to see if you have any message, or
whatever, and just use any phone you want to, or any carrier,
because it is shown that we have good coverage here. And it
brought to light that he knew something was wrong. And I said--
I said, Mr. Chairman, this is happening all over our State.
So we started these tests, and we started challenging every
school, every area, and it was unbelievable. I know Shelly's
office has done the same. It is just unbelievable the response
that we received. And we start pushing, and pushing, and
pushing these maps. Then they said they couldn't pay for the
maps, and they didn't. Really it was reluctant to fix--to
upgrade these maps.
Well, rural America was getting left behind, rural West
Virginia and Appalachia was definitely left behind. So we put
some things in this piece of legislation as we were working the
Infrastructure Bill, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill, to
make sure that we wouldn't get left behind this time. And we
said that these areas that have no coverage whatsoever ought to
be the highest priority. And I just wanted to make sure that we
are on track, and that you are all coordinating it with the
FCC, is on track to make sure that is where the first
assistance is going to go, and the highest need that there is
in the country is in the areas that have no coverage
whatsoever.
And Secretary, it came more to light during the--basically
this pandemic, than any time before. I had kids that couldn't
do their homework, they fell behind. Rural America fell behind
faster and further than any part of our country. We had,
basically, our veterans who couldn't do telehealth. We had
doctors who weren't getting reimbursed because they couldn't do
telehealth. They were doing everything by normal landlines or
cell service. So we had to get a waiver in order for them to
get reimbursed for telephone health, if you will.
So it has been a cadre of problems that we have had, but it
is said that basically there are at least 258,000 West
Virginians without broadband access, but we have had estimates
as high as 900,000, which is 50 percent of our population does
don't have connectivity, or not dependable connectivity.
So the only thing I can say: What steps are you taking in
the short term to make sure that these needs are going to be
met? And how can I help you?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Thank you, Senator. Okay, shall I
just go?
Senator Manchin. I have you, yes. Secretary, you are on, I
have you. I have you clear.
Secretary Raimondo. Okay. Well, it is great to see you,
albeit on a screen.
Senator Shaheen. Senator Manchin, I think you need to mute.
Try it again.
Secretary Raimondo. Okay. It is nice to see you. And it is
heartbreaking to listen to you talk. It is outrageous and
heartbreaking, and I am determined to work with you to make
sure every single person in West Virginia, every household,
every small business has high quality broadband, when we are
done with this work.
Yes, I will commit to you that this is an initiative by its
design, which is prioritizing unserved and underserved; you
know, underserved is maybe technically they have service, but
it is poor quality service. That is the explicit focus. That is
the priority. And that is where we are going to go, to the
unserved and the underserved.
And the reason we are setting this up so that the States
are in the lead is I am a firm believer that the States know,
in some cases, address by address, school by school, where the
dead spots are. And so, we are relying upon State broadband
offices, and mayors, and county commissioners, and Governors to
put together a plan to, you know, tell us what they think is
required in their State to provide excellent, high quality,
affordable broadband.
I also will say, and I mix that----
Senator Manchin. And if I can just----
Secretary Raimondo. Oh. Go ahead.
FCC MAPPING COMPLETION
Senator Manchin. Can I just chime in one time, real quick?
Basically, the FCC, Chairman Rosenworcel, how are you all
connected with her making sure, and what timeline does she have
on her maps? How are they doing on the maps, because we have
been speaking, and everything, trying to stay on top, and make
sure she has the necessary funds, and also the resources, and
help in the urgency that needs to be done, because we can't do
a thing without that?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. No, no, believe me, she hears from
me often. I have met with her. Alan Davidson has met with her.
We are in constant, constant communication. She is saying
summer we will have the maps, and so we are going to continue
to work with her to make sure we get them as soon as we can,
but even more important that they are accurate.
Senator Manchin. Do you know what I would ask you to do? It
might help, help you all determine where the need is the
greatest, and how you can best deliver the services there, and
funding is--as for best practices, every State has some areas
that have an area of best practice. We have a co-op that is
probably one of the better ones, not only in our State, but
probably in the country.
And if we can mimic that, and use their expertise in what
they have found, we could, hopefully, be a little bit quicker
in getting the services to the people in West Virginia. We have
a higher cost of getting service in a rural area. So basically
we have 10 percent, I think there was a 10 percent upcharge on
that.
Secretary Raimondo. Mm-hmm.
Senator Manchin. That would allow for the higher cost in
the more expensive, mountainous areas, the more rugged terrain,
if you would. These are the type of things I think we can
accelerate that. And if the State could let us know how they
are cooperating with you, and if our State of West Virginia is
working with you with their Broadband Council, using the best
practices, giving you some ideas of how we can accelerate that.
But until the maps come back, they can tell you what is not
covered right now, but I am hoping the maps are going to be
accurate enough to show you where the need is.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes, absolutely. We will work with your
State. I will keep all of you apprised as to how it is going
with your States. I would ask you to keep me apprised, how you
think it is going. You are correct, there is a 10 percent set
aside for high-cost areas, which are areas which are more
expensive than the average unserved area.
And I expect, whether it is West Virginia, Alaska, a lot of
your communities will be eligible for that plus-up, to take
into account just how expensive it is to lay fiber in these
areas.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much, Senator Manchin.
We will now, I think the status is we are into the second
round of questions. Everyone has had their first round. And I
have had my second round. So I will turn it over to Senator
Moran for his second round.
Senator Moran. Chair, thank you.
Secretary Raimondo, thank you for the conversation we had
earlier. I welcome the chance to have further discussions, as
you suggested, in regard to RDOF, and what FCC may be doing
that may eliminate or reduce the likelihood of many States
accessing the funds from the Department of Commerce.
And I think you have said this, but I am going to ask this
question just so that you can say yes one more time and then I
can find it in the record, if I have to come back to it.
[Laughter.]
COMMITMENT TO UNSERVED AREAS
Senator Moran. Will you commit that the Department of
Commerce will ensure unserved areas have access to quality
broadband service before investments are made in areas with
existing service?
Secretary Raimondo. I will. Here is my commitment. I commit
that at the end of this, every person in Kansas will have
access to high quality, affordable broadband. And so I commit
to ensuring that we are not going to spend money adding
duplicative service in places before making sure that everyone
who is unserved and underserved is covered.
Senator Moran. A more useful answer than a yes or no
response. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Be careful, Madam Secretary, because that
means every State in the country is going to want that same
commitment.
Senator Moran. I believe that commitment was made to
Kansans.
[Laughter.]
Secretary Raimondo. No, look. I can hear my staff saying,
be careful, but here is the situation. This money is explicitly
prioritizing unserved and underserved. That doesn't mean some
of the money won't go to places that already have coverage. And
by the way, that competition will bring down prices, and that
is not a bad thing. But what I will commit to you is, we are
not going to spend money, quote/unquote ``overbuilding'' until,
first, we are certain that everyone who is unserved and
underserved has coverage. That is the whole point of the
program.
Senator Moran. I might point out to my colleagues, any of
them who care on this topic the way I do, the legislation that
we passed altered the formula for the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, it used to be 90 percent, some RAN provision in
previous legislation that 90 percent had to be spent in places
that there were no service. And we lowered that to 50 percent
which troubled me, but we were unsuccessful in altering it, to
return it.
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
Let me ask just a couple of questions beyond this topic.
Operations and maintenance, it has become clear to me. I think
I was slow to recognize this. The money that we generally
spend, almost without exception is to build out the
infrastructure for broadband, but there is very few resources,
maybe some at the FCC that are for operations, and maintenance.
So what I have discovered with my rural carriers, my rural
telephone companies, when they build out these subsidy dollars,
this assistance to help them accomplish that, gets the
infrastructure in place, but still it is too expensive to
provide the service on an ongoing basis. And I don't think
anything in this legislation directs the Department of Commerce
to assist in those operation and maintenance costs.
But I would just raise this issue for you, Madam Secretary,
there is still something else that may get us the
infrastructure in place, but then it be still unaffordable on
an ongoing basis. And there may be something between what--I
think it is at USF that may be helpful in this regard, but that
may take some coordination between rural development, FCC, and
the Department of Commerce to pay attention to one more--it
would be sad if we got the infrastructure in place, but still
remained unaffordable to provide the service throughout the
future years.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. I will look into that, and I
appreciate it. I mean, obviously the hope here is that we are
providing an enormous amount of money to help defray the cost
of laying the broadband and the infrastructure. And we are
requiring the providers who receive the money to guarantee a
low-cost plan.
Having said that, I hear what you are saying. I will also
say this, please be involved in creating your State's plan. So
whether it is overbuilding, or making sure we get to everybody
who is, you know, not covered, or has poor service that is why
we are designing this. You and your Governor, and you know, the
mayors know Kansas better than we ever will. So I will come to
you before we approve the plan, and we will welcome your
feedback?
Senator Moran. That is good advice for all of us to get
fully engaged in what is going on in our home States. As I
said, we had outreach to our Director of Broadband Services at
our Department of Commerce, and we need to make sure that we
stay engaged, not just with that moment.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
Senator Moran. But into the ongoing process. As Senator
Collins led the way, let me mention tariffs. You and I, and you
have been very care--kind in your hosting an event for us to
bring folks who are having difficulties as a result of the
tariffs, and high lumber prices, steel price is another
example. I want to add a third one to the list that I have
talked to you about previously.
And I certainly share Senator Collins' concern about
softwood lumber, and housing prices, and the consequence, at a
time in which supply chain is so limited, it seems to me that
tariffs ought not to be one more burden in the cost or
availability of materials in this country.
RISING COST OF FERTILIZER
The one I would raise for you is fertilizer. AG commodity
prices are higher, as everything is higher these days, so the
price of wheat, cattle, corn, soybeans, and all the things that
we produce in Kansas are up, but so, in an overwhelming way,
are the input costs necessary to produce that wheat, cattle,
and corn. One of the most important components is fertilizer,
and fertilizer is generally made from phosphates, and from
natural gas, both which are skyrocketing in price.
So there is not profitability in agriculture, despite what
you might see about the price that a farmer or rancher might
receive for what he or she raises, but we have placed, the
previous administration, placed tariffs, countervailing duties
on phosphate imports from Morocco.
And its preliminary decisions, you have continued that, and
I would again, highlight that a time in which the demand for
fertilizer and feeding the world, we just met with the U.S.
Food Service Ambassador today. The demand for food, the need
for food around the globe is huge and compelling. And what we
can do to make sure that we produce more and feed more people
is really important. And we also need to see something in the
line of profitability for those who product that food.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
Senator Moran. Thank you. My time has expired.
Secretary Raimondo. So I hear you, and I am very sensitive
to this, and it is exacerbated now, like with the overall
inflation, and then the supply chain challenges, generally, so
I will look at that. I will look at that. As I say, I have very
little degrees of freedom on these countervailing duty cases.
I have been--I am very pleased that I was able to negotiate
the end of the steel and aluminum tariffs, the 232 tariffs with
the EU, and I am hard at work trying to do the same with
Japanese, and the U.K., because I agree with you, the tariffs
on these imports, at an inflationary time can be difficult. But
I owe you a better answer and that will--
Senator Moran. Excuse me for not complementing you, thank
you for the--with regard to steel and aluminum.
And Madam Secretary, I need to depart to speak on the
Senate Floor.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
Senator Moran. I thank you for your time today.
Secretary Raimondo. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Moran. Senator Collins.
Senator Collins. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
RIGHT WHALE REGULATIONS
Madam Secretary, Secretary, I know that you realized that
you would not be leave here today, without us having yet
another discussion about NOAA's right whale regulations. As you
are well aware the entire Maine delegation, our Governor, the
Maine Department of Marine Resources, all agree that his rule
is overly burdensome, unfairly targets the Maine lobster
industry, and will not achieve the goal of saving the right
whale.
In fact, NOAA's own data show that Maine's lobster industry
has never been linked to the death of a right whale. A Federal
judge in Maine was able to block the NOAA regulations for a
time, and remarked that the regulations were based on what he
called markedly thin evidence.
And that certainly summarizes how we feel. Yet, NOAA
proceeded to close more than 950 square miles of productive
ocean area to lobster fishing. And that closure went through
until yesterday, it just reopened today. And now we are finding
that the gear conversion that is required is simply not
available.
An AP story entitled, ``Worries grow as deadline for whale-
friendly gear draws near'', quotes the Maine Department of
Marine Resources as receiving numerous complaints that there
simply isn't a sufficient supply of approved ropes, or plastic
links that are required by the new NOAA regulations.
I would mention that over the years the Maine lobster
industry has greatly reduced the amount of rope that it uses,
and they have always been great stewards of the environment,
and that is why this is particularly frustrating. So the Maine
delegation along with the Governor has asked for a delay in the
implementation of the gear conversion requirements from May 1
to July 1.
That would save the industry more than $7 million in lost
fishing time, and we believe it would have no, or negligible
impact on risk reduction. The overall scarcity of this gear is
making it virtually impossible for many lobstermen to find it.
It is just simply not available. So with the implementation
date still at May 1, and that is coming up quickly, lobstermen
are struggling to find the compliant gear in the marketplace.
Will NOAA reconsider delaying the requirement?
Secretary Raimondo. So thank you for the question. And as I
have said to you before, I take this very seriously, and I
admire the way you keep with it. We have thousands of people in
Rhode Island who make a living as commercial fishermen, and I
know it is more than just a living. It has often been in their
family for generations. They did it, their father did it, their
grandfather did it, so it is a culture, it is a way of life,
and it is a living. And I understand that, and want to work
with you to find the solution.
I wish I had an easy solution here. NOAA is not permitted
on its own to change the date from May 1 to July 1. I have
looked into it, and under the APA we don't have that ability
to, on our own, change the date.
I will tell you my Head of Fisheries, Janet Coit, I have
directed her to be on this, and she is talking to the
Commissioner in Maine almost daily. She spoke with him today, I
received an update. She will be speaking with him tomorrow. We
are trying to help locate the gear, as well as provide as much
flexibility and assistance as we can.
So let us continue to work on it, a bit more, to see if we
can alleviate the supply chain issues, and just continue to
kind of work on that problem in the weeks ahead. And I will
call you and keep you apprised.
Senator Collins. Thank you. This is a terrible problem for
our State, and it just seems so unfair when our lobster men and
women are not the problem. Ship strikes are a problem. There
are some problems with Canadian snow crab gear, for example.
But were not the problem, and as you have rightly said,
lobstering is an iconic industry in our State, it is a way of
life, it is multi-generational, our lobstermen and women have
always been extremely sensitive to the environment, and good
stewards of the resource, and is extremely frustrating.
Secretary Raimondo. I share the frustration. It is
complicated as you know, with the subject of a lawsuit, and
there is not a simple solution, but I will commit to you to
stay on it, and see if we can do everything we can to help the
lobstermen.
Senator Collins. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Collins. The New
Hampshire lobster industry also appreciates that.
Madam Secretary, today we had 14 Members of our Committee
here. That is, I think, a record for a hearing, and it speaks
to the interest and urgency people feel about broadband and how
that funding gets done, and how we get help for our community.
So thank you for your commitment, and for your efforts to
ensure that this program works as well as humanly possible.
Secretary Raimondo. Mm-hmm.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Shaheen. If there are no further questions this
afternoon, senators may submit additional questions for the
official hearing record. We request the Department of Commerce
responses to those questions within 30 days.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the
hearing:]
Questions Submitted to Hon. Gina Raimondo
Questions Submitted by Senator Patrick Leahy
Question 1. Under Section 60102 of the Infrastructure Investment
and Jobs Act (IIJA), which establishes a grant program for broadband
deployment, any actions or decisions taken by the Assistant Secretary
of Commerce for Communications and Information are exempt from the
requirements of certain laws. That includes the entirety of Chapter 5
of the United States Code, which contains the Freedom of Information
Act (FOIA). This is problematic, as this effectively means that tens of
billions of taxpayer dollars are not subject to the public scrutiny and
transparency provided by FOIA.
Do you agree it is problematic to entirely exempt such a
significant program supported by billions in taxpayer dollars from the
requirements of the Freedom of Information Act? Would the Department be
receptive of legislative amendments to address this exemption as
currently written in the law? Does the Department have any
justification for requiring such a sweeping exemption, which clearly
runs afoul of the intent of Congress in enacting the Freedom of
Information Act?
Answer. The Department and NTIA intend to run the Broadband Equity,
Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program transparently and with
accountability, including making information publicly accessible so
that the public can track how each State is spending BEAD funding and
monitor their State's progress. We, along with States and subgrantees,
each have a critical role to play in ensuring that the BEAD Program is
implemented in a manner that reflects transparency, accountability, and
oversight sufficient to, among other things, minimize the opportunity
for waste, fraud, and abuse; ensure that grant recipients under the
Program use grant funds to further the overall purpose of the Program
in compliance with the requirements of the Infrastructure Investment
and Jobs Act (IIJA), the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost
Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards set forth at 2
C.F.R. Part 200, and other applicable laws and regulations; and to
allow the public to understand and monitor grants and subgrants awarded
under the Program. We take these responsibilities seriously and are
happy to work with the Committee on this matter.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Jerry Moran
Question 1. There are many different broadband programs already in
existence across the Federal government, including those at the FCC and
the Department of Agriculture. Because of this, many states have a
patchwork of ongoing projects. Coordination between Federal agencies is
critical to help maximize the return on broadband investments.
Coordination with the FCC is particularly important, as it is currently
preparing the maps that will determine the allocation of funds. This
coordination is essential to reach the unserved, and to ensure that we
do not overbuild where broadband already exists.
How often are you in touch with the FCC and other Federal entities
to coordinate efforts, and to ensure the funds will go to the
communities the law intended them to go?
Will you commit to me that you will work to prevent the
overbuilding of existing networks to the greatest degree possible?
Answer. Last June, NTIA, FCC, and the Department of Agriculture
(USDA) signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that commits our
respective agencies to coordinate resources and leverage data to
appropriately identify areas of need. I have personally spoken with
Chairwoman Rosenworcel, and my staff, NTIA Administrator Alan Davidson,
and the staff at NTIA are in regular communication with leadership and
staff at the FCC, Treasury, USDA, and other agencies that fund
broadband deployment.
The IIJA lays out a clear framework for states to fund broadband
infrastructure projects, which requires prioritizing unserved
locations, then underserved locations, and then community anchor
institutions.
Question 2. You know as well as anyone, given your Department's
work on supply chains, that companies in every corner of the economy
are struggling to acquire critical materials. This issue will be even
more acute for broadband deployment. Given the significant amount of
funding that will be going out the door in a short timeframe, many
companies will be competing for the same materials and equipment.
That concern is particularly important with respect to electronic
processors, or semiconductors. The Department of Commerce has taken the
lead on the issue of semiconductor shortages, and has recently
completed a comment period regarding ongoing semiconductor shortages.
What can the Department do to alleviate broadband equipment
availability concerns in advance of these programs dispersing funding?
Do you believe that semiconductor shortages will impact the
deployment of broadband, and what can be done to mitigate any potential
shortages in the broadband space specifically, to ensure there are not
deployment delays?
Secretary Raimondo, does the Department envision offering supply
chain waivers, similar to those offered under BTOP?
Answer. In the short term, we will work with industry to explore
options for alleviating broadband equipment availability concerns. In
the long term, we must take steps to ensure a resilient and secure
supply chain for critical materials and semiconductor chips, including
continued assistance to firms expanding their semiconductor
manufacturing investments in the United States. The microchip supply
chain is a concern across many sectors. I continue to strongly support
the Bipartisan Innovation Act, including appropriations for the CHIPS
for America Act to establish programs that incentivize competitive U.S.
semiconductor manufacturing and contribute to U.S. economic and
national security.
The Administration is committed to faithfully implementing the
IIJA, including the law's Build America, Buy America provisions. Since
his first day in office, President Biden has relentlessly focused on an
industrial strategy to revitalize our manufacturing base, strengthen
critical supply chains, and position U.S. workers and businesses to
compete and lead globally in the 21st century. The Commerce Department
will consider waiving these requirements only where the acquisition of
domestic components would be inconsistent with the public interest,
their cost would be unreasonable, or the relevant materials or products
are not mined, produced, or manufactured in the United States in
sufficient and reasonably available commercial quantities and of a
satisfactory quality.
Question 3. I believe that Federal programs should not fund
overlapping networks. However, I am also concerned that some states may
lose out on funding, based on how prior Federal programs cover
currently unserved areas of those states.
The IIJA lays out a methodology for allocating funds to states
under the BEAD program: an initial $100 million, followed by an amount
determined the number of unserved areas in a state. The purpose of the
formula is to provide the states with the most unserved areas the most
funding, something I agree with.
However, one issue that I foresee is uncertainty regarding whether
currently unserved areas are still going to be considered ``unserved''
if a separate Federal broadband program, like FCC's RDOF, has awarded
funding for those areas, but a network has not yet been built out. This
risk is compounded if a previously-identified project ultimately fails
to deliver. This creates a serious risk that some states could lose out
on a significant amount of funding, as RDOF awards cover broad swaths
of some states.
Will the Department of Commerce consider areas that are ``covered''
under another Federal program, but do not currently have access to
broadband, as unserved, for the purposes of the funding calculation and
allocation?
Will the Department have a process by which states can revisit the
number of unserved in their states if other broadband Federal programs
fail to build out their commitments and then leave people and
communities behind?
Answer. NTIA will allocate funds according to the statute which
provides that the determination of whether a location is unserved for
allocation purposes is determined in accordance with the broadband DATA
maps. Section 60102(h)(2) does, however, require eligible entities to
``ensure a transparent, evidence-based, and expeditious challenge
process under which a unit of local government, nonprofit organization,
or other broadband service provider can challenge a determination made
by the eligible entity in the initial proposal as to whether a
particular location or community anchor institution within the
jurisdiction of the eligible entity is eligible for the grant funds,
including whether a particular location is unserved or underserved.''
NTIA has the opportunity and the obligation to review the results of
that challenge process.
NTIA is also working with other Federal agencies to coordinate
broadband investment programs (e.g., the FCC's Rural Digital
Opportunity Fund and the Capital Projects Fund), to best ensure that
affordable, reliable, high speed broadband is deployed to every
serviceable location in the United States.
Question 4. During the hearing, you expressed an understanding that
flexibility, when it comes to the type of broadband technology used in
deployment, will be necessary to make certain all unserved areas of the
country ultimately are served.
Can you please confirm this understanding, and explain the
necessity of ensuring technology neutrality when it comes to covering
all unserved areas with broadband?
Answer. There is no ``one-size-fits-all'' approach to broadband
deployment given each state's unique challenges, and NTIA will ensure
that the states have flexibility in identifying technical solutions. In
many cases, the best solution will be fiber. But we will consider any
technology that will meet America's broadband needs, consistent with
the requirements set out in the IIJA.
Question 5. The IIJA mandates that states certify to the Assistant
Secretary that they will ensure coverage of unserved areas prior to any
investment in underserved or other areas.
How will this certification work, and how will the Department of
Commerce ensure that all unserved areas within a state will be served
prior to further investments in other areas?
Answer. The IIJA lays out a clear framework for states to fund
broadband infrastructure projects, which requires prioritizing unserved
locations, then underserved locations, and then community anchor
institutions. NTIA will adhere to that framework, including by
requiring each state to certify that the state will ensure coverage of
broadband service to all unserved locations within the state or
territory.
Question 6. In addition to equipment supply chain issues,
telecommunications workers will also be in extremely high demand. There
is an existing shortage of telecommunications workers now, so this
increased demand could also lead to delays in deployment.
The Telecommunications Skilled Workforce Act, which I helped
introduce with Senator Thune, was incorporated into the IIJA and would
establish an interagency group--led by the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) and Department of Labor--to analyze the shortage and
make official recommendations for increasing the number of
telecommunications workers.
What is the Department of Commerce doing to help address this need?
Answer. In order to build out broadband to every corner of the
country, we are going to need a highly skilled, diverse workforce that
can safely do their jobs. The Department of Commerce is participating
in the Telecommunications Workforce Interagency Group, as established
in the IIJA, along with the FCC, the Department of Labor, and the
Department of Education. The working group held its first meeting in
March and the Department looks forward to collaborating with our agency
partners to identify the current and future needs of the
telecommunications industry workforce.
In addition, NTIA will engage in outreach and technical assistance
activities to help states, territories, and their political
subdivisions prepare to seek funding and plan for use of funds through
the BEAD Program, by encouraging coordination with states'
telecommunications workforce development plans.
Question 7. The IIJA and the American Rescue Plan provide
significant funding for broadband deployment and other infrastructure
investments. Those bills also encourage the use of Advanced Digital
Construction Management Systems to expedite the utilization, execution,
and oversight of projects funded under those acts. It is my
understanding that the Route 6/10 Interchange Reconstruction project in
Providence, which is the largest in RIDOT history, is using this
technology.
What steps has the Department has taken to facilitate the
utilization of these project management technologies?
Answer. NTIA is developing a robust technical assistance plan to
allow states to learn from each other about best practices. NTIA will
evaluate whether to include Advanced Digital Construction Management
Systems as one element of the project management technical assistance.
Question 8. The need to address ever-evolving cybersecurity threats
as part of every state broadband plan is critical.
Can you assure me that broadband funding applications that are
submitted to you will demonstrate they have taken cybersecurity
considerations into account with details on how grant funds will secure
these connections?
What steps will NTIA take to ensure the proposed cybersecurity
measures in each plan are adequate?
Answer. I agree that addressing cybersecurity challenges in the
state broadband plans is critical. Supporting industry's capabilities
to respond to cybersecurity and privacy risks is one of my top
priorities as Commerce Secretary.
Section 60102(b)(4)(B) of the IIJA requires NTIA to provide
technical and other assistance to states ``regarding cybersecurity
resources and programs available through Federal agencies, including
the Election Assistance Commission, the Cybersecurity and
Infrastructure Security Agency, the Federal Trade Commission, and the
National Institute of Standards and Technology.'' Further, section
60102(g)(1)(B) of the IIJA requires that every BEAD Program subgrantee
``shall comply with prudent cybersecurity and supply chain risk
management practices, as specified by the Assistant Secretary, in
consultation with the Director of the National Institute of Standards
and Technology and the Commission.'' NTIA staff has engaged with
colleagues at NIST and the Commission and will ensure that the BEAD
Program incorporates appropriate and prudent cybersecurity and supply
chain risk management practices.
In addition, in the Request for Comment issued on February 4, 2022,
NTIA asked stakeholders what guidance or requirements should be
required for network reliability and availability, cybersecurity,
resilience, and other related topics. Based on those responses, we are
reviewing existing guidance--including those developed by the
Department through NIST--to ensure that cybersecurity practices are
addressed through the Notice of Funding Opportunity.
Question 9. USDA's latest rules for their ReConnect program
includes changes to how they will score applications to their program,
including awarding more points to broadband providers who commit to
``net neutrality'' standards. Reflecting the lack of bipartisan
agreement on net neutrality, IIJA includes nothing regarding favoring
broadband providers who adhere to net neutrality commitments in the
law.
Please describe the metrics that NTIA will use to assist in
evaluating the plans that States will submit to be approved.
Will you commit to me that the Department of Commerce will not take
it upon itself to issue rules that are contrary to the bipartisan
spirit of the IIJA, and specifically that the Department of Commerce
will not favor providers who commit to adhere to net neutrality
provisions?
Answer. The IIJA requires the Assistant Secretary to determine
whether the initial and final grant proposals filed by the states
propose to use BEAD Program funds for the purposes listed in section
60102(f) of the IIJA and in a manner that is in the public interest and
effectuates the purposes of the IIJA. My focus is on deploying
reliable, affordable high-speed broadband to all Americans.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Lisa Murkowski
Question 1. Middle Mile: In Alaska, middle mile infrastructure--the
network that connects local networks to high speed network service
providers--is one of our biggest obstacles to ensuring reliable and
affordable Internet throughout the State. For example, we've had folks
visit in the past promising Wi-Fi access to every student throughout an
entire school--but access for an entire school in a remote area isn't
usually the problem. We have made big strides in securing the equipment
for end-users--like laptops in schools--but the middle mile is what we
lack.
I advocated for substantial funding in IIJA--$1 billion in total--
to deploy middle mile projects. How will this program be administered
and what is your expected timeline to start receiving public input on
this issue?
Answer. NTIA intends to issue a Notice of Funding Opportunity by
May 16, 2022, that will provide guidance to applicants on how to
participate in the Middle Mile Grant Program. NTIA expects to complete
its review, selection of successful applicants, and award processing
early in 2023.
Question 2. Grants to States: Alaska has incredibly unique
challenges when it comes to large distances, difficult terrain,
challenging topography, extreme weather, and small populations in
remote areas. As a result, it is essential that there not be a one size
fits all approach to deployment and that States be given flexibility in
determining how grants are awarded.
Do you agree that proposals should be evaluated without a
preference for a certain technology, but rather on their affordability,
speed, reliability, capacity, and the amount of people that will be
reached?
Answer. There is no ``one-size-fits-all'' approach to broadband
deployment given each State's unique challenges, and NTIA will ensure
that the States have flexibility in identifying technical solutions. In
many cases, the best solution will be fiber. But we will consider any
technology that will best meet America's broadband needs now and in the
future, consistent with the requirements set out in the IIJA.
You stated that out of over $42 billion, each State will receive
$100 million and then the rest of the funds will be distributed
``primarily on the number of underserved households.'' This concerns me
because Alaska has a small population, yet broadband deployment to our
underserved populations is prohibitively expensive due to our large
State and challenging environments. How will you ensure that Alaska is
fully covered and not left out due to having a small population?
Answer. The IIJA incorporates a 10 percent set aside for high-cost
areas in the BEAD Program that should help address this concern.
Specifically, to support high-cost deployment areas, $4,160,100,000
will be allocated among the States by dividing the number of unserved
locations in high-cost areas in the State by the total number of high-
cost areas in the United States; and multiplying the quotient by the
amount made available for the set aside.
Question 3. I would like to follow up on my question I asked during
your testimony regarding the Tribal Broadband Connectivity Program
(TBCP). You stated that your Department, and more specifically NTIA was
still working out the details for how it will administer the additional
$2 billion in funding from IIJA. Whether or not applicants will need to
re-apply or if new projects will be eligible. Or if applicants can re-
apply to be more competitive. I would like an update on your thoughts
on this and your timelines for making a decision and implementing this
next tranche of funds for TBCP.
Additionally, some projects may be less competitive in one program,
such as this one, but more competitive in, say, the provisions for
middle mile. As NTIA reviews Tribal connectivity grant applications,
how are you coordinating with other Federal agencies, such as USDA,
that also received broadband funding? How is NTIA participating in a
whole-of-government approach to broadband deployment and adoption on
tribal lands? Should people submit for more than one of these programs?
Answer. Meeting the goal of connecting everyone in America with
reliable, affordable, high-speed Internet will require a ``whole of
government'' approach that includes close coordination among Federal,
State, and community actors. We are in regular communication with our
interagency colleagues and the White House Infrastructure Task Force to
ensure full coordination. NTIA, FCC, and USDA signed an MOU in June
2021 that documents their commitment to coordinate resources and
leverage data from each to appropriately identify areas of need,
including on Tribal lands.
NTIA anticipates using a portion of the $2 billion to ensure that
the stronger applications submitted in response to the first TBCP
Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) get funded. NTIA then anticipates
using the remaining funds to issue a second NOFO that will provide an
opportunity to Tribes, Alaska Native Corporations and other eligible
applicants that did not have an opportunity to file an application
during the first NOFO, as well as providing an opportunity for
applicants that were not funded under the first NOFO to reapply.
Can you speak to projects being granted on a truly ``technology
neutral'' basis? Especially in more remote areas, we need to ensure
we're getting creative with how to affordably and efficiently get more
broadband access to the most people in the most remote areas in the
most rapid manner. Communities in extreme rural Alaska should not
continue to be left completely behind.
Answer. As noted in answer to your earlier question, there is no
``one-size-fits-all'' approach to broadband deployment given each
State's unique challenges, and NTIA will ensure that the States have
flexibility in identifying technical solutions. In many cases, the best
solution will be fiber. But we will consider any technology that will
meet best America's broadband needs now and in the future, consistent
with the requirements set out in the IIJA.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator John Boozman
Question 1. One of the challenges with updating the national
broadband maps is that existing providers report advertised speeds
instead of actual speeds to the FCC. An issue that, at present, seems
likely to be carried over to the new FCC broadband data and maps.
However, simply advertising 100/20 is not sufficient to be able to
claim that 100/20 is actually being provided to the customer.
Advertised speeds are likely to be the basis of the new FCC data,
which can be challenged but may be a lengthy process. Will NTIA work to
ensure states have the flexibility to utilize state broadband data or
to seek verification or challenge claims of existing levels of service
where necessary to ensure communities are not left behind? How will
NTIA evaluate applicants' speed delivery capabilities?
Answer. NTIA, in implementing the BEAD Program, will be required to
use the FCC's updated broadband maps that the Commission is creating as
part of the Broadband DATA Act. These first of their kind maps will
show which locations have broadband service and will be used to
determine which locations are unserved.
Section 60102(h)(2) of the IIJA requires states to establish a
process to challenge deficiencies in those maps. It requires that each
state ``ensure a transparent, evidence-based, and expeditious challenge
process under which a unit of local government, nonprofit organization,
or other broadband service provider can challenge a determination made
by the eligible entity in the initial proposal as to whether a
particular location or community anchor institution within the
jurisdiction of the eligible entity is eligible for the grant funds,
including whether a particular location is unserved or underserved.''
NTIA has the opportunity and the obligation to review the results of
that challenge process.
In addition, NTIA is already working with states to help them
understand and participate in the FCC mapping processes, share mapping
best practices, and provide other mapping support. The objective is to
get states thinking about how best to leverage their state process to
ensure that communities are not left behind. This type of technical
assistance will continue throughout the BEAD Program.
Question 2. The USDA Reconnect broadband grant program includes
criteria against which grant applicant ISPs are scored. However, in
that program, no consideration is given (or points awarded in the
``scoring'' system) for the cost of the build proposed by an applicant.
For example, Applicant A may propose to build an area for $12 million,
whereas Applicant B may propose to build the same area for $10 million.
If Applicant A scores higher than Applicant B, it's likely that the
government will spend $2 million more than necessary to subsidize
broadband availability in that area. Does Commerce/NTIA plan to adopt
the same scoring rules as the USDA, or will it adopt different rules to
ensure the most efficient use of taxpayer dollars?
Answer. My objective is to make sure these Federal dollars go as
far as possible and help to accomplish the President's goal of
connecting all Americans. As a result, we will be working with the
states to ensure that we are maximizing the value of Federal support
for these projects. Each state faces unique circumstances--there is no
``one size fits all'' solution to broadband deployment. As such,
successful execution of the BEAD Program demands close collaboration
between NTIA, as the program administrator, and the states who will
have significant flexibility when choosing how to fund broadband
deployments. I have directed NTIA to engage in early and clear
communication during all phases of the process to help the states
ensure that the subgrantees they choose are well equipped to deliver
affordable, reliable, high-speed broadband at every location within
their jurisdictions.
Question 3. Madam Secretary, I'm interested in how you are
prioritizing investments in ``future proof'' broadband networks,
especially those that use optical fiber. The magnitude of funding
warrants serious consideration of how each grant applicant will
contribute or fit in to the larger telecommunications ecosystem. We
want to encourage diverse participation amongst a level playing field.
We must also prioritize deployment of networks and technologies that
will deliver the highest value broadband performance to Americans--that
means fast, low latency, reliable, scalable, stands the test of time,
something that has cost effective maintenance.
As you shape and administer broadband funding through the Broadband
Equity, Access, and Deployment program, what can you do to ensure that
the applicants and technologies being prioritized are of the highest
quality and value for the American people?
How are you considering the long-term viability of these broadband
investments?
Answer. There is no ``one-size-fits-all'' approach to broadband
deployment given each State's unique challenges, and NTIA will ensure
that the States have flexibility in identifying technical solutions. In
many cases, the best solution will be fiber. But we will consider any
technology that will meet America's broadband needs, consistent with
the requirements set out in the IIJA.
Question 4. Some previous Federal broadband programs have awarded
support to serve rural areas at speeds/levels of latency never before
made available in real-world conditions.
Congress made clear that NTIA must properly vet applicants. Will
NTIA adopt objective standards by which applicants for funding will be
vetted, before being invited to participate in the Broadband Equity,
Access, and Deployment program, to ensure that they have the capability
necessary to perform?
Answer. Section 60102(g)(2) of the IIJA obligates states to, among
other things, ensure that any prospective subgrantee is capable of
carrying out activities funded by the subgrant in a competent manner in
compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws; has the
financial and managerial capacity to meet the commitments of the
subgrantee under the subgrant, the requirements of the Program, and
such requirements as may be further prescribed by the Assistant
Secretary; and has the technical and operational capability to provide
the services promised in the subgrant in the manner contemplated by the
subgrant award. NTIA will work with the states regarding specific
showings that states must, at a minimum, require from prospective
subgrantees.
Question 5. Recently, the Treasury issued final rules for
distribution of ARPA funds that States are required or encouraged to
incorporate into their downstream rules for issuing grants. One of
those rules encourages that the States, in turn, require ISP grantees
to include at least one low-cost service option without data usage caps
and at ``sufficient'' speeds (not defined any more specifically). Isn't
it likely that this rule will negatively affect ISPs if existing
customers downgrade to the new ``affordable'' plan? Further, isn't this
effectively rate regulation through executive branch rule-making? Will
there be a similar rule in the BEAD program? Does Commerce/NTIA endorse
this sort of coercive rate regulation by executive fiat?
Answer. The IIJA expressly provides that nothing in the BEAD
statute should be construed to authorize NTIA to regulate the rates
charged for broadband service. The IIJA does require subgrantees
selected to deploy broadband networks with BEAD Program funds to offer
not less than one low-cost broadband service option for eligible
subscribers and requires that this low-cost option is to be defined by
each state in consultation with NTIA and subject to the Assistant
Secretary's approval.
Question 6. In addition, Treasury rules require the states to
require ISP grantees to opt-in to the ACP program which as defined by
the FCC is a voluntary program for ISPs to participate in. The Final
Rules recently released for the ACP program requires ISPs to enroll all
eligible customers into the program without regard for any previous
credit history, or unpaid past-due balance, the participant may have
with the carrier. An ISP is allowed to disconnect an ACP customer for
non-payment after 90 days but as stated previously, the provider cannot
deny a household re-enrollment on past or present past-due balances.
Simply put, a provider will be required to re-activate a customer--
potentially on day 91--regardless of whether they have resolved their
past due balance. Why should a carrier have to agree to carry past-due
balances, carried forward or incurred in the future, and do so
indefinitely in order to participate in closing the digital divide
through a Federal grant? Does Commerce/NTIA believe this is a
reasonable burden to place on ISPs who we're relying on to deploy these
dollars and get the fiber in the ground?
Answer. The Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) is administered
by the FCC and is an important component of the overall effort to
ensure that all Americans have access to affordable, reliable, high-
speed broadband service.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Shelley Moore Capito
Question 1. While the broadband programs authorized and funded
under the IIJA represent the greatest one-time investment ever in
closing the digital divide, we still have the monumental task of making
sure the money is spent in the right places.
To ensure that we direct dollars to where they are needed most,
rather than overbuilding in already well-served areas, are you
committed to using updated, verifiable maps that will help ensure that
initial project awards aren't directed to areas that already have
broadband service?
On that same note, multiple Federal agencies, such as the Federal
Communications Commission, the Department of Agriculture, the Treasury
Department, and your own agency, also spend billions of dollars to
support broadband deployment. What steps will the Commerce Department
take to ensure that monies from the recently passed infrastructure law
are not allocated to projects that would just overbuild on existing
broadband networks?
Answer. NTIA, in implementing the BEAD Program, will be required to
use the FCC's updated broadband maps that the Commission is creating as
part of the Broadband DATA Act. These first of their kind maps will
show which locations have broadband service and will be used to
determine which locations are unserved.
The IIJA lays out a clear framework for States to fund broadband
infrastructure projects, which requires prioritizing unserved
locations, then underserved locations, and then community anchor
institutions. NTIA will require that States faithfully adhere to that
framework.
Question 2. Recently I, along with Ranking Member Moran and a
number of my senate colleagues, sent letters to both the Department of
Treasury and USDA to express concern over steps they have made to give
``extra points'' to non-profit, municipal, and cooperative providers
when deciding on broadband funding recipients. My concern is that these
measures could hurt commercial-community-based providers with a proven
track record of successfully deploying Internet in rural areas.
Does the Department of Commerce plan to adopt a similar ``points
system'' in their decisionmaking in disbursing funds?
Answer. Each State faces unique circumstances--there is no ``one
size fits all'' solution to broadband deployment. As such, successful
execution of the BEAD Program demands close collaboration between NTIA,
as the program administrator, and the States, who will have significant
flexibility when choosing how to fund broadband deployments. I have
directed NTIA to engage in early and clear communication during all
phases of the process to help the States ensure that the subgrantees
they choose are well equipped to deliver affordable, reliable, high-
speed broadband at every location within their jurisdictions.
Question 3. In your written testimony, you said that the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) has held three
virtual, public listening sessions to help inform the development and
implementation of the broadband program in the law over the past 2
months.
Can you provide some examples of the entities you have already met
with and provide what information is exchanged during these sessions
from the Department?
Are you willing to provide a list of all entities to the
subcommittee that have participated in the listening sessions you refer
to in your testimony?
Answer. We are committed to a robust outreach engagement and
outreach strategy to ensure we hear from diverse stakeholders from
across the country. We are also leveraging strong relationships with
State broadband leaders to gather State input to inform our program
design. NTIA is meeting twice a month with the State broadband leaders
cohort and convened 108 participants representing 50 States and
territories on March 1-2 for a robust two-day summit. NTIA had 1,250
people registered for its first public listening session, which was
held in December. It provided an overview of the new broadband grant
programs authorized and funded by the IIJA. The second session focused
on the Request for Comments on broadband programs in the IIJA. Over 800
people registered for this session. The third session focused on the
BEAD Program. Nearly 700 people registered for this session. Each of
these sessions are posted on the BroadbandUSA website. Since the
hearing, two additional listening sessions occurred, on the Enabling
Middle Mile Broadband Infrastructure program (664 registrants) and
Digital Equity Act programs (636 registrants). Each of these sessions
provided the opportunity for attendees to provide live feedback and
input regarding the session topic via verbal or written comments. The
full recording, transcript, and PowerPoint presentations for each of
these sessions are on the BroadbandUSA website under Events-Past
Events. Registrants included a broad cross-section of stakeholders such
as: local and State governments; Tribal governments; regional councils
and organizations; colleges and universities; private-sector companies;
community and public interest organizations; national associations
representing a variety of stakeholder types; and members of the general
public.
In addition, NTIA's Office of Internet Connectivity and Growth is
holding weekly office hours to meet with both large and small
organizations, including individual States and territories, community
and public interest groups Internet service providers, local government
staff and officials, regional councils, colleges, individual Internet
service providers (ISPs) as well as national associations representing
ISPs, State and local government, etc.
Question 4. Your written testimony seems to emphasize affordability
over connectivity.
Are you prioritizing connections over affordability or
affordability over connections regarding the Broadband Equity, Access,
and Deployment Program (BEAD)?
Answer. The BEAD Program seeks to provide access to affordable,
reliable, high-speed broadband service to all Americans. The IIJA lays
out a clear framework for States to fund broadband infrastructure
projects, which requires prioritizing unserved locations, then
underserved locations, and then community anchor institutions. NTIA
will require that States faithfully adhere to that framework.
Question 5. The Broadband Technology Opportunities Program (BTOP),
an approximately $4 billion grant program administered by NTIA in 2009,
was a disaster in West Virginia. You are ultimately responsible for
distributing $42 billion in broadband funds--just over ten times the
BTOP amount.
How do you plan to ensure that the funds from the infrastructure
bill will successfully deploy high-speed broadband with no fraud,
waste, or abuse to the American taxpayer?
Answer. The Department, NTIA, States, and subgrantees each have a
critical role to play in ensuring that the BEAD Program is implemented
in a manner that ensures transparency, accountability, and oversight
sufficient to, among other things, minimize the opportunity for waste,
fraud, and abuse; ensure that recipients of grants under the Program
use grant funds to further the overall purpose of the Program in
compliance with the requirements of the IIJA, the Uniform
Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements
for Federal Awards set forth at 2 C.F.R. Part 200, and other applicable
laws and regulations; and to allow the public to understand and monitor
grants and subgrants awarded under the Program. We take these
responsibilities seriously.
I also recognize that each State faces unique circumstances--there
is no ``one size fits all'' solution to broadband deployment. As such,
successful execution of the BEAD Program demands close collaboration
between NTIA, as the program administrator, and the States, who will
have significant flexibility when choosing how to fund broadband
deployments. I have directed NTIA to engage in early and clear
communication during all phases of the process to help the States
ensure that the subgrantees they choose are well equipped to deliver
affordable, reliable, high-speed broadband at every location within
their jurisdictions.
Question 6. Secretary Raimondo, what is your understanding of the
NTIA and FCC's roles in spectrum management?
Answer. NTIA and the FCC have important and complementary roles in
managing the nation's use of spectrum. NTIA is responsible for Federal
Government spectrum use, while the FCC regulates non-Federal use,
including State and local government. Naturally, this requires
extensive coordination and cooperation between the agencies, ranging
from routine matters to significant spectrum allocation and
reallocation decisions. The history of success from their joint work is
impressive, and is a large reason why the United States has led the
world in introducing innovative spectrum management frameworks, from
commercial auctions to advances in spectrum sharing. Most recently, our
emphasis on spectrum for 5G has resulted in 530 megahertz of contiguous
mid-band spectrum being made available with more likely to follow. The
FCC has similarly freed up large swaths of spectrum for unlicensed uses
such as Wi-Fi, a true U.S. success story.
At the same time, we are working to make this relationship even
stronger. The NTIA Administrator and the FCC Chairwoman announced in
February a new Spectrum Coordination Initiative that aims to
meaningfully boost this relationship. The Initiative will include more
regular meetings at both the leadership and staff levels, reviewing and
updating the existing MOU between the agencies, working together to
inform a whole-of-government national spectrum strategy, recommitting
to decisionmaking based on sound engineering and science, and
increasing proactive technical exchange and collaboration including
participation in each other's advisory bodies.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator John Kennedy
Question 1. Secretary Raimondo, I have heard concerns from some
providers about the low-cost option element of the infrastructure
broadband grant program. The legislation forbids NTIA and Commerce from
regulating the rates of service--and many argue that prohibition should
extend to states as well. But even aside from rate regulation, there
are worries that imposing excessive burdens on providers through the
low-cost option will result in those providers not participating in the
grant program.
Will you commit that NTIA and the Department will approach the
requirements for the low-cost option in a measured, standardized way,
and encourage the states to do the same?
Answer. The IIJA expressly provides that nothing in the BEAD
statute should be construed to authorize NTIA to regulate the rates
charged for broadband service. The IIJA does require subgrantees
selected to deploy broadband networks with BEAD Program funds to offer
not less than one low-cost broadband service option for eligible
subscribers and requires that this low-cost option is to be defined by
each state, in consultation with NTIA and subject to the Assistant
Secretary's approval. The Assistant Secretary will seek to ensure that
the low-cost option is implemented consistent with the requirements of
the IIJA.
Question 2. At the White House briefing in November where you spoke
about the IIJA's broadband provisions, you said, ``the whole name of
the game here is to focus on the underserved and the unserved.'' The
unserved areas are the hardest to serve areas that really need the most
attention and help getting broadband.
Will you commit to maintaining that focus on unserved areas? What
can you do to make sure that funds don't stray from this priority
before accomplishing this most important goal of getting broadband to
those who still don't have it?
Answer. The BEAD Program seeks to provide access to affordable,
reliable, high-speed broadband service to all Americans. The IIJA lays
out a clear framework for states to fund broadband infrastructure
projects, which requires prioritizing unserved locations, then
underserved locations, and then community anchor institutions. NTIA
will require that states faithfully adhere to that framework.
Question 3. Many States have indicated the need to establish a
robust challenge process. Once the FCC's maps are complete and NTIA can
begin disbursing funding, there will inevitably be inaccuracies in the
maps. This could be due to error or inaccurately reported data, the
fact that broadband networks are constantly in flux and data is out of
date nearly immediately, or that a provider has a Federal or State
commitment to build a network that meets BEAD speed standards, but it
has not been completed at this time. I have heard from constituents in
my State that NTIA needs to make sure there is adequate opportunity for
interested parties to comment on areas that NTIA and the States deem
eligible for BEAD funding.
Will you commit to allowing ample time for the FCC maps to be
reviewed and, potentially, challenged?
Answer. Pursuant to section 60102(e)(1)(C) of the IIJA, the
Assistant Secretary can begin approving and distributing funding for
State broadband planning purposes after a State files a letter of
intent to participate in the program. The IIJA further directs the
Assistant Secretary, in coordination with the Commission, to allocate
the remaining BEAD funds amongst the States once the broadband DATA
maps are made public. Mapping data is vital, and we are working closely
with our colleagues at the FCC to determine how best to balance the
need to provide certainty regarding the amounts to be allocated to the
states and territories in a timely manner against the need to allow the
FCC, states, and providers to validate the content of the maps.
Question 4. Do you agree that it is important for your Department
to take a balanced approach to the program rules so experienced
providers are incentivized to participate for grant funding?
Answer. Yes
Question 5. Would you also agree that experience in building,
operating, and maintaining broadband networks should be taken into
consideration in grant application reviews?
Answer. Section 60102(g)(2) of the IIJA obligates States to, among
other things, ensure that any prospective subgrantee is capable of
carrying out activities funded by the subgrant in a competent manner in
compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws; has the
financial and managerial capacity to meet the commitments of the
subgrantee under the subgrant, the requirements of the Program, and
such requirements as may be further prescribed by the Assistant
Secretary; and has the technical and operational capability to provide
the services promised in the subgrant in the manner contemplated by the
subgrant award. NTIA will provide guidance to States regarding specific
showings that States should require from prospective subgrantees.
Question 6. Will Commerce abide by the requirement that the
broadband grant program will remain technology neutral, and require
that States do the same?
Answer. There is no ``one-size-fits-all'' approach to broadband
deployment given each State's unique challenges, and NTIA will ensure
that the States have flexibility in identifying technical solutions. In
many cases, the best solution will be fiber. But we will consider any
technology that will meet America's broadband needs now and in the
future, consistent with the requirements set out in the IIJA.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Bill Hagerty
Question 1. The National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA) currently operates a budget of $45.6 million
dollars a year--a budget that this subcommittee carefully and
deliberatively crafts each year. Yet, the Bipartisan Infrastructure
legislation has now provided the NTIA with management of nearly $50
billion dollars in broadband grants. That is an astronomical budget
increase of more than 100,000 times. Secretary Raimondo, how will the
NTIA effectively manage such an enormous large increase in
responsibility?
Answer. The Department, NTIA, states, and subgrantees each have a
critical role to play in ensuring that the BEAD Program is implemented
in a manner that ensures transparency, accountability, and oversight
sufficient to, among other things, minimize the opportunity for waste,
fraud, and abuse; ensure that recipients of grants under the Program
use grant funds to further the overall purpose of the Program in
compliance with the requirements of the IIJA, the Uniform
Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements
for Federal Awards set forth at 2 C.F.R. Part 200, and other applicable
laws and regulations; and to allow the public to understand and monitor
grants and subgrants awarded under the Program. We take these
responsibilities seriously. NTIA is partnering with NIST for grant
support and is augmenting its current capacity with a significant
number of additional hires with significant grant administration
experience to help administer the programs Congress tasked NTIA with in
the IIJA.
Question 2. Secretary Raimondo, NTIA has very little experience in
the grant making process. What is the, is there a plan to ensure that
grant recipients are held accountable?
Answer. NTIA has run in the past and is running several large grant
programs. In addition, the Department has significant grant making
experience which NTIA is leveraging. The BEAD Program, which is the
largest program NTIA is implementing, will require states to submit
multiple plans for review and approval by NTIA. States will also be
required to implement their own programs to minimize waste, fraud, and
abuse. NTIA will be monitoring these processes as the program is being
implemented and executed to ensure that states and subgrantees are
meeting their obligations. In addition, Congress included clawback
provisions in the IIJA for entities that fail to meet their
obligations, NTIA will use these provisions as necessary to ensure that
the program meets its overall goals.
Question 3. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Act details that, in
calculating the allocations for the Broadband Equity, Access, and
deployment (BEAD) program, the NTIA will rely on the FCC's broadband
maps to determine and understand the gaps in service and where Federal
dollars can make the biggest difference. Secretary Raimondo, how are
the FCC maps coming along? Is there a timetable of when those maps will
be released? Has your Department been working in coordination with the
FCC as they develop these maps?
Answer. I have personally spoken with Chairwoman Rosenworcel, and
my staff, NTIA Administrator Alan Davidson, and the staff at NTIA are
in regular communication with leadership and staff at the FCC. On
February 22, 2022, the FCC announced that the window for providers to
file their initial Broadband Data Collection (BDC) data--the data that
will populate the new FCC maps--will open on June 30, 2022, and close
September 1, 2022. On March 4, 2022, the FCC published data
specifications related to the biannual submission of subscription,
availability, and supporting data for the BDC. These are important
steps toward the first publication of the maps.
Question 4. In many cases, official data is not regularly
maintained and misidentifies coverage gaps that would inappropriately
render certain localities ineligible for these funds. Often, data held
by local communities better represents the reality of coverage gaps.
So, in making funding decisions, will NTIA limit itself to the FCC
maps, or will Governors and local officials have discretion to
determine how best to use those dollars?
Answer. Pursuant to section 60102(e)(1)(C) of the IIJA, the
Assistant Secretary can begin approving and distributing funding for
state broadband planning purposes after a state files a letter of
intent to participate in the program. The IIJA further directs the
Assistant Secretary, in coordination with the Commission, to allocate
the remaining BEAD funds amongst the eligible entities once the
broadband DATA maps are made public. I agree that accurate mapping data
is vital, and we are working closely with our colleagues at the FCC to
determine how best to balance the need to provide certainty regarding
the amounts to be allocated to the states and territories in a timely
manner against the need to allow the FCC, states, and providers to
validate the content of the maps.
Section 60102(h)(2) of the IIJA will help to address your concern,
as it requires that each state ``ensure a transparent, evidence-based,
and expeditious challenge process under which a unit of local
government, nonprofit organization, or other broadband service provider
can challenge a determination made by the eligible entity in the
initial proposal as to whether a particular location or community
anchor institution within the jurisdiction of the eligible entity is
eligible for the grant funds, including whether a particular location
is unserved or underserved.'' NTIA has the opportunity and the
obligation to review the results of that challenge process.
Question 5. As you said in your opening statement, a solution for
New York or California may not work in Tennessee. For example,
Tennessee maintains provider and technology neutrality, and
consequently they have had good participation from many different types
of providers. That neutrality has allowed Tennessee to partner with
whoever would best serve an area. In fact, the Bipartisan
Infrastructure bill provides for states to use an all-of-the above
approach to broadband deployment. Secretary Raimondo, will eligible
applicants for these funds be required to demonstrate the ability and
expertise to build and maintain a broadband network before receiving
funds?
Answer. Section 60102(g)(2) of the IIJA obligates states to, among
other things, ensure that any prospective subgrantee is capable of
carrying out activities funded by the subgrant in a competent manner in
compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws; has the
financial and managerial capacity to meet the commitments of the
subgrantee under the subgrant, the requirements of the Program, and
such requirements as may be further prescribed by the Assistant
Secretary; and has the technical and operational capability to provide
the services promised in the subgrant in the manner contemplated by the
subgrant award. NTIA will provide guidance to states regarding specific
showings that states should require from prospective subgrantees.
Question 6. Will the Department of Commerce or individual states
oversee the vetting and application process?
Answer. States will design their own programs in accordance with
guidance provided by NTIA. These programs will include processes for
subgrantee selection and application evaluation. The IIJA requires
states submit both their initial and final plans to NTIA for approval.
In approving state plans, NTIA will carefully review the vetting and
application processes established by states, in addition to the other
required elements, to ensure these processes are in compliance with
guidance NTIA has provided and the overall goals of the BEAD Program.
In addition, NTIA will provide substantial technical assistance to the
states throughout the program to assist states in establishing and
executing their own state programs.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Mike Braun
Question 1. In the fiscal year 2021 appropriations bill, Congress
directed the Department to ``track the use of, and access to, any
broadband infrastructure . . . in a central database,'' and to provide
an annual report to Congress. In December, NTIA provided its first
report, in which it identified 65 Federal programs across 13 agencies.
The report also notes that NTIA was only able to ``Reflect only those
programs that responded and should not be treated as a comprehensive
view.''
While some of these programs have differing objectives, they often
share nearly identical priorities, like the RDOF, the ReConnect
Program, and Commerce's BEAD program, which all fund broadband
construction programs.
Do you do you support Congressional efforts aimed towards
consolidating the number of Federal broadband programs?
Answer. Meeting the goal of connecting everyone in America with
reliable, affordable, high-speed Internet will require a ``whole of
government'' approach that includes close coordination among Federal,
state, and community actors. We are in regular communication with our
interagency colleagues and the White House Infrastructure Task Force to
ensure full coordination. NTIA, FCC, and USDA signed an MOU in June
2021 that documents their commitment to coordinate resources and
leverage data from each to appropriately identify areas of need, and
work to avoid duplication of efforts where feasible.
Question 2. How can the Commerce Department assist lawmakers in
identifying duplication across Federal broadband programs?
Answer. As you note in your prior question, section 903 of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, also known as the ACCESS
BROADBAND Act, established the Office of Internet Connectivity and
Growth within NTIA and required it to, among other things, ``track the
construction and use of and access to any broadband infrastructure
built using any Federal support in a central database.'' Additionally,
section 60105 of the IIJA directs the FCC, ``in consultation with all
relevant Federal agencies, [to] establish an online mapping tool to
provide a locations overview of the overall geographic footprint of
each broadband infrastructure deployment project funded by the Federal
Government.'' This online mapping tool ``shall be . . . the
centralized, authoritative source of information on funding made
available by the Federal Government for broadband infrastructure
deployment in the United States.'' We are working closely with our
colleagues at the FCC to ensure that these tools will help lawmakers,
regulators, providers, and the public to identify where Federal
broadband funding has been committed.
Question 3. My constituents are particularly worried that in
implementing these funds, the Federal government will instruct States
to target more densely populated areas. By doing so, the Federal
government would be abandoning the most at-risk communities, where the
private-sector is least able to derive an investment return. This is a
particular issue that has been raised with me regarding FCC auctions,
as the most rural census blocks are often the most difficult to serve.
Do you expect to insert suggestions into your rulemaking driving states
to focus on population dense areas over rural America?
Answer. The BEAD Program seeks to provide access to affordable,
reliable, high-speed broadband service to all Americans. The IIJA lays
out a clear framework for states to fund broadband infrastructure
projects, which requires prioritizing unserved locations, then
underserved locations, and then community anchor institutions.
Question 4. Today, over-the-top content--``video streaming''--is
exploding in its use like never before. These services can place
serious strain on telecommunications network owner, ISP's, who are
tasked with delivering this data-heavy content to customers. These
problems are particularly serious in high cost rural areas. It would
appear their resources must be devoted to constantly adding capacity
rather than expanding their network to reach more unserved. But the
Federal government doesn't appear to have great data on the costs these
services add to rural network operation. I've introduced a bill to have
the FCC study this question.
Are you familiar with the costs associated with transmitting large
amounts of video data to small, rural ISPs in the rural areas of this
country?
Answer. NTIA will work with our colleagues at the FCC to explore
the issue.
Question 5. How will the Commerce Department consider these added
costs when the NTIA and the States award Federal dollars to ISPs
throughout the country to build broadband networks where they are
needed the most?
Answer. NTIA will work with our colleagues at the FCC to explore
the issue.
Question 6. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, as well as
the American Rescue Plan, encourage the use of Advanced Digital
Construction Management Systems to expedite the utilization, execution,
and oversight of projects funded. It is my understanding that the Route
6/10 Interchange Reconstruction project in Providence, which is the
largest in RIDOT history, is using the technology. Please provide for
the record the steps the Department has taken to require and facilitate
the utilization of these project management technologies?
Answer. NTIA is developing a robust technical assistance plan to
allow states to learn from each other about best practices. NTIA will
evaluate whether to include Advanced Digital Construction Management
Systems as one element of the project management technical assistance.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Richard Shelby
Question 1. Secretary Raimondo--During the hearing, you mentioned
that the Federal Communications Commission would likely complete its
updated broadband mapping data by the summer of 2022. Given that the
new FCC mapping data will be vital in determining each states'
allocation of remaining Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD)
funds, it is important that the FCC mapping data is accurate and that a
process is established to reconcile potential differences between the
new FCC mapping data and existing state mapping data prior to the
Department's disbursements of BEAD funds.
Therefore, at what point will the Department determine that BEAD
funds should begin to be distributed for state broadband planning
purposes if challenges between state mapping data and the new FCC
mapping data occur?
Answer. Pursuant to section 60102(e)(1)(C) of the IIJA, the
Assistant Secretary can begin approving and distributing funding for
state broadband planning purposes after a state files a letter of
intent to participate in the program. The IIJA further directs the
Assistant Secretary, in coordination with the Commission, to allocate
the remaining BEAD funds amongst the states once the broadband DATA
maps are made public. I agree that accurate mapping data is vital. We
are working closely with our colleagues at the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) to determine how best to balance the need to provide
certainty regarding the amounts to be allocated to the states and
territories in a timely manner against the need to allow the FCC,
states, and providers to validate the content of the maps.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Shaheen. And the hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:30 p.m., Tuesday, February 1, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
the Chair.]
COMMERCE, JUSTICE, SCIENCE, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2023
----------
TUESDAY, APRIL 26, 2022
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 10:00 a.m., in room SD-192, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeanne Shaheen, (Chair) presiding.
Present: Senators Shaheen, Leahy, Schatz, Manchin, Van
Hollen, Moran, Murkowski, Collins, Graham, Capito, Kennedy,
Hagerty, and Braun.
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEANNE SHAHEEN
Senator Shaheen. I am delighted to call to order the
Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related
Agencies, and welcome the Attorney General, Merrick Garland,
who is today's witness for the hearing to Review the
President's fiscal year 2023 funding request. It's very good to
see you again and I'm sure, as you know, we will have lots of
senators coming in and out, as the first real hearing day back
after a 2-week break. There's a lot going on. So, I hope you
will be patient.
This year, the President's fiscal year 2023 budget request
for the Department of Justice is $39 billion. That's an 11
percent increase compared to the fiscal year 2022 enacted level
for the Department.
This budget provides a new focus in critically important
areas, like protecting civil rights, including a request for
increased resources for the Civil Rights Division and Community
Relations Service, to provide for more attorneys and mediators,
as well as supporting grant programs that address hate crime
prevention.
Funding increases are also requested for agencies and
programs that strengthen national security, including
additional resources to investigate domestic terrorism, combat
foreign threats, and prevent gun violence.
It was also good to see the Department's request for
increased funding for many grant programs, including nearly
double the resources for the Office on Violence Against Women
programs.
Funding requested for newer programs, including those in
the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, seem
to be much needed in order to help youth and families,
especially after this pandemic. I hope to receive an allocation
that allows us to fund longstanding, as well as newer,
programs, at as high a level as possible.
Increased grant funding also means increased support for
our police departments. This budget request does include that,
particularly for Community Oriented Policing Services, or COPS,
grants. But I would like to note that this Subcommittee has
included strong funding for law enforcement grants over the
past several years, and I think that is a commitment of this
Committee.
One area that Senator Moran and I have worked closely on is
to ensure that Byrne JAG funding receives steady increases
annually. For my State of New Hampshire, the majority of Byrne
JAG funding supports our State's drug task force, which works
to keep illegal narcotics, including fentanyl, out of our
communities. And as we know, that epidemic of opioid misuse has
dramatically increased during the pandemic.
We've also worked together, on a bipartisan basis, to
increase funding for programs and improve relations and
strengthen trust between police and the communities they serve.
Last year, we provided a total of $201 million for these
programs. This also includes overhauling the COPS development
program to have dedicated funding for mobile crisis teams,
police department accreditation, and officer training.
I'm pleased to see that the Department seems to also like
the way we restructured this COPS program and repackaged it as
the Just Policing program in your budget request this year.
Now, before I close, I want to thank the 120,000 career
employees of the Department of Justice, including law
enforcement personnel and attorneys, for their work to keep
Americans safe. I know it's been a challenging year with our
country facing unprecedented threats from those that are newer
and rapidly changing, like cybercrime, and those that are sadly
familiar, like terrorism. Your employees are meeting these
challenges while continuing to work through a global pandemic,
and we all very much appreciate their work.
I also want to thank all of those at the Department who
investigated and prosecuted the ISIS terrorists known as The
Beatles, including El Shafee Elsheikh, who murdered four
Americans, James Foley, Kayla Mueller, Steven Sotloff, and
Peter Kassig. The hard work of the U.S. Attorney's Office for
the Eastern District of Virginia recently resulted in a guilty
verdict for Elsheikh, and I think that not only sends a message
to terrorists around the world that those who commit heinous
crimes against Americans are going to be prosecuted, but it
provides some level of closure and justice for the families of
those murdered.
So, Mr. Attorney General, I look forward to our discussion
today. And with that, I'd like to recognize our Subcommittee
Vice Chair, my colleague, Senator Moran.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JERRY MORAN
Senator Moran. Senator Shaheen, thank you for convening
this hearing. Before turning to the subject matter of the
hearing, I want to express my sincere appreciation for your
stewardship of our fiscal year 2022 appropriations process and
thank my colleagues who are Members of this Subcommittee. This
Subcommittee held seven hearings, including a broadband hearing
in January that, I believe, was one of the best we've had in
our tenure.
Senator Shaheen. Absolutely.
Senator Moran. We produced a strong, bipartisan bill in the
Senate, even with complicated dynamics that were outside of our
control. And in conference, despite a very tough allocation,
Senator Leahy, a very tough allocation, we secured a final bill
that makes critical investments in scientific research, law
enforcement, space exploration, economic development, and U.S.
competitiveness. It is a bill this subcommittee can be proud
of.
Senator Shaheen, thank you for your leadership. I am
excited to continue to work with you and my colleagues as we
kick off the 2023 appropriation process.
General Garland, welcome to this hearing. This budget that
is being presented supports DOJ grant programs under the newly
reauthorized Violence Against Women Act, which I was a proud--
which I was proud to co-sponsor, and for programs that support
local police and sheriff's departments. I want to highlight
these programs as a critical tool to address the shocking
increase in violent crime, including a 30 percent surge in U.S.
murder rate, the largest single year increase in 50.
Unfortunately, violent crime continues to lack the
attention it requires. It is absolutely critical the Department
of Justice support State and local law enforcement, both
through grant programs and through joint law enforcement
operations. The budget includes an increase for fiscal year
2022 enacted--to fiscal year 2022 enacted levels for DOJ.
However, rhetoric and behavior from the administration too
often send a different signal. If law enforcement officers are
not respected, or shown respect, from our leaders, they will
not be respected within the community.
We've also seen an appalling increase in attack on police
officers. It is no surprise that the police departments and
sheriff's offices are short-staffed and having issues
recruiting new police officers.
The budget request would undermine the Board of Prison--
excuse me, the Bureau of Prisons' ability to maintain suitable,
modern facilities that are capable of delivering educational,
vocational, and fellowship programming.
In addition, request proposes new, unauthorized grant
programs intended to inhibit America's exercise of their Second
Amendment rights.
A budget request is, ultimately, a proposed allocation of
scarce resources, and it's disappointing that these messaging
programs were prioritized over the budget's critical missions
in fully addressing the surge in violent crime.
The budget request is a first step in the appropriations
process, and I look forward to working with you, Attorney
General, and with Senator Shaheen, as we craft the fiscal year
2023 Appropriations Bill. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Moran. And I realize
that the Chair of the Appropriations Committee, Senator Leahy,
is here. And I forgot to ask if he would like to offer some
opening remarks.
Senator Leahy. No, I just appreciate you and Senator Moran
holding this. I'm delighted that the Attorney General is here.
I'm delighted the country has the Attorney General. And I'll
leave it to everybody else.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Leahy. I will now turn
it over to you, Attorney General Garland.
STATEMENT OF HON. MERRICK GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL,
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Attorney General Garland. I'm on? Is this working? Yes.
Good morning.
Senator Shaheen. Maybe you can pull it closer.
Attorney General Garland. Yes. Better.
Senator Shaheen. Much.
Attorney General Garland. Okay. Good morning, Chairwoman
Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and distinguished Members of the
Subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before
you today.
Over the past 411 days that I have been Attorney General,
three co-equal priorities have guided the work of the Justice
Department--keeping our country safe, protecting civil rights,
and upholding the rule of law. These priorities reflect the
Justice Department's mission, and our mission is reflected in
the President's fiscal year 2023 budget.
Our first funding priority is keeping our country safe from
all threats, foreign and domestic, whether from hostile nation
States, terrorists, or common criminals. As our country's chief
law enforcement officer, I am committed to supporting members
of law enforcement at all levels of government as they work to
protect our country, while also safeguarding civil liberties
and ensuring our own accountability to the American people.
To these ends, the President's fiscal year 2023 budget
requests more than $20.2 billion to support the work of the
Justice Department's law enforcement components and U.S.
Attorney's offices nationwide as they carry out their complex
mission sets. These resources will strengthen the Justice
Department's efforts to reduce violent crime and gun violence,
to counter the multitude of serious and evolving threats to our
country from terrorists, cyber criminals, and hostile nation
States, to combat the violent drug trafficking networks that
are fueling our Nation's overdose epidemic, and to protect our
Nation's democratic institutions, including the one we sit in
today, from violent attack.
In addition, the President has proposed a total of more
than $30 billion in new investments over the next decade, to
support law enforcement by funding the police, preventing
crime, and accelerating criminal justice reform. In fiscal year
2023 alone, the President's budget requests more than $8
billion in grants for States and localities nationwide to fund
the police, including by putting more police officers on the
beat, and to implement community-based strategies to prevent
crime and gun violence.
The President's fiscal year 2023 budget also prioritizes
the protection of civil rights. We are seeking a 32 percent
increase in funding for the Civil Rights Division, as well as
additional resources for our U.S. Attorneys, the FBI, the
Community Relations Service, and our Office for Access to
Justice. Our Civil Rights work remains vital to safeguarding
voting rights, prosecuting hate crimes, ensuring constitutional
policing, and addressing unlawful discrimination.
Another area of departmental focus is safeguarding economic
security, fairness, and opportunity. This is reflected in our
request for resources to protect the American people from
intellectual property crimes, to reinvigorate antitrust
enforcement and consumer protection, to combat corporate crime,
and to bring to justice those who seek to profit unlawfully
from the COVID-19 pandemic. In particular, the Department
requests a total of $273 million, an increase of 41.6 percent,
for the Antitrust Division to carry out its critical mission of
promoting competition in the American economy and protecting
workers, consumers, and businesses alike.
Finally, we are requesting $11.7 billion to ensure the just
administration of our Nation's immigration courts and Federal
correctional systems. This includes $1.35 billion for the
Executive Office for Immigration Review, which I'll be
referring to as EOIR, to reduce the immigration court backlog
by hiring more than 1,200 new staff, including approximately
200 immigration judge teams over the fiscal year 2022 enacted
level.
Our request for $8.18 billion for the Bureau of Prisons
will help ensure the health, safety, and well-being of more
than 150,000 individuals in Federal custody, as well as the
officers who protect them. This request will allow BOP to hire
1,300 new correctional officers and First Step Act staff and
would be used to support rehabilitative programming and improve
conditions of confinement.
I respectfully ask for your support for our budget, as the
Justice Department works to uphold the rule of law, to keep our
country safe, and to protect civil rights for all. Thank you
for the opportunity to speak with you today.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Merrick B. Garland Attorney General of the United
States
Good morning, Chairwoman Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and
distinguished Members of this subcommittee. I appreciate the
opportunity to appear before you today on behalf of the United States
Department of Justice to discuss the President's funding request for
fiscal year 2023.
In the face of a range of evolving and complex challenges, the
Justice Department remains committed to its mission of upholding the
rule of law, keeping our country safe, and protecting civil rights. I
am pleased with the progress the Department has made on each of these
fronts since I appeared before you last June.
The Justice Department's success depends upon the trust of the
people we serve. That trust must be earned every day. Over the past
year, we have worked every day to uphold the norms and principles that
are essential to the rule of law and upon which that trust depends. We
have worked to counter the foreign-based threats from nation states,
terrorist groups, radicalized individuals, and cyber criminals that
seek to undermine our democratic and economic institutions and to sow
fear among our people. And we have worked to counter persistent
domestic-based threats. Those include domestic violent extremist acts
aimed at undermining our democratic institutions, violent crime and gun
violence that undermines our communities' trust in the rule of law, and
corporate crime that threatens our economic institutions. We have
worked to protect civil rights, stepping up efforts to deter, prevent,
and prosecute hate crimes, and to foster trust between law enforcement
and the communities we serve.
To continue and expand this important work in fiscal year 2023, the
Justice Department requests a total of $37.65 billion in discretionary
resources. Our top funding priorities are:
I. Keeping our Country Safe. Every person living in this country
expects and deserves that their government protect them from a wide
range of threats--from international and domestic terrorism to
cybercrime and violent crime. As our country's chief law enforcement
officer, I am committed to supporting members of law enforcement at all
levels as they work to protect our country from these threats, while
also safeguarding civil liberties and ensuring our own accountability
to the American people. In total, the President's fiscal year 2023
Budget requests more than $20.2 billion to expand the capacities of our
law enforcement components and U.S. Attorneys' Offices to keep our
country safe. This includes:
--A total of $10.80 billion for the Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI) to carry out its complex mission sets, including keeping
our country safe from a multitude of serious and evolving
threats, ranging from foreign terrorism to espionage and cyber
threats and from violent crime to the proliferation and
potential use of weapons of mass destruction.
--A total of $2.77 billion for the United States. Attorneys' offices,
including resources to prioritize the prosecution of violent
crime.
--A total of $3.10 billion for the Drug Enforcement Administration
(DEA) to prevent the flow of deadly drugs into our communities.
--A total of $1.81 billion for the U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) to
assist local law enforcement in apprehending violent fugitives
from our neighborhoods and to protect our nation's judges and
courts.
--A total of $1.73 billion for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) to enhance the National
Integrated Ballistic Information Network (NIBIN), modernize the
National Tracing Center, and expand multijurisdictional gun
trafficking strike forces with additional personnel.
In addition, to keep our country safe, the President's fiscal year
2023 Budget requests a total of $133.5 million for the National
Security Division, an increase of 10.6 percent above the fiscal year
2022 enacted level.
II. Protecting Civil Rights. The President's fiscal year 2023
Budget requests robust support for the Justice Department's core civil
rights components. This includes:
--A total of $215.2 million for the Civil Rights Division--an
increase of $52.7 million or 32.4 percent above the fiscal year
2022 enacted level--to expand its efforts to deter and
prosecute hate crimes, safeguard fair elections, and combat
discrimination.
--A total of $81.4 million to bolster the civil rights work of the
FBI and a total of $42.4 million to bolster the civil rights
work of the United States Attorneys' offices.
--A total of $25 million for the Community Relations Service--an
increase of 19.2 percent above the fiscal year 2022 enacted
level--to provide mediation and conciliation services to
communities impacted by conflict.
--A total of $10 million for the Office for Access to Justice to
expand equal access to justice for all.
--A total of $106.3 million in new funding to strengthen trust and
accountability in law enforcement by expanding, formalizing,
and managing Body Worn Camera programs for the FBI, DEA, USMS,
and ATF, and $7.9 million in new funding for the Environment
and Natural Resources Division's efforts to advance
environmental justice and combat the climate crisis.
The Justice Department's fiscal year 2023 request also prioritizes
significant investments in grants for state, local, Tribal and
territorial law enforcement partners nationwide. The President has
proposed a total of more than $30 billion in new investments over the
next decade to support law enforcement by funding the police,
preventing crime, and accelerating justice system reform. In fiscal
year 2023, the President's Budget includes the following resources for
our law enforcement and community partners nationwide:
--A total of $6.24 billion in discretionary and mandatory resources
for the Office of Justice Programs (OJP) to support critical
longstanding Justice Department grant programs, including Byrne
Justice Assistance Grants and Project Safe Neighborhoods, as
well as new programming that will provide state, local, Tribal,
and territorial governments with additional resources to
prevent crime, reduce gun violence, and accelerate criminal
justice system reform.
--A total of $2.83 billion in discretionary and mandatory resources
for the Community Oriented Policing Service (COPS) to support
the hiring of police and sworn law enforcement personnel
nationwide and the implementation of community-based strategies
to combat violent crime. Specifically, the Department is
seeking a total of $537 million in discretionary resources for
the COPS Hiring Program--an increase of 118 percent above the
fiscal year 2022 enacted level.
--A total of $1 billion--an increase of $425 million or 74 percent
above the fiscal year 2022 enacted level--for the Office on
Violence Against Women (OVW) to support longstanding Violence
Against Women Act (VAWA) programs, including programs that
provide critical resources to local, state, Tribal, and
territorial partners across the country to fund police,
prosecutors, courts, and victim services as well as resources
to provide legal assistance for victims, transitional housing,
and homicide and domestic violence reduction initiatives.
III. Safeguarding Economic Security, Fairness, and Opportunity. A
fair economy is foundational to the American dream. To safeguard
economic security, fairness, and opportunity for all, the President's
fiscal year 2023 Budget requests a total of $273 million, an increase
of 41.6 percent, for the Antitrust Division to carry out its critical
mission of promoting competition in the American economy and protecting
workers, consumers, and businesses alike. In addition, the Department
is committed to using every available Federal tool--including criminal,
civil, and administrative actions--to combat and prevent fraud. The
President's fiscal year 2023 Budget request renews the Department's
request for critical funds for our United States Attorneys, the
Criminal Division, and the Civil Division to protect consumers and
combat and prevent fraud, including by bringing to justice those who
seek to profit unlawfully from the COVID-19 pandemic.
IV. Administering Just Immigration Court and Correctional Systems.
The Department's fiscal year 2023 budget requests critical resources
that will allow us to carry out our responsibilities for administering
our nation's immigration court system and the Federal detention and
correctional systems. The requested funds for the Executive Office of
Immigration Review (EOIR) will increase the number of immigration
judges and broaden the availability of legal representation in
immigration court. And the requested resources for the Federal Bureau
of Prisons (BOP) will help improve staffing levels in BOP's 122
facilities nationwide while also maintaining an investment of $409.5
million for First Step Act implementation.
Greater detail on each of these priorities is provided below.
i. keeping our country safe
The Justice Department is committed to doing everything in its
power to protect the American people from all threats, foreign and
domestic, while also protecting our civil liberties. Our country
continues to face a multitude of serious and evolving threats, ranging
from foreign terrorism to domestic extremism and from cybercrime to
violent crime. These threats are as complex as at any time in our
history. And the consequences of not responding to them have never been
greater.
In the recently enacted fiscal year 2022 Omnibus, Congress provided
critical resources for the Department to strengthen its national
security and law enforcement capacities, to focus our efforts on
disrupting threats to our country, and to build deeper and even more
effective partnerships, both here at home and around the world. Moving
forward, enhancements are needed in order to keep apace of current and
emerging case demands and public safety priorities in the 94 U.S.
Attorneys' offices. The Department's fiscal year 2023 request
reiterates the need for these resource enhancements.
Today I would like to highlight five significant areas of focus to
keep our country safe: (A) reducing violent crime and gun violence; (B)
protecting national security, including by countering terrorism and
fighting cybercrime; (C) combating drug trafficking and preventing
overdose deaths; (D) protecting vulnerable communities; and (E)
protecting our democratic institutions.
A. Reducing Violent Crime and Gun Violence
Last May, the Justice Department launched a comprehensive strategy
aimed at mobilizing our Federal prosecutors, agents, investigators, and
criminal justice experts to disrupt and prosecute violent crime. To
these ends, we directed all 94 United States Attorneys' offices across
the country to work with our state and local partners to address the
violent crime problems specific to their districts. We strengthened
Project Safe Neighborhoods, our cornerstone initiative to reduce
violent crime at the community level. We launched five cross-
jurisdictional strike forces to disrupt illegal firearms trafficking in
key corridors across the country. We finalized a new rule to curb the
proliferation of unserialized ghost guns. We published model gun safety
legislation for states. We established a new policy to hold rogue gun
dealers accountable for willful violations of the law. And the
Department's law enforcement components--including ATF, DEA, FBI, and
the U.S. Marshals Service--continue to operate force-multiplying task
forces with state and local law enforcement agencies.
The Department's fiscal year 2023 funding request includes more
resources for our law enforcement components to embed agents in
homicide units in departments across the country, trace crime guns,
recover illegal firearms, pursue violent fugitives, and disrupt violent
drug trafficking. The Department's request also includes critical
resources for our U.S. Attorneys' offices to prosecute those who commit
violent crimes. In addition, the Department's request includes a
variety of increases to address the problem of violent crime and
murdered and missing indigenous persons in Indian Country. These
enhancements include additional resources for the Department's law
enforcement components and U.S. Attorneys' offices in light of the
Supreme Court's decision in McGirt v. Oklahoma, 140 S. Ct. 2452 (2020).
In addition to expanding the capacity of Federal law enforcement to
make our communities safer, the President has proposed a total of $30
billion in new mandatory investments to support law enforcement and
crime prevention over the next decade. In fiscal year 2023, the
President's Budget includes significant investments in grants for state
and local law enforcement partners nationwide. A total of $6.24 billion
is requested in discretionary and mandatory resources for OJP to
support critical longstanding Justice Department grant programs,
including Byrne Justice Assistance Grants and Project Safe
Neighborhoods, as well as new programs that will provide state, local,
Tribal, and territorial governments with additional resources to
prevent crime, reduce gun violence, and accelerate justice system
reform. In addition, a total of $2.83 billion in discretionary and
mandatory resources is requested for the COPS Office to support the
hiring of police and sworn law enforcement personnel nationwide and the
implementation of community-based strategies to combat violent crime.
Specifically, the Department is seeking a total of $537 million in
discretionary resources for the COPS Hiring Program--an increase of 118
percent above the fiscal year 2022 enacted level.
B. Protecting National Security
Countering Foreign and Domestic Terrorism. The Justice Department
remains committed to countering terrorism and keeping pace with
emerging terrorist threats while protecting civil rights and civil
liberties. Our whole-of-Department commitment to countering terrorism
is reflected in our request for more resources for our 94 U.S.
Attorneys' offices; our law enforcement components, including the FBI;
our grant-making offices; and our litigating divisions, including the
National Security Division, the Civil Rights Division, and the Criminal
Division. This request also includes resources to sustain and
strengthen the FBI's counterterrorism efforts, including its Joint
Terrorism Task Forces (JTTFs), the essential hubs for both
international and domestic counterterrorism cooperation across all
levels of government nationwide.
Enhancing Cybersecurity and Fighting Cybercrime. Keeping our
country safe also requires countering cyber threats--whether from
nation states, terrorists, or common criminals. One year ago, the
Justice Department launched a comprehensive strategic cyber review
aimed at improving our ability to investigate and prosecute state-
sponsored cyber threats, transnational criminal groups, infrastructure
and ransomware attacks, and the use of cryptocurrency and money
laundering to finance and profit from cyber-based crimes. Over the past
12 months, the Justice Department has developed and implemented
improvements on several fronts, including with respect to ransomware
attacks and the criminal misuse of cryptocurrency. The President's
fiscal year 2023 Budget requests nearly $150 million in critical
enhancements to support the Department's cyber efforts, including
investments that support efforts to build cyber investigative
capabilities at FBI field divisions and U.S. Attorneys' offices
nationwide. These investments also further enhance the cybersecurity
posture of the FBI, DEA, and Department more broadly. The Justice
Department requires these significant investments to protect its own
data and cyber infrastructure and to build on its efforts to combat the
latest cyber threats.
Countering Nation-State Threats. The Justice Department is
committed to taking a comprehensive approach that draws on the full
extent of our tools and authorities to address the alarming rise in
illegal and nefarious activities from hostile nations. The Department
places a high priority on countering threats to our country posed by
the governments of the People's Republic of China (PRC), Russia, Iran,
and North Korea. Nefarious activities from hostile nation-states are
increasingly brazen and threaten to undermine core American values and
institutions--from unlawful and malicious cyber campaigns to the theft
of technology and intellectual property to the use of espionage tools
and tactics against American companies and workers alike.
To address these threats, the Justice Department is taking a
variety of actions, including aggressively prosecuting state agents for
espionage; preventing hacking campaigns; preventing the repression of
dissidents; addressing efforts to manipulate public discourse in the
United States; and fully enforcing violations of economic sanctions and
export restrictions. The Department appreciates the $59.4 million in
supplemental funding for our efforts to respond to Russia's military
invasion of Ukraine, which, among other things, is supporting the work
of the Department's KleptoCapture Task Force. And we ask for your
support for the President's fiscal year 2023 funding request, which
seeks critical resources for Justice Department attorneys, agents, and
intelligence analysts to continue the vital work of countering threats
from hostile nation- states.
C. Combating Drug Trafficking and Preventing Overdose Deaths
The Justice Department is committed to keeping our country safe
from violent drug trafficking gangs and cartels. These criminal
networks are fueling the overdose epidemic in our country. In the
twelve months between September 2020 and September 2021, more than
104,000 Americans died due to drug overdose. The overwhelming majority
of these deaths involved opioids.
In 2021, DEA seized more than 15,000 pounds of fentanyl and more
than 20.4 million counterfeit pills, many of which contained lethal
amounts of fentanyl, marketed by criminal drug networks. The Department
remains vigilant in addressing the evolving nature of the illicit drug
threat and continues its work to dismantle illicit online drug
marketplaces and to detect, limit, and deter illegal prescriptions,
distribution, and diversion offenses that result in patient harm. We
are committed to using all available resources to combat drug
trafficking and prevent overdose deaths in the United States.
The President's fiscal year 2023 budget requests critical resources
to combat dangerous drug trafficking gangs and cartels and to prevent
the flow of deadly drugs into our communities. This includes our
request for a total of $3.10 billion for DEA's investigations,
counterdrug efforts across 241 domestic offices and 92 foreign offices
in 69 countries around the world, and diversion control. The
Department's funding request also includes more than a half a billion
dollars in opioid-related grants, including increased funding for drug
courts and locally driven responses to opioids and substance use.
D. Protecting Vulnerable Populations
The Department is committed to protecting and supporting all
communities, including the most vulnerable among us. That includes our
special obligation to protect children from crime and exploitation.
Likewise, elder abuse, fraud, and neglect remain urgent problems in our
country, particularly as the COVID-19 pandemic ushered in a new wave of
exploitative practices targeted at seniors. The Department also has a
unique legal relationship with, and responsibility to, federally
recognized Tribes. Gender-based violence, including domestic violence,
dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking, cuts across
socioeconomic, racial, and geographic lines. In addition, low-income
communities, LGBTQ communities, communities of color, people with
disabilities, non-citizens, and victims of human trafficking face
disproportionately high rates of victimization. The Justice Department
is dedicated to protecting these communities.
The President's fiscal year 2023 requests seeks to make investments
in all of these areas. For example, the Department seeks an additional
$21 million for OJP's Missing and Exploited Children Program and
requests additional funds for the Criminal Division's Child
Exploitation and Obscenity Section. The Department seeks to invest a
total of $1 billion in the Office on Violence Against Women, an
increase of $425 million or 74 percent above the fiscal year 2022
enacted level. This funding request supports longstanding Violence
Against Women Act programs, including programs that provide critical
resources to all states and territories to fund police, prosecutors,
and courts, as well as resources to provide legal assistance for
victims, transitional housing, and homicide and domestic violence
reduction initiatives.
E. Protecting Our Democratic Institutions
Finally, keeping our country safe requires protecting its
democratic institutions, including the one we sit in today, from
violent attack. The Department will continue to work closely with
state, local, Tribal, and territorial law enforcement to protect public
servants--from local election officials to Members of Congress--from
violence and threats of violence. Among other things, the President's
fiscal year 2023 Budget seeks critical resources for the U.S. Attorneys
as well as the U.S. Marshals Service to safeguard the security of
Federal judges nationwide, including an increase of more than $32
million to support judicial and Federal courthouse security.
ii. protecting civil rights
Protecting civil rights was a founding purpose of the Justice
Department in 1870. We began our work during Reconstruction to enforce
the rights promised by the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth
Amendments. This required confronting the racist conduct of the Ku Klux
Klan and others who used terror and violence to keep Black Americans
from exercising their civil rights. Today, nearly 152 years after the
Department's founding, far too many still face discrimination in
voting, housing, and the criminal justice system; and
disproportionately bear the brunt of the harm caused by pandemic,
pollution, and climate change. Among a variety of investments, the
Department's top civil rights funding priorities include:
A. Reinvigorating Civil Rights Enforcement
The Civil Rights Act of 1957 created the Justice Department's Civil
Rights Division with the mission of upholding the civil and
constitutional rights of all Americans. Today, the Division's work
remains vital, including bringing cases to safeguard voting rights,
prosecute hate crimes, and end unlawful discrimination. The
Department's request seeks a total of $215.2 million for the Civil
Rights Division, an increase of $52.7 million, or 32.4 percent, over
the fiscal year 2022 enacted level.
The Department's dedication to civil rights enforcement is not
limited to the Civil Rights Division, and the fiscal year 2023 request
reflects this broader commitment. The Department seeks a total of $81.4
million--an increase of 28 percent--for the FBI's investigations into
alleged violations of the Federal civil rights laws, and a total of
$42.4 million--an increase of 24 percent--for the civil rights work of
the U.S. Attorneys' offices.
B. Fostering Trust and Accountability in Law Enforcement
The Justice Department's budget request seeks $106.3 million in new
funding to strengthen trust and accountability in law enforcement by
expanding, formalizing, and managing Body Worn Camera programs for the
FBI, DEA, USMS, and ATF. These cameras would be used not only by our
state and local law enforcement and task force partners, but also by
Federal agents.
The Department's budget request also includes a total of $25
million for the Community Relations Service to provide mediation and
conciliation services to communities impacted by conflict. The
Department's requested grant funding also supports these efforts and
includes $23 million for the COPS Just Policing Program, which will
expand upon current, effective approaches within law enforcement
agencies that can reform organizational culture, practices, and
recruitment.
C. Expanding Access to Justice and Reforming Criminal and Juvenile
Justice Systems
The Department's fiscal year 2023 request includes $10 million to
fund the newly re-established Office for Access to Justice to broaden
the scope of its programs and activities, including through improving
language access coordination and improving pro bono services.
The Department's request also seeks to leverage the capacity of the
Federal justice system to advance innovative criminal justice reform
initiatives and serve as a model for reform that is not only
comprehensive in scope, but evidence-informed and high-impact. For
example, the Department's fiscal year 2023 request seeks a total of
$760 million for juvenile justice grants. The Department also requests
a total of $409.5 million for First Step Act implementation, including
$100 million for a collaboration between the Justice Department and the
Department of Labor for a national initiative to provide comprehensive
workforce development services to people in the Federal prison system,
both during their time in BOP facilities and after they are transferred
to community placement.
D. Advancing Environmental Justice and Tackling the Climate Crisis
The Justice Department is committed to implementing Executive Order
14008, Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad (January 27,
2021), which establishes a whole-of- government approach to addressing
the climate crisis and formalizes the Federal government's commitment
to environmental justice. To these ends, the Department's request
includes a total of $142 million--an increase of $22 million or 18.2
percent above the fiscal year 2022 enacted level--for the Environment
and Natural Resources Division. Among other things, this funding would
support the Division's efforts to combat the climate crisis, launch an
Office for Environmental Justice, and execute a comprehensive
environmental enforcement strategy.
iii. safeguarding economic security, fairness, and opportunity
A fair economy is foundational to the American dream. Fraud, theft,
corruption, bribery, and anticompetitive agreements threaten the free
and fair markets upon which our economy is based. They decimate the
assets of individuals, organizations, and governments alike, and they
increase costs for every American. Corporate crime also weakens our
economic institutions by undermining public trust in the fairness of
those institutions. In its pursuit of fair markets, the Justice
Department will ensure that everyone in our economy competes by the
same rules; that tax dollars flow to their intended recipients; and
that corporate crime is deterred, detected, and prosecuted.
A. Preventing the Theft of Technology and Intellectual Property
Protecting the American people from intellectual property crimes is
a priority for the Department of Justice. These crimes threaten our
national security and economic security as well as public health and
safety. The Justice Department is committed to deploying a whole-of-
Department approach to enforcing intellectual property rights and the
President's fiscal year 2023 Budget seeks critical resources for the
Criminal and the National Security Divisions, as well as the FBI and
our United States Attorneys, to pursue complex intellectual property
crime investigations around the world.
B. Reinvigorating Antitrust Enforcement and Consumer Protection
Antitrust and consumer protection laws are the charter of our
economic liberty. The Justice Department is committed to the vigorous
enforcement of these laws. Anticompetitive practices hurt the American
people--producers, consumers, and workers alike. And they hurt the
American economy. Too many industries have become too consolidated over
time. Too many companies have pursued corporate conduct and more
aggressive mergers that have made all of us vulnerable. Against this
background, our antitrust enforcement efforts cannot and will not slow
down. No matter the industry and no matter the company, the Justice
Department will vigorously enforce our antitrust laws. We will
aggressively protect consumers, safeguard competition, and work to
ensure economic fairness and opportunity for all.
The Department's Antitrust Division has been underfunded for too
long and has nearly 400 fewer staff today than it had in 1979. That is
why we are seeking critical resources to reinvigorate our enforcement
efforts and ensure a competitive economy for all Americans. In
particular, the President's fiscal year 2023 Budget seeks a total of
$273 million, an increase of $80.2 million or 41.6 percent over the
fiscal year 2022 enacted level, for the Antitrust Division. These
additional funds will allow the Antitrust Division to meet the
challenges of its growing civil and criminal enforcement programs,
including by hiring additional attorneys and support staff, and by
modernizing the Antitrust Division's information technology
infrastructure to support litigation against sophisticated defendants.
In addition, the Justice Department is committed to using criminal,
civil, and administrative actions to protect consumers. The Department
will work to ensure the safety of food, medicines, and consumer
products, and will safeguard consumer information from unlawful
acquisition and use. Using our full array of civil and criminal
enforcement tools, we will hold accountable those who make fraudulent
or misleading representations in the marketing of goods, especially
where such conduct risks consumer harm.
C. Combating Corruption and Financial Crime
Another critical focus of the Department's budget request is
investing in combating corruption and financial crime that weakens our
economic institutions. The Department's request seeks significant
investments in the Consumer Protection Branch, our U.S. Attorneys'
offices, the FBI, and the Criminal Division to promote economic
competition and prevent the theft of intellectual property, deter and
prosecute corporate crime, protect the government against fraud, and
combat corruption. The Department is specifically focused on
prioritizing the prosecution of COVID-19 related fraud through its
COVID-19 Fraud Enforcement Task Force.
D. Promoting the Integrity and Efficiency of the Bankruptcy System
Congress established the United States Trustee Program in 1977 to
serve as the ``watchdog'' of our nation's bankruptcy system. In that
role, United States Trustees oversee nearly one million ongoing
bankruptcy cases annually, undertake tens of thousands of civil
enforcement actions, and refer thousands of criminal matters to U.S.
Attorneys' offices for investigation and prosecution each year. The
President's fiscal year 2023 Budget requests a total of $260 million
for this important program to protect the interests of all stakeholders
in the bankruptcy process by advocating for strict, equitable
compliance with the law and addressing violations by debtors,
creditors, and professionals alike.
E. Revitalizing Tax Enforcement
The integrity of our tax system is vital to maintaining public
confidence. Honest taxpayers must be able to trust that they will not
bear an undue share of the Federal tax burden. The President's fiscal
year 2023 Budget requests $121.3 million, an increase of 4.4 percent
above the fiscal year 2022 level, for the Department's Tax Division to
support its vital mission of enforcing our tax laws fully, fairly, and
consistently.
iv. administering just immigrationcourt and correctional systems
The President's fiscal year 2023 Budget requests a total of $11.7
billion for the Department to carry out its responsibilities for
administering both our nation's immigration court system and our
Federal correctional system.
A. Administering an Equitable and Efficient Immigration Court System
The Justice Department is responsible for equitably and efficiently
administering our nation's immigration court system. The Department's
fiscal year 2023 request would strengthen our ability to apply the
immigration laws justly, consistently, and in a timely fashion, while
ensuring due process under the law. The Executive Office for
Immigration Review (EOIR) needs more resources to address the case
backlog, which has been growing for over a decade. For fiscal year
2023, the Department requests a total of $1.35 billion for EOIR to
reduce the backlog of immigration cases. This request will allow EOIR
to hire more than 1,200 new staff, including approximately 200 new
immigration judges above the fiscal year 2022 enacted level. The
President's fiscal year 2023 Budget also expands EOIR's virtual court
initiative and invests new resources in legal access programming.
B. Maintaining a Safe and Humane Correctional System
Administering the Federal detention and prison systems are also
critical parts of the Justice Department's responsibilities. The fiscal
year 2023 funding request seeks a total of $2.13 billion for the U.S.
Marshals Service for Federal prisoner detention. In addition, the
Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) is currently responsible for the
custody and care of more than 150,000 Federal inmates. It is critical
that prisons, detention centers, and community-based facilities are
safe, humane, cost-efficient, and secure.
Adequate staffing is a prerequisite to safe and secure facilities,
and we must ensure that even facilities in hard-to-recruit areas are
fully staffed. To this end, the Department requests a total of $8.18
billion for BOP to ensure the health, safety, and wellbeing of
incarcerated individuals and correctional staff, and to ensure
transparency, accountability, and effective oversight of all Federal
prisons and detention centers. This request would allow BOP to hire
more than 700 new correctional officers and nearly 600 new First Step
Act staff. These funds would also be used to support rehabilitative
programming and improve conditions of confinement.
I respectfully ask for your support for the President's fiscal year
2023 funding request as the Justice Department works to uphold the rule
of law, keep our country safe, and protect civil rights for all.
Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much. For those who came in
a little later, let me just point out, we will have a 5-minute
questioning period and senators will be called on in order of
arrival rather than seniority, because we are no longer doing
any virtual hearings in this Committee. So, I will begin.
Last month you announced the establishment of Task Force
KleptoCapture, which was described as an interagency effort
dedicated to enforcing sanctions, export restrictions, and
economic countermeasures against Russia. As I understand, this
includes targeting the crimes committed by Russian officials,
oligarchs, and others, who aid or conceal unlawful conduct. I
know that the country is watching very closely what's happening
in the war--the unprovoked war of Russia against Ukraine, and
that one huge element in that is being able to reduce the
amount of funding for that war that Russia has. So, can you
talk a little bit about where you are, in terms of the
interagency effort and the kind of cooperation you're getting
internationally?
Attorney General Garland. Yes. And I second what you said
about what we're all seeing on the news, almost everyday--
incredibly graphic videos of horrible atrocities that are going
on in Ukraine. It's not just the war, it's the way in which the
war is being prosecuted by the Russian government. Pictures of
dead bodies of civilians in the streets, some bound with their
hands behind their backs, intentional bombing of civilian
residential apartments, of a theater in Mariupol. All of those
pictures are just horrific and are the kind of things anybody
growing up in the 20th century never expected to see in the
21st again--a land war in Europe.
So, every part of this government is doing its part. The
Justice Department's role, right now, is to investigate and
prosecute sanctions violations. So, we have, as you said, the
KleptoCapture Task Force. Its purpose is to go after the assets
that the Treasury Department has sanctioned, as well as to go
off--to go after assets that have been laundered against the
money laundering statute for criminal behavior by the Russian
oligarchs.
So, in addition, we are participating in the Treasury
Department's REPO task force, which is the international task
force, where I have met with, unfortunately virtually, the Home
Secretaries, Attorneys General, and Treasury Secretaries of the
participating countries. The international cooperation has been
superb, really superb, and heartwarming for law enforcement
officers who often have to twist arms and beg for extraditions
and other sorts of cooperation abroad. There is no resistance
at all, now.
Senator Shaheen. Can you talk about how the Department is
going to be dealing with the proceeds from any recovered
assets?
Attorney General Garland. Yes. So, the money would go into
the Asset Forfeiture Fund. First thing we have to do is freeze
the assets. Second thing is we have to get a forfeiture. Third
is it has to go in the Asset Forfeiture Fund. The gov--we would
support legislation that would allow some of that money to go
directly to Ukraine. That's not the current circumstance, with
respect to the Fund. But under the current circumstances, like
all forfeited assets, these assets would go into the Asset
Forfeiture Fund.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. We will take that under
advisement in the committee.
Let me also just editorialize a minute and say, I hope that
these efforts will allow for future follow up that will take a
look at how corrupt money is being laundered in the West, and
produce a real effort to shut that down, not just in Russia but
anywhere it's occurring.
One of the issues that you and I discussed on the phone, in
advance of this hearing, was my concern about how long it's
taking to get some of the nominees approved, for U.S. Attorney,
for U.S. Marshals. And I understand that there are two
problems. One had been the challenge of getting the background
checks done on those nominees. And I guess I would be
interested in hearing whether there are more resources that
need to be put toward that. We need to take a look at that
process and see if there are changes that need to be made. And
then, of course, the other challenge is here in the Senate,
with individuals who are holding up those nominees.
So, can you speak, first, to what happens when we have U.S.
Attorneys--in New Hampshire, our U.S. Attorney nominee, it's
been over a year--almost, I think, over a year now that she has
been forwarded to the White House and is on hold. Can you just
speak to the challenge with addressing crime around the country
when we have U.S. Attorneys who are taking that long to get
approved?
Attorney General Garland. Yes. So, the United States
Attorneys, as well as the United States Marshals, are the tip
of spear of our effort to fight violent crime. They are the
ones who convene the task forces in every one of the 94 U.S.
Attorney office districts. The task forces are combinations of
all of our Federal law enforcement, the four law enforcement
agencies of the Justice Department, as well as the law
enforcement agencies of the Department of Homeland Security and
other Federal agencies, combined with State, local,
territorial, and Tribal law enforcement. These cooperative task
forces then, also, cooperate with the local communities.
And that is the way in which the best attack on violent
crime is possible. To look at what's needed in the local area,
to identify the primary drivers, that is, particularly, the
repeat shooters, to get them off the streets and to get them in
jail. And to organize those things, we need confirmed United
States Attorneys. The work of the actings is excellent but, as
everyone knows, in order to establish policies and programs in
any office, it's important to have a permanent head.
So, I couldn't--I couldn't urge more strongly for the
Senate to approve, as swiftly as possible, the U.S. Attorney
nominees and the Marshals nominees.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you very much. Is it fair to
say that the hold up in--when people are holding these
individuals up for other purposes, that that has a negative
impact on our ability to fight crime?
Attorney General Garland. Yes, I don't want to get into the
inner workings of the Senate, but what I will say is that any
time we're not getting confirmed law enforcement officers it
does have a negative effect on our ability to fight violent
crime, cybercrime, all the responsibilities that the United
States Attorneys and Marshals have.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. I won't quote you at
that. I will say it myself. Senator Moran.
Senator Moran. General Garland, thank you. You're aware,
and we've talked about even yet this morning, the tremendous
increase in levels of violent crime. The murder rate has surged
30 percent in 2020. It's the largest increase in over 50 years,
in any single year. But overall violent crime, which includes
assaults, robberies, and rapes increase by 5 percent.
Joint operations between Federal law enforcement and local
and State law enforcement seem to be successful. We've had
Operation Legend and Operation Triple Beam in our State.
Director Wrasy joined me in Kansas earlier this year. We met
with our local State law enforcement officials. During that
conversation, the Chief Karl Oakman, of the Kansas City, Kansas
Police Department, expressed his desire--first of all, how
valuable those joint operations were and his desire to see more
of them. And of course, that's not unique to the Kansas City
region of our State.
To what extent are joint law enforcement operations a part
of the DOJ's plan to combat violent crimes?
Attorney General Garland. Well, they are the center of our
strategy. In May of 2021, after I'd been in office just a
couple of months, I saw the same statistics that you're
referring to now about the rise in violent crime--the startling
rise in 2020, which continued into 2021. And so, I launched our
first violent crime strategy for the Department. That really
includes three pillars, all of which are the ones you're
talking about, which is joint task forces among Federal law
enforcement, joint task forces between Federal and the State
and local law enforcement, and involvement of the community
because it is essential that the community let us know where
the bad guys are and who the bad guys are. So, it is the core
of what we do.
So, the money that we're asking for comes in, I would say,
two buckets here. We're asking for more than $20 billion--
that's an increase of 8.2 percent--for our Federal law
enforcement in the Justice Department, all of whom participate
in these task forces. So, that includes the U.S. Attorney's
offices, the FBI, the ATF, the DEA, the U.S. Marshals Service.
Then, we're asking for $8.2 billion, which is an increase
in $5.48 billion, for grants for State and local law
enforcement, for the sheriffs you're talking about, for the
police you mentioned in your opening, as well. This includes
money for COPS hiring, for the Byrne JAG grant that the Chair
spoke of, which are used for these task forces, for OVW grants,
some of which are also used for investigative task forces.
That's the way we are able to create these joint task forces.
And so, that's--I completely agree with your assessment.
Senator Moran. General, thank you. I--you mentioned the
U.S. Marshals. I, too, would mention the U.S. Marshals
Service's Regional Fugitive Task Force as another valuable
combination of local and Federal law services.
Let me turn to--in 2021, the DOJ Office of the Inspector
General released a report that revealed multiple agents at the
FBI had mishandled the investigation into former U.S.A.
gymnastics physician, Larry Nasser, and subsequently, lied
about their misconduct. I want to take this moment, in your
presence, to again raise my strong concerns with the fact that
it seems these agents have not been held fully accountable for,
what you described as, an institutional failure.
I understand that DOJ is reviewing its earlier decision.
This is an issue that Senator Blumenthal and I pursued in the
Commerce Committee. But you are reviewing the decision not to
criminally charge these agents. Could you provide me a status
update as to where this issue lies?
Attorney General Garland. Yes. So, you are right. This is a
horrible institutional failure. I--it's almost unspeakable--it
is unspeakable, what happened to those gymnasts, and also
unspeakable, the way in which the investigation failed to
proceed. We have created institutional changes, in that regard,
to make sure it doesn't happen again. The FBI has revised its
procedures and the Deputy Attorney General has issued memoranda
to the field so that, whenever a U.S. Attorney's office or
Federal law enforcement decides not to follow up, that they
immediately advise State and local law enforcement, so that
they can continue.
Your description of--so, the question of the
investigation--so, the FBI's internal disciplinary work is
still in progress. The question of reopening the earlier
declination is in the hands of the Assistant Attorney General
for the Criminal Division, Kenneth Polite, who is continuing to
review the matter.
Senator Moran. Does that mean that the FBI made a report to
the--to that official who is now reviewing that report?
Attorney General Garland. I think--it is the--the referral
came from the Inspector General's report. So, it's the report
that you are aware of that was given to the Criminal Division
to review the earlier decision to decline.
Senator Moran. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Moran. Senator Leahy.
Senator Leahy. Thank you, Chair. Attorney General, as I
mentioned earlier, I'm glad you're here this morning. Time is
short, so I'll get right to the questions.
I'd like to start with the VOCA Fix Act, VOCA, signed into
law last year. We passed this legislation to give a much
needed, steady stream of deposits into the Crime Victims Fund.
As you know, that fund helps crime victims all over the
country. A major piece of the legislation requires funds
collected under deferred and non-prosecution agreements to be
deposited in the Crime Victims Fund.
Now, I understand that there was a sizable deposit in the
first month of implementation, but the collection's been
deferred, and non-prosecution agreements have actually been
quite low. Across October and November, for example, the actual
total deposited in the Crime Victims Fund was around $1
million. What accounts for such starkly low deposits from what
it used to be? Is the Department concerned that this may end up
with a zero balance in the Crime Victims Fund?
Attorney General Garland. So, this is going to be a
complicated answer. I'm going to do the best I can. I may have
to refer to Assistant Attorney General Loftus, who knows the
details of the numbers far better than I. But I'll see if I can
walk you through where we are here.
The VOCA Fix, which we greatly supported and are greatly
appreciative, allowed the money to include the deferred
prosecution agreements, which were not available before. The
Deputy Attorney General sent a memorandum to all United States
Attorneys' offices and to the FBI and law enforcement, to
ensure that the money that comes from deferred prosecution
agreements is tagged for the Victims of Crime Fund. So, we are
making those changes.
Senator Leahy. Is it making clear that's a priority?
Attorney General Garland. Yes. That--the money there must
be put in and it's a priority to make sure that that happens.
And you are right that, in September--my figure is $254 million
was deposited, which was the largest monthly deposit in the
last 4 fiscal years. That was immediately after the VOCA Fix
came into effect. In fiscal year 22 the numbers I have for the
first 6 months are $409 million in the fund.
You know, these are cyclical. They go up and down. It
depends on whether there was a deferred prosecution agreement,
whether there were forfeitures and other seizures during that
time. So, I don't think we have enough information, yet, to
know what the numbers--
Senator Leahy. I would ask only the Department make it
clear that it is a priority that it goes there. And because of
time, let me mention another thing. There's been a lot of
bipartisan support in the Violence Against Women
Reauthorization Act. But what we, the Appropriations Committee,
determined to do was put it as part of the fiscal year 2022
Omnibus Appropriations Package because we're concerned, in the
normal course of events, it might not have gotten up for a
vote. But the President's fiscal year 2023 budget doesn't
account for some of the new programs that were included in
Violence Against Women Act.
Many of us had worked across the aisle to improve that Act,
to enlarge it. I know that, when I was Chair of Judiciary, we
added Native Americans, the LGBTQ community, sexual
exploitation of minors. So, is the Department going to support
the new programs enacted by VAWA, and will you make sure that
your budget shows that?
Attorney General Garland. The answer is yes. I'm not sure
which programs, I'd like to have our staffs talk about them,
didn't make it in.
Senator Leahy. Okay, I will, because we came together to
get VAWA through the way we did. But I also want to make sure
that we have the funding and that you have what you need there.
And lastly, and I'll just submit this for the record,
because I see my time is up, you recently issued Freedom of
Information Act guidelines. And I'm pleased with that. But I'm
concerned about the enforcement of it. So, I will also submit a
letter for the record on that and appreciate your answer,
Attorney General.
[The information follows:]
Clerk's Note: A question for the record on FOIA was submitted
rather than an actual letter.
Attorney General Garland. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Leahy. Senator Collins.
Senator Collins. Thank you, Madam Chair. Welcome, Mr.
Attorney General. The administration has taken conflicting
positions on whether or not the COVID pandemic constitutes a
public health emergency. Could you please explain to the
subcommittee how the Department can justify arguing in court
that the pandemic has subsided enough to warrant the
termination of Title 42, which will worsen the problem of tens
of thousands of unvaccinated migrants illegally entering the
county, while at the same time arguing in a separate case that
the public health consequences are dire enough to warrant
compelled mask usage by Americans on public transportation?
Attorney General Garland. Yes. Thank you, Senator. It's
just, I think, important to--for me to explain the role of the
Justice Department, which is not to make judgments about the
public health and, really, not to make judgments about policy
in either of the two areas that you're--that you're raising,
but rather to make determinations of whether the programs and
requests of the agencies that are responsible for those are
lawful.
So, with respect to the mask mandate on the planes, I think
this is quite transparent. The CDC announced its assessment
that this was a program that continued to be necessary in the
confines of airplanes and public transportation. The only
question for us is, is that a lawful--and they asked us to
appeal. The Solicitor General concluded it was lawful and so we
have appealed.
With respect to Title 42, it's the same analysis from our
side, from the Justice Department's side. The only question
here is the CDC's program. It's the--CDC's announcement and its
assessment and we defend that program as long as it's lawful.
We don't make the public health determinations that you're
speaking of.
Senator Collins. And I understand that. I think that the
CDC has put the Justice Department in an untenable position of
arguing one position in one case, and a completely conflicting
position in another case. But I understand that you don't make
the public health determination.
Let me switch to another consequence of the uncontrolled
southern border. In the year between September 2020 and
September 2021, more than 104,000 Americans died from drug
overdoses. In Maine, we set a horrific new record, 636 people
died from drug overdoses. That was a 23 percent increase from
the previous year. In 2021, the Maine Drug Enforcement Agency
seized more than 10,000 grams of fentanyl. That's a 67 percent
increase from the previous year. Just 3 months into this year,
agents tell me that they have already seized half of last
year's total.
Law enforcement officials in Maine and elsewhere, tell me
that these drugs are largely entering the United States through
the southern border, where resources that could be targeting
drug interdiction are instead being diverted to help with the
influx of migrants illegally crossing the border. Do you agree
that the government's inability to secure the southern border
has lead to more drugs coming into our country?
Attorney General Garland. Look, I--the opioid epidemic, and
particularly the influx of fentanyl, is just horrifying and
extraordinarily sad for the large numbers of Americans who are
becoming addicted and who have become addicted. We--the job of
the Justice Department is to fight the large-scale drug
trafficking organizations that are bringing this money--these
drugs into the country.
And that's the reason we have asked for large increases for
all of our anti-drug programs. The DEA has asked for a $102
million increase, which is for a total of $3.1 billion, to
fight the very issues that you're speaking of. The U.S.
Marshal's Service has asked for $1 billion for drug trafficking
fugitive capture. The U.S. Attorney's offices $106 million, the
FBI $161 million, the Criminal Division $446.9 million,
including regional opioid task forces, and the COPS grants. The
money that we're giving includes the money for the anti-heroin
and anti-meth task forces.
So, we are doing--we are asking for all the money we can
get, and we are not stopping here. As you no doubt know, I
announced the indictment and extradition of the former
President of Honduras to the United States to face justice for
organizing drug trafficking coming out of the Northern
Triangle. We will be persistent in that effort.
Senator Collins. Thank you.
Senator Moran. Senator Manchin.
Senator Manchin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you,
Honorable Merrick Garland. I want to thank you for your
continued support of public service. It's been wonderful and we
appreciate very much your position.
Let's start on voting rights. I've always believed that
healthy democracy depends on a voting system that is
accessible, free, fair, and secure. While history is going to
tell us that we've come a long way in ensuring all individuals,
regardless of their race, sex, or political affiliation have
the ability to cast their vote, we can all agree that we still
have a lot of work to do.
I'm particularly concerned about the recent opinions and
rulings that seem to undercut decades of established legal
precedent under the Voting Rights Act. Specifically in
February, a Federal district court in Arkansas ruled that only
the U.S. Attorney General has standing to enforce Section 2 of
the Voting Rights Act. The court found that it would be
inappropriate to imply a private right of action to enforce
Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.
So, your opinion on that, sir, with that interpretation?
You agree, disagree, and what impact, if any, could this ruling
have on voting rights, if this was adopted across the country.
Attorney General Garland. Yes, very good question, Senator.
On the first question, normally I don't, sort of, opine.
Senator Manchin. I understand.
Attorney General Garland. In this case, I've already
opined, so I don't think it hurts any to do that. We have
filed--across the country, in a number of these cases, we
believe there is a private right of action to enforce the
Voting Rights Act. It has always been assumed that that was the
case, since the Act was passed in the mid-60s. No one has ever
questioned it, I think, until this year.
To the second point, the consequences of the Justice
Department being the only one who can bring voting rights
cases, I'm going to be blunt. You're going to have to give us a
lot more money. If the Justice Department has to bring every
single case to enforce voting rights, we're going to have--
Senator Manchin. You know, the argument about that, sir--
I'm sorry to interrupt you, but the argument about that--you
hear the pros and cons on that. They're saying, well, there'd
be too much litigation. That, you know--and if you had
everybody being able to declare that they've been infringed
upon. And we don't see that going any further than that. We're
having all these discussions in our committees, but we're
trying to get a clarity on that. But it seems like, to me, that
the person has that right, but it hasn't been exercised if it's
been frivolous. I haven't seen it go any further, so I don't
know how it's been a strain on the court system.
Attorney General Garland. So, I--you know, I haven't done
an analysis of the court system, but this has been the rule
that we've had all the way since the mid-60s. I've never heard
any complaints that it is taxing the court system in any--
Senator Manchin. Yes, we haven't either.
Attorney General Garland. Any way.
Senator Manchin. Sir, if I could switch a little bit on
that, and that's very helpful. We're working on that. On the
price gouging--we hear a lot about price gouging right now. And
we saw that with a--when we first had the--when we first had
COVID brought to our attention, horrible epidemic, back in May
of 2020--March of 2020. We saw that with N95 masks, Clorox
wipes, toilet paper at the beginning of the pandemic, and now,
we're going to--we're seeing it again, this time with fuel
prices and food prices and things of that sort. Should there be
a criminal price gouging statute?
Attorney General Garland. Well, this is a matter of huge
debate and antitrust and economics. I'd like to hold off on
that, but our staff would be happy to work with--
Senator Manchin. Right now, what constitutes you all,
basically, taking it under your surveillance, if you will,
acceptable prices for scarce products? What constitutes the
acceptable prices for scarce--
Attorney General Garland. So--right--
Senator Manchin. Market demands, things of this sort,
global pricing.
Attorney General Garland. So, for us, the questions are
unlawful agreements to fix prices and exclusionary behavior by
monopolists and near monopolists. So, if we're in either of
those circumstances, if they exclude competition, that falls
under the antitrust laws and, likewise, agreements on prices
between competitors.
Senator Manchin. And I want to follow up, also, on Senator
Collins' concerns on the opioid epidemic. Myself and Senator
Capito, in the State of West Virginia, we've been number one as
far as getting slammed with this. Can you speak to the status
of DOJ's current efforts to curtail the opioid crisis,
including the Appalachian Regional Prescription Opioid, or what
we call the ARPO Strikeforce?
Attorney General Garland. Yes, so I think that's a--and I
hope you agree, I think that's a very effective task force.
That money is included in our request for funds. I think it--
I'm not sure whether that's the one that comes under the Office
of Justice programs or under the Criminal Division, but those
task forces, both the meth and heroin ones that Senator Collins
was concerned about the last time we spoke, and the opioid one
that you're talking about--
Senator Manchin. We need your support for that, sir.
Attorney General Garland. We support, and we support
expanding those and, if we get the money requested in the
budget--
Senator Manchin. Very quickly, I want to follow up with, I
introduced the DEA Enforcement and Authority Act that would
amend the immediate suspension order standard of review from a
substantial likelihood of an immediate threat standard to a
probable cause standard. That's, again, order standard of a
review from a substantial likelihood of an immediate threat to
a probable cause standard. So, what additional authorities do
you believe DOJ or FBI need in order to effectively stop the
flow of prescription opiates and other illegal drugs? Because
the substantial likelihood is pretty darn broad and probable
cause, we know exactly what their intent are.
Attorney General Garland. So, I haven't been directly
involved in the question of the standard here. Our Consumer
Protection branch does the work on--
Senator Manchin. If you could look--we have that piece of
legislation. I think all of us have been--our States have been
ravaged by this--
Attorney General Garland. Yes.
Senator Manchin. Horrible addiction that we have, and drugs
continue to flow. It might give us a better chance to fight
this opioid onslaught or drug onslaught. But if you could look
into the language, if you all could support, that's the DEA--
it's the Enforcement and Authority Act.
Attorney General Garland. All right.
Senator Moran. Senator Manchin, thank you.
Attorney General Garland. We'll be happy to do that,
Senator.
Senator Moran. Senator Kennedy.
Senator Kennedy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you,
General, for being here. Could you pull that mic closer to you,
please, sir.
Attorney General Garland. Oh, I'm sorry. Is that better?
Yes.
Senator Kennedy. Yes, sir. General, I think the Justice
Department is losing. I think you're losing on crime. I think
you're losing on drugs. I think you're losing on immigration. I
think you're losing on Chinese espionage.
Let me start with crime. What percentage of cops in America
do you think are bad cops?
Attorney General Garland. A very small percentage.
Senator Kennedy. Like, how small?
Attorney General Garland. I don't have a number. I think
most police--
Senator Kennedy. Well, you're the country's chief--one of
the country's chief law enforcement officers.
Attorney General Garland. Yes, but--
Senator Kennedy. Is it less than 10 percent?
Attorney General Garland. Yes. Let me just be clear. We
believe that most police officers follow the Constitution in
their practices. Most police departments do. And all police
officers, I believe, want to work in police departments that
follow constitutional policing requirements.
Senator Kennedy. Is it less than 5 percent?
Attorney General Garland. I don't have the numbers. I think
it probably is, but again, I don't have any numbers for you.
Senator Kennedy. Okay. Do you think most cops are racist?
Attorney General Garland. No, I do not.
Senator Kennedy. What percentage of cops do you think, in
your judgment--I know you can't give me an exact figure--do you
think are racist?
Attorney General Garland. I'm sorry. I'm not resisting
because I have a number that I can't give you. I just really--I
don't have any way of making that valuation.
Senator Kennedy. What's your gut tell you, less than 5
percent?
Attorney General Garland. One thing I've learned is to not
give answers from my gut.
Senator Kennedy. Right. Well, you think it's less than 5
percent?
Attorney General Garland. I don't know the answer. I'm
sorry.
Senator Kennedy. Okay. You don't know?
Attorney General Garland. I don't know, no.
Senator Kennedy. Okay. Why doesn't the Justice Department
support ``Stop, Question, and Frisk''?
Attorney General Garland. I'm not sure what--you mean,
``Stop and Frisk''? Is that what you mean?
Senator Kennedy. Some call it ``Stop and Frisk''
(indiscernible).
Attorney General Garland. Yes, yes, look--yes, we--I don't
know that the Justice Department has a position. This is a
State and local role, normally. Look--
Senator Kennedy. Do you think it works?
Attorney General Garland. I'm sorry.
Senator Kennedy. Do you think ``Stop, Question, and Frisk''
works?
Attorney General Garland. I think, in some circumstances it
can work but, of course, it can be abused.
Senator Kennedy. Right.
Attorney General Garland. Yes.
Senator Kennedy. What--but why doesn't the Justice
Department aggressively encourage law enforcement officials to
use that technique? It's been declared constitutional, as you
know.
Attorney General Garland. Yes, the Supreme Court has
affirmed the constitutionality of ``Stop and Frisk''. That's--
in the Terry case. That's exactly right. But we don't do--
that--Federal Government doesn't do patrolling. This is work
for patrol.
Senator Kennedy. I know you don't, but this you're one of
the country's chief law enforcement officials--maybe the
chief--and what you say matters. And suppose--here's what I'm
asking. Let's take Chicago, where you haven't--we haven't made
any end roads in stopping the killing. I mean, Chicago is now
the world's largest outdoor shooting range. We know that a lot
of the shootings come from gangs. Why wouldn't you want to call
the police chief and the mayor in Chicago and say, ``Look, you
know who these gang members are. When you have reasonable
suspicion, under Terry v. Ohio, an objective standard, more
than just a hunch, why don't you aggressively stop, question,
and frisk these gang members?'' You'll get guns off the street.
You'll get drugs off the street. And you'll get a lot of gang
members off the street, and you'll stop people killing each
other. Why won't you do that?
Attorney General Garland. The best way for the Federal
Government to stop violent crime is to work at each local level
and determine--and let the State and locals determine what the
best use of their own resources is.
Senator Kennedy. Judge, I'm sorry for interrupting you but
I'm trying to get some answers.
Attorney General Garland. You're--I'm sorry--
Senator Kennedy. Why won't you do that? Just tell me why
you won't do that.
Attorney General Garland. Because--
Senator Kennedy. Your opinion matters.
Attorney General Garland. Because there is no one solution
fits all that the Federal Government can suggest to State and
local law enforcement. We believe State and local law
enforcement knows best as to what to do there. We provide--
Senator Kennedy. Well, it's not working.
Attorney General Garland. We provide our technical
expertise. We put lots of resources into joint task forces. We
pick up--
Senator Kennedy. Well, General, it's--I know I've got to
shut this down. I've only got 15 seconds. Is that why you're
asking, in the middle of a raging inflation, for 7 percent more
money, $2.36 billion to provide technical increase--or
technical advice? I mean, we're going backwards here on crime,
General. You're the State's--or the country's chief law
enforcement officer and you won't even answer my question about
how you feel about ``Stop, Question, and Frisk''.
Attorney General Garland. I think it--
Senator Kennedy. Why should we give you more money?
Attorney General Garland. I think it's a resource
allocation issue for each local police department. I believe
that the Justice Department does the best by putting the money
that we're asking for as an increase in law enforcement that
can assist the State and locals in the best way.
Senator Kennedy. But, General, is that what we're supposed
to tell the mothers of those kids getting killed in Chicago?
``You don't understand. It's a resource allocation issue.''
Attorney General Garland. No, what you're supposed to tell
the mothers in Chicago, and what I told them when I was there,
was the Justice Department was there to provide all the
resources that this subcommittee will give us, to stop violent
crime.
Senator Kennedy. But yet, you won't try--
Attorney General Garland. The more resources you can give--
Senator Kennedy. ``Stop, Question, and Frisk''.
Attorney General Garland. That is a question for the State
and the local--I'm sorry, for the State and local law
enforcement.
Senator Kennedy. I didn't go over as much as Manchin did,
Madam Chair.
Senator Moran. That's not the standard by which we judge
behavior.
Senator Kennedy. Thank you, General.
Attorney General Garland. You're welcome.
Senator Moran. Now, Senator Van Hollen.
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Senator Moran, and welcome,
Mr. Attorney General.
Attorney General Garland. Thank you.
Senator Van Hollen. I want to start with some thanks to you
and President Biden and your team at the Justice Department for
implementing something that many of us have pushed for a long
time, which is a final rule with respect to ghost guns. These
are, of course, are weapons. You can buy them over the Internet
in pieces, quickly assemble them, and they shoot and kill
people just like a regular firearm. But one major difference,
they do not have serial numbers, which is why they're becoming
more the weapon of choice by criminals in my State of Maryland,
places like Baltimore City, and around the country.
So, I want to applaud you for moving forward on that effort
and, also, applaud the President for nominating a Director of
ATF, Steven Dettelbach, a good candidate. I hope the Senate
will confirm that nomination expeditiously. The ATF has gone
headless for way too long, as you know. And we need a strong
ATF to crack down on illegal gun trafficking, among other
issues.
As you know, you know, Congress has brought back
congressionally-directed spending, so that we can try to target
resources where our communities say they're needed the most.
And Senator Cardin and I worked with this Committee to channel
important resources to address the really serious violent crime
problem in Baltimore City. And there's no one solution, but we
provided a series of resources for community-based crime
violent prevention programs, community policing.
So, my question to you, Mr. Attorney General, Baltimore
City's waiting on those funds. How quickly can we get them? Can
you give us your commitment that you can get those out the door
quickly?
Attorney General Garland. If you give us the money, we can
get them out the door quickly. You know, an important part of
our ability to fight violent crime in Baltimore and other
locations, where it is a very serious problem, is having more
Assistant U.S. Attorneys to prosecute these cases. The Federal
Government has stronger--
Senator Van Hollen. So, Mr. Attorney General, just one
clarification here. So, I'm talking about, in this question,
monies we've already have appropriated. These are monies that
we've provided. They're in the custody of either the Department
of Justice or Treasure, and we'd just--
Attorney General Garland. I see. I see.
Senator Van Hollen. Like to get the money out the door.
Attorney General Garland. What we will do--as far as I
know, that--our priority is to get the money out the door. It
doesn't do us any good to keep it in main Justice, I assure
you.
Senator Van Hollen. Yes.
Attorney General Garland. So, if--
Senator Van Hollen. Well, we'd like--we'd like to encourage
your team to get it out because it is a serious situation
there.
Now, to the broader issue you're raising, with respect to
resources for the U.S. Attorney in Maryland, for the ATF in
Maryland, for U.S. Marshal Service in Maryland, we have seen
some increases over the last couple years. And I want to thank
you and your Deputy Attorney General Monaco, who's had a
serious of phone calls with Senator Cardin and myself. But can
you--we do need more resources. I mean, we have a very serious
problem in Baltimore City. And we do have good cooperation
between the Federal Government, State and local jurisdictions.
But can you talk about, specifically, how resources you're
requesting here can strengthen our ability to get more
resources to Baltimore City?
Attorney General Garland. Yes, so, through no fault of this
Subcommittee, we did not get the amount of money for the United
States Attorneys that was in the budget request, and it was in
the marks of the Subcommittee as a consequence of the omnibus.
We received $120 million less than the fiscal year 2022
request. So, for that reason, we're asking for increases for
the U.S. Attorney's offices, to allow us to hire 157 more
Assistant U.S. Attorneys. Obviously, the more Assistant U.S.
Attorneys we have, the easier it is to allocate them around the
country to the places that are in need.
Same is true with respect to ATF. We're asking for an
increase of 122 agents. Again, the more that we have, the more
we're able to expand the locations in which we can put people.
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Mr.--I look forward to
supporting that budget request for the reasons you've laid out.
I hope the Committee will as well.
My final--I just have a statement here, Mr. Attorney
General. The Congress, on a bipartisan basis, has recognized
that the FBI needs a new consolidated headquarters that meets
its security requirements. And before the previous
administration, three sites had been located. And in the last
bill passed by the Congress, Appropriations Bill, we directed
the General Services Administration to select one of those
three earlier identified sites for the new fully consolidated
FBI Headquarters. So, as the chief law enforcement officer, we
expect you to work with us to make sure that the law is
followed, and I'm confident that you will do that.
Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Van Hollen. Senator
Hagerty.
Senator Hagerty. Thank you, Senator Shaheen, and thank you,
Ranking Member Moran, for holding this hearing. Thank you,
Attorney General, for being back with us today.
I want to touch on something that's a great concern to my
constituents and I think, frankly, to the confidence of many
people in our system that you control, through the Department
of Justice, and that's the matter of the Hunter Biden
investigation. It received a great deal of press, but I want to
ask you a bit about how the communications have worked, within
your Department, with the White House, on this.
First, have you been briefed on the Hunter Biden
investigation yourself, General Garland.
Attorney General Garland. So, the Hunter Biden
investigation, as I said even in my own nomination confirmation
hearing, is being run by and supervised by the United States
Attorney for the District of Delaware. He's--
Senator Hagerty. I'm aware of that, but he reports to you.
Attorney General Garland. He is supervising the
investigation and I'm--you know, I'm not at liberty to talk
about internal Justice Department deliberations. But he is in
charge of that investigation. There will not be interference of
any political or improper kind.
Senator Hagerty. And are any senior officials in your
Department being briefed or--
Attorney General Garland. Again, he is the supervisor of
this investigation and, you know, the normal processes of the
Department occur. But he is the supervisor of this
investigation.
Senator Hagerty. Well, if you won't be able to say whether
there have been communications there, I'd like for you to tell
me--or answer this question, if you would. Would you think it
would be appropriate for the President of the United States to
call you into the Oval Office and tell you that his son didn't
break the law regarding this matter?
Attorney General Garland. Absolutely not. And the President
has not done that, and the President has committed not to
interfere, not only in that investigation, but any other kind
of--
Senator Hagerty. Well, I agree with you, but--
Attorney General Garland. Investigation.
Senator Hagerty. But--but I do wonder this, then, why the
President is resorting to TV and having his surrogates go on TV
to say just that message. Earlier this month, White House Chief
Of Staff Ron Klain stated on national television that, ``The
President is confident that his son didn't break the law''. And
the White House Communications Director said that, ``President
Biden maintains his position that his son did nothing that was
unethical''. This was on national television.
The President's already told his subordinates, clearly,
these are people that he can fire at will, that he and his
family did nothing wrong. How can the American people be
confident that his administration is conducting a serious
investigation?
Attorney General Garland. Because we put the investigation
in the hands of a Trump appointee, from the previous
administration, who's the United States Attorney for the
District of Delaware. And because you have me as the Attorney
General, who is committed to the independence of the Justice
Department, from any influence from the White House, in
criminal matters.
Senator Hagerty. Well, I think the observation here is
terribly critical because there's an obvious conflict of
interest here, because of those who are investigating the Biden
family and their enterprise can be fired by the head of the
family who's being investigated. That is Joe Biden can fire the
attorney general in Delaware. He can have an impact on all of
your staffing.
And I want to ask you this. Under what circumstances do you
consider, or how do you evaluate whether you would appoint a
special counsel?
Attorney General Garland. I think this is a fact and law
question in each case, determining--depending upon how cases go
forward and a question of whether the Justice Department, with
its normal processes, should continue. I want to be clear,
though, special counsels are also employees of the Justice
Department. We don't have an independent counsel statute
anymore. Both the Democrats and the Republicans experimented
with this, and I think, probably in the end, neither side liked
it. And that's why we ended with the law not being
reauthorized. But in any event, the special counsel is also an
employee of the Justice Department.
Senator Hagerty. Have you had any consideration about
whether to do this, or--
Attorney General Garland. Again, I think our internal
deliberations have to stay within the Department.
Senator Hagerty. Again, I'll just restate that there's an
obvious conflict there that raises concerns amongst my
constituents.
I'd like to turn to some public evidence, though. There are
emails and photographs that show that President Biden, while he
was Vice President, met several of Hunter Biden's business
associates, including a Burisma executive--that's the energy
company that paid Hunter Biden $1 million per year to sit on
its Board--and a Russian billionaire, who paid Hunter's firm
$3.5 million, around the same time. All of this is while
President Biden was running portions of the United States
Foreign Policy, including Ukraine.
There's evidence that Hunter Biden paid for Joe Biden's
living expenses while he was Vice President. A Hunter Biden
email from 2010, entitled ``JRB Bills'', Joe R. Biden Bills,
discusses paying for the upkeep of Joe Biden's large lakefront
home.
There's another 2010 email from a Biden confidante to
Hunter Biden saying, ``Your dad just called me. He could use
some positive news about his future earnings potential.'' To
me, this suggests that Joe Biden's $231,000--his taxpayer
funded salary--and lifestyle as Vice President of the United
States weren't enough to support his lifestyle. That same
confidante of--and, also, Hunter Biden's business partner, made
nine visits to the White House between 2009 and 2013, and met
with Joe Biden in the West Wing, while Joe Biden was Vice
President.
And we have a text message from Hunter Biden to his
daughter, stating that, ``Don't worry. Unlike Pop--'', meaning
Joe Biden, ``I won't make you give me half your salary''.
So, it seems President Biden was serving as Vice President
and running U.S. Foreign Policy, at the same time that his son,
Hunter Biden, was raking in money from shady foreign business
deals. And this was money that was being diverted to benefit
Vice President Biden.
So, General Garland, do you have any reason to dispute the
evidence that indicates that President Biden was involved with,
and using money from, Hunter Biden's business deals?
Attorney General Garland. Senator, following the long-
standing rule of the Justice Department, we don't discuss
investigations or evidence that may or may not be relevant to
investigations. That's a matter for the United States
Attorney's office that's investigating the case.
Senator Hagerty. Well that's great--thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Shaheen. Attorney General Garland has requested a
break at 11:15. So, what we are going to try and do is to get
Senator Schatz and Senator Capito in and then, we will break--
have a 10-minute break, and then, we will take up the rest of
the questions. Senator Schatz.
Senator Schatz. Thank you very much, Chair Shaheen, and
Vice Chair Moran. Attorney General, thank you for being here.
I have--I'm going to try to get through five questions. So,
if I can have quick answers, that'd be great.
What, if any--
Attorney General Garland. I'll try to talk fast.
Senator Schatz. Are the DOJ's plans to reinstate Federal
prosecutorial discretion for non-interference in States,
territories, and tribes where marijuana is legal?
Attorney General Garland. So, as I understand our role,
with respect there, it's really the same as it is with respect
to States. You're talking about marijuana prosecutions--
Senator Schatz. Yes.
Attorney General Garland. Right. And I think I--you know, I
laid this out, actually, also, in my confirmation hearing and
my view hasn't really changed since then. And that is that the
Justice Department has almost never prosecuted use of marijuana
and it's not going to be--it's not--that's not an efficient use
of the resources given the opioid and methamphetamine epidemic
that we have.
Senator Schatz. That's good enough for me. Let's move on.
Attorney General Garland. Okay.
Senator Schatz. I want to talk a little bit about PREA
oversight. There have been a number of recent sexual abuses
case at FCI Dublin and other Federal prisons across the
country. What's the Department going to do to address these
PREA violations?
Attorney General Garland. Yes, so, this is a, you know,
another really terrible set of events. We have prosecuted a
number of the individuals responsible now, at Dublin, for this.
We have put into place a new warden at Dublin, I think, within
the last three weeks. We've--the Deputy Attorney General has
set up a task force to investigate and determine what the
procedural failures here were, and how these kind of failures
can be prevented in the future. And the matter's been referred
to the Inspector General for an internal investigation.
Senator Schatz. Thank you. Will the DOJ at least consider--
I don't want you to commit to it now, but consider supporting
the reestablishment of an interagency law enforcement equipment
working group to oversee and provide recommendations for
Federal programs, that include the transfers or sales of
controlled equipment to law enforcement? We know this issue
comes up periodically. This is a space where this can be done
intelligently. I think we've seen the various--1033 and other
programs, where equipment is transferred to local departments,
and it can be very useful, or it can be overkill. And the point
of a working group like this is to, sort of, sus out what
departments need and what seems to be over arming local police
forces.
Attorney General Garland. I appreciate your not asking for
a commitment, but of course, any consideration of that issue
requires interagency discussion, because some of the equipment
you're talking about is Defense Department equipment. So,
certainly, I would be happy to consider that.
Senator Schatz. This is a Hawaii-specific question. We
don't have a halfway house in Hawaii, since October of 2019.
So, does the Department have an interim or emergency set of
measures to ensure that Hawaii's halfway house eligible
individuals still have access to services?
Attorney General Garland. Yes, so, as you know, Senator, I
think we have discussed this before. We've had--the Bureau of
Prisons has had problems expanding a residential re-entry
center in Hawaii, for a number of reasons, not the least of
which is the providers are very scarce. BOP, I understand, has
made progress on a day reporting center contract and hopes to
make an award within the next few months.
Senator Schatz. Great. Final question, easy one. What is
your position on clemency for Leonard Peltier?
Attorney General Garland. So, this is a matter that goes
into--applications go to the Pardon Attorney. The Pardon
Attorney makes recommendations through the Deputy Attorney
General to the President. And so, I'm not going to comment on
that, now.
Senator Schatz. Can you comment on where we are in the
process?
Attorney General Garland. I don't--I assume, but don't
know, that an application has been made. I actually don't even
know whether--I mean, I've read about this in the press, so I
don't know anything more about it than what I've read in the
press.
Senator Schatz. And this doesn't cross your desk?
Attorney General Garland. Certainly not as an initial, or
even secondary, matter. This goes to the Pardon Attorney and
then, the Deputy Attorney General. I'm not saying I wouldn't be
involved, but it certainly has not crossed my desk.
Senator Schatz. Thank you very much.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Schatz. Senator Capito.
Senator Capito. Thank you, Madam Chair, Ranking Member, and
thank you, Mr. Attorney General, for being with us today.
I'm not going to ask you a question on this. I just wanted
to begin with expressing my deep concern about the flow of
fentanyl into the country, from the southern border. Senator
Manchin mentioned West Virginia's at the tip of the spear, as
you know. Senator Collins brought this up as a big issue. We've
had meetings over the last two weeks, being at home, and
fentanyl is the killer. I mean, it is what's coming up through
the southern border. So, I would impress upon you how
absolutely critical it is that the situation at the southern
border has got to get better. I understand the demand side is
what's driving this, in a lot of ways. But if we can cut the
supply, I think we can cut a lot of tragedy out of a lot of
people's lives. And I know you understand that, as well.
Let me ask a question. According to--over the pandemic,
we've seen a significant increase in first-time gun owners,
with almost 60 percent increase in African-American gun owners,
50 percent increase in Hispanic gun owners, 43 percent in
Asian-American gun owners. I guess I would ask you if you have
a perception as to why this is. But the reason I'm asking the
question, and I'm interested in it, of course I want to see our
Second Amendment rights protected, but also, the NICS system,
which runs the background checks, goes through West Virginia,
as you know.
So, do you have a--any kind of perception as to why gun
ownership is up among different groups and, during the
pandemic? I know it's been bigger in all groups. What would you
attribute that to? And what kind of strain is this having on
our NICS system?
Attorney General Garland. So, I don't know the answer, I'm
sorry, to the first question. This is the kind of analysis that
I, you know, can't make up and I can't even guess at. I don't
know what the causes are.
The second question I can answer. You know, the more gun
sales, the more difficult it is for the NICS system, but that's
the job of the NICS system. So, that's why we're asking for an
increase in $6.2 million for the NICS system, in the
President's budget here, to take into account the increase in
the number of sales.
Senator Capito. Right. And they can certainly use it. And
we know we want accurate records, we want good records, and, I
mean, they're working 24/7, as you know.
Recently, FBI Director Christopher Wray stated, during an
interview, that there is a 59 percent increase in police
officer killings. That is, officers being killed at a rate of
almost one every five days. This is alarming to me. We had one
of these incidences in our hometown. It's occurring at ambushes
and attacks. You're asking for more money in $30 billion in
mandatory spending for law enforcement help. What are you
looking at, in this area, to protect--I know hiring is an
issue, but protecting our force? And this is very concerning to
me.
Attorney General Garland. Well, it's extraordinarily
concerning to me and to all of the 120,000 members of the
Justice Department, most of whom are involved in law
enforcement. So, these are our brothers and sisters who are,
sometimes being targeted directly, sometimes being killed in
the line of duty, and sometimes, as a consequence of suicide.
So, we have an overall task force involved in investigating
threats, which includes, in particular, threats against law
enforcement and local police.
Senator Capito. Are you seeing the threats go up?
Attorney General Garland. Yes, extraordinarily so. And
you're right about--I think what--I don't know the number that
Director Wray cited, but I'm--it sounds exactly right to me.
The number is extremely worrying.
Senator Capito. Well, I'd like to see the focus of some of
this new funding go into this precise issue. The suicide issue,
obviously, is something that's deeply troubling, as well. I
think a lot of it is the lack of respect for law enforcement in
certain areas of the country, around the country. We're having
trouble hiring in. We tried to do--we tried to do reform,
couldn't get it across the finish line to try to help our local
law enforcement recruit, train, you know, do bias training, and
all kinds of things that we see are issues within our police
department. But I'm very, very concerned about this.
Let me ask you another question. I noticed in your
statement that you're going to create a division to combat
climate crisis. The reason I'm interested in this is, I'm on
the EPW Committee. I'm the Ranking Member there. There is a lot
of enforcement at EPA and other places on environmental
justice. You're going to create a new Office for Environmental
Justice. I mean, are these directives coming from the White
House? Why now, and why, with all of the other efforts that are
going on, throughout all the different Cabinet positions in the
government, is this something that you're putting a high
priority on, right now?
Attorney General Garland. So, I think you rightly noted,
it's not a division. It's an office within an already existing
Environment Division. The reason is that there are
responsibilities, both in the Environment and Natural Resources
Division and in the Civil Rights Division, and so, coordination
on the environmental justice issue is required.
Senator Capito. Is that not being handled in other areas?
Like, for instance, in the EPA Enforcement, in their
Environmental Justice Office.
Attorney General Garland. Well, to be honest, I don't know
about their Environmental Justice Office. But we have a Civil
Rights Division, which does prosecutions for civil rights
violations. We have the Environment and Natural Resources
Division, which does the affirmative cases. And we wanted to
have some coordination between the two, that's the reason for
having this office.
Senator Capito. Well, thank you. I think I've mentioned
about three things I would put in front of this. And thank you
so much.
Attorney General Garland. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Capito. We will now
take a break. We will reconvene at 11:30.
Attorney General Garland. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
[Recess]
Senator Shaheen. This hearing will come back to order, and
I will call on Senator Murkowski who is next.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Attorney
General, welcome. Before I begin asking my questions, I wanted
to note that, when Senator Leahy was asking you about the VOCA
Fix, know that that's something that we're monitoring very,
very, very carefully. We worked hard to make sure that we had
$5 million for the Victim's Service Organizations in Alaska, to
help. That was a real panic cry that we heard from the State.
And I am concerned--Senator Leahy has emphasized making this a
priority, but I want to make sure that we're not in a situation
where we're looking again, realizing we're not measuring up
here. There's a gap. So, if there is any kind of alternative
funding line items to ensure that our victims' organizations
are able to receive this, I certainly hope that the Department
is looking at that.
And he also raised an issue with regard to some of the new
grant programs in VAWA that, for reasons known or unknown, have
not been reflected in the President's budget. And you
indicated, you know, you weren't sure that those might be. Some
of the ones that we have looked at are those grant programs,
the new grant programs focused on expanding access to SANEs, as
well as to medical forensic examinations. So, my hope is that--
is that this was just a matter of timing, not a deliberate
choice to overlook those very important programs, certainly in
rural States like Alaska. So, I just underscore that when
Senator Leahy raises these issues, I am right there with him.
So, to the issue of VAWA. And as you know, this was
something that I've been working on for a long period of time
and was very pleased that we were able to advance this, get it
signed into law, contained within the VAWA reauthorization is
the Tribal title, the Alaska Public Safety Empowerment Pilot.
What we're really trying to do here, is to be able to provide a
level of justice in areas in my State, where they simply have
none. We want to get to these remote, rural villages, not
necessarily those on the road system.
What we want to do is supplement, basically, the work that
the State is doing, with regard to public safety. We're not
creating Indian country. We're not taking jurisdiction away
from the State. But as you know, the Attorney General, in
consultation with the Secretary of Interior, is directed to
establish a process to designate those Indian Tribes that can
participate in the pilot. So, the question to you this morning
is, what do you anticipate, in terms of the Department of
Justice plan to begin this process? How do you see this moving
forward?
We also direct the creation of an Alaska Tribal Public
Safety Advisory Committee, not later than a year. So, I'm just
asking this morning, if you can share how the President's
budget will support the Alaska Public Safety Empowerment Pilot,
as well as the Public Safety Advisory Committee.
Attorney General Garland. Yes. So, I'm very grateful for
everything that you did, with respect to getting VAWA
reauthorized. Of course, the Justice Department has been full
on in support of this all along. So, we are a lock step on
this. We support the pilot program. We think it's an important
ability of authority to bring these and to prosecute these and
investigate these matters. We can't just leave them undone.
So, I'm very eager to get the pilot going, to get the
villages decided. Likewise with the commission. So, I don't see
any reason why we won't be able to be on time on our marks for
this.
Senator Murkowski. Well, know that we would like to be
working with you to understand what those timelines are to help
with the expectations of folks back home.
Last question for you relates to the Bureau of Prisons.
Currently, Alaska does not have any Federal facilities to house
our Federal inmate population within the State. We have seen
considerable growth over the years. The number of Federal
inmates has grown from just a few hundred to over 1,000. And
what happens then, is many of these individuals are sent to
serve their sentences at facilities outside the State,
sometimes 2 to 5,000 miles away from their homes.
I have sent you a letter--sent it back in March of this
year, asking that you consider working with the Bureau of
Prisons to conduct a new feasibility study. It hasn't been done
for a period of time. It was, apparently, about two decades
ago. A lot has changed in Alaska since then. But I would ask
that you look at this. We've not heard a response back, so if
you can take a look at this and, again, try to work with us on
a new feasibility study. But also, working with the Bureau of
Prisons to obtain additional halfway house bed space in Alaska.
Currently, we have only 39 beds for the entire State of Alaska.
All of them are located in Anchorage. So, if you could,
perhaps, follow up with me on those two asks, it would be
greatly appreciated.
Attorney General Garland. I would be happy to have our team
speak to yours, or the two of us speak directly. I'd be very
happy to.
Senator Murkowski. Very good. Thank you. Thank you, Madam
Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Murkowski. Senator
Braun.
Senator Braun. Thank you, Madam Chair. As I was going to
another Committee hearing, and I just talked to Madam Chair--we
had three of them at the same time today. Seems like we could
organize ourselves a little better.
I was listening to your conversation with Senator Hagerty,
and I did not hear the end result. And I'm assuming he probably
asked, do we need a special prosecutor to look into the Hunter
Biden, you know, affair. Do you think we need to, and I would
then have one follow up question to that? So, do we need a
special prosecutor to look into that?
Attorney General Garland. So, as you know, the
investigation is being run and supervised by the United States
Attorney in Delaware, who is an appointee of the previous
administration, and continues on as the United States Attorney.
The question of whether to have a special counsel is one that--
it's an internal decision making in the Department, so I don't
want to make any judgments one way or the other. But I'm quite
comfortable with the United States Attorney for that district
continuing in the role that he's playing.
Senator Braun. So, a follow up question to that would be,
of course Special Prosecutor Counsel Mueller, you know, was
assigned in that whole Steele dossier issue, which now has been
debunked. If you had been in that capacity then, do you think a
special counsel was needed there, as well?
Attorney General Garland. It's hard to put myself back into
that circumstances. And then, of course, there would be a
different--for me to be in that position, there would've been a
different president. So, I'm not sure I can answer that
hypothetical.
Senator Braun. Well, it's obvious that that would be a
question that many would wonder about, in terms of what that
standard is, what that consistency is. And it seems like it
would be the same from one administration to the next.
Got a question that really is probably more pertinent, in
the sense that what's happening on our southern border is
confusing, in the sense that the administration says we don't
have enough resources. It's done things, from the beginning,
that has--I was down there with 17 other senators, roughly a
year ago. And to give you a description of the immensity, it
had gone from record low illegal crossings--and I'm one that
believes we need to secure the border and roll our sleeves up
and fix all the issues associated with it. We were--had risen
from, I think, 40,000 to 70,000. This last month, it was
212,000. I think 60-some thousand got away. I mean, it has
exploded beyond anybody's imagination. I think self-induced.
And then, there are conflicting statements that part of
it's due to not having enough resources. Are we resourced at
the border, properly? And that would be how we address any
illegal crossings. That seems to be delegated to lower levels
of authority. Isn't that confusing? And in light of the issue,
in terms of where it's at, do we to do something differently?
And does your office need to be outspoken about trying to fix
it?
Attorney General Garland. So, I want to be careful about
explaining what our role is, because we do need more resources.
I think most of the resources you're referring to are
Department of Homeland Security resources. So, I'll leave that
for that Secretary to express what they need. But we have asked
for $1.35 billion for our immigration courts, $1 billion of
which is to reduce the immigration court backlog. So, the thing
that's our job is to run the immigration courts after we get
referrals from DHS.
So, we have already onboarded everyone we can, as
immigration judges. We asked, in fiscal year 2022, for 100
more. Again, no fault of this Committee, because you gave us
the right mark. But as a consequence of the Omnibus, that was
not funded. So, we're asking for 200 new immigration judge
teams, a total of 1,200 new staff for that purpose. That's
the--we've also asked for money for a virtual court initiative,
so that we can run these court proceedings more efficiently and
more effectively and from whatever area. If we get the
additional immigration judges, we will move them to the border.
We're already going to be moving them to the border, as it is.
Senator Braun. And can you describe what your request is,
compared to what it was in prior years? What magnitude of
difference?
Attorney General Garland. So, yes. It's an additional 1,200
staff for--
Senator Braun. In addition to how much before, so we can--
Attorney General Garland. It will bring us to a total of
834 IJs. The staff includes all their clerks, etc. So, with 200
more we'll get to 834. So, 834 minus 200 is 634 was what we had
before.
Senator Braun. And just with the arithmetic I put out there
earlier, the problem has quadrupled--
Attorney General Garland. Yes.
Senator Braun. Or quintupled. So, it would beg the
question, are we putting enough resources to it, or is it, kind
of, lip service because we know it's become a big issue? I
would advise, maybe, that might not be adequate, given the
magnitude of the current problem, it's still predicted to go up
by even 50 percent more.
Attorney General Garland. So, that's a fair question,
Senator. Of course, we didn't get what we asked for the last
time, so we're trying to be realistic about what we can ask
for. But resources are not the only thing we're doing. We've
also adopted a new asylum officer rule with DHS, so that asylum
decisions are made by the asylum officers, not by the IJs. So,
they--IJ is immigration judges. So, they won't have to do that.
And then, if there are denials, there will be a streamlined
process, which should reduce the amount of time from current 4
years to 6 months. We also have a dedicated dockets, in order
to be able to better distribute the work among our IJs.
So, it's a combination of things. We want more resources
and we're trying to streamline the whole process and put more
of the work--
Senator Braun. I don't think in the--
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Braun.
Senator Braun. Okay, thank you.
Attorney General Garland. I'm sorry.
Senator Shaheen. I know that Senator Moran and I both have
a second round of questions that we would like to do. It's not
clear that anyone else is interested. I don't know, Senator
Braun, if you also have another round. But mine are relatively
brief, so I will go ahead.
You were discussing with Senator Capito the horrific issue
of police being targeted and, also, suicides. As I'm sure
you're aware, there's no comprehensive national data collection
regarding police suicides. So, in fiscal year 2020, we directed
the Bureau of Justice Statistics to maintain a data set and
report on police suicides for Federal, State, and local law
enforcement. Unfortunately, BJS has not moved forward on
collecting this data. We've provided stronger directives, as
well as $3 million for that data collection effort, in the
fiscal year 2021 bill, but still nothing.
So, were you aware of the delays with this project? And
what can we do to try and collect this data? Because it's, as
you know, it's really critical to figuring out how we respond.
We need to have information so we can think about what we can
do to address what is becoming more and more of a challenge
nationwide.
Attorney General Garland. I am aware. I understand that BJS
will be submitting its report within the next couple of months.
I'm not sure exactly how many months is it? In about 8 weeks
I'll have an update for you on this--on where they are on this.
Senator Shaheen. Good. Well, I look forward to getting
that. And we've had--sadly, we've had some high-profile
suicides in New Hampshire. And I also look forward to working
with the Department on what we can do to address the challenge
of suicide within our law enforcement agencies. So, thank you.
I'm pleased to hear that we should expect something soon.
Unfortunately, I missed a couple of the discussions around
what's happening with fentanyl, because I had to step out. But
I know that on Thursday, the administration released their
National Drug Control Strategy. Like so many States, New
Hampshire is one that has had way too many overdose deaths
because of fentanyl. And I wondered if you could give us a
little insight into how resources are being shifted within the
Department to respond to that strategy and how that might
impact small States, like New Hampshire, which are struggling
with this challenge?
Attorney General Garland. Yes, so of course--there--we have
been involved in the development of the strategy in its most
simple form. There's two sides to this. There's the enforcement
against the drug trafficking organizations and there's the
health challenges for those who are addicted, to try to get
them off of the addiction and to take care of them.
So, on the drug trafficking side, you know, we're asking
for $9.8 billion across DOJ, to counter drug trafficking. The
principal agency for us, of course, is the DEA, for $3.1
billion, which is a $102 million increase for countering drugs.
Fentanyl's at the very top of the list of the concerns. When I
was at the border, I saw the same problems that everybody else
is reporting of. These are very tiny pills, and as the DEA
administrator makes clear, one pill can kill. And the odds--you
know, it's like playing Russian Roulette because some of these
pills are overdose pills. So, that's an extraordinary part of
what we're doing.
We've asked for money for Marshals and for the U.S.
Attorneys and for the FBI. The FBI is particularly targeting
fentanyl and opioid trafficking on the dark web. And as we
announced within the last two weeks, we took down the largest
dark web drug marketplace, to prevent the way in which some
people are getting it, which is online, at this point.
So, there's a number of different things here. Criminal
Division has money in the budget for the Regional Opioid Strike
Forces. And then, there are COPS grants, under the COPS
program, for anti-heroin and anti-meth task forces. So, that's
on the enforcement side.
On the overdose/addiction side, we've asked for $418
million for the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery, the CARA
Act grants. We've asked for $190 million for the COSSAP
program. That's Comprehensive Opioid Stimulant and Substance
Abuse grants. And another $75 million for mental health and
substance use grants. Money for drug courts, $95 million for
veterans' treatment courts, and for our Consumer Protection
Branch, which tries to stop those who are oversubscribing and
improperly overdispensing opioids.
So, it's a--you know, it's a two-pillar issue here for us.
I can't think of anything more important or anything more
tragic than what fentanyl is doing to the American people.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. I certainly agree with
that and hope that, as the strategy is rolled out that,
considerable thought will be given to rural parts of the
country and small States, like New Hampshire, which may appear
positively on lots of scales, with respect to income level and
resources, but in fact, have been very hard hit and really need
help.
Thank you very much. Senator Moran.
Senator Moran. Chairwoman, thank you. General, thank you
for your presence today.
Just a couple more questions, perhaps a follow-up to a
couple of my colleagues questions. But first of all, I'd like
to start with Title 42 and your conversation with Senator
Braun. I think your answer to him was more prospectively might
transpire and the need for additional resources in the future.
I would like to highlight or focus on this year, your
budget request that's in front of us now. I know there's some
uncertainty with a Federal judge in New Orleans and a decision,
but it seems to me that--my view, this is a pretty reckless
decision because the estimates are about 14,000 migrants could
begin crossing the border per day, after Title 42 ends on May
the 23rd. That has to have enormous resource consequences for
the Federal Government. I think Homeland Security is already
talking about additional--running out of money and needing
additional dollars. ICE and Border Patrol, it's estimated,
could be out of funds by July of this year.
What about the impact on DOJ components, Marshals,
immigration courts, U.S. Attorney's offices? Have you prepared
any estimates, has the Department prepared estimates, as to
what the increasing expenditures may be this year, unaccounted
for in your budget request?
Attorney General Garland. I don't know that we have. I
don't think we have those numbers now, but we can--I think our
staff can work with yours. There's no question that there will
be an increase in U.S. Attorney resources needed along the
southern border. We've hired, with respect to the IJs, as I was
telling Senator Braun, we've hired all the way up, under the
current appropriations. So, without more we won't be able to
increase the numbers. We are doing everything we can to
streamline the system and to move people, the IJs, to the
borders to assist there. But look, we're always happy for more
money and I'll be happy to have our staff speak with the
subcommittee's staff about that.
Senator Moran. Well, General, I mean, the crux of my
conversation with you earlier in today's hearing, generally
revolved around violent crime. And my view is that consequence
of what the administration is determined to do, with Section
42, can't be compensated for by removing resources going to
fight violent crime. The border and violent crime are clearly
related, significantly related, but you--
I remember visiting the border and what stood out to me is
that, when we were housing the juveniles on the border, 40
percent of the border patrol agents were then in the housing
business, not in the border patrol business. And I think
there's an analogy there of something the Department of Justice
must avoid, which is to take resources away from something that
is a crisis already, to address the crisis that is going to
occur with the removal of 42. Does that make sense?
Attorney General Garland. Yes, and I assure you we don't
want to remove the money that we need to fight violent crime to
put it anywhere else.
Senator Moran. Has the Department either volunteered or
been tasked with providing DOJ personnel to support DHS during
this crisis?
Attorney General Garland. I don't know what the--
Senator Moran. U.S. Marshals.
Attorney General Garland. Well, yes. But to be clear, we
don't do border patrolling. None of our law enforcement is able
to do--is trained for that, or anything else. The Bureau of
Prisons is going to make buses available and--for the transfers
that the Border Patrol needs assistance for. And the Marshal
Service is going to be providing additional Deputy U.S.
Marshals to assist CBP at the border. But I don't want to
overstate how much that is, because our ability to make those
contributions is not large.
Senator Moran. Thank you. Senator Shaheen visited with you
about drugs, in particular, rural and small States. You and I
had a conversation, probably as you were being confirmed, about
rural law enforcement departments. And I asked you, and you
agreed, and I think you've pursued making certain that rural
agencies, small agencies in particular, have a fair shot at
getting the Federal resources. Anything that you can do to
update, or anything that you would request of me to make that
more--less ownersome and more likely?
Attorney General Garland. I think we have been doing that.
We've made it easier to make--for small law enforcement
agencies, in particular the rural ones that you're speaking of,
to make the applications for the grants.
I will tell you that on my recent trip to U.S. Attorney's
offices to talk to joint law enforcement task forces, in
Colorado and Louisiana, in particular, I met with the rural
sheriffs and, you know, I wanted to make sure that these task
forces were not only focused on the cities, but were focused on
helping the rural sheriffs, as well. And in both of those
circumstances, at least, we got considerable affirmation that
that is working well.
That--you know, this is--the rural law enforcement provides
the boots on the ground who know the people in the community.
And the Federal law enforcement, DEA, FBI, ATF, Marshals, are
able to provide the technology and the skill sets necessary to,
you know, find people who cross the border from one
jurisdiction into another and to bring them back. So, this is
anecdotal, but my anecdotal work suggest very good cooperation
in these joint task forces.
Senator Moran. Thank you. My time is more than expired. I
just would mention one other thing and, perhaps there could be
a follow up by you or your staff. I'm surprised that the DOJ is
only requesting--your budget request is only an additional
$68.6 million to investigate and prosecute cybercrime,
including $52 million at the FBI and $15 million at the U.S.
Attorney's office. The magnitude of the problem is--I can't
imagine can be addressed with that--with that minimal or modest
amount.
Attorney General Garland. My numbers are--look at little
different than yours.
Senator Moran. All right.
Attorney General Garland. Mine show more than $1.2 billion
to address cybersecurity and cybercrime across the country. The
increases are $15 million for 50 more U.S. Attorneys to bring
these cases. Another $88 million for additional 75 FBI
personnel to bring these cases. And then, for our own
cybersecurity for the Justice Department and all the law
enforcement agencies, $115 million. So, I'm not sure why the
numbers are different.
Senator Moran. No, I may have--I may have misspoken or,
certainly at minimum, was confusing. Those are the increases,
not the total amount--
Attorney General Garland. We did get--
Senator Moran. Over enacted levels.
Attorney General Garland. No, we did get more money in the
recent supplemental because of Ukraine. I can promise you, we
expect to ask for more money and part of the money we're going
to ask for is cyber defense, because we're quite worried,
obviously, about that. Other money in there will be for--I'm
trying to decide whether to call it KleptoCapture or just our
Sanctions task force. But it's the KleptoCapture Task Force.
So, we'll be asking for additional money, but you did give us
more money in the supplemental on this, as well.
Senator Moran. General, thank you. Thank you for joining
us. And I did agree with Senator Shaheen to help her, or work
together with her, to see that we get the U.S. Attorney process
back under a fashion in which we get some confirmations
concluded.
Attorney General Garland. That would be great. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Moran, on both counts.
Senator Graham?
Senator Graham. Thank you. Good morning. So, on the Russia
front, we had lunch and I really--I appreciate what you and
your team are doing. There's a lot on your plate. You know, you
wanted money in the supplemental. Is there any additional
authority you need from Congress to be more aggressive, in
terms of going after the oligarchs and kleptocracy? Do you need
any legal changes?
Attorney General Garland. Yes, so--thank you for asking
about that. We have been very carefully examining that question
and I expect that there will be requests for legislative
changes. These could go, particularly, in the way in which we
do the forfeitures, to make is easier for us to do the
forfeitures. I think I mentioned earlier, also the possibility
of taking money out of the Forfeiture Fund that we collect this
way and sending it to Ukraine. So, the answer is yes--
Senator Graham. Okay.
Attorney General Garland. And we are hard at work on it.
And I expect, very soon, within days, probably, that the
administration will be able to present some requests.
Senator Graham. Well, good. Mr. Attorney General, I think
there will be a receptive audience to give you more money, if
that's what it needs to go after the people who've profited
from destroying the Russian economy.
Along that line, there's articles in the paper about family
members that have been used by Putin to, sort of, launder
money, and talk of a girlfriend in Sweden. Do you know anything
about an effort to bring sanctions against her?
Attorney General Garland. First answer is no and the second
answer, I guess is, if I did know I wouldn't be able to discuss
it.
Senator Graham. Okay, fair enough.
Attorney General Garland. This is a Treasury Department
issue--
Senator Graham. Yes, I just--right. I just--I would
encourage you to put everything on the table.
When it comes to Afghanistan, have you been briefed,
recently, about the possibility of terrorism emanating from
Afghanistan, into the United States? Has that threat level gone
up or down or do you know?
Attorney General Garland. We are--the details of that I'd
have to defer to a classified briefing.
Senator Graham. Okay, all right. That's fair.
Attorney General Garland. But I think it is fair to say
that we are constantly concerned about the risk that ISIS-K
will try to mount something in the United States, likewise,
continuing with respect to Al-Qaeda. But the FBI is putting all
its enormous amount of resources into preventing that, as are--
as is the intelligence community outside the United States.
Senator Graham. Okay. Well, let's stay in touch on that.
Sort of, back to the border. This idea of taking Title 42
out of the toolbox, in terms of a way to deal with illegal
immigrant crossings, do you believe that if Title 42 is
repealed, there would be a surge at the border?
Attorney General Garland. I think it's important for me to
explain our role in this, and the Justice Department's only
role is, when the CDC makes its assessment, as it did, and asks
us to appeal, for us to determine whether that would be lawful.
And the Department concluded that the CDC's--
Senator Graham. But you--but you're in charge--I'm sorry,
go ahead. Finish your thought.
Attorney General Garland. Yes, and so, that was so. I
think--to answer the other part of your question, I think that
all intelligence suggests that there will be a large increase
in the border, yes--
Senator Graham. Now, when it comes to drugs--
Attorney General Garland. Migrants, yes.
Senator Graham. Right. When it comes to drugs coming into
the United States from the southern border, in the last year,
has that problem gotten better or worse?
Attorney General Garland. I don't know what the numbers
are. I mean, it is obviously the case that the transportation
of fentanyl, particularly, has increased. Fentanyl is much
easier--it's much more compact, much smaller, goes a longer
way. The smugglers, particularly in the trucks, have developed
ways to hide it, even from our x-rays.
Senator Graham. Yes.
Attorney General Garland. So, that problem, of fentanyl
crossing the border, has definitely increased, in a way that
makes all of us very worried.
Senator Graham. Okay. So, when it comes to your role in all
this, if Title 42's repealed and we get a surge, there's an
increase in fentanyl coming across the border, and the leading
cause of death for Americans from 18 to 45, they tell me, is
fentanyl overdose, do you think this budget and the game plan
for the Biden Administration is--will be effective against this
increase?
Attorney General Garland. I think that the budget we've
asked for for drug trafficking and drug interdiction, which is
$9.8 billion, is a huge amount and an enormous allocation of
America's resources, in this respect. But again, our job is
different than the Department of Homeland Security's job.
Senator Graham. No, I got you.
Attorney General Garland. And I can't speak to their
resources.
Senator Graham. And I'll try to wrap up here. But drug
interdictions are dramatically less than they were in fiscal
year 2021. We had 913,000. That's how much drugs were
interdicted. Now we're at 340,000. It seems to be that
interdiction's going down. So, my basic question is, do you
consider the border in a state of crisis?
Attorney General Garland. I think, as you rightly pointed
out, there's going to be a lot--and intelligence suggests,
there will be a lot of people--a lot more people migrating over
the border.
Senator Graham. Well, the reason I mention that, as I
believe it is. I believe the amount of drugs coming across are
unprecedented. The amount of people coming across the border
illegally is unprecedented. Seems to be every train line is
getting worse. And to be honest with you, Mr. Attorney General,
I think we need to go all in, all hands-on deck, of controlling
our border. And do you believe that what we have in place,
through this budget and the system as a whole, that we can
expect to turn this around?
Attorney General Garland. I think that the money--with
respect to the Justice Department, which is the only thing I
can speak to, I think that if you give us the increased
resources that we're asking for, we can do our job.
Senator Graham. Okay. So, 6 months from now we'll see.
Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Graham.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much, Mr. Attorney General,
and to all of your staff.
Attorney General Garland. And thank you.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Shaheen. If there are no further questions, this
afternoon, senators can submit additional questions for the
official hearing record. We request the Department's responses
within 30 days of receiving those. And the Subcommittee stands
in recess until Tuesday, May 3rd, when we will hold a hearing
on the budget requests of NASA and the National Science
Foundation.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the
hearing:]
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY
Questions Submitted to Hon. Merrick Garland, Attorney General,
Department of Justice
Question 1. Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) Fix Act of 2021
Implementation: I would like to follow up on our discussion during your
live testimony regarding the VOCA Fix Act. I mentioned to you that
despite a sizeable deposit in the first month of implementation, the
deposits into the Crime Victims Fund from deferred and non-prosecution
agreements have actually been quite low. Across October and November,
for example, the total deposited from those two new categories was only
$1 million.
A. What do you think accounts for such starkly low deposits
resulting from deferred and non-prosecution agreements?
Answer. Signed into law on July 22, 2021, the VOCA Fix Act requires
monetary penalties from Federal deferred prosecution and non-
prosecution agreements to be deposited into the Crime Victims Fund. The
Office for Victims of Crime reports that the Fund received $262.3
million from deferred prosecution and non-prosecution agreements from
July 22, 2021, to December 31, 2021, and $227.2 million from deferred
prosecution and non- prosecution agreements from January 1, 2022,
through April 30, 2022.
Because this Act has been in effect for less than a year, the
Department does not yet have sufficient information to make long-term
projections on future deposits from deferred and non-prosecution
agreements. The Department will continue to monitor receipts closely
and educate US Attorneys' offices and Department litigating components
about the importance of the Fund.
B. Is the Department concerned such low deposits may soon result in
a zero dollar balance in the Crime Victims Fund?
Answer. The balance of the Fund as of April 2022 is $2.934 billion.
The Department is hopeful that the VOCA Fix Act will generate
substantial increases in receipts to keep the Crime Victims Fund
solvent and offset the fall-off in receipts in recent years. Receipts
will continue to be monitored closely. The Department will work with
Congress to ensure the Fund remains solvent.
C. What more can the Department be doing to educate its attorneys
and other litigating components about the impacts of their
prosecutorial decisions on the Crime Victims Fund?
Answer. The Department has issued a memorandum to U.S. Attorneys'
offices, Department litigating components, and the Office of Justice
Programs regarding the purpose of the Crime Victims Fund; how the Fund
supports and benefits hundreds of thousands of survivors every year;
and how criminal fines, and not Federal taxpayer dollars, are what
sustains the Fund. In addition, the Office for Victims of Crime reports
that it will brief attorneys in the Antitrust Division about the VOCA
Fix Act and the Fund later this summer.
Question 2. Freedom of Information Act: I am pleased that you
recently issued Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) guidelines directing
all agencies to comply with the requirements of FOIA. During a FOIA
hearing I chaired in March, however, I was disappointed by the
Department's answers regarding its willingness to enforce these
guidelines. I did not come away from the hearing with a clear sense of
what the Department is ready to do if agencies ignore or violate the
guidelines you issued.
A. Will you commit to utilizing the full powers of your office to
enforce the Department's FOIA guidelines and ensure
compliance with FOIA?
B. Will you commit to working with the Director of the Justice
Department's Office of Information Policy to establish
remedial or enforcement actions for the Department to take
should other agencies fail to comply with the recently
issued FOIA guidelines?
Answer to Questions 2A and 2B:
As the new FOIA guidelines I issued on March 15, 2022, make clear,
``[t]ransparency in government operations is a priority of this
Administration and this Department.'' The Justice Department takes very
seriously our government-wide role to encourage compliance with FOIA,
and we are fully committed to utilizing all of the tools available to
us to ensure agencies are faithfully and effectively applying the law
with a presumption of openness.
Question 3. Voting Rights: The wave of efforts across the country
to suppress access to the ballot box is alarming. Legislation like the
John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act are essential to ensuring that
Americans can fulfill their constitutional right to vote. I am alarmed
that the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act continues to be
blocked from even debate in the Senate.
A. Do you agree that voter suppression poses a fundamental threat to
our democracy?
Answer. Yes. As I described in speeches I delivered on May 29, 2022
and June 11, 2021 and in a Washington Post op-ed I wrote on August 5,
2021, the right of all eligible citizens to vote is the cornerstone of
our democracy and the source from which all other rights ultimately
flow. Since the Shelby County decision in 2013, there has been a
dramatic rise in legislative efforts that make it harder for millions
of citizens to cast a vote that counts.
B. While the Department waits for Congress to act, what steps are
you taking to ensure that Americans' access to the ballot
box is protected, everywhere in the country?
Answer. The Department is taking a wide range of steps to protect
the right to vote, including:
--The Department has doubled the Civil Rights Division's Voting
Section's enforcement staff.
--The Department has issued guidance on Federal voting rights laws as
they relate to redistricting and methods of election for
governmental bodies, methods of voting, and post-election
audits.
--The Department has brought lawsuits against Georgia and Texas
regarding recently enacted measures that impact the right to
vote.
--The Department has undertaken a number of steps to protect the
right to vote of deployed servicemembers and Americans residing
overseas, including entering into an agreement with Ohio.
--The Department has brought a lawsuit and reached an agreement under
the National Voter Registration Act with New Jersey.
--The Department has brought a lawsuit and reached an agreement under
the National Voter Registration Act and the Help America Vote
Act with Oneida County, New York.
--The Department has set up a task force to address threats against
election workers and officials.
--The Department has also filed numerous amicus briefs and statements
of interest regarding issues under the Federal voting rights
laws.
C. What additional resources would be helpful for the Justice
Department to improve and expand its efforts to protect
Americans' access to the ballot box?
Answer. The Department has supported Congress' efforts to enact new
legislation to protect the right to vote, including but not limited to
the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, the For the People
Act, and the Freedom to Vote Act. The Department has also sought
increased funding for the Civil Rights Division's enforcement work in
its fiscal year 2023 budget request, including to support its voting
rights work.
Question 4. Preventing Gun Violence (Need for Permanent ATF
Director): I was pleased that President Biden nominated Steve
Dettelbach to be the Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and
Firearms (ATF). The ATF remains at the forefront of protecting our
communities from violent criminals and the preventing the illegal use
and trafficking of firearms. Unfortunately, the ATF has had only one
permanent director since 2006; this must change. Steve would make an
effective and fair-minded ATF Director.
A. Why is it so important that the ATF have a permanent director?
What ATF actions are inhibited in the absence of a Senate-
confirmed director?
Answer. As your question notes, in March 2006, Congress passed and
President Bush signed into law the USA PATRIOT Improvement and
Reauthorization Act (Public Law No. 109-177, 120 Stat. 247), which
requires the ATF Director to be appointed by the President with the
advice and consent of the Senate. This statutory requirement reflects
the importance of ATF's crucial public safety mission. That mission is
all the more critical today given the unacceptable level of firearms
violence in our communities.
The confirmation of an ATF Director will reinforce that the Federal
government is committed to reducing firearms violence; signal to the
dedicated professionals of ATF and ATF's local, state, Federal, Tribal,
and territorial law enforcement partners that both Congress and the
Administration support ATF's vital mission; and enhance continuity and
stability at ATF. A Senate-confirmed Director is also uniquely
positioned to respond to congressional inquiries and to advocate for
the agency during the budget formulation and enactment process.
Question 5. Vermont Office (Importance of Confirming U.S. Marshal/
Attorney Nominees): I would like to thank your hardworking Federal
agents, especially those in Vermont, for their dedication to fighting
criminal activity and protecting our communities. The U.S. Marshals
working out of Burlington arrested 90 fugitives last year, and even
more in the year prior. The Vermont U.S. Attorney's Office aided in the
criminal investigations of Purdue Pharma's role in the opioid epidemic
that has ravaged the New England area. Given the critical role that the
Department's Federal law enforcement officials play in keeping us all
safe, it deeply concerns me that a single Senator has arbitrarily held
up two U.S. Marshal and six U.S. Attorney nominees.
A. When politicians hold U.S. Marshal and U.S. Attorney nominees
hostage for political grandstanding, how does that impact the
Department's ability to investigate crimes and prosecute criminals?
What kind of impact does that have on the local communities depending
upon these law enforcement officials?
Answer. It is vitally important to have Senate-confirmed U.S.
Marshals and U.S. Attorneys in each Federal district. The U.S. Marshals
protect the rule of law by apprehending the nation's most violent
fugitives and help ensure the safety of the Federal judiciary. The U.S.
Attorney serves as the chief Federal law enforcement officer in each
district. Despite delays in the confirmation process, the committed
public servants who work in these districts have ensured that their
important work and mission continue without interruption.
Question 6. DOJ Review of FBI Nassar Investigation Declination
Decision: Last year, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing to
examine the Justice Department Inspector General's report on the FBI's
unacceptable handling of the Larry Nassar investigation. During that
hearing, we heard from some of the nation's most elite gymnasts who
spoke bravely about their traumatic experiences and their long search
for justice and accountability.
While the Justice Department initially declined to bring charges
against the disgraced FBI agents involved in this investigation, the
Department announced in October that it was reviewing that declination
decision based on ``new information that has come to light.'' However,
we have not heard from the Department on the status of that decision.
A. Do you have any updates with regard to that review and its
timeline?
Answer. As the Deputy Attorney General testified before the Senate
Judiciary Committee on October 5, 2021, the Assistant Attorney General
for the Criminal Division, Kenneth Polite, undertook a review of the
September 2020 decision not to bring Federal criminal charges against
two former FBI special agents in connection with their involvement in
the FBI's investigation of Lawrence Nassar. The Criminal Division's
review was led by experienced prosecutors who carefully reviewed and
analyzed the evidence gathered in the investigation. On May 26, 2022,
the Criminal Division's decision to adhere to its prior decision not to
bring Federal criminal charges was made public.
The Criminal Division's decision does not in any way reflect a view
that the Justice Department condones the conduct of the former agents;
nor does it reflect a view that the investigation of Lawrence Nassar
was handled as it should have been. As I testified before this
Committee on April 26, 2022, the institutional failures here are
unspeakable and quite apparent.
Question 7. January 6th Investigation: Less than a year and a half
ago, a violet mob of insurrections stormed the Capitol, the first time
in 244 years that our country was almost prevented from carrying out a
peaceful transfer of power. According to the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, the violent attack was an act of domestic terrorism.
Five people died during or soon after the attack, and nearly 140 law
enforcement officers suffered injuries, ranging from brain damage to
cracked ribs, to smashed spinal cord discs.
Although I am encouraged more than 800 people have been charged
with crimes stemming from the assault on the Capitol, the Justice
Department estimates between 2,000 and 5,000 people entered the Capitol
on January 6. Investigators have a long way to go before everyone who
participated in the attack is held accountable.
A. Why is it important these individuals are held accountable for
their failed attempt to overthrow the will of the American
people? What resources or tools would DOJ need to improve
its efforts to hold these perpetrators accountable?
Answer. The commitment to the peaceful transfer of power must be
respected by every American. Our democracy depends upon it. The
preservation of American democracy also requires our willingness to
tell the truth. That is why it is essential for us to ensure that the
magnitude of an event like the January 6, 2021, assault on the United
States Capitol is not downplayed or understated. That attack disrupted
proceedings in both chambers of Congress and interfered with the
peaceful transfer of power from one administration to the next.
In response, the Department began work on what has become one of
the largest, most complex, and most resource-intensive investigations
in its history. The prosecution efforts, which are being led by the
United States Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia, are
ongoing. Accordingly, the President's fiscal year 2023 Budget requests
$34.1 million and 130 term positions (80 term attorneys) to support the
Justice Department's efforts to investigate and prosecute defendants
charged in connection with the events of January 6, 2021.
B. Do you have any updates about DOJ's investigation of the funders,
organizers, and ringleaders who may have not been present
at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, but nonetheless were
responsible for the terrible events of that day?
Answer. Longstanding policy and practice of the Justice Department
generally prevents us from commenting on or confirming the existence of
any investigation.
Question 8. DOJ IP Enforcement Office: It is imperative that
American innovation is protected, especially against bad actors in
foreign countries. The Justice Department's Intellectual Property Task
Force has indicted Chinese citizens and companies attempting to steal
trade secrets from companies like Motorola and General Electric. I
believe this work is critical in protecting our public safety and
economic wellbeing. I thank you for that work on behalf of American
innovators and inventors.
A. How is the IP enforcement task force equipped to investigate and
prosecute trade secret violations in a complex digital
world? What kind of resources or tools would the DOJ need
to improve its enforcement of the Defend Trade Secrets Act?
Answer. The Department of Justice remains committed to the
protection of intellectual property rights and to vigorously combating
intellectual property crime, particularly when it threatens public
health and safety, national security, and the U.S. economy. This
includes combating economic espionage and other thefts of trade secrets
that pose a significant threat to U.S. companies and competitiveness.
The Economic Espionage Act (EEA) of 1996 provides criminal
penalties for economic espionage as well as other thefts of commercial
trade secrets. Within the Justice Department, the National Security
Division's Counterintelligence and Export Control Section (CES) is
responsible for review and approval of economic espionage charges.
Together with CES, the Criminal Division's Computer Crime and
Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS) coordinate on economic espionage
and other trade secret prosecutions involving foreign actors and
provide substantial guidance and support to United States Attorneys'
offices in prosecuting a range of trade secret theft cases and in
meeting the investigative, evidentiary, and technological challenges
these cases pose. While the threat of foreign governments and business
competitors stealing U.S. trade secrets remains high, the coordination
within the Department--including with the FBI's counterintelligence,
criminal, and cyber agents--results in strong cases with a deterrent
impact.
In addition, the 2016 enactment of the Defend Trade Secrets Act
(DTSA) created a Federal civil cause of action for trade secret theft,
including thefts for which the EEA provides criminal penalties. As a
result, many trade secret owners have been able to pursue civil
remedies for trade secret theft in Federal courts. While the Justice
Department does not specifically track the number of Federal civil
trade secret actions brought, the opportunity to protect trade secrets
through private action in Federal courts has clearly been a powerful
tool for victim companies.
Question 9. Death Penalty: Last summer you imposed a moratorium on
Federal executions pending a review of the Justice Department's
policies and procedures.
A. Do you have any updates about the status and timeline of that
review?
Answer. On July 1, 2021, I asked the Deputy Attorney General and
Office of Legal Policy to engage in a series of reviews pertaining to
Federal execution protocols, the Manner of Execution regulations, and
related Justice Manual provisions. These are complex issues, and the
various perspectives on these matters all deserve to be heard and given
due consideration. The Department has therefore engaged in
comprehensive and ongoing outreach to solicit input and inform policy
decisions. That engagement continues with urgency and deliberation.
______
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR BRIAN SCHATZ
Question 1. Prosecutorial discretion for state-approved marijuana:
Following up on my question at your hearing, the Obama Administration
issued guidance on prosecutorial discretion for noninterference in
states, territories, and tribes where marijuana is legal. These memos--
known as the Cole and Wilkinson memos--provided states, territories,
and tribes with clarity as they implemented approved marijuana
programs. Given the increased number of approved programs in the years
since the Cole and Wilkinson memos, as well as the utility of the
guidance provided by the memos, does the Justice Department's plan to
update and reissue the Cole and Wilkinson memos? If yes, what is your
expected timeline?
Answer. As I stated in my testimony on April 26, 2022, the Justice
Department's enforcement resources are not put to their best use
prosecuting nonviolent, low-level marijuana offenses, even in
jurisdictions where marijuana use remains illegal. With respect to
those jurisdictions where marijuana use and sales are lawfully
regulated, there is even greater reason to conserve prosecutorial
resources so that we can focus our attention on violent crimes and
other crimes that cause societal harm and endanger our communities. The
Department is examining a range of issues that relate to marijuana and
its production, sale, and use, and we intend to address these issues in
the days ahead.
Question 2. Project HOPE Institute: The explanatory statement
accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022 (Public Law 117-
103) included language directing the OJP to establish a Project HOPE
Institute to provide training, technical assistance, and best practices
for jurisdictions replicating the HOPE model. What is the status of the
Project HOPE Institute?
Answer. The Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) reports that it is
administering competitive grant funds and managing training and
technical assistance to state, county, and Tribal agencies to
operationalize the principles behind Project HOPE--swiftness,
certainty, and fairness--in their supervision strategies. BJA works
closely with the Swift Certain and Fair (SCF) Resource Center, which
provides content expertise and project management support to those
grantees to design, implement, and adjust their strategies to local
needs and contexts.
In fiscal year 2021, BJA made an award of $500,000 to support the
Hope Institute, via competitive solicitation, to the Marron Center at
New York University, which operates the SCF Resource Center, to expand
guidance to the field at large.
The fiscal year 2022 solicitation opened March 23, 2022 and closed
on May 25, 2022. The award to support the Hope Institute remains on
track for implementation in 2022.
Question 3. Correctional Education Evaluation: The explanatory
statement accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021
(Public Law 116-260)--also included in the explanatory statement
accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022 (Public Law 117-
103)--included language directing the NIJ to establish a public-private
partnership with research and correctional institutions to collect and
evaluate data and continue to advance the research on the impact of
correctional education on recidivism. What is the status of the public-
private partnership?
Answer. The National Institute of Justice reports that it awarded a
competitive grant of $585,726 to the University of Chicago to examine
whether re-orienting the prison experience towards rehabilitation--by
investing in education, mental health, and physical health while
individuals are incarcerated--can reduce prison recidivism,
specifically reincarceration rates. The project involves a
collaboration with the Illinois Department of Corrections. This project
performance period is 3 years, from January 1, 2022, through December
31, 2024. Should you wish a more detailed briefing of the project
design and expected outcomes, my staff would be happy to put your staff
in contact with the relevant experts within the Department.
Question 4. Science Advisory Board: The explanatory statement
accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (Public Law 116-
260)--also included in the explanatory statement accompanying the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022 (Public Law 117-103)--included
language directing OJP to reestablish a Science Advisory Board to
provide extra-agency review of, and recommendations for, OJP's
research, statistics, and grants program. The re-established Board
should be comprised of scholars and practitioners in criminology,
statistics, sociology, and practitioners in the criminal and juvenile
justice fields and should be tasked with ensuring the programs and
activities of OJP are scientifically sound and pertinent to
policymakers and practitioners. What is the status of the Science
Advisory Board?
Answer. The Office of Justice Programs (OJP) reports that it is
assessing the re-establishment of the OJP Science Advisory Board. OJP
has discussed this issue and reengaged with multiple external
scientific organizations, including the National Academy of Science's
Committee on Law and Justice and the Consortium of Social Science
Organizations. Dr. Nancy La Vigne, whom the President appointed
Director of OJP's National Institute of Justice, began her tenure on
May 9, 2022. OJP anticipates that Dr. La Vigne will play an important
leadership role in advancing the consideration and re-establishment of
the Science Advisory Board.
Question 5. ICACCOPS Training: The explanatory statement
accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022 (Public Law 117-
103) included language directing the Justice Department to prioritize
expanded training on and use of ICACCOPS across Federal, State, local,
Tribal, and military law enforcement agencies. The language also
directed the Justice Department to coordinate with the Department of
Defense on the implementation of section 5500 of Public Law 116-92.
What is the status of the expanded training and the coordination with
the Department of Defense?
Answer. In accordance with the joint explanatory statement
accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022 (Public Law 117-
103), the Department's Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention (OJJDP) reports that it is actively working together with
Fox Valley's National Criminal Justice Training Center (NCJTC) to
expand capacity, training, and coordination with entities across the
Department of Defense (DoD). Those efforts build on ongoing programs
and efforts that provide DoD entities with ICACCOPS training and
resources. For example, NCJTC reports that its ongoing management of
the ICACCOPS investigative system, the ICAC Task Force website, and the
ICAC listserve, provides valuable resources to many members of DoD
investigative entities. In addition, NCJTC reports that it provides
core and specialized training and technical assistance to DoD
investigators, including training on ICACCOPS supported tools.
Question 6. Sexual Abuse Services in Detention Hotline: The
explanatory statement accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2022 (Public Law 117-103) included language directing the Justice
Department to explore opportunities for releasing existing grant
funding, including through OVC's discretionary grant program, for
efforts that would create a hotline to provide sexual abuse and rape
crisis counseling services to incarcerated individuals across the
country. What is the status of the efforts to create a national hotline
to provide sexual abuse and rape crisis counseling services to
incarcerated individuals?
Answer. In fiscal year 2021, the Office on Violence Against Women
(OVW) partnered with the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) to issue
the National Service Line for Incarcerated Survivors of Sexual Abuse
solicitation, supported with funds from BJA's Prison Rape Prevention
and Prosecution Grants appropriation. The Urban Institute, in
partnership with the National Sexual Violence Resource Center, was
selected as the recipient and has begun work.
The Service Line Initiative is being administered as a two-phase
project beginning with a planning phase followed by an implementation
phase.
This current project is for Phase One--the planning phase. Phase
One will include a national scan of practices related to efforts to
comply with PREA Standards, identification of common service gaps and
needs, and guidance from subject matter experts on what a national
service line would require to be responsive to both the PREA Standards
and the unique needs of incarcerated victims. The goal of Phase One is
to develop a comprehensive plan for the design and implementation of a
Service Line for incarcerated victims of sexual abuse.
Phase Two, the implementation phase, will focus on using the
comprehensive plan developed in the first phase to guide the Service
Line's implementation. It is anticipated that Phase Two will be
directed and administered by OVW and BJA, and that it will be funded
competitively. Phase Two is dependent upon the availability of
sufficient PREA appropriations in future fiscal years.
______
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOE MANCHIN, III
Question 1. As the Chairman of the Cybersecurity Subcommittee on
the Armed Services Committee I am acutely aware of the various risks
posed to the U.S. Government and our critical infrastructure operators,
which is why I was pleased to see streamlined cyber intrusion reporting
standards included in the previous appropriations omnibus.
The FBI's 2022 Internet Crime Report details more than 800,000
complaints of suspected Internet crime were filed and nearly $7 billion
dollars lost last year. That's nearly doubled from 2019. This makes
clear to me that cyber threats are only growing in number and
sophistication. In my opinion, one of the largest issues we're facing
is a continued lack of interagency cooperation in tracking and
responding to these cyber threats due to perceived jurisdiction limits.
While the Department of Defense and the Intelligence Community can only
operate outside of the United States, DHS and DOJ are the main entities
responsible for operating within the U.S.--and lack of cooperation
among the agencies means cyber-attacks are more likely to slip through.
A. In order to combat this lack of cooperation and communication why
are interagency taskforces not more prominent between
interagency organizations?
Answer. The Justice Department has worked together with partners
across government to establish and strengthen mechanisms that
facilitate strong interagency cooperation and communication to address
cyber threats:
--The Justice Department's National Cryptocurrency Enforcement Team,
Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section, and
Counterintelligence and Export Control Section lead our efforts
to coordinate with domestic law enforcement, regulatory, and
other partner agencies across government to combat the criminal
use of digital assets, criminal cyber threats, and state-
sponsored cyber threats, respectively.
--Regular interagency cooperation has been essential to the Justice
Department's successful cyber enforcement efforts to date. For
example, our successful operation in March 2022 to disrupt
malware known as ``Cyclops Blink'' that was controlled by the
Russian Federation's Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU), began
with collaboration between the Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI), the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS)
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), the
National Security Agency, and the United Kingdom's National
Cyber Security Centre. Additionally, the March 2022 unsealing
of criminal charges against four Russian government employees
for their role in two historical hacking campaigns targeting
critical infrastructure was paired with a related FBI, CISA,
and Department of Energy cybersecurity advisory, sanctions by
the Department of the Treasury, and a Department of State
Rewards for Justice announcement.
--The National Cyber Investigative Joint Task Force (NCIJTF) is a
multi-agency cyber center with the responsibility of
coordinating, integrating, and sharing information to support
cyber threat investigations and synchronizing joint efforts
that focus on identifying, pursuing, and defeating bad actors
seeking to exploit our nation's systems. The NCIJTF is a
frequent venue for collaboration and coordination among 30
partnering agencies from across the Federal government,
including the Justice Department, the Intelligence Community,
and the Department of Defense (DoD). Task Force representatives
are co-located and work jointly to leverage collective
authorities and capabilities.
--The FBI also works closely with CISA, NSA, and international
partners to release advisories identifying malware and
mitigation measures to assist those with compromised devices.
As a recent example of this coordination, in February 2022, the
FBI, CISA, and NSA published a joint Cybersecurity Advisory
regarding the ongoing efforts of Russian state-sponsored cyber
actors to target U.S. cleared defense contractors.
--In addition, the National Security Council convenes weekly Cyber
Response Group meetings and regular Interagency Policy
Committee and sub-IPC meetings to share threat updates and
discuss and implement cyber policy. Further, on some occasions,
the interagency has convened Cyber Unified Coordination Groups
to coordinate the government's response to significant cyber
incidents. These meetings include, among others,
representatives from the Justice Department, the Intelligence
Community, DoD, the State Department, the Department of the
Treasury, and DHS.
--When significant cyber incidents occur within the United States,
such as the ransomware attacks in the last year against
Colonial Pipeline and Kaseya, officials from the FBI and CISA
work in lockstep coordinating the response. In addition, CISA's
Joint Cyber Defense Collaborative, which established in August
2021 to unify defensive actions and drive down risk in advance
of cyber incidents, includes the public and private sector as
well as Federal and state, local, Tribal, and territorial
governments.
B. How often do you meet with the other Cabinet Secretaries to
discuss cyber threats and improving our response efforts
during and after attack?
Answer. Cyber threats and incident response are a frequent topic of
conversation at all levels of leadership. Along with other senior
Department officials, I regularly discuss these issues with principals
and deputies across government in both NSC-led meetings and direct
conversations with colleagues.
Question 2. Recently, a district court judge in Louisiana indicated
that he would grant a temporary restraining order blocking the end of
Title 42. At the time that the Administration announced its decision to
end the Title 42 policy on May 23, I made clear my concern about ending
Title 42 without a plan in place to deal with the anticipated influx of
migrants at our southern border. Specifically, I pointed out that
encounters at the southern border reached an all- time high level of
1.734 million people during fiscal year 21. And that through the first
5 months of fiscal year 22, encounters were on place to match or exceed
those numbers.
A. Is DOJ planning to appeal any TRO issued by the district judge?
Answer. On April 27, the District Court for the Western District of
Louisiana issued a temporary restraining order in Louisiana, et al. v.
Centers for Diseases Control & Prevention, et al. The temporary
restraining order prevented the government from implementing the
termination of the Title 42 order before May 23, 2022. The Department
did not appeal that order. On May 20, the district court issued a
preliminary injunction preventing CDC from enforcing the termination of
the Title 42 order. The Department has appealed that decision. Because
this matter is in active litigation, it would not be appropriate for me
to comment further.
B. What is the Administration's plan for addressing the anticipated
influx of immigrants at the southern border?
Answer. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is responsible
for border processing, enforcement, and security. While the United
States Marshals Service and the Federal Bureau of Prisons have provided
DHS limited support upon request in appropriate circumstances, the
Justice Department's Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) is
responsible for equitably and efficiently administering our nation's
immigration court system. While EOIR will work to assign sufficient
immigration judges to minimize the impact on EOIR's existing docket,
EOIR needs more resources to address the case backlog, which has been
growing for over a decade, and the Justice Department's fiscal year
2023 budget request would strengthen EOIR's ability to apply the
immigration laws justly, consistently, and in a timely fashion, while
ensuring due process under the law. The Department requests a total of
$1.35 billion for EOIR to reduce the backlog of immigration cases,
which would allow EOIR to hire more than 1,200 new staff, including
approximately 200 new immigration judges above the fiscal year 2022
enacted level.
Question 3. It is undeniable that the opioid epidemic has taken a
serious toll on all Americans-- not just in my state, but across the
country. As I am sure you are aware, last year, the CDC reported that
more than 100,000 Americans died from drug related overdoses, making
2021 the deadliest year on record for overdoses. It is estimated that
more than two-thirds of those overdoses likely involved an opioid or a
synthetic opioid, such as fentanyl. And for those men and women who are
fortunate enough to escape death and get clean, they often face
severely limited job opportunities after serving their time for crimes
committed as a result of their drug addiction. To help fix this
problem, I introduced a bill called the Clean Start Act last Congress
and again this Congress, which seeks to help individuals working to
recover from substance use disorder with criminal records seal those
records if they complete a comprehensive addiction treatment program
and show that they have turned their lives around.
A. How do you plan on helping former offenders re-join the workforce
and once again become responsible taxpayers?
Answer. Eliminating barriers to successful reentry is a priority
for the Justice Department. To advance this important goal, the
Department plans to continue employing a broad set of policy tools and
strategic partnerships with Federal, state, and grantee partners.
For example, in fiscal years 2022 and 2023, DOJ and the Department
of Labor (DOL) will partner to provide intensive job training in select
Bureau of Prisons' facilities followed by intensive, individualized
reentry support during halfway house or home confinement. This includes
$100 million in the President's fiscal year 2023 budget for DOJ and DOL
to develop a national initiative to provide comprehensive workforce
development services to those in Federal prison, both during their time
in Federal custody and after they are transferred to community
placement. DOL and DOJ would also oversee evaluation to assess these
programmatic efforts on recidivism, labor market outcomes, and other
key metrics.
The Justice Department also supports reentry through the broad
array of programming, policy initiatives, and grantmaking undertaken by
the Office of Justice Programs (OJP). This includes OJP's work with
state and local systems to better equip formerly incarcerated persons
for re-entry by facilitating the attainment of state IDs prior to
release; helping build successful prison/college partnerships to
improve educational outcomes; and implementing vocational and
employment skills training programs that result in apprenticeships and
meaningful employment post-release. OJP (through the BJA), also
supports, and will continue to support, grantees who are implementing
programs specifically designed to help populations recovering from
substance use disorders be ready to reenter the workforce.
OJP's work will be further advanced through its recently announced
partnership with the Council of State Governments Justice Center.
Through that partnership, OJP will help launch the national Reentry
2030 campaign, a national initiative to achieve better and more
equitable reentry and reintegration outcomes by engaging states to
adopt public, ambitious goals that drive system change.
This is just a high-level description of some of the many varied
ways the Department is engaging on this critical issue. Should you
desire a more detailed briefing on the Department's efforts, my staff
would be happy to put you in touch with the relevant experts within the
Department.
B. What programs and initiatives, in your experience, are the most
effective in preventing recidivism for first time
offenders?
Answer. Across institutions, the Department offers and supports a
variety of programs to address reentry needs related to education,
employment, substance use, and mental health to assist individuals'
successful transition back to the community. My staff would be happy to
put you in touch with the relevant experts within the Department--
including staff within the Office of Access to Justice and OJP--to
provide your staff with a detailed briefing regarding the relative
advantages of various programs, policies, and approaches.
______
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR LISA MURKOWSKI
Question 1. Accessing DOJ Grants. In October of 2020, the
Department of Justice launched JustGrants, an online grant management
system to streamline the grant process for applicants and grantees and
to simplify the payment process. I have heard from several Alaskans
that there were some issues with the system when it was first launched
a few years ago, which I understand the Department has been working to
resolve.
A. How has the Department been working with stakeholders and
internally to bring JustGrants up to full performance?
Answer. In October 2020, the Justice Department transitioned to a
single consolidated grants management system to eliminate duplication
of effort across DOJ's grantmaking components, improve our ability to
manage, track, and monitor DOJ grants, and provide applicants and
grantees with an improved user experience across the entire grants
lifecycle. JustGrants replaced multiple legacy DOJ systems and
integrated them into one unified system, which was a complex, resource
intensive effort. JustGrants launched in October 2020 with basic
functionality to support operations necessary to move applications
through the essential stages of the grant management lifecycle, from
solicitation posting, application review, and award making, through
post-award management, monitoring, and closeouts of all open and active
awards. JustGrants is currently supporting 40,000 users and
approximately 15,000 active grants totaling $17.6 billion. As of May
10, 2022, $7.2 billion has been drawn down by grantees since JustGrants
went live.
Over the course of the transition to JustGrants, many users
experienced instances in which JustGrants did not perform as they
expected. It is a priority for the Department to improve the
functionality of JustGrants. Current emphasis is on ensuring a
successful fiscal year 2022 award making season, which includes
improvements in application submission, application review,
transmitting commitments, and obligations to DOJ's Financial Management
System. This fiscal year we have increased the number of development
teams from six to eight, which has allowed us to release more updates
into the system in less time to improve the user experience. OJP
reports that a recent examination of service desk tickets in April of
this year compared to the same time last year indicated a 52 percent
reduction in calls. The types of calls have also shifted significantly
from system issues and walking users through actions in the system to
assisting grantees with password re-sets and making role assignments.
OJP reports that it provides significant outreach and support to
users on how to apply for funding opportunities in the new system and
manage grants once awarded. Similar to last year, the JustGrants team
is hosting ``Application Mechanics'' webinars for applicants and
continues to provide four weekly sessions for users to receive live on-
the-spot technical assistance to carry out actions within the grants
management system. To respond to the peak periods of the application
season, the JustGrants Service Desk is extending hours and will add
staff to meet demand.
DOJ obtains internal and external user feedback through a variety
of means such as weekly office hours for users and training and webinar
feedback forms. DOJ uses this information to improve system
functionality, usability, training resources, and support services. It
is and will remain a priority of DOJ to continue to evolve and improve
the system over time to bring more benefits to applicants, grant
recipients, and Department personnel across the grants lifecycle.
______
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR SUSAN M. COLLINS
Question. Rapid disbursements, generous benefits, and suspensions
of traditional verification requirements during the pandemic rendered
unemployment insurance (UI) programs ripe for fraud. According to the
Department of Labor Office of the Inspector General, at least $163
billion of the estimated $872.5 billion in pandemic-related UI payments
could have been paid improperly, with a significant portion
attributable to fraud. While state and Federal law enforcement have
recovered some funds, much more must be done.
A. DOJ's budget request recognizes combating pandemic fraud as a
``Priority Goal.'' How will this designation help DOJ
combat pandemic fraud?
Answer. The President's fiscal year 2023 Budget requests an
additional $41.2 million to combat pandemic fraud. These additional
resources will allow the Department to fund analysts tasked with
identifying connections between irregularities in the large volume of
pandemic benefit data collected and under collection, which will result
in potential criminal leads. These additional resources will also
permit the staffing of strike teams to pursue the leads that analysts
develop, transforming the raw data into actionable criminal
investigative matters. And these additional resources will fund agents,
analysts, and prosecutors in the field who will open criminal matters
and use the powerful tools of legal process to investigate the networks
of fraudsters who stole billions in pandemic relief funds. In sum,
these resources will increase the likelihood that we identify fraud
proceeds and restore them to the Treasury, in amounts far greater than
the funds provided for this effort.
B. During its investigations, has DOJ or any of its partners
identified any international criminal organizations
responsible for this fraud?
C. Do any such organizations have ties to the Russian government?
Answer. Questions 1B and 1C: With respect to investigations and
resolutions that have been made public, the Department's Director for
COVID-19 Fraud Enforcement advises that several cases have involved
foreign actors seeking to exploit pandemic relief packages for personal
gain. For example, last month Federal prosecutors in the Western
District of Washington secured a guilty plea from a Nigerian citizen
who used the stolen identities of more than 20,000 Americans to file
for more than $2 million in government benefits, including from
multiple state unemployment insurance benefit systems during the
pandemic. See https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdwa/pr/nigerian-citizen-
pleads-guilty-covid-19-unemployment-fraud-washington-and-17-other.
In addition, as a general matter, our law enforcement partners
advise that stolen personally identifiable information (PII) is the
fuel that drives much of the pandemic relief fraud, and a vast amount
of PII has been stolen by international criminal cyber actors and is
sold online. In the coming days, the Department will be announcing the
launch of specialized pandemic fraud Strike Force Teams in key
districts across the country. These Strike Force Teams will supplement
the hard work underway throughout the Department, including by
targeting fraud committed by overseas actors who steal the identities
of American workers to further their criminal ends and who have
victimized other Americans by tricking them into moving money from our
shores to foreign countries.
______
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOHN KENNEDY
Question 1. Federal Correctional Complex Oakdale and Federal
Correctional Complex Pollock are Federal prisons facilities in
Louisiana. FCC Oakdale and FCC Pollock are experiencing twin crises
that many other Federal prisons across the nation face: correctional
officers are overworked and understaffed. The dangers faced by these
correctional officers cannot be overstated. My constituents back home
in Louisiana are concerned about this issue--and so am I.
In 2017, the Department of Justice eliminated all existing
vacancies within the BOP-- approximately 5,000 positions nationwide--in
an effort to downsize the agency. This decision lowered the total
number of approved positions at facilities like FCC Oakdale and FCC
Pollock. Nearly 5 years later, this has led to chronic staffing
shortages. Congress attempted to correct this issue in 2021 and again
in 2022 when it provided funding to the BOP in the respective Omnibus
bills directing BOP to hire staff across the Federal prison system so
that levels would equal those from before the position elimination.
BOP has failed to carry out Congress's instruction, and it is
instead lowering the total amount of positions. For example, in January
2016, FCC Oakdale had 501 positions filled out of 550 total positions
authorized (46 vacancies). As of April 2022, FCC Oakdale has only 416
positions filled out of 467 total positions authorized (46 vacancies).
In 2018, FCC Pollock had 365 positions filled with 426 total positions
authorized. Now there are only 313 positions filled with 368 total
positions authorized. BOP pretends that it has met the January 2016
staffing levels as directed by Congress, but the reality is that there
are fewer total positions authorized across both Federal prison
complexes. This has led to augmentation--forcing non-correctional
officers, such as teachers and counselors, to perform the duties of
correctional officers--and mandatory overtime for correctional officers
already facing exhaustion and fatigue.
Per the Joint Explanatory Statement to the 2021 Omnibus, the BOP
was instructed ``to improve hiring policies to ensure that, within the
funding provided, it can promptly fill existing and future vacancies in
order to staff its 122 Federal facilities at January 2016 levels, and
forgo further position eliminations.'' The Joint Explanatory Statement
to the 2022 Omnibus stated ``BOP is expected to hire additional full-
time correctional officers in order to reduce the overreliance on
augmentation and improve staffing beyond mission-critical levels in
custodial and all other departments, including medical, counseling, and
educational positions.''
Since the BOP has ignored congressional instruction, the situation
has grown dire. Prison housing units at the low security facility at
FCC Oakdale often only have one correctional officer to monitor inmates
within that housing unit. Correctional officers at FCC Oakdale are
often forced to work double shifts in order to make up for staff
shortages, which leads to exhaustion and fatigue. Non- correctional
officers, such as teachers and counselors, are being forced to work as
correctional officers in order to make up for staff shortage.
Correctional officers at FCC Pollock are frequently mandated to work
16-hour days, apparently with no breaks between 8-hour shifts.
Augmentation occurs there, too. This is unacceptable. Recently a member
of my staff visited the Federal prisons in Oakdale and Pollock,
Louisiana. He observed staffing shortages at these facilities
firsthand. During his visit to the United States Penitentiary at FCC
Pollock, two inmates attacked and stabbed another inmate with hand-made
metal shanks. As a result, a housing unit was placed on lockdown and an
ambulance was called, with the ambulance operator ultimately requesting
a medivac helicopter.
A. Can you commit in writing that the Department of Justice will
faithfully ensure that all 122 Federal prisons in this
country, including those in Oakdale and Pollock, Louisiana,
will receive the appropriate level of funding pursuant to
the instructions from this Committee?
Answer. As I made clear in my testimony before this Committee on
April 26, 2022, maintaining a safe and humane correctional system is a
critical responsibility of the Justice Department. In particular,
ensuring that all 122 BOP facilities are fully staffed by professionals
with the necessary skills and expertise to ensure a safe and humane
prison system is a priority for the Justice Department. That is why in
fiscal year 2023, the President's Budget requests a total of $8.18
billion for BOP to ensure the health, safety, and wellbeing of
correctional staff and incarcerated individuals. The Justice
Department's fiscal year 2023 request would allow BOP to hire more than
700 new correctional officers and nearly 600 new First Step Act staff.
B. What steps are the Department of Justice taking to reduce
augmentation of positions within BOP and mandatory overtime
of correctional officers?
Answer. BOP reports that through the first half of fiscal year
2022, documented augmentation hours have decreased compared to each of
the past two fiscal years. BOP further reports that it has contracted
with an outside consultant, NTT Data Services, to create a new tool
that will help BOP make real-time staffing calculations and predictive
forecasting for staffing needs, which will help BOP better understand
and address the overuse of augmentation and overtime. Currently, BOP is
working closely with the vendor and the study is moving along. BOP
anticipates that, as soon as this summer, it will be able to start
testing a new tool for making staffing projections.
C. When will the staffing numbers at FCC Oakdale and FCC Pollock be
adjusted to reflect the staffing positions of January 2016
as directed by Congress?
Answer. BOP reports that it has contracted with a consultant to
assist it in determining the appropriate staffing level at all
institutions. BOP further advises that any adjustments to BOP's
staffing levels are contingent upon affordable FTE levels determined by
receiving adequate funding from Congress. BOP's affordable FTE level in
2016 was 37,565. In fiscal year 2021, BOP's affordable FTE level was
35,161. This reflects a reduction of over 2,000 FTE.
According to BOP, any adjustments to return to the 2016 staffing
levels will require additional FTEs and adjustments to ensure adequate
positions at all institutions.
D. Have non-correctional officers tasked with correctional officer
responsibilities been adequately trained to meet
departmental standards?
Answer. BOP reports that employees working in institutions,
regardless of their position, receive the same basic law enforcement
training in correctional duties and are required to successfully
complete this training as a condition of their employment. As a result,
they all receive Law Enforcement Officers pay, are covered under the
LEO retirement system, and are expected to perform correctional duties
and functions as needed.
E. How much overtime has been used at FCC Oakdale and FCC Pollock
between April 1, 2021, and April 1, 2022?
Answer. BOP advises that overtime costs during this time period
were approximately $3.2 million for FCC Oakdale and approximately $6.2
million for FCC Pollock.
Question 2. Over a year ago now, I submitted Questions for the
Record (QFRs) to the Federal Bureau of Prisons, which operates under
the Justice Department, after Director Michael Carvajal testified
before the Senate Judiciary Committee's April 2021 hearing titled
``Oversight of the Federal Bureau of Prisons.'' Director Carvajal never
responded to my questions. I sent two additional oversight letters
regarding BOP funding to Director Carvajal on July 15, 2021 and
December 14, 2021, respectively, without response.
A. As the country's chief law enforcement officer, will you ensure
that I receive substantive responses to Questions for the
Record and oversight letters?
Answer. Yes. BOP reports that its responses both to your oversight
letters dated December 14, 2021 and July 15, 2021 as well as all
outstanding Questions for the Record that Director Carvajal has
received will be substantive and submitted to Congress in short order.
Under the previous administration, the Justice Department's China
Initiative ``reflect[ed] the strategic priority of countering Chinese
national security threats'' by prosecuting individuals who committed
espionage to benefit the Chinese government. In 2022, the Justice
Department ended the program.
A. Are you aware that FBI Director Christopher Wray concluded that
the espionage threat posed by China is the most
``unprecedented in history''? Is the FBI wrong?
Answer. Director Wray and I are fully aligned in both our
assessment of the threats posed by the government of the People's
Republic of China (PRC) and the Justice Department's response to those
threats. The Department--including the FBI--is committed to taking a
comprehensive approach that draws on the full extent of our tools and
authorities to address the alarming rise in illegal and nefarious
activities from the PRC government.
B. Do laboratories and businesses continue to face threats of
economic espionage and intellectual property theft by the
Chinese?
Answer. Yes, laboratories and businesses continue to face
significant threats of economic espionage, intellectual property theft,
and threats to research integrity and security by the Chinese
government and its policies. The Department is committed to using all
available legal tools to prevent and address that activity, including
partnership with research funding agencies and appropriate criminal
investigations and prosecutions.
C. What Departmental programs or tools remain in place to protect
the country against Chinese counterterrorism, espionage,
and intellectual property theft?
Answer. The Department continues to employ a rigorous, all-tools
approach. In addition to opening criminal cases, where appropriate, the
Department is actively engaging with and sharing information with the
companies, universities, and international and local governments whose
technology, innovations, research, and information may be at risk. The
Department also chairs the Committee for the Assessment of Foreign
Participation in the United States Telecommunications Services Sector,
which advises the Federal Communications Commission on national
security and law enforcement concerns associated with applications for
telecommunications licenses meeting certain thresholds of foreign
ownership or control.
We are committed to protecting the country against the threats
posed by the government of the PRC--in particular, espionage, cyber
intrusions, and theft of intellectual property. As the Assistant
Attorney General for the National Security Division said in February,
the Department ``will be relentless in defending our country from
China,'' and will ``continue to prioritize and aggressively counter the
actions of the PRC government that harm our people and our
institutions.'' There has been no change in tools or resources
allocated to address threats from PRC government policies, including
espionage and intellectual property theft.
______
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR BILL HAGERTY
Question 1. Despite the fact that marijuana is illegal at the
Federal level, some states do not prohibit its usage under state law.
How do drug usage rates, the number of drug prosecutions, and other
drug abuse and addiction metrics compare among states that allow or
prohibit marijuana usage under state law?
Answer. The Department does not have the data to undertake the
comparison requested in the question. For example, DEA reports that it
does not track drug usage rates, the number of drug prosecutions, or
other drug abuse and addiction metrics. Nor has the Department--as far
as I am aware--conducted any analysis or research along the lines
contemplated by the question.
Last year, President Biden issued Executive Order 14006, which
directed the Attorney General not to renew U.S. Marshals Service (USMS)
contracts for contractor-operated criminal detention facilities.
This executive action was poorly conceived and short-sighted.
Specifically, the Administration did not consider its significant
consequences for the USMS and the American people. This executive order
is harming detainees by forcing their relocation to less-safe and less-
humane facilities that are often hours away from their families and
counsel.
This decision seems to have been driven by politics, rather than
internal or external analysis or budget or logistical justifications
regarding the impact of this decision on the justice system. In light
of this misguided executive action, the USMS did not renew contracts
with a facility in West Tennessee and a facility in Kansas and is in
the process of declining to renew others.
The USMS should have the flexibility to contract with private
facilities for pretrial criminal detention when doing so best
accomplishes its mission and is in detainees' interests.
The fiscal year 2022 Omnibus Appropriations Act gave your
Department the discretion to take appropriate action where necessary to
account for a lack of suitable government-operated detention space. So
far, though, your Department has not used this discretion.
Question 2. Have there been any internal or external reviews or
analyses regarding the implementation of Executive Order 14006? If so,
please describe these reviews and analyses.
Question 3. Has your Department or its Inspector General evaluated
the impact of Executive Order 14006 on the justice system?
Answer. Questions 2-3: With respect to Justice Department reviews
and evaluations regarding the implementation of Executive Order 14006,
including the impact on the justice system, the United States Marshals
Service (USMS) reports that its Prisoner Operations Division conducted
an assessment of all Intergovernmental Agreements (IGAs) with state and
local agencies within proximity of the private facilities under direct
contract with USMS. The USMS assessment examined IGA bedspace
availability within 150 miles of the affected Federal courthouses to
determine whether private facility populations could be absorbed. The
Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) reports that it conducted a
simultaneous review of its facilities proximate to USMS private
detention facilities to determine bedspace suitability and availability
for USMS needs. BOP has provided over 1,800 beds (over and above
bedspace already provided for USMS use) to assist USMS in complying
with EO 14006.
In addition, USMS and the Justice Management Division report that
they have developed an initial analysis of implementation costs based
on rough estimates of the average IGA population, the number of
facilities required to accommodate the displaced detainees, and
transportation requirements to support the distance and dispersion of
detainees among many facilities. Since completion of the initial
assessments, USMS reports that it has continued to review options for
safe, secure housing of detainees being relocated as a result of EO
14006, including whether contract extension clauses are necessary.
With respect to any evaluation of the impact of Executive Order
14006 on the justice system conducted by the Inspector General, we
would respectfully refer you to the Justice Department's Office of the
Inspector General.
Question 4. Have the Bureau of Prisons and the U.S. Marshals
Service been efficient and cost- effective with respect to sharing
facilities and services in the past?
Answer. USMS and BOP have a history of working closely together on
matters involving the detention and transportation of Federal inmates,
and routinely collaborate to maximize USMS bedspace usage at Federal
facilities. USMS and the BOP have an ongoing Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) under which the BOP makes more than 11,000 beds
available at 26 facilities in major metropolitan areas such as Los
Angeles, San Diego, Philadelphia, Chicago, and Houston. In some of
these locations--Miami, Los Angeles, New York, Seattle, and San Diego--
USMS maximizes nearly every bed the BOP has allocated for USMS use.
As part of the USMS-BOP coordination on EO 14006, the BOP has
helped provide solutions to critical USMS detention requirements due to
a facility closure in the District of Kansas (Leavenworth). In
addition, BOP has made facilities available to USMS in Pennsylvania and
North Carolina to assist with pre-sentencing detention housing
shortages unrelated to EO 14006.
Question 5. Do you believe that a decision of this magnitude with
wide-ranging impacts on the criminal justice system merited an analysis
regarding its likely and potential effects prior to implementation?
Answer. As noted, the Department has conducted assessments and
reviews. With respect to the impact on the criminal justice system, the
executive order explains that the Federal government ``has a
responsibility to ensure the safe and humane treatment of those in the
Federal criminal justice system,'' and that ``privately operated
criminal detention facilities do not maintain the same levels of safety
and security'' for incarcerated individuals and correctional staff. We
will continue working to implement the executive order in responsible
fashion.
______
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR MIKE BRAUN
Question 1. Nearly 1 month ago, on March 29, Senator Lankford and
I, alongside six other colleagues, sent a letter to you regarding the
Department of Justice's October 4, 2021, memorandum directing the FBI
to target parents expressing concerns at school board meetings.
During a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee in October,
you admitted that the National School Boards Association's September
29, 2021 letter, proven by emails obtained through FOIA requests to
have been solicited by Secretary Cardona, was the foundation for your
memorandum--not data.
You have not responded to our letter and provided data proving the
need for such allocation of finite Department resources nor have you
rescinded this offensive memo even after the National School Boards
Association publicly apologized for the September 29 letter.
A. What data do you have that this is an issue that warrants Federal
intervention and why does it take a month to reply?
B. Do parents have a right to express concerns to their local school
board?
C. Who is the primary stakeholder in children's education?
Answer. 1A, 1B, 1C: As I said in my congressional testimony last
October, it is the job of parents to be involved in the education of
their children, and it is ``the role [of] the First Amendment to
protect their ability to be involved.'' That is why the October 4,
2021, memorandum makes absolutely clear in the first paragraph that
``spirited debate about policy matters is protected under our
Constitution.'' These protections clearly and importantly cover debate
concerning school board policies.
Question 2. As of the date your response, what is the number of
Firearms Technology Industry Services evaluation requests still pending
a final determination response from ATF to the requesting party?
Answer. ATF reports that, as of May 13, 2022, Firearms Technology
Industry Services (FTISB) has 222 evaluation requests pending final
determination. These 222 cases are comprised of 105 stabilizing brace
and frame or receiver determinations submitted over 1 year ago; 20
receiver determinations submitted under 1 year ago; 80 import
evaluations less than 60 days old; and 17 domestic evaluations of
various types submitted recently. ATF further reports that frame or
receiver determinations and stabilizing brace determinations have been
delayed because of Department rulemaking on these subjects.
A. Of the pending evaluation requests disclosed in response to
question 1, how many of them have been pending for over 1
year?
Answer. ATF reports that 105 evaluation requests are pending for
longer than 1 year.
B. How many of them have been pending for over 2 years?
Answer. ATF reports that 76 evaluation requests have been pending
longer than over 2 years.
C. What is ATF's current processing time for ATF Form 6 Import
Permits, and Forms 4, respectively?
Answer. ATF reports that processing the ATF Form 6 Import Permit
currently takes an average of 45 days. ATF reports that processing the
ATF Form 4 currently takes an average of 10 months for a paper form and
90 days for an e-Form.
Question 3. Can the regulated public rely on the guidance posted on
ATF's website as the current position of the agency?
Answer. Yes. ATF routinely checks its website in an effort to
ensure instructional information is current, within prevailing policy,
and authorized by the associated statutes and regulations.
Question 4. When ATF determines that guidance posted on their
website is ``wrong'' or represents a misinterpretation of law, does the
ATF take steps to clarify this with the public and how long does that
process take? Is there currently any guidance that the agency considers
incorrect or contrary to law?
Answer. ATF reports that guidance it posts is carefully reviewed
prior to issuance and that posted guidance reflects the most complete
analysis of the law and facts at the time the guidance is made
available to the public. ATF reports that it is unaware of any current
guidance that is incorrect or contrary to law.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Shaheen. The hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:05 p.m., Tuesday, April 26, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
the Chair.]
COMMERCE, JUSTICE, SCIENCE, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2023
----------
TUESDAY, MAY 3, 2022
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:04 a.m., in
room SD-192, Dirksen Senate office Building, Hon. Jeanne
Shaheen (Chair), presiding.
Present: Senators Shaheen, Van Hollen, Moran, Capito, and
Braun.
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION AND THE NATIONAL SCIENCE
FOUNDATION
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEANNE SHAHEEN
Senator Shaheen. Just for the record, we will no longer
take people asking questions in virtual format, so people will
be here in person, and we will take people in order of arrival
for questions.
This is really a pivotal moment for the prosperity and
security of the United States and democracies around the world.
At the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, which is also
meeting right now, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin and
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Of Staff Mark Milley are
discussing resources needed to meet the military challenges
from Russia, China, and others around the world. But the
agencies that are represented here that each of you represent--
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and
the National Science Foundation (NSF) are also key to standing
up to the challenges facing our country. So it gives me great
pleasure this morning to welcome NASA Administrator Bill Nelson
and NSF director--I am going to call you Dr. Panch for ease of
statement. So thank you both for being here this morning. It is
really good to see you again, and I am delighted that our
Ranking Member has joined us.
Just to clarify, again, for the record, we have about four
hearings going on in the Senate this morning, so we are not
sure who will be able to attend, but Senator Moran and I, I
know, have lots of questions, so we will be able to cover so
many issues that are going to be important as we look at the
appropriations process.
The programs that each of you manage are on the frontlines
of bolstering the Nation's cybersecurity, training teachers,
technicians, explorers, and entrepreneurs, developing
industries of the future, and understanding the existential
threat of climate change. This subcommittee wants the next pair
of boots on the moon, the next Nobel Prize-winning discovery,
and the next paradigm-changing technology company to be made in
the USA, or, from my perspective, better yet, the Granite
State. I am sure Senator Moran feels that way about his home
State of Kansas.
We know in New Hampshire that manufacturers have what it
takes to cut it in space. We have local companies much like
Mikrolar, a contractor for NASA, who is a continued contributor
of technology and supplies to NASA programs, but we cannot take
our continued leadership for granted. Our global competitors,
including China--especially China--are investing heavily in
scientific and technological innovation, and if we want to see
sustain our scientific leadership, and the economic prosperity,
and national security that it affords, we have to continue to
keep peace.
When the U.S. Government was shut down in 2019 due to
partisan bickering--a disagreement in the Senate over the
budget--China was landing on the dark side of the moon. We are
not going to be able to compete if that is the choice that we
have. Now, I do not want to focus on the past, but we need to
learn from it so that we do not repeat it. Most critical, it is
a reminder of what is at stake in this global competition. That
is why I am pleased that the fiscal year 2022 omnibus provided
the largest increase to NSF in more than a decade and a $770
million increase for NASA. I am also pleased that Congress is
currently in the midst of a bipartisan conference on
significant legislation to advance the mission of both these
agencies, the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act, which is the
name of the Senate version of the bill.
President Biden's fiscal year 2023 budget for NASA and NSF
build on this progress and keep the Nation moving in the right
direction. For NASA, the fiscal year 2023 request is nearly $26
billion, an increase of $1.9 billion, or 8 percent, above the
fiscal year 2022 enacted level. The President's request
includes $10.5 billion for NSF. This is an increase of $1.65
billion, or 19 percent, above the fiscal year 2022 enacted
level. There is a lot to like in these requests. I am sure that
each of you would have liked more, but I think this is an
increase that can be put to good use, and I know that both
Agencies plan to expand climate research.
NASA is asking for $2.4 billion in earth science research
and more than $500 million to lessen the impact of aviation on
the climate. NSF's budget includes a total of $1.55 billion for
climate and clean energy research as we work to enhance our
energy security and create energy efficiency and renewable
energy jobs. Most important, the request invests in people with
$150 million for STEM engagement at NASA and $1.4 billion for
NSF's renamed Directorate for STEM Education. And this is a
major priority for me because I have seen how critical it is to
our economy in New Hampshire and to the economy in the country.
I was just at a ribbon-cutting yesterday for BAE systems,
which makes critical parts for the F-35 and a lot of our
warfighting equipment, and they are hoping to hire several
hundred more jobs in New Hampshire. And when I asked them what
is your biggest challenge, it was workforce. It was finding
those STEM-educated workers who can come in and do the jobs,
the engineers, the scientists that they need. And so the work
that you are doing in that area, both NASA and NSF, is really
critical. This is, of course, a point of pride for New
Hampshire as well because of the home--we are the home of
Christa McAuliffe and Alan Shepard, who are both revered
Granite Staters and emblems of STEM education.
The same sentiment is shared by our academic institutions
that are highly respected around the country for their
aerospace research and innovation. And as we were discussing,
Senator Administrator Nelson, we are immensely proud of the
University of New Hampshire Space Center, which was recently
selected by NASA to research the earth-sun environment. As one
of the two winners of the Heliophysics Medium-Class Explore
Competition, the $250 million will improve our understanding of
the dynamics of the sun, its connection to the earth and the
universe.
NASA's budget request will land the next humans on the moon
and return soil samples from Mars, while NSF seeks to create
jobs and maintain U.S. leadership on critical technologies that
will define the next several decades, technologies like
artificial intelligence and quantum computing through the new
Directorate for Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships, and I
am really looking forward to hearing more about that in your
testimony. There are also a few challenging items in these
requests. In particular, I am concerned with the proposed cuts
to NASA heliophysics and an overall lack of resources to
address recent decadal surveys, and astrophysics, and planetary
science at both agencies.
So in conclusion, I believe that we must continue to look
toward the next frontiers of science and space, and I am
looking forward to the launch of Artemis 1 this summer. I
understand that Senator Moran is also looking forward to that.
I support NASA and NSF because these agencies inspire us with
curiosity-driven research and exploration, and I think
curiosity is one of the most important aspects of the human
condition. So we thank you--both of you for what you do to
answer questions that we want to know about.
So with that, let me recognize the vice chair and one of
the conferees of the United States Innovation and Competition
Act, Senator Moran.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JERRY MORAN
Senator Moran. Chairwoman, thank you very much. I
appreciate hearing your enthusiasm. You and I are involved in a
lot of hearings, in this subcommittee and others, and I would
hate to admit that none of--that any of them are ones that I am
not excited about being at. But if there is a level of
enthusiasm for a subject for a hearing, it is this one, and it
is nice to have the two of you here today together. And I
certainly welcome our former colleague, Administrator Nelson,
and Director Panchanathan to this hearing.
I want to start by thanking Panch for visiting Kansas with
me last year. It was a highlight and very valuable certainly to
me and I hope to you, but to the people, the students that we
spent and you spent time with, and I am very grateful for that.
And, Senator Nelson, you are, ``relentless'' may be an
overstatement, but not far--relentless in your willingness--
stated willingness to come to Kansas. And it seems to be my
schedule that is keeping that from happening, and I am going to
make it happen shortly, and I thank you for that. There is
great value in Americans seeing the two of you, hearing your--
what you are about, your mission, and generating the enthusiasm
in them. It is helpful to us as we appropriate money for our
constituents to believe that that money is being wisely spent
and a value to the country.
The proposed budget for NASA is $26 billion. That is an
increase of about 8 percent. NSF's proposed budget is $10.5
billion and represents an almost 19-percent increase. I am
pleased to be a conferee on USICA, and I hope that we have
success in reaching an agreement so that that legislation can
become law. NASA is one of the most well-known government
agencies. In the past year, we have witnessed the successful
launch of the James Webb Telescope, and I appreciate your
efforts, Administrator, to see that I and four of my colleagues
were present. We did not quite succeed. It all worked on the
20th of December, it worked on the 22nd of December, it may
have worked on the 24th of December, but when it was Christmas
morning, most of our families had other plans for us on that
day. But in addition to the James Webb Telescope, it was a year
of research and science on Mars from perseverance and
ingenuity, and we are eagerly awaiting the Artemis 1 launch
that signifies our first step toward returning American
astronauts and, in this case, a woman to the moon.
I have been the lead Republican on this committee since the
early days of the Artemis program and worked closely with the
previous administrator to identify challenges ahead on what was
needed to ensure the long-term success of Artemis missions.
Returning to the moon and sustaining a presence there is a
long-term goal for our Nation, and I am pleased that this
Administration is continuing that goal. NSF's scientific
research is no less impressive. In Kansas alone, you can go
from a lab studying plant genomics to studying Arctic and
Antarctic ice without leaving the State, and even without
leaving the campus.
We cannot rest upon our past successes, however. There is
significant competition across the globe to be the Nation that
unlocks the knowledge and discoveries that will drive economic
growth and success. This research is important to our national
security as well. We know that competition is a focus from
investments by other nations but also from incentivizing the
unlawful transfer of intellectual property. This is a
recognition of the power of knowledge. It is important we are
able to harness that power, knowledge, and inspiration as
generated by your agencies for the good of our country. NASA
and NSF have the opportunity to capitalize on their missions,
to encourage students, young people across the country, no
matter where they live, to pursue activities and careers in
STEM. We just had a former astronaut in Kansas at the Kansas
Cosmosphere, and we visited with 4th, 5th, and 6th graders,
hugely a value. They had no interest in me but were very
excited about the astronaut.
Our country needs a workforce in each and every State that
is ready to push the frontiers of knowledge and has the skills
to thrive in a tech-intensive economy. Great opportunities
within your Agencies to maintain our leadership across the
scientific spectrum on earth and in space if we are strategic
in our investments. We are at a time where there is severe
unrest in the world. Russia and China continue to make
significant gains in the space domain. It is vital that the
United States maintain our leadership in space and in research
and development, and I look forward to discussing the
importance of this and the details of your proposed budgets
being presented with us today. I thank you both for your
leadership.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much, Senator Moran.
Senator Nelson and then Dr. Panch, do you want to give us your
testimony?
Senator Nelson. Thank you, ma'am. Madam Chair, if I may
have my remarks submitted for the record, and I would like to
just talk to you, if I may.
First of all, I want to thank you all for the
appropriations for 2022, and that gave us what we needed. And a
little birdie told me that you all are seriously considering
getting the appropriations bills out for 2023 before October 1,
and if you do, that will be a minor miracle. All of you will
become Merlin the magician, and--but I do believe that that is
being seriously discussed among the leadership, and my
compliments to Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell that those
serious discussions, as well as the chairs and the Ranking of
Appropriations, are occurring, and I hope it does. It will
bring about certainty for all agencies of government if that,
in fact, happens, and breaks what has become a routine
procedure where we often wait half, at least, of a fiscal year
before getting the appropriations and going on a continuing
resolution of previous appropriations, which often do not have
any application to the present. So I commend you.
I want you to know, just to pick up on comments that both
of you made about STEM and about kids, I have been just blown
away by our interns. We have lots of interns, and we love our
interns. And 30 percent of our interns end up coming to work
for NASA, and we are going to expand our interns. They are
reflective of what the two of you just related about seeing
students in school, that when the subject of space comes up,
their little eyes light up. They get excited. They are
motivated. It is a subject matter of which it is a window into
the items that are absolutely critical for the future of the
country: science, technology, engineering, mathematics.
We saw a bit of this several generations ago in the Apollo
generation when that major thrust of a space achievement
occurred for two generations of students. We saw the effects of
a concentration on the STEM subject matter and how that rippled
through the schools, and the colleges, and the universities,
and produced a workforce that gave us some of the technology
that we are experiencing today. And that is what is going to
happen with the Artemis generation, and you all--the two of you
have just testified to that fact by virtue of what you have
seen, and it is extraordinary.
We are taking it very seriously. We send our astronauts to
a lot of schools. We send our scientists to a lot of schools.
We are giving grants specifically in areas that have been
overlooked in the past. This is part of our diversity outreach.
So, for example, we have sent a space grant to the University
of Wyoming. In the past, a lot of those rural universities did
not have a direct relation, but we do not want those students
in rural areas--and that is just one example--we do not want
them overlooked. They are part of the national culture that is
so excited about space, and technology, and so forth. So I
wanted to comment since the two of you both mentioned it.
You have given us the resources in which to proceed with
the Artemis Program. It was the Apollo generation. We are going
back to the moon. We are going to land the first woman and the
next man. It is going to be an exciting time. But this time we
are going back to learn, to stay, to develop new systems, new
technologies, new techniques on how to live a long time in that
hostile environment, because when we go to Mars, we are going
to have to learn that, and we are going to have to learn new
technologies, too.
I want to urge you as an Appropriations Committee, do not
short-sheet space technology, the R&D. We need that extra oomph
in our research and development, and let me give you one
example. For years, by the way, you, the Congress, has rescued
us on the question of nuclear energy in space. As a matter of
fact, not until this year were we able to get the Office of
Management And Budget to agree to put, albeit a minor amount,
it is a symbolic amount for nuclear research for space, nuclear
thermal and nuclear electric, not only producing electricity
where, for example, on the surface of the moon we are going to
need a lot of electricity because if we find water, then we
have rocket fuel. And we have got a mission going to land on
the South Pole next year. It is going to dig around down into
the moon's surface, and if there is water there, then we have
that opportunity.
So I want to commend you for how you have constantly
supported nuclear thermal, nuclear electric, but I want to ask
you to consider pouring on the juice because that nuclear
propulsion would give us a way to get to Mars quicker. And if
we can get to Mars quicker, then we do not have to stay there
for a long, long time until the planets realign so that we can
get back within a reasonable period of time.
And so I could keep talking on and on. Aviation, something
dear to Senator Moran, we are going to fly the first electric
airplane this year. We are going to fly the first low-sonic
boom, supersonic future transport that can fly over populated
areas with just a little rumble instead of that boom, boom that
goes with the existing sonic boom. There are so many things. I
am going to wait for your questions. Both of you mentioned
James Webb Space Telescope. My goodness, in 1 month we are
going to have the first pictures, and it is going to be from
light that has traveled at the speed of light, 186,000 miles
per second, traveled for 13-and-a-half billion years. It will
be the light in the infrared spectrum that is from the
formation of the very first galaxies. Just think of the
discoveries that we are going to have of this thing called the
universe that is too big for me to even conceive it. Think of
the questions we are going to answer of which we do not even
know what the questions are right now as a result of what we
are going to learn.
And so I am going to stop there, Madam Chair. I want to
hear from Dr. Panch, who is well-known, well-respected in his
scientific discovery, a partner for us, and I look forward to
hearing from you all as well.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Bill Nelson, Administrator, National
Aeronautics and Space Administration
Chair Shaheen and Members of the Subcommittee, I am pleased to have
this opportunity to discuss the President's $26,000,000,000 budget
request for NASA for Fiscal Year 2023. This budget will keep us at the
forefront of exploration and discovery through daring and challenging
missions like Artemis, which includes returning American astronauts to
the Moon as early as 2025. This budget will help our Nation--and the
world--address climate change. It provides opportunities in science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education, and it
promotes diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA)
throughout the Agency and with our partners. It's an investment to
support good-paying jobs and the businesses and schools that partner
with NASA in all 50 States. Finally, this budget reaffirms the
Administration's confidence in the extraordinary NASA workforce that
has dared to do the impossible for more than six decades. This year, we
adopted the mission statement ``NASA explores the unknown in air and
space, innovates for the benefit of humanity, and inspires the world
through discovery.'' This is a budget that will allow us to fulfill
those goals and serve those ideals. While my five minutes doesn't allow
me time to describe NASA's more than 100 missions in development and
operation, I would like to highlight a few for you today.
Soon, the Space Launch System, the most powerful rocket NASA has
ever built, topped by the Orion spacecraft, will lift off from historic
Launch Complex 39B at the Kennedy Space Center for its maiden voyage
around the Moon. This mission--Artemis I--will take the Orion
spacecraft and science payloads around the Moon, as well as test out
systems in preparation for Artemis II--the first crewed launch,
scheduled for 2024. After these test flights and as early as 2025, NASA
will launch Artemis III, returning U.S. astronauts to the surface of
the Moon. The next generation of moonwalkers will more strongly reflect
the diversity of the Nation. During the Artemis campaign, NASA will
land the first woman and the first person of color on the Moon--but the
Moon is a steppingstone to further exploration. With annual missions to
build out our lunar infrastructure, including the Gateway--a new
international space station in lunar orbit--NASA astronauts will learn
to live and work on and around the Moon in preparation for future
exploration of Mars. This budget invests approximately $7.5 billion in
Exploration, including key elements for a robust and sustained presence
at the Moon including an upgraded launch capability; sustained lunar
lander capability; lunar robotic missions; lunar science;
communications infrastructure; next-generation spacesuits; safe,
reliable, and continuous surface power systems; and surface mobility
systems. And, with projects to test technologies that would allow for
human exploration of Mars, we are advancing toward the Red Planet.
The budget includes approximately $4.3 billion for Space
Operations, continuing support for the International Space Station,
which the Administration has proposed extending through 2030, while
stimulating the growth of the low-Earth orbit economy by working with
industry to develop commercial space stations. These investments will
pave the way for continuity of sustained U. S. presence in orbit and
create scientific and economic opportunities.
This budget increases funding for NASA's Space Technology research
and development portfolio to $1.44 billion, to develop essential
technologies that enable NASA's future missions to the Moon, Mars and
beyond, while ensuring our technology investments also support the
space economy. Space Technology has more than 1,400 technology projects
and approximately 140 planned flight demonstrations. Soon, we will send
the CAPSTONE CubeSat to the Moon as a pathfinder for the Artemis
program. CAPSTONE will collect data and test navigation technologies in
the unique orbit planned for Gateway. Other notable Space Technology
investments that support exploration of the solar system include those
in fission surface power and nuclear propulsion. Through this budget,
NASA will continue working with academia, and form strategic commercial
collaborations using joint investments with industry to develop
important technology solutions that support new space economies in low-
Earth orbit and at the Moon. This work increases the Nation's space
capabilities, supports job creation, and enables NASA to focus on
missions farther into the solar system than ever before.
This request emphasizes NASA's role in addressing climate change,
as a leading provider of Earth systems science and data. With this
budget, the Agency will start to build a future Earth System
Observatory: an array of satellites, instruments, and missions that
will generate a 3D, holistic view of the entire planet. From bedrock to
atmosphere, the Earth is a system. As that system changes, NASA will
help measure and understand the nature of that change. This request
also reflects a renewed emphasis on providing actionable data and
information to a broad range of users. NASA is planning an Earth
Information Center that will make climate data and information more
accessible and usable for Federal, State, and local government leaders,
researchers, as well as the public. These efforts will be implemented
in coordination with other agencies and partners.
The recent, remarkable launch of the James Webb Space Telescope
demonstrated NASA's innovation alongside international partners and
inspired the world. Faced with 344 single points of failure, the NASA
team poured hard work and ingenuity into this project, and pulled it
off flawlessly. This summer, we will see its first scientific images,
revealing the stars and galaxies that formed more than 13 billion years
ago, just after the beginning of the universe--a period of cosmic
history never before observed. Again, we will bring the world together
through the unique science from an ambitious NASA mission.
Building on this success, this request is the largest request for
science funding in NASA history at nearly $8.0 billion. The President's
budget request enables NASA to explore solutions for bringing the
samples of Martian rock and soil collected by the Perseverance rover to
Earth through the Mars Sample Return mission. This budget supports over
100 science missions and 10,000 U.S. scientists through more than 4,000
research awards across astrophysics, heliophysics, Earth science,
planetary science, and biological and physical science.
The budget provides more than $971,000,000 to advance U.S.
leadership in the civil aviation manufacturing sector, with over half
of that amount targeted to reduce the climate impacts of the aviation
industry. This year, NASA will start test flights on our Low Boom
Flight Demonstrator, which will enable environmentally and socially
acceptable supersonic passenger flights, opening new markets for
American companies and workers, and the X-57 Maxwell, an all-electric
aircraft. This request also accelerates plans for a new experimental
``X'' plane focused on sustainability. Under the Sustainable Flight
National Partnership, NASA and U.S. companies will develop and fly a
highly efficient, next-generation airliner prototype as early as 2026.
NASA investments will result in safer skies, smoother passenger
experiences, and faster, more sustainable aircraft.
NASA continues to invest in engaging students, educators, and
educational institutions to attract diverse groups of students to
Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM). This includes
funding that supports learning opportunities that spark interest and
provide connections to NASA's mission and work; creating unique
opportunities for a diverse set of students to contribute to NASA's
work; and building a diverse future STEM workforce. The Office of STEM
Engagement (OSTEM) leads NASA's STEM engagement function, providing
strategic guidance and direction in partnership with the mission
directorates. In fiscal year 2023, the budget request includes
$150,000,000 for OSTEM, supporting the National Space Grant College
Fellowship Project (Space Grant); Minority University Research and
Education Project (MUREP); Established Program to Stimulate Competitive
Research (PSCoR); and Next Generation STEM Project (Next Gen STEM).
NASA fully supports the Biden-Harris administration's vision to
affirmatively advance equity, civil rights, racial justice, and equal
opportunity for all. The Agency launched its Equity Action Plan in
April 2022, a comprehensive effort to assess and examine the potential
barriers and challenges that exist for communities that are
historically underrepresented and underserved in the aerospace and STEM
fields. NASA is assessing its programs, procurement processes and grant
policies to identify systemic barriers that limit representation and
participation of a diverse community of students and professionals.
When we enable individuals to inclusively participate, we provide space
for all possible talent, skills, knowledge, perspectives, ideas,
thinking, problem-solving, and innovations. This empowers NASA to
achieve the greatest success in discovering and expanding knowledge for
the benefit of all humanity.
With each great step, NASA magnifies its presence as a unifying
symbol of possibility and inspiration. At every opportunity, NASA
endeavors to educate and inspire. With every breakthrough, we seek to
generate more than incredible data--we help to create the next
generation of scientists, engineers, and explorers who will be the
innovators of the future. The American story is about discovery,
innovation, and a relentless spirit to push forward--and upward. This
budget allows NASA to continue our journey to enable a new era filled
with boundless optimism and limitless possibilities for all humanity.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much. Dr. Panch?
STATEMENT OF HONORABLE SETHURAMAN PANCHANATHAN,
DIRECTOR, NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
NSF'S FISCAL YEAR 2023 BUDGET TO CONGRESS
Dr. Panchanathan. Thank you so much. It is truly a delight
to testify with you. As you said, NASA is a great partner. Good
morning, Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and Members of
the Subcommittee. It is truly an honor to appear to you--appear
with you again today to discuss the President's fiscal year
2023 budget request and the many ways in which the National
Science Foundation is accelerating discovery and innovation, as
I say, at speed and scale for the benefit of all Americans. I
would like to start by thanking this Committee for your
continued support of NSF. Your leadership has been and will
continue to be central to keeping the United States the global
leader in science, engineering, and technology.
For more than 70 years, NSF has been a catalyst for
economic growth and job creation in the United States. You do
not have to look hard to see the profound impact of the Agency.
The Internet, 3D printing, smartphones, and the networks that
power them, and even the CRISPR technologies that were
foundational in the development of COVID tests and vaccines,
and disease-resistant crops, are just a few examples of how
NSF's investments have benefited every American.
However, we currently face challenges to our scientific
leadership. You both spoke about that. Other nations are
seeking to replicate our success, our unique innovation
ecosystem, and to control the future of critical technologies,
like AI and Quantum Information Science. Our economic and
national security depends on our ability to invest heavily in
the technologies of today while making the discoveries that are
the foundation for the technologies of tomorrow and the future.
We must see growth everywhere by building ecosystems of
innovation in every region of our country, and we must harness
our domestic talent across every demographic and geographic
background to unlock the true potential of our workforce.
NSF'S FISCAL YEAR 2023 BUDGET TO CONGRESS
The $10.5 billion fiscal year 2023 budget request for NSF
makes historic investments in each of these areas. First, the
budget funds critical exploratory, curiosity-driven research
that, Chair, you talked about, which is an engine of economic
growth and the foundation for the industries of the future. The
request includes $9.8 billion, an increase of $1.6 billion
above the fiscal year 2022 enacted level, to support research
across the spectrum of science, engineering, technology, and
STEM education. With this additional funding, NSF will continue
to be the champion of fundamental research that is the bedrock
of our future.
Second, the budget invests nearly $1.4 billion--again, you
alluded to that, Madam Chair--in support of the scientists and
engineers of today and tomorrow. There is tremendous untapped
STEM talent across every demographic and socioeconomic group in
every geographic region of our country. Every person needs
access to quality STEM education opportunities, from K to 12,
to community colleges and universities, and we must inspire and
motivate the missing millions to participate in the Nation's
innovation enterprise.
NEW PROGRAM: GRANTED
The fiscal year 2023 request introduces a new program aimed
at advancing the geography of innovation and engaging the
missing millions. Since I spoke to you last, I am delighted to
announce this new program. This new program is called GRANTED,
an acronym for Growing Research Access for Nationally-
Transformative Equity and Diversity. This will focus on
breaking down barriers to competitiveness at underserved
institutions within the Nation's research enterprise. It will
complement NSF's longstanding, broadening participation
programs and build lasting institutional capacity.
DIRECTORATE FOR TECHNOLOGY, INNOVATION, AND PARTNERSHIPS
Finally, the budget makes substantial investments in use-
inspired, solutions-oriented research. This has been a critical
part of NSF's mission and now must be scaled to meet this
moment of intense global competition. With the support of the
Administration and Congress, NSF has launched, and I talked
about this last year, and I am delighted to say again that we
have launched the first new directorate in more than 30 years.
This new Directorate for Technology, Innovation, and
Partnerships, or TIP, sits at the crossroads of exploratory,
curiosity-driven research, use-inspired solutions-oriented
research, and translational research across all scientific and
engineering disciplines. Significant resources are needed to
ensure that TIP will have the transformative impacts it is
designed to achieve. That is why the fiscal year 2023 budget
request includes $880 million for this new directorate. TIP
will leverage decades of NSF's investments in areas like
Artificial Intelligence, expedite technology development and
translation in emerging industries, and cultivate new education
and entrepreneurial pathways.
REGIONAL INNOVATION ENGINES
I am also proud to announce that today, we will be
releasing the first new major funding opportunity through the
TIP Directorate. The Regional Innovation Engines Program offers
a unique opportunity to spur economic growth in regions that
have not participated in the technology boom of the past few
decades. It will include partners from industry, academia,
government, nonprofit, civil society, and communities of
practice. These partnerships will stimulate the creation of
technology-driven products and solutions to serve the
corresponding regions and the Nation's needs. In doing so, the
NSF Engines, as we call them, will stimulate economic growth,
develop talent, and build centers of innovation across the
country. The fiscal year 2023 budget request additionally
invests in the critical world-leading infrastructure, including
testbeds, living laboratories, and prototyping platforms
necessary to enable fundamental research.
RESEARCH SECURITY
NSF also takes very seriously the need to safeguard
taxpayer-funded research. NSF is playing a leading role in
developing processes, training, and policies to ensure research
security and integrity. We are committed to strong partnerships
across the Federal Government with academia and with our like-
minded international partners to uphold the values of openness,
transparency, reciprocity, and research integrity that have
made the global research environment so successful.
I am amazed every day by the ingenuity and the dedication
of the NSF workforce and the incredible innovations NSF makes
possible. During the pandemic, we saw no decrease in
productivity. In fact, it was quite the opposite, and thanks to
the support of the Administration and Congress through the
CARES Act and the American Rescue Plan, we have been able to
support those in the research community most impacted by the
pandemic.
Again, I would like to thank each of you for your support
of NSF. The fiscal year 2023 request positions the Agency to
ensure U.S. leadership in science, engineering, and technology
for decades to come, and I look forward to working with you to
achieve that goal. Thank you, Madam Chair and Ranking Member
Moran.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Director Panchanathan
introduction
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and Members of the
Subcommittee, it is a privilege to appear before you today to discuss
how the National Science Foundation is building on decades of
successful investments and breakthroughs in science, engineering, and
technology to ensure that the United States remains the global leader
in innovation into the future.
Established by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950 (Public
Law 81-507), NSF is an independent Federal agency charged with the
mission ``to promote the progress of science; to advance the National
health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the National defense; and
for other purposes.'' NSF is unique in carrying out its mission by
supporting research across all fields of science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics, and at all levels of STEM education. NSF
investments contribute significantly to the economic and national
security interests of the Nation, and development of a future-focused
science and engineering workforce that draws on the talents of all
Americans resulting in the creation of new businesses, new jobs, and
more exports.
Over the past 72 years, NSF has funded research and researchers,
innovations and innovators, and world-class infrastructure that has
garnered incredible benefits to the Nation. The Internet, 3D printing,
and CRISPR technologies that enable everything from the development of
COVID-19 vaccines to climate- and disease-resistant crops are all
examples of the outcomes and benefits of NSF investments. Many of the
technologies and industries that are the drivers of national
competitiveness today--artificial intelligence, quantum information
science, advanced manufacturing, and advanced wireless and
biotechnology, to name a few-are rooted in NSF support, over the course
of multiple decades in many cases, for research at the frontiers of
science and engineering.
securing the future
Since the end of World War II, the United States has been the
global leader in science, engineering, and technology due to the vision
of leaders like Vannevar Bush and sustained investment by the Federal
Government. The decision to make long-term investments in basic
research was not just a decision to make science and engineering a
priority alongside the economy, national defense, and national health--
what we have learned is that these investments are an engine that
strengthens each of these national priorities.
Today, we are facing challenges to that leadership as other nations
seek to replicate our success, especially to control the future of
technologies. According to the 2022 Science and Engineering Indicators
report, ``The State of U.S. Science and Engineering,'' published by the
National Science Board and prepared by NSF's National Center for
Science and Engineering Statistics, while the United States remains the
world leader in global research and development, the rate of growth of
research and development and science and technology capabilities by
other countries, including China, has outpaced that of the United
States in recent years. The 2022 report also shows that while industry
performs the substantial majority of U.S. R&D, the Federal Government
continues to be the largest investor in basic research. However, the
proportion of U.S. R&D funded by the Federal Government, across all
research types, has declined since 2010.\1\
As we look to the future, it is critical that we foster the
Nation's capacity to produce breakthroughs, to innovate, and to
cultivate the diverse domestic talent necessary to power our country
forward. Our economic and national security depend on our ability to
invest heavily in the technologies of today while making the
discoveries that are the foundation for the technologies of tomorrow;
to seed innovation everywhere by building ecosystems of innovation in
every region of the country; and to develop our domestic talent across
every geographic and demographic background. The President's fiscal
year 2023 Budget Request of $10.5 billion for NSF makes historic
investments in each of these areas.
strengthening established nsf
By seeding strategic investments, NSF explores the frontiers of
discovery and innovation, and makes possible breakthroughs and advances
that place the United States at the forefront of global leadership in
science and technology. With the continued support of Congress, NSF has
been able to sustain support for high-risk, high-reward research that
produces incredible benefit for the American people. For example, more
than four decades of NSF investment preceded the detection of
gravitational waves from merging black holes billions of light years
from Earth. This discovery was groundbreaking, with the lead
researchers winning a Nobel Prize in Physics in 2017. To achieve this
feat, they had to develop and refine new equipment and technologies to
achieve their goals--and the development of these ultra-sensitive
sensors and precision detection techniques they are pursuing today
could very well prove to have incredible impacts on our everyday lives
in the form of transformative future technologies, like quantum sensor
technology.
Curiosity-driven research has proven to be an engine of economic
growth. Since its inception, NSF has been a foundation for the
industries of the future. Each year, thousands of researchers expand
the base of human knowledge and, in doing so, unlock new possibilities.
They have built autonomous vehicles; revolutionized our wireless
networks; developed life-saving medical technologies; transformed
manufacturing; and brought digital tools to agriculture,
transportation, and education. Curiosity-driven, exploratory research
is a critical component to the Nation's current and future success.
This will continue to be our central focus: to accelerate discovery and
to enhance state-of-the-art research capabilities.
To that end, the President's fiscal year 2023 Budget Request
includes $9.8 billion, an increase of $1.6 billion above the fiscal
year 2022 enacted level, to support research across the spectrum of
science, engineering, and technology, including biological sciences;
computer and information sciences; engineering; geosciences; math and
physical sciences; social, behavioral, and economic sciences; and STEM
education. With this additional funding, NSF will continue to be the
champion of the fundamental research that is strengthening our science
and engineering enterprise at speed and scale.
Within the request are key priority areas where NSF plays a leading
role in addressing issues of national importance. For example, the
request includes funding to accelerate climate research, increasing our
understanding of the impacts of climate change and developing
corresponding solutions. NSF has been investing in fundamental research
at the heart of global climate issues for several decades. Long-term,
continuous, and consistent observational records are a cornerstone of
global climate science and resilience research. NSF supports a variety
of research observation networks that complement, and are dependent on,
the climate monitoring systems maintained by our Federal partners. The
results of NSF investments have helped us understand climatic
phenomena, and helped communities design mitigation strategies,
strengthen adaptation capabilities, and build more resilient futures.
Focal areas of the fiscal year 2023 Request include Clean Energy
Technology (CET) and the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP).
The fiscal year 2023 request invests $500,000,000 in CET spanning high-
risk, high-reward ideas from researchers across the science and
engineering spectrum. These investments are needed to create broad new
understanding and innovations that may increase energy efficiency,
enhance sustainability, mitigate climate change, or lead to other
societal benefits. NSF's portfolio spans longstanding programs as well
as focused new opportunities and will continue to advance the
fundamental science and engineering underlying clean energy
technologies and infrastructure that decrease energy prices and build
our domestic supply chain. NSF also will support multidisciplinary
research in areas such as affordable green housing and sustainable
systems for clean water, clean transit, and other infrastructure.
In fiscal year 2023, $913,400,000 is requested for NSF to continue
to support research that contributes to the USGCRP goal to accelerate
action on two fronts: (1) advance scientific knowledge of the
integrated natural and human components of the Earth system, focusing
on changes that pose the biggest risks and opportunities to society,
and (2) provide the scientific basis to inform and enable timely
decisions on adaptation and mitigation. NSF will continue to engage
with other USGCRP agencies on priorities from intra-seasonal to
centennial predictability, predictions, and projections; water cycle
research; impacts of climate change on the Nation's critical
ecosystems, including coastal, freshwater, agricultural and forests
systems; understanding the impacts of global change on the Arctic
region and effects on global climate; and fundamental research on
actionable science.
In addition, NSF will seek greater integration of social-science
research, methodologies, and insights into understanding and supporting
responses to global change, improving computing capacity, and
maintaining needed observational capabilities over time.
For example, in fiscal year 2023, NSF will develop the National
Discovery Cloud (NDC) for Climate, a new resource that will federate
advanced computing, data, software and networking resources,
democratizing access to a cyberinfrastructure ecosystem that is
increasingly necessary to further climate-related science and
engineering.
investing in innovation and emerging industries
Equally important to our Nation's competitiveness and success is
use-inspired, solutions-oriented research, which has been a critical
part of NSF's mission throughout its history. Intense global
competition and a rapidly changing technological landscape requires the
United States to take a different approach to research and development
investment that brings science and technology innovations to market
much more rapidly. Doing so requires unleashing the untapped economies
of innovation across the Nation and more tightly integrating curiosity-
driven research and use- inspired outcomes. NSF fosters an environment
ripe for innovation focused on economic and societal progress. Many of
today's foremost national and societal challenges such as healthcare
and education demand deeply multidisciplinary, multi-sector, solution-
oriented research to achieve much-needed science and technology
innovations. We must enable collaborations spanning diverse
institutions, sectors, and geographies to co-create new technologies
and solutions to address these challenges and accelerate prosperity.
With the support of the Administration and Congress, NSF has
launched its first new directorate in more than thirty years. The new
Directorate for Technology, Innovation and Partnerships (TIP) sits at
the crossroads of exploratory, curiosity-driven research, use-inspired,
solutions-oriented research, and translational research across all
disciplines and investment models. Significant resources are needed to
ensure that TIP will have the transformative impacts it is designed to
achieve. That is why, in fiscal year 2023, $880,000,000 is requested
for TIP to work with programs across NSF and with other Federal and
non-Federal entities to expedite technology development in emerging
industries. This investment is crucial to addressing societal and
economic challenges, while maintaining the United States' technological
leadership. TIP will leverage decades of NSF investments in areas like
artificial intelligence and quantum information science coupled with
accelerating the translation of research results from the lab to the
market and society. TIP will also cultivate new education pathways,
leading to a diverse and skilled technical future workforce comprising
researchers, practitioners, technicians, and entrepreneurs.
Partnerships within the agency, with other agencies, industry, non-
profit organizations, and like- minded international partners are also
crucial to our success. TIP will leverage NSF's unique relationships
with the academic community and grow the agency's collaboration with
industry to spur innovation throughout the Nation. The NSF Regional
Innovation Engines (NSF Engines) will engage local communities,
academia, government partners, industry, philanthropy, and others to
identify issues of local, regional, and national importance, and to
drive innovation in critical and emerging technologies to address these
issues. The NSF Engines will be geographically distributed to ensure
that we are unlocking the innovation that we know exists everywhere.
The fiscal year 2023 Budget Request proposes increased funding in
six emerging industries where continued investment in both exploratory,
curiosity-driven research and use-inspired, solutions-oriented research
is needed to sustain U.S. leadership, support economic development, and
secure our National security.
(1) Advanced manufacturing is essential to almost every sector of
the U.S. economy, spurring it forward by increasing productivity,
enabling new products, and opening new industries. The fiscal year 2023
Request includes $421,000,000 for research to develop innovative
technologies to create products and processes with higher performance,
higher efficiency, and greater capabilities. NSF programs accelerate
advances in manufacturing materials, technologies, and systems;
workforce development; and translational activities that speed advances
from the lab to the market.
(2) Advanced wireless networks and systems provide the
communications backbone that connects users, devices, applications, and
services that will continue to enrich America's economy. NSF has a
proven track record of investing in fundamental research that advances
wireless technologies. For example, today's fifth-generation (``5G'')
wireless networks and systems were enabled by two decades of ground-
breaking NSF-funded research on millimeter-wave capabilities, advanced
antenna systems, and novel algorithms and information processing
protocols. NSF partners with other Federal agencies and industry on
such research. Looking forward to fiscal year 2023 and beyond, NSF-
supported research will make possible innovations in areas critical to
future generations of wireless networks and systems, such as new
wireless devices, circuits, protocols, and systems; security and
resilience; mobile edge computing; distributed machine learning, and
inferences across mobile devices; and fine-grained, real-time dynamic
spectrum allocation and sharing. In fiscal year 2023, $168,000,000 is
requested for this research, which will generate new insights capable
of making wireless communication faster, smarter, more affordable, and
more robust and secure- with profound implications for science and
society.
(3) Artificial intelligence (AI) is advancing rapidly and holds the
potential to vastly transform our lives. NSF is the largest non-defense
funder of artificial intelligence research and the agency's ability to
bring together numerous fields of scientific inquiry uniquely positions
the agency to lead the Nation in expanding the frontiers of AI.
Additionally, through collaboration and coordination with the Office of
Science and Technology Policy, NSF leadership is helping to drive and
coordinate AI R&D efforts across the government. In addition to
foundational research advancing the frontiers of learning, reasoning,
and planning, the key to harnessing the promise of artificial
intelligence is the use-inspired and translational research that links
artificial intelligence and economic sectors such as agriculture,
manufacturing, transportation, and personalized medicine. Equally
important is the investment in education and learning, including
growing the human capital and institutional capacity needed to nurture
the next generation of artificial intelligence researchers and
practitioners. In fiscal year 2023, $734,000,000 is requested for NSF's
AI investments, including continued support for the National AI
Research Institutes program, a growing partnership with other Federal
agencies and the private sector, to create national hubs for
universities, Federal and local agencies, industry, and nonprofits to
advance AI research and workforce development.
(4) Biotechnology comprises the data, tools, research
infrastructure, workforce capacity, and innovation that enable the
discovery, use, and alteration of living organisms, their constituent
components, and their biologically-related processes. NSF has long
supported the breadth of fundamental research that catalyzes ongoing
developments in biotechnology. In fiscal year 2023, $392,000,000 is
requested for NSF investments that will include continued support for
discovery of fundamental biological principles and the development of
biotechnologies, advances in bioinformatics, computational biology, and
systems biology, as well as advances in the future biotech workforce.
(5) Microelectronics and semiconductors are omnipresent in today's
world--in transportation, communications, healthcare, manufacturing,
information technology, and nearly every other part of our daily lives.
Yet, U.S.-led innovations in this area have slowed in recent decades,
and the Nation is now facing historically unprecedented global
competition and chip shortages impacting numerous sectors of the
economy. The overarching objective of NSF's investment in
microelectronics and semiconductors is to develop new paradigms in
semiconductor capabilities. With the fiscal year 2023 request of
$146,000,000, NSF will continue to invest in foundational research, in
use-inspired research, and in partnerships and infrastructure,
including access to chip fabrication facilities for the research
community, to seed a vibrant future for microelectronics and
semiconductors in the United States.
(6) Quantum Information Science (QIS) research will form the basis
of one of the major technological revolutions of the 21st century. NSF
investments advance fundamental understanding of uniquely quantum
phenomena that can be harnessed to promote information processing,
transmission, and measurement in new ways. Building upon more than
three decades of exploratory discovery, NSF investment in QIS will help
propel the Nation forward as a leading developer of quantum technology.
In fiscal year 2023, $261,000,000 is requested for NSF to invest in
foundational quantum science advances, helping mature a relatively new
field, which will have implications for computing, communications, and
many other critical industries.
investing in a diverse and inclusive stem workforce
There is tremendous untapped STEM potential throughout the Nation.
To meet the needs of the future workforce that is necessary for
successfully seeding innovation throughout the Nation, every person
needs access to quality STEM education opportunities. Every demographic
and socioeconomic group in every geographic region of the country is
full of talent that must be inspired and motivated to participate in
STEM and contribute to the Nation's innovation enterprise. We must
scale existing pathways into STEM fields and create new tracks into
science and engineering. The fiscal year 2023 request includes $1.38
billion for STEM education in support of the scientists and engineers
of today and tomorrow.
Each year, NSF investments reach approximately 300,000 people at
almost 2,000 institutions in every State and territory. Through their
work on NSF-supported grants, students, researchers, faculty,
technicians, entrepreneurs, and others develop the skills and knowledge
that prepares them for the jobs of the future. To ensure continued
global leadership in science and technology, we must inspire, nurture,
and advance domestic talent across our Nation. The future depends on
investment in inclusion, in diversity, in training STEM educators, and
in inspiring the next generations through formal and informal learning.
Continued global leadership also requires investment in the next
generation of scientists trained to pursue questions beyond the
traditional scientific disciplines. NSF is investing in education
research across all levels of learning-from preK-12 through graduate
education and beyond-which then informs education and training programs
to better develop skill sets in cutting-edge technologies, promote
highly collaborative team science, and foster greater diversity in the
workforce.
NSF is strongly committed to the development of a future-focused
science and engineering workforce that draws on the talents of all
Americans. Increasing equity in underserved communities must span a
wide range of stakeholders, from individuals traditionally identified
as underrepresented or underserved, to institutions of higher education
that serve groups underrepresented in STEM, to those communities, lands
and jurisdictions across the country that currently lack resources and
opportunities for robust education, workforce development, and regional
innovation.
In fiscal year 2023, NSF intends to build on existing programs and
develop new ones to strengthen and scale equity investments. NSF will
focus on those groups underserved and underrepresented in STEM and will
be more intentional in how we engage Minority Serving Institutions
(MSIs). NSF will further expand support for individuals and
institutions in EPSCoR jurisdictions to ensure geographic diversity.
In fiscal year 2023, NSF requests $50,000,000 to launch a new
initiative called Growing Research Access for Nationally Transformative
Equity and Diversity (GRANTED). GRANTED will improve the Nation's
research capacity at emerging and underserved research institutions
through a variety of mechanisms and programs aimed at advancing the
geography of innovation and engaging the Missing Millions, the millions
of young people and students who have the talent and drive to be part
of the STEM community but who have not been able to access STEM
opportunities. It will support the enhancement of research
administration and post-award management as well as the implementation
of effective practices for competitive proposal development, through
mechanisms such as research-coordination networks (RCNs) and
institutional partnership grants, ideas labs, and research enterprise
hubs in different geographic regions. GRANTED funding in fiscal year
2023 will focus on support for MSIs and aim to mitigate the barriers to
competitiveness at underserved institutions within the Nation's
research enterprise as NSF contributes to the Administration's priority
on equity.
world-class research infrastructure
NSF invests in world-class research facilities, instrumentation,
and scientific capabilities to ensure that researchers have access to
the most cutting-edge scientific equipment. Through the Major Research
Equipment and Facilities Construction (MREFC) projects, NSF has built
the world's most powerful solar telescope, transformative optical and
radio telescopes, state-of-the-art research vessels, and complex
facilities in the harshest environments, including at the South Pole.
The fiscal year 2023 request continues these investments, including
long-term upgrades of NSF's major Antarctic infrastructure. It also
supports construction of the Vera C. Rubin Observatory, two detector
upgrades at the High Luminosity-Large Hadron Collider, and the Regional
Class Research Vessels. NSF is also investing in smaller scale, but
equally important research infrastructure that serves a vital purpose
for the United States' research and innovation enterprise. The Mid-
scale Research Infrastructure program is aimed at transforming
scientific and engineering research fields as well as inspiring STEM
talent. Mid-Scale Research Infrastructure (RI) can also serve as a
proving ground for new and innovative major research facilities. In
fiscal year 2023, NSF will invest a total of $126.25 million in Mid-
scale RI, split between two tracks, Mid-scale RI-1 ($50,000,000),
funded through the Research & Related Activities account, and Mid-scale
RI-2 ($76.25 million), funded through the MREFC account. Through these
two tracks, the Mid-scale RI program is providing U.S. researchers
access to critical infrastructure, including testbeds, living
laboratories, and prototyping facilities, across the spectrum of
disciplines supported by NSF.
The Nation's science and engineering activities rely on facilities
and instruments that are geographically and technically accessible,
cost-effective, and managed well. To meet the infrastructure needs of
the entire community, NSF is dedicated to supporting activities that
ensure that instrumentation and research infrastructure can be
designed, developed, acquired, or constructed across the Nation,
through programs with focused oversight and targeted investments.
Moreover, a sizeable portion of NSF's resources is invested in the
ongoing operations and maintenance (O&M) activities necessary to keep
research infrastructure at the cutting edge, and fully operational and
accessible to those who use it to advance the boundaries of science.
The fiscal year 2023 facilities O&M request continues to reflect a
balance among multiple priorities. NSF divisions carefully allocate
resources between research grants and O&M costs for research
infrastructure. In addition to the regular O&M funding that keeps
facilities functional, support for upgrades, significant periodic
maintenance, and infrastructure renewal must also be addressed within
Facilities O&M, which accounts for 10 percent of NSF's total request in
fiscal year 2023. NSF continues to explore ways to invest in research
infrastructure at all scales in order to keep pace with changing
technologies, increased demand by users, and expanding research
opportunities.
nsf responsiveness to covid-19
NSF is grateful to the Administration and Congress for the support
of the research ecosystem during the COVID-19 pandemic. With the
funding provided by the ``Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic
Security Act,'' or ``CARES Act,'' NSF was able to mobilize the research
community to make critical contributions to fighting the SARS-CoV-2
virus, including research to model the virus's structure, create new
products to mitigate the virus's spread, and develop new treatments and
vaccines. From equipment delays and reagent shortages to lost training
time and missed field research, the pandemic also strained research
projects in unique ways. With the continued support from Congress and
the Administration, including the $600,000,000 provided in the American
Rescue Plan act of 2021 (ARP), NSF has been able to support groups of
individuals and institutions most affected by the pandemic, as well as
those at vulnerable transition points in their research careers. With
more than $450,000,000 of the ARP funding obligated to date, NSF has
been able to make more than 1,300 awards spanning all disciplines of
science and engineering- supporting researchers, students, facilities
and more. Thanks to these investments, NSF has been able to support
innovative research ideas and sustain critical research talent that is
central to our long-term competitiveness that could have been lost
during the pandemic without the support that the Administration and
Congress made available.
securing taxpayer-funded research
NSF is expanding capabilities and competencies to protect the U.S.
science and engineering enterprise through its Research Security
Strategy and Policy activity. In January 2022, the Office of Science
and Technology Policy, through the National Science and Technology
Council, issued implementation guidance for National Security
Presidential Memorandum 33 (NSPM-33) on the National Security Strategy
for United States Government-Supported Research and Development. NSF is
working together with other Federal research agencies to establish
uniform mechanisms for researchers to provide agencies with consistent
information on their appointments, activities, and sources of research
support; many of these mechanisms will be made available to the
community during fiscal year 2023. Consistent with its published System
of Records Notice, NSF has established processes to proactively
identify conflicts of commitment, vulnerabilities of pre-publication
research, and risks at various stages of the research funding
enterprise from proposal submission to the performance of NSF-funded
research. To ensure clear understanding of research security issues,
NSF disclosure requirements, and the tenets of beneficial international
collaboration, NSF is leading the efforts to develop training resources
for staff and the research community that will continue to be refined
in fiscal year 2023. NSF is also commissioning a JASON study in fiscal
year 2022 to provide guidance on the establishment of a Research on
Research Security funding program that is expected to begin in fiscal
year 2023.
NSF participation in discussions with the U.S. research community
and with international colleagues is key to the success of the agency's
activities, which includes the development of common frameworks for
understanding research security. That is why NSF is co-leading the U.S.
efforts to work with G7 nations on research security and integrity. NSF
is committed to strong partnerships across the Federal Government, with
academia, and with our like-minded international partners to ensure
that we can uphold the values of openness, transparency and reciprocity
that have made the international research environment so successful.
conclusion
At a time of intense global competition, the fiscal year 2023
Budget Request for NSF positions the agency to lead the Nation in
innovation, discovery, and STEM education to build a more diverse and
inclusive workforce and unleash economic and societal progress. With
the new TIP Directorate established, NSF is well positioned to leverage
the uniquely American innovation system in which investment in
fundamental research is intertwined with strong partnerships among
government, academia, and industry. With a keen focus on strengthening
NSF's investments in exploratory, curiosity-driven research and use-
inspired innovations, NSF will build on seven decades of preeminence in
STEM to catalyze partnerships that produce breakthroughs and
advancements in emerging industries like artificial intelligence and
quantum information science. In this way, NSF will ensure that the
United States is in the vanguard of global competitiveness.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. With the
continued support of this Committee and the Congress, NSF will continue
to unleash rapid innovations, and foster ecosystems of innovation
throughout the country to ensure that the United States remains the
global leader in science, engineering, innovation, and technology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ National Science Board, National Science Foundation. 2022.
Science and Engineering Indicators 2022: The State of U.S. Science and
Engineering. NSB-2022-1. Alexandria, VA. Available at https://
ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20221.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you both very much for your
testimony. We will now enter 5-minute questioning rounds, and I
will begin.
Administrator Nelson, I think the whole world has been
transfixed on Russia's unprovoked war in Ukraine and what is
happening there. And part of what we have heard from the
rhetoric coming out of Russia is the suggestion that they may
no longer participate with us in the International Space
Station, and they may look to China to partner on space
activities. Can you talk about how concerned we should be about
that and whether you are hearing at NASA's level any chatter
that they may actually be pulling out of our partnership there?
Senator Nelson. Madam Chair, they are not pulling out. In
the last day or so, there are misleading headlines. If you read
the articles, it says something else of comments that were made
by people in Roscosmos, the Russian space agency. I want you to
think about this issue in a historical context. In the height
of the Cold War with the Soviet Union, a Soviet spacecraft and
an American spacecraft rendezvoused and docked in space, and
the crews lived together and worked together in space led by
General Tom Stafford and General Alexei Leonov. That personal
friendship endured over the years, so much so, when Alexi
passed away a couple of years ago, who gave the eulogy at the
funeral in Moscow? None other than General Tom Stafford, and
that cooperation in civil space has continued to this day.
First, there was a Russian space station. There was Mir,
and the U.S. Space Program--space shuttle docked with Mir, then
together we built the International Space Station.
Theoretically, you cannot operate the space station without
both. The Russians had the propulsion, the altitude control.
The U.S. has the electricity production. I see nothing in the
very even-keeled professional relationship between the
cosmonauts and the astronauts, between mission control in
Moscow and Houston, in the training of Russian cosmonauts in
America and the training of American astronauts in Moscow and
Baikonur, I see nothing that has interrupted that professional
relationship, no matter how awful Putin is conducting a war
with such disastrous results in Ukraine.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. That is really nice to
hear, and I have been encouraged by the reports that we have
seen about recent cooperation between the cosmonauts and our
astronauts. Can you also comment on China and what you are
seeing with respect to China and Russia cooperating in space?
Senator Nelson. Now, China is completely a different
experience for the U.S. Space Program because there has not
been any transparency. They are very secretive. An example:
they put up their space station and the first stage of the
rocket. They did not save enough fuel so that they could have a
controlled reentry. This is about a year or two ago, and as a
result, it was going to come down someplace. Fortunately, it
came down in the Indian Ocean, but it could have come down
somewhere in Europe. It could have come down in Saudi Arabia.
And they were secretive about the coordinates of where it was
going to come down.
I have since talked to the Chinese ambassador, and he gave
me the opening. He said, well, what could we do. I said, I will
give you an example of exactly what you could do to begin
things. You, 50 years after us, have returned a sample from the
moon. Fifty years ago, we made our sample of the lunar soil and
rocks available to the international scientific community. You
could do the same. Thus far, they have not indicated anything,
so it has been a very strained relationship with the Chinese
space program.
What is the extent of cooperation with Russia--between
Russia and China? I am simply not sure. China has made
entreaties to Russia, Russia has flirted with China, and you
remember Putin went to the opening of the Olympics as the guest
of President Xi, but we do not know to what extent. We do know
that because of the professional relationship and what I
believe to be the intention of the Russian space program to
continue with the space station, and now that we have gotten
the White House approval of extending the space station until
2030, if you all appropriate funds, and, of course, what we
want to do is continue it until we have a commercial space
station and then deorbit an aging space station in 2031. But we
see every reason that the Russians are going to continue on the
space station for the immediate future, and, of course, we
personally hope that they will continue with us all the way to
2030.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much. Senator Moran.
RETURNING HUMANS TO THE MOON
Senator Moran. Chair, thank you very much. Administrator
Nelson, given the amount of work that remains to be done with
test flights and developing and testing a lander and space
suits, what do you see as the largest technical threat to
landing our astronauts on the moon by 2025?
Senator Nelson. First of all, you all have helped us so
that that landing will occur because there have been
indications, and we hope that you will consider favorably the
President's request to start competition in a human lander.
Now, as it turned out, the first competition, NASA simply did
not have enough money to award for two landers. And by far, the
most economical of the three competitors was the one that was
given the nod--SpaceX--for the first landing. That is a done
contract. What we wanted to do, and what you all, the Congress,
have made particularly clear to me through hearings all last
year, and I happen to agree with you, is that you wanted
competition for the ultimate lander. So on the basis of that,
we have started the initial process, and if you deem it wise in
giving us the appropriations which the President has requested,
then we will have a simultaneous competition excluding SpaceX
because they already have that under procurement law and cannot
participate in the next competition. The winner of that
competition would have the opportunity, as SpaceX, to land an
uncrewed lander first and then do the crude landing. They would
have that opportunity.
And then we would have two landers somewhere in the 2027
timeframe, having both already landed to make the ultimate
choice of the lander that would last for some period of time as
the lander on the moon. That is a decision that you will have
to make in this President's request, and I believe that that is
the plan that can bring us all the value of competition. You
get it done with that competitive spirit, you get it done
cheaper, and that allows us to move away from what has been a
plague on us in the past, which is a cost-plus contract, and
move to an existing contractual price.
AERONAUTIC CAPABILITIES
Senator Moran. Thank you for your answer. Let me ask about
aeronautics. You did mention that it has a great value to
Kansas and the country. That portfolio includes everything from
low-sonic boom aircraft to developing advanced materials and
technologies that lead us to a safer, cleaner, more fuel
efficient aircraft. You are asking for an increase of $90
million to further our understanding of aeronautics. That is a
$972 million dollars request.
While NASA is involved in identifying and improving this
research, there are great opportunities within the university
research community to improve our understanding and develop
aeronautic capabilities within the aviation sector. How does
NASA intend to use its proposed aeronautics budget to build
upon the strong university research capabilities that exist
today to solve current and future aeronautical problems of
tomorrow?
Senator Nelson. Well, for example, at Wichita State, they
are working on composites. Here is the problem today with
composites. You can do an airliner, like the, I think it is
called the 787. It is a composite body. It is much lighter, but
it is kind of like a one-of-a-kind. You need to be able to
stretch that process out where you can make composites and it
be much more of an assembly line situation. Wichita State is
working on that. You get that to the point through aeronautical
research that NASA is working on so that we can start popping
out air frames that are composites. Then you have saved a lot
of weight, and, therefore, you have saved a lot of fuel, and
you have gotten a lot greater efficiencies. And according to
the passengers that fly on the 787, it is also more comfortable
inside because of the humidity.
Senator Moran. It seems like you agree with me that the
private university--the public and private universities are of
value to NASA and to the country in this regard.
Senator Nelson. Absolutely, and as a matter of fact,
Senator Shaheen was here 12 years ago when we passed the new
NASA bill on a track where there was going to be the government
program, and there was going to be a commercial program, and we
are seeing the fruits of that, for example, going to and from
the International Space Station today because we are
transporting crew by NASA contracting with SpaceX and
eventually Boeing. And Boeing should launch its spacecraft, by
the way, in a week or so, and this is a test flight, and then
the crew would be later this year. So we would have two ways of
getting to the International Space Station--SpaceX and Boeing--
and we have already got lots of ways to get cargo up there,
including Northrop Grumman launching from Senator Van Hollen's
constituency. It is actually right across the State line in
Virginia, but most of the people live in Maryland that work
there at Wallops Island launch facility.
And so there is just so much that is happening in the
commercial area, whether it is done directly under NASA's
government contracts or whether NASA contracts with commercial
entities in order to produce what we are asking them to
produce. Now, when it comes to safety, NASA is all over it. We
are not simply going to put up crew in spacecraft that are not
safe, even though we have contracted with a commercial company,
and the proof is in the pudding. Look what has happened with
commercial crew going to and from the International Space
Station.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Moran. Senator Van
Hollen.
WALLOPS FLIGHT FACILITY
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Madam Chairman, and to the
Ranking Member. Great to have both of you here. Administrator
Nelson, thank you for your enthusiasm, for all the initiatives
that you are overseeing, and for presenting a budget that
includes important investments in space exploration and
discovery, as well as robust funding for earth sciences, which
you said are very important to all of us and encompass many of
the Maryland-based missions, including at Goddard.
And appreciate the funding for PACE, for OSAM 1, and,
again, continuing support for the Webb Telescope. We are all
thrilled with the fact that that deployed successfully, and we
all know a million things had to go right in order for that to
be successful, and it has been. And I am very proud of all the
folks at the Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore who
were responsible for mission operations for the Webb as well as
about 2,000 other Marylanders at Goddard and other places. And
as you say, we all look forward to getting the first images
back soon.
Thank you for mentioning Wallops. I am going to spend a
moment focusing on the Wallops Flight Facility, which, as you
indicated, is critical to our space and earth science missions.
It is a hub for unmanned flight. It is a supplier to the
International Space Station. It is a home to NASA's Balloon
Program. This is a great budget, but it does have a shortcoming
in that it does not include the funds that we have
traditionally provided to the 21st Century Launch Complex
Program. Other Administrations have also admitted that, and we
have worked on a bipartisan basis to make sure those funds are
provided because Wallops is attracting new commercial space
partners. It is growing, and I think you have acknowledged as
well in your infrastructure needs budget the importance of the
Wallops Island Causeway Bridge.
So Mr. Administrator, I know you have been there, just your
commitment to work with us to make sure that that is a success.
Senator Nelson. Not only do you have my commitment. I have
been out there, and we are afraid that bridge is going to fall
in the water.
Senator Van Hollen. Yes.
Senator Nelson. And it is the number one priority, and I
thought with machinations with some of your colleagues on this
Committee that we were going to get it in the 2022 budget. I
may get in trouble by saying this, but I hope that there is
going to be kind of infrastructure bill that is still going to
come out of the Senate that would allow us then to have high-
priority, desperately-needed infrastructure projects like the
Wallops Island Bridge be taken care of.
Senator Van Hollen. Yes.
Senator Nelson. The only way we got some of the others was
that you all passed our hurricane emergency supplemental, and
we got the roof being done down in New Orleans on the big
facility down there, but we have not been able to get that
Wallops Bridge--yes.
Senator Van Hollen. I hear you. I hear you, Mr.
Administrator. We are going to work on that. I mean, the
infrastructure modernization bill had a lot of good investments
in it, but it did neglect some critical U.S. Government
investments like this one. I mean, obviously if you do not have
a bridge going to the Wallops Space Complex, you are in a world
of hurt. I do want to flag also the issue of bridge repair over
the BW Parkway for Goddard.
Mr. Administrator, let me ask you about heliophysics
because I indicated that I think the budget is a good one, but
in the area of heliophysics, there is a slight reduction, which
I will work with my colleagues to remedy. But I do want to
applaud you for your continued support to the science
directorate. If you look at the Heliophysics Division's budget,
it has been reduced. I think that is a mistake, especially as
we witness the impact of solar flares on Starlink satellites,
and space weather, as you know, poses a serious risk to our
satellites and communication systems. So I have--I also believe
you are--you are committed to that mission.
In my remaining time, Dr. Panch, if I could just thank you
also for all your work at the National Science Foundation.
Quantum science is obviously a critical area for our country,
and you mentioned it in your remarks, and Maryland is an
important center for quantum information science. Can you
elaborate a little bit more on what you are doing in that area,
and at the same time, talk a little bit more about your efforts
to bring HBCUs--
Dr. Panchanathan. Yes.
Senator Van Hollen [continuing]. Into your efforts to make
sure that all of our talent is on the playing field when it
comes to science.
QUANTUM INFORMATION SCIENCE
Dr. Panchanathan. Thank you, Senator, for asking the
question. As you pointed out, it is a very, very important
technology, and it is very important that we stay in the
vanguard of innovation. It turns out yesterday, I was giving a
talk at IBM Yorktown, and I was standing in front of the
quantum computer right there and admiring the tremendous work
that has gone into it in terms of many, many things: materials,
devices, the fabrication technologies, of course, that goes
with it, the Quantum Information Science, and a whole lot more,
and the quantum networking, all of those things that have come
together in order for us to be building such a fantastic
machine. And I was told that it is deployed not only across the
United States but also will be deployed all across the globe,
so really a world leader in this.
From an NSF perspective, this investment has happened for
several decades. We are here today because of the sustained
investments that NSF has made in all aspects, whether it is
physics, chemistry, you know, material science, computing,
engineering, and a whole lot more, over several decades to get
to the point where we are right now. And I am very thrilled to
say that through a partnership with the Department of Energy
and other partners, we are continuing to invest in quantum
institutes, which are large-scale partnerships, to be able to
advance it at speed and scale, as I would often say. We also
have a number of investments in terms of how we take these
ideas to action in terms of entrepreneurial ventures and
supporting industry partnerships, things of that nature, and
that is why I was there at IBM yesterday.
But as you said, the most important thing for us is to make
sure that we have the quantum workforce. This is an exceedingly
important imperative. Yes, we will have great quantum
researchers, and we will continue to invest in that, but we
need to make sure that we have quantum inspiration starting not
just at the university level but right at the K to 12 level. So
we have a Q-12 Program, which essentially is focused on K to 12
inspirations of quantum. How might we get quantum foundry-like
ideas accessible for high school children to be able to, and
middle school children to be able to, get excited about quantum
science? How can we relate quantum futures at the K to 12
level? So this is something that we are working with many
partners to develop that kind of curriculum at the K to 12
level.
HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES
To your point about HBCUs, we have a program called Expand
QISE, Quantum Information Science and Engineering. This is
precisely the focus. How might we get the quantum futures also
exciting people at HBCUs, at other MSIs, Hispanic-serving
institutions, Tribal colleges and universities, so we are
working diligently with our partners? Specific to HBCUs, since
we met last, Senator, I have had many conversations with HBCU
presidents and chancellors, and I am thrilled to report that
one of those presidents and chancellors is University of
Maryland Eastern Shore President Anderson, and so we had good
conversations and asking them how might we have more
Historically Black Colleges and Universities. How might we have
the minority- serving institutions, R2 institutions, also
participating in the quantum revolution? We also need community
colleges in this because it requires a lot of technical skills
also to be part of how we build the quantum future.
So we are working on all of this in terms of STEM training
for talent everywhere to be inspired by quantum.
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Senator Capito.
COMMERICAL LANDER
Senator Capito. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you both
for being here today. Administrator Nelson, it is good to see
you. About a week ago I was pleased to be at a conference--I
just missed you. You came, I think, the next day, but I was
with a couple of your leaders, James Reuter and Thomas
Zurbuchen from the Space Technology and Science areas. And the
goal is to combine the skill and resources, both in people and
capabilities, of West Virginia, Ohio, and Pennsylvania regions
to become more active contributors to our space industrial
base. A really exciting conference. I have seen this firsthand
at Constellium and Ravenswood, which does a lot of the
aluminum, and then also I toured the Astrobotic--I do not know
if you got to do that--while we were in Pittsburgh, which was
exciting to see what they are going to be landing in the 4th
quarter.
So how do you see this perspective? I know you touched on
it a bit with the question that I heard with Senator Moran, the
private sector and even the more rural parts of our Nation that
can really capitalize on the exciting, I think, futures in
space?
Senator Nelson. Specifically, that consortium of three
States is responsible for 10,000 jobs in the three States, and
it is impressive what you all have done. Also, while I was
there, I did go to Astrobotic, and they revealed the first
commercial lander on the moon. This will be, and it will be
later this year, this will be the first U.S. landing on the
moon since a half century ago when we last landed with Gene
Cernan on Apollo 17. And this is going to be a commercial
landing under the CLPS Program, of which we have incentivized
the commercial industry to build the landers and put scientific
payloads on them, many of which are NASA payloads, and do all
kinds of things without NASA having to do the lander.
And so, for example, there are three companies that are
going to be landing. One of those companies is going to have a
NASA instrument on it. It will land on the South Pole. It will
dig down to see if the water that we know is there in the
shadowed crevices on the South Pole, which is now ice, is there
water underneath, and if so, then there is the potential for
rocket fuel, hydrogen, and oxygen. And so these are the kind of
things that you are doing out there in combining the efforts of
three States, and it is only going to grow.
Senator Capito. Yes, it was really exciting to hear not
just the private sector, but that higher ed, educational, and
the nonprofit community. As you know, Pittsburgh has some
really great community organizations from their long history of
building this country, that they have now--are now sustaining
and looking at space.
Let me ask you one other question about the upcoming OSAM--
it used to be called Restore-L--and because West Virginia's
Robotic Technology Center is a part of that. That is the in-
space service, assembly, and manufacturing of satellites. What
do you think--how important is this? I mean, I can see it, but
if you could quantify a little bit.
Senator Nelson. Hugely important.
Senator Capito. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm.
Senator Nelson. If we are able to service a spacecraft on
orbit, then we get extra life out of it.
Senator Capito. Right.
Senator Nelson. Not only repairs and maintenance, but also
fueling.
Senator Capito. Right.
Senator Nelson. And so it makes sense.
Senator Capito. Right.
Senator Nelson. And we are developing--NASA's developing
this capability. We have contracted out for commercial entities
to do this as well. And by the way, before you get through, I
just want to give kudos to you. You know, we have what we call
the IV&V Center--
Senator Capito. Right.
Senator Nelson [continuing]. In West Virginia--
Senator Capito. Mm-hmm.
Senator Nelson [continuing]. Independent verification and
validation of software.
Senator Capito. Right.
Senator Nelson. That is so super important to NASA, and I
am going to be there in a couple of weeks, and I hope your
schedule on a Monday morning works out so that you can come
with us. And then I will try to get you and whoever in the
delegation is with us back to Washington.
Senator Capito. Sounds great. That is named for Katherine
Johnson, as you know, one of our proud West Virginians. I was
there for the dedication. I look forward to that, and I will be
looking at my schedule. Thank you. I have a question for you,
but I will submit it for the record. Thank you so much.
Senator Nelson. Thank you so much, Senator. Good seeing
you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Capito.
Senator Braun.
Senator Braun. Thank you, Madam Chair. You know, where I
come from, which was running a business for 37 years prior to
getting here, investment was always the most important thing
you had to consider. When you invest, there is a return on it,
and if you do not do it well in business or government, you end
up paying the price. Your competitors generally outmaneuver you
in the long run.
When we are looking at both NASA, the National Science
Foundation, you might be surprised, but I think we ought to be
putting as many resources into it as we can. It is one of the
few things that, even though it may not be tangible, it is very
important, and sometimes it is very tangible as well in terms
of what it yields down the road. So I am one that generally
always thinks of the particulars, which I see $23.27 billion
enacted in fiscal year 2021, $24.04 request, $25. That is about
as mild a request in terms of increases of anything I have seen
since I have been here. It is in the context, though, that we
are $30 trillion in debt. That is such a complicated subject.
All I can tell you, it is not a great business plan to borrow
your way into the future when a lot of it does not give you a
true return on investment.
I want to talk about I think what is even a more an
existential discussion, and that is our main geopolitical
competitor. So, Dr. Panch, when it comes to the Chinese, they
are not apologetic. They are not even quiet about it. They
would want to replace us someday and do it, I think, by merit,
according to maybe what they might think that might be, but in
the meantime, I have observed them as being ones that, I do not
know, their handshake business partners. And if we do enable
and invest more in the National Science Foundation or NASA, how
are we sure that with their behavior, especially when you are
maybe doing it to some extent where there is--even if it is not
shared information, it could be extracted, how are we certain
that we are going to do it in a way that keeps us secure and
does not aid the competition? And then, Mr. Nelson, I would
like you to answer that same question as it would apply to
NASA. Go ahead.
RESEARCH SECURITY STRATEGY POLICY AND CHINA
Dr. Panchanathan. Thank you very much, Senator, for that
question. I often say research is security. Research is
research integrity. Research integrity is research security. So
clearly, before I get to the specific question about China, we
are working with international partners who share our values,
who share our values of research integrity, transparency,
openness, and also reciprocity. So we are working with partners
who emphasize that, and we are building those partnerships.
So one of the things that NSF did 2 years ago, and I was at
that time on the National Science Board, is we commissioned a
security group called JASON, and we asked them to look at the
problem so that it is not just an internal thing only but an
external group of experts looking at it and giving us advice in
terms of how do we move forward in research security. And we
are pretty much following the guidelines that have been given
to us by JASON, of course, in consultation with many other
constituencies.
One of the principal recommendations that was made was to
appoint a chief officer for Research Security Strategy and
Policy, whose job it is to, every day, wake up and think about
research security on its own--in its many forms to make sure
that we are protecting those things that need to be protected,
and set up the policies that need to be set and put in place
for that to be, you know, exercised in its fullest form. And I
am very happy to say that that person reports directly to me,
and that was part of the recommendation. But more importantly--
yes.
Senator Braun. Are you confident that in this case,
especially with what we have observed over the last decade or
so, especially more recently, that it will be foolproof, it
will not be breached if we are making these investments to
where it would be nothing more than giving them information
that would end up hurting us somehow in the long run?
Dr. Panchanathan. Senator, this is where I think the
partnership with agencies, and that is what we are working with
right now, NSF is closely partnering with this chief officer,
with the intelligence agencies, with other agencies like NASA,
with the Department of Energy, and all these agencies because
it is an all-of-government approach. In fact, NSF co-leads with
the Office of Science and Technology Policy, with the
Department of Energy, and NIH to make sure that the policies
that we are putting in place is consistent across the board for
all researchers in institutions that we essentially invest in.
And so I can tell you that we have constant conversations
about this. In fact, I will tell you since we met last time, we
have developed an analytic software that can actually look at
where people are supposed to be declaring their conflicts of
interest and things of that nature of commitment, that they are
surfaced, and we are able to then make sure that people are
ensuring that they are declaring their conflicts, as the case
may be. But more importantly, the work happens in the academic
institutions. So we are partnering with the academic
institutions to make sure that the policies that we are putting
in place are going to be, you know, essentially implemented.
But in terms of taking care of any breaches, we work very
closely with the Office of Inspector General. As you know, it
is an independent entity from NSF, and we make sure that we
take care of any such situations.
Senator Braun. Thank you because it looks like you are well
aware of the potential of what might happen. Mr. Nelson, would
you weigh in?
Senator Nelson. Senator, your question about China, I have
made no bones about, in response to Senator Shaheen, they are
simply not transparent. They have not cooperated. We have given
them ample opportunities, and I will not repeat what is already
on the record for the Committee. We would welcome that, but we
would be very guarded in our dealings with the Chinese. But
thus far, all the opportunities that we have given them, and
the example that I gave was that life was threatened on the
face of the earth with the uncontrolled entry of their first
stage of their rocket when they put up their space station. Not
only had they not saved enough fuel for a controlled reentry,
and, thank goodness, it came down in the Indian Ocean, but it
could have come down in Europe, and it could have come down in
Saudi Arabia.
And not only had they not done that, but they refused to
give us coordinates and information about the track. We
fortunately had our own information about the track, so we were
pretty on top of it, but it is just another illustration. And
it is such a contrast to what we have been doing with the
Russians ever since the Soviet Union, in 1975, where the
civilian space program has always had a cooperation to this
point now and going forward, why this is such an international
space program with the Japanese and the European Space Agency,
and now the UAE are all participating with us, not only on the
space station, but as we go to the moon and the gateway, which
is like a space station, that will orbit the moon.
Senator Braun. Well, thank you for being vigilant and alert
to the potential. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Braun. Senator Braun
raised the issue of investing, and I agree. I think it is one
of the reasons that I support the U.S. Innovation and
Competition Act, because I think that is a place where we are
investing in science in a way that we really need to, science
and innovation. And one of the provisions that is included in
that that I support requires that at least 20 percent of NSF
investment go to EPSCOR States, like New Hampshire.
So, Dr. Panch, can you talk about why it is important for
us to also encourage small States to participate in EPSCOR and
to invest in those programs?
ENCOURAGING STATE PARTICIPATION IN EPSCOR
Dr. Panchanathan. Madam Chair, thank you so much for that
question. If you recall, last year when I gave the testimony, I
said talent and ideas are democratized all across our Nation,
no exception. I happen to come from one of the small States,
too, and, therefore, I fully understand that when you energize
talent everywhere, I think innovation will happen, can happen
anywhere. I always say innovation anywhere, opportunities
everywhere, for which we need to energize talent everywhere.
I have been deeply committed to this since I got in. In
fact, the central pillar of my three-pillar vision is about
ensuring inclusivity access and ensuring that we embrace
diversity of all kinds: diversity of geography, socioeconomic,
demographic, and racial diversity. So we need to make sure that
talent everywhere is energized, so that is the first point that
I want to lead off with.
So if you look at some of the programs that NSF has
launched, let us take the AI institutes or the quantum, even,
programs. You will be very pleased to know that AI institutes
right now, with just two rounds, with 16 institutes, spans 40
States and the District of Columbia, and a third round is
coming in. And this is an intentional effort because I truly
believe that AI is everywhere, and AI should be everywhere, and
quantum, likewise, should be inspired everywhere.
So I think in terms, therefore, how do we get these ideas
that we say are everywhere to rise up? And that is why I talked
about this new program that we launched where, if you look at
institutions that truly deserve the level of investments with
the fantastic ideas that is everywhere, one way of doing that
is to make sure some of the institutions have the research
infrastructure support that makes it possible for them to rise
up and be successful in the gold standard merit review process
of NSF. How do we get those institutions, and other
institutions also to play ball? And this is why the GRANTED
Program is a virtual research infrastructure office.
How do we get to such developments support? How do we get
pre-award, and post-award support? How do we get support in
terms of how we transact intellectual property? How do we build
a partnership with industry? This kind of support that--is not
necessarily available in all institutions. How do we make it
possible in Historically Black Colleges and Universities, in
other MSIs, in States like the EPSCOR States, where there is a
lot of talent and ideas that need to be lifted up? So I am a
huge fan of the GRANTED program to lift those ideas and make
them successful. So I am very, very comfortable with the fact
that we have it as an aspirational goal of how we might invest
in all these States, the ESPCOR States included, in a way that
can bring out those talents and ideas.
Senator Shaheen. And so you would agree then that helping
to build that infrastructure also means ensuring that NSF's
large-scale programs, like science and technology centers,
engineering research center, midscale infrastructure, AI
institutes, the new technology directors, director, and all of
those should also encompass EPSCOR States.
Dr. Panchanathan. Absolutely. In fact, I have made the
point, in fact, publicly I have said this, that when
institutions like R1 institutions lead and some--they bring in
partnership other institutions, I have said that we should also
look at R2 institutions, and MSIs, and HBCUs. Sometimes they
should be the lead and R1s should be partner institutions. And
so I am fully in concert with the fact that all these
institutions can be everywhere and should be everywhere because
ideas are everywhere.
Senator Shaheen. And does that 20 percent of NSF
investment, is that a goal that allows us to do that?
Dr. Panchanathan. So an aspirational goal because if the
GRANTED Program, as we have outlined it, which I am confident
is going to be wildly successful, you will find that we will
end up over the years that we are essentially probably
exceeding even that kind of investment that goes to the EPSCOR
States and the regions of our Nation where the investments are
not as prominent right now. So, you know, as an aspirational
goal, it is a good goal to have.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. I am counting on--Senator
Moran is a member of--a conferee of the conference committee to
hold tight on that 20 percent to go to EPSCOR States, small
EPSCOR States, so share that with Senator Moran since he is not
here right now.
Let me also ask you, Dr. Panch, about the number of
additional grants that NSF would be able to fund if you are
funded at the request level. What does that allow you to do
that you would not be able to do otherwise, and how do you see
that contributing to our goal of promoting innovation and
competition?
ADDITIONAL GRANT FUNDING WITH FISCAL YEAR 2023 REQUEST LEVEL
Dr. Panchanathan. Madam Chair, if you will recall the last
testimony that I gave, I talked about the numbers of grants,
what we need, and what we are leaving on the cutting room
floor. I, in fact, invoked this when I was with Senator Moran
in Kansas when a question was asked from a faculty member who
had gotten a competitive rating and said, but I did not get
funded, right? So NSF, we receive about 40,000 to 50,000 grant
proposals a year. Last year, for example, it was about 43,000
grant proposals. We fund about 11,000 of them, a 25-percent
sort of a success rate, let us put it that way. Now, clearly,
if you ask me, Panch, so what is the number of proposals that
are recommended by the Gold Standard Merit Review Process that
the NSF, you know, is very well known for, it turns out it is
close to about, you know, one-third, or 30 percent, of the
proposals. So clearly, we have a number of proposals that are
ranked competitive that are left behind on the cutting room
floor, right? So right now, with 25 percent, with the new
investments that are being proposed, we will get to about 2,800
more proposals, our success rate going from 25 percent to 26
percent.
But I also talked about the size of our grants last time.
You know, I said average is about 200K. We need to work towards
raising it to 300K. With this increase, we will get from 200K
to 240K. You know, we will be part way there. We will be 20
percent of the way there, and so the 50 percent that we desire,
but that is a good trend to take to where we need to be in
terms of how we should get this done. And I see this as a
national security issue because the unfunded ideas and unfunded
proposals are the ones that our competitors invest in, and we
should not leave that on the cutting room floor.
And I am hoping, and I am grateful for all of you for
recognizing that, and I am grateful to the President and the
Administration for investing in NSF because this would make
that possible.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Senator Moran is back, but
while he is still getting settled--
Senator Moran. If you would ask another question--
Senator Shaheen. Yes.
Senator Moran [continuing]. I would be grateful.
Senator Shaheen. I will do that because I wanted to wait
until you got back to follow up on your question to
Administrator Nelson about the 2025 date, because, obviously,
it depends on a lot of things going right if we are going to
make that 2025 date. And I was a little fuzzy on how confident
you are that that can actually happen. So can you tell us today
that, if you get your budget request, that you will be able to
make that 2025 date for the landing?
MOON FLIGHT TIMELINE
Senator Nelson. We will not fly astronauts until it is
safe, and if that means there is a delay, then we will delay.
But we have every reason to believe that we are on a schedule
that, first of all, that Artemis will certainly, through the
SLS Rocket and the Orion Spacecraft, be ready, and we will have
flown in 2024 a crew after this first test flight later this
year. We will have flown a crew in a 30-day mission in lunar
orbit. And then we have every confidence to feel that, under
the contract with SpaceX, that in 2024, they will land an
uncrewed lander as part of their demonstration, and that a year
later, in 2025, that we will be ready for them to have launched
their lander into lunar orbit. Orion goes into lunar orbit, the
crew is transferred, and the lander goes down and lands and
stays for whatever the prescribed time is, a day or so, and
then they come back and rendezvous in lunar orbit with Orion,
and come home.
Now, of course, we believe that that is the schedule, but I
can just tell you that if I am making the decisions, it is not
going to fly until it is safe.
Senator Shaheen. Well, I certainly think we would all
expect no less than that--
Senator Nelson. Yes, ma'am.
Senator Shaheen [continuing]. That certainly needs to be
the bottom line for the decisionmaking. My question is really,
assuming that it is safe, are we going to meet all those other
deadlines in order to ensure that it is safe--
Senator Nelson. Yes.
Senator Shaheen [continuing]. And get the landing done?
Senator Nelson. And I appreciate your question, and you
ought to ask that question. It is also true that every space
mission that we have had, there have been delays. You think
back to Apollo. Look what happened after the Apollo 1 fire. I
mean, they were down for over 2 years and still, with an
incredible amount of money poured in, were able to make
President Kennedy's goal of landing on the moon by the end of
the decade. Look at the space shuttle, the space shuttle, a
fantastic flying machine, by the way, that we now know had
certain technical flaws, and we lost 14 souls. It, too, was
delayed until 1981 when, in fact, a lot of people thought that
it was going to fly not long after Apollo-Soyuz in 1975 and fly
in the late 70s. It did not happen, and look what happened.
When we lost Challenger, we were down 2-1/2 years, and then in
2003, we lost Columbia and were down another couple of years
and the further delays.
So you cannot go until it is right, but all these things
cost money. These delays cost money. That is another reason we
had a question here about competition. That is another reason
to get to fix-priced contracts and then hold them to it, and we
are doing that with the landers for the moon.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Senator Moran.
MAINTAINING BASIC RESEARCH LEVELS WHILE ESTABLISHING TIP DIRECTORATE
Senator Moran. Thank you, Chair. Dr. Panch, again, thank
you for your presence here and your leadership at NSF. Let me
begin by talking about the TIP Directorate. You mentioned in
your testimony about the development of the new directorate,
and you did so with great excitement. The NSF budget proposes
$880 million for the continued establishment of the TIP
Directorate, which is now about 20 percent of the total amount
that is being requested for research. Is NSF balancing the
creation of the TIP Directorate while preserving its basic
research foundation, the bedrock of NSF's work, its mission,
and should I, should we be concerned that TIP will change the
direction of NSF and undermine that basic research needed to
enable us to reach the goals of TIP?
Dr. Panchanathan. Very good question, Senator. Thank you
for asking that question. So if you look at some of the
programs in the TIP Directorate--let us look at SBIR/STTR
Program, the Innovation Corps, which is the entrepreneurship
program, and the Partnership For Innovation, which is also a
program that was at NSF, some of those programs that have been
focused on the translation of scientific ideas into the market
have been existent at NSF in terms of training the
entrepreneurs of the future.
What we are trying to do right now is to scale them, but on
top of that, also build a program called the Regional
Innovation Engines, and these regional innovation engines, to
be very clear, are meant to train the next generation, the
future practitioners and future researchers also, in a fused
environment of academia and industry working together. So it is
about the mission of NSF, which is about training the STEM
talent for the future and inspiring new ideas, so it is the
same mission that we are working on.
I cannot talk enough about the NSF's vision. When I came
in, I started describing it this way. It is the DNA of NSF. The
one strand of the DNA of NSF is curiosity-driven, discovery-
based exploratory research, and that is something that you
alluded to, Senator, but we also at NSF have been doing the
other strand, which is what I called use-inspired, solutions-
focused, translational research or innovations. To me, these
are highly synergistic like DNA is. Explorations make possible
translations, but translations make possible more explorations.
There are many, many examples of this, you know, including,
for example, in space exploration. You start working on the
technology for space exploration. You explore. You find new
sites, new problems to solve, and this synergy is exceedingly
important, in fact, to open up new vistas of scientific
explorations also. That is why this is exceedingly important.
The TIP Directorate, I want to make sure, is not a distraction.
It is an attraction. It is an attraction to do more in
exploratory science rather than distracting of explanation, so
that is the first thing I want to say.
The second thing I want to say is it makes possible the
kind of work that we need in States like Kansas. You and I saw
this, Senator, first time, the unbelievable work and the talent
that is there in the Johnson Community College. Let us take
that as an example. They are doing amazing work. They won the
Community College Innovation Challenge when we were there. And
when I met these students, it is very clear that if we do not
have these crucibles of innovation, we will not have the
community colleges, universities, and other researchers getting
the practitioner talent trained at the highest level of
intensity for where we need to move forward in terms of the
industries of the future.
So I am happy to elaborate more, but this is what we are
trying to do.
Senator Moran. Let me follow up with, in the absence of
what research takes place at NSF, where would the private
sector--in the absence of that research, what would we lose the
most? What does the private sector do in comparison--applied
research versus basic research--or do we need to focus public
funds?
APPLIED RESEARCH VS BASIC RESEARCH
Dr. Panchanathan. Yes, so the public funds, I think, are
mostly focused--still in NSF, the majority of the public funds
are focused and will continue to be focused on fundamental,
basic research. But as I said earlier, we are also trying to
invest so that more fundamental research can be uncovered
through the practitioner work that we do. But let us not
forget, just in the last year--let us take some examples. In
the AI institutes, in fact, the private sector has come to us
and said we will co-invest with you. Amazon invested in the
Fairness in AI Program. One of the AI institutes scaled funding
of $20 million were invested by a combination of Intel, Google,
Accenture, and Amazon. So the private sector is coming to us
and saying we will co-invest with you because our basic
research needs are something that NSF is well positioned to do.
You have a gold standard merit review process. We can work with
you to unearth more basic research that benefits all
industries, so, in fact, I would say it is an additive effect
rather than a subtractive effect.
So yesterday I was in IBM. You know, IBM is investing about
$100 million on HBCU campuses to empower them. And we were
talking about how we might collaborate with companies who have
interest in wanting to get the talent of the future and also
newer ideas that they want to work in, and they are willing to
partner with NSF. This is a new world: a new world of
partnership. So what we are also doing at the same time is, to
address your question in another way, I am developing a strong
partnership with the Department of Commerce so that their
regional technology hubs and our regional innovation engines
are tightly integrated. So the scientific prowess of what we
have, which is what makes our Nation unique, the innovation
potential that is there is able to be taken out and scaled, and
that we are able to compete now with other nations who are
starting to become more tight.
So I want us to be a lot more tightly coupled between
agencies, between the various programs, and nice handoffs, and
we have a fantastic partnership with NASA at so many levels,
and that is what we need more of. And I am a huge fan of that
because our Nation, I think, needs all the public investments
to then translate to economic prosperity, societal prosperity,
and, most importantly, every region of our Nation, and the
ideas and talent lifted up there. And we saw firsthand what is
happening in the great State of Kansas.
Senator Nelson. Senator, if I may, Dr. Panch has just
described the emphasis on public/private partnership, the ethos
that is very similar to what we are doing. It is a new day.
Government cannot do it all. You all give us X amount of money,
and we have got to make that money happen the way that we are
trying to achieve, and we can leverage that money by working
with the commercial industry and through competition, bring
those costs down to NASA.
I will give you one more example: the development of SpaceX
and their very successful rocket, the Falcon 9 and the Falcon 9
Heavy. General Hyten, the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs,
told me last year before he retired, he said the fact that we
have competition now ongoing to space just for the military has
saved them $40 billion in launch costs. So it is just another
example of the public/private partnership. We are doing this
with regard to climate, and, of course, I will be happy to go
into examples if you would like that, Senators.
Senator Moran. Dr. Panch, my questions are not intended to
be critical but to garner an understanding of how we can more
rapidly advance--
Dr. Panchanathan. Yes.
Senator Moran [continuing]. The outcomes that we need
economically and in national security in a time in which our
adversaries have--seemingly an adversary has unlimited public
funds.
Dr. Panchanathan. Yes.
Senator Moran. How do we do this in a way that gets us to
the places that we need to be the fastest?
PUBLIC INVESTMENT IN SCIENCE VS COMPETING NATIONS
Dr. Panchanathan. Senator, I never look at your question as
a criticism at all. In fact, on the contrary, I look at it as,
you know, your expression of strong support. I will tell you,
to the point that you make about our competitors, our
competitors somehow, because they have a top-down approach,
they seem to force the synergy. Forced synergies will not work.
We all know that, at least not in the long term. That is what
is fantastic about our Nation. I repeat this slogan. I say
innovation anywhere, opportunities everywhere. I will keep
saying this because we have that innovation potential anywhere,
and that is why we need to bring that out by, not forced
synergies, by natural synergies of coming together, and that is
what we are doing.
How can we use the public funds in a way that inspires
every talent and idea everywhere, but at the same time, how do
we leverage, as Senator Nelson was saying, through public-
private partnerships, scale even more and scale faster? I am
anxious to scale fast because I think we are so good, but we
need to scale fast and use every bit of talent that we have in
our Nation.
Senator Moran. Absolutely. The capabilities of the United
States to advance faster, better, be safer, be more
economically secure than our adversaries comes from the
initiative, enterprise. Innovation that comes from our private
sector, that comes from private citizens.
Dr. Panchanathan. Yes.
Senator Moran. And government is a tool in which we can
enhance and speed up that process, but I will choose the
innovator over the government decision every time.
Dr. Panchanathan. You are right. I mean, innovation is
everywhere, but we have a role, I often say, Senator, if I can
say that. We have a role of catalyzing, enabling. As public
investors, that is what we are doing. The innovation is there.
All we are doing is we are trying to make it surface up. We do
not want anybody to be left behind. You know, I have met
unbelievable talent all across the Nation. I am traveling quite
a bit. Like Administrator Nelson, I am also traveling quite a
bit around the Nation, and I am so inspired. Every time I go, I
meet K to 12 students. I meet our community college students. I
meet our university students and entrepreneurs. I am really
inspired to do more, faster, better, as you said.
Senator Moran. As we would say, I adopt Dr. Panch's last
few paragraphs as my own remarks. Thank you.
Dr. Panchanathan. Thank you.
Senator Moran. Let me ask, in regard to the conference
committee that is hopefully soon to meet, what is it that you
hope to see occur in USICA, or whatever the legislation
ultimately is called, that advances the cause at NSF?
IF USICA/COMPETES ACT ADVANCES
Dr. Panchanathan. Big, bold investments that take all of
the ideas that I talked about that are being left behind. And,
Senator, we saw a concrete example in our conversation at the
Johnson Community College. It is disheartening to see people
who are putting a lot of effort to take their idea with so much
hopes and aspirations, and writing a fantastic proposal,
submitting it to NSF, and getting a gold standard merit review
saying, yes, this is worthy of investment, and not having that
idea flourish is a totally missed opportunity; likewise, those
ideas that need to be, you know, inspired everywhere that
result in innovation ecosystems, you know.
For example, we talked about the States of Kansas, you
know, Nebraska, Iowa, Indiana, Illinois, just as one example,
where they can be the crucible of the innovation for the future
of agriculture--smart agriculture--then such crucibles of
innovation that we can build all across our Nation. And I was
with John Deere the other day, just 2 weeks ago, in Illinois
visiting John Deere, and I am looking at their technological
roadmap. I am looking at what they are doing, and I am saying,
wow, you know, I never knew a tractor company has so much
technology built into this with AI, computing, and so on.
And so I think that is what we need to do more is to see
how we can build those crucibles of innovation, and to do that,
the proposals that are made in the USICA and COMPETES Acts, I
think, is the right strategy, the investment for this bold,
rapid scaling of ideas and talent. And I am really, really
hopeful, and I am very thankful for all of your support so that
we will make this happen very soon, sooner than later, because
we cannot miss any more time. This is the time.
Yesterday, my talk at IBM was the time is now. This is the
time. We need to accelerate our progress to stay far ahead of
our competition, not even look behind.
Senator Moran. Senator Shaheen, I am down to no longer any
questions, but just one comment, and that is to the NASA
Administrator. Senator Nelson, earth-observing satellites are
an essential tool for Kansas because it aids us in our
agricultural practices, and that is a hugely important
component of our State's economy. And your offer to educate me,
show me, and demonstrate to Kansans and Americans the value of
those earth-observing satellites is very much appreciated, and
I look forward to the moment in time in which we accomplish
that.
Senator Nelson. Yes, sir, and, indeed, a lot of people
think of NASA as the space agency--do not forget the first
``A,'' aeronautics. But also people do not realize NASA is the
point of the spear on climate and climate change because all
the measurements that are being made are done by instruments
that we design, build, launch, and many of them we operate. And
over the course of the next decade, we are going to have the--a
great observatory of five additional major spacecraft, that all
of this information is going to be put into a 3D composite on
precisely what is happening to the earth's climate, what is
happening to the water, to the land, to the ice, to the
atmosphere.
We are putting up at the end of this year a mission that is
going to be able to measure for the first time the elevation of
the streams, and rivers, and lakes, the freshwater. We have
been able to measure the elevation of the oceans, the salt
water. We are going to be able to find out very precisely what
is happening to the ice. And all of this, and we have the
support of the White House on this, and we hope we will have
your support. We are going to create, if you can envision in
space terms, a mission control center. It is going to be called
the Earth Information Center. It is going to bring all of this
data in, and it is going to be displayed, and it is going to be
available to everybody, not just government at all levels,
including your local county commission when they are planning
their land planning. But it is going to be available to
schools, and universities, and the private sector as well as to
what is happening and the changes that are happening to the
climate.
Senator Moran. Rainfall may be the most common topic of
conversation among my constituents on most days.
Senator Nelson. And, Senator, I just want to say on Dr.
Panch's testimony, we did not collaborate on our testimony, but
I feel like I could start a sentence and he could finish it,
and vice versa. And what he said, big, bold investments, and
that is equally applicable to NASA.
Senator Moran. Thank you.
HELIOPHYSICS AND SPACE WEATHER
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. We appreciate that. I do
have a few more questions actually before we close the hearing.
And I share your enthusiasm, Administrator Nelson, for this
budget, but I will admit I have a couple of concerns. One is
the one that Senator Van Hollen raised about heliophysics, and
that is based on a parochial concern because the cut has the
potential to impact the University of New Hampshire, which is
one of our Nation's premier heliophysics institutions, but also
because one of the things that heliophysics does, as you know,
is helps us to understand how our sun impacts the solar system.
And part of that is what happens with climate change, as you
were so eloquent about, and also our weather.
And I appreciate NASA's establishing the space weather as
its own program, but I wonder if you could help me understand
why the request cuts space weather more than 12 percent, and
what activities are proposed to be terminated. And one of the
things that I always remember is one of the reasons we were not
successful back when we were trying to get the Iran hostages
out was because we did not accurately understand what the
weather was going to be when we landed those helicopters, and
we saw the same thing happen when we went to get Osama bin
Laden. The weather almost undermined that mission as well. So
it is not just about our crops and what we need to do, but
there are also significant national security implications for
understanding what is happening with our weather.
So help me understand why the cut, and how the decision to
reduce funding for heliophysics was made.
Senator Nelson. I do have, in my previous life, some
credentials in this area because there is an instrument up
there called Discover. It was terminated in politics in a
previous administration because it had been proposed by a
former Vice President of the United States.
Senator Shaheen. Yes, I remember that.
Senator Nelson. And yours truly had the opportunity to get
some more--fortunately, NASA had the good sense to keep it in
mothballs. And then, lo and behold, the Department of Defense
had a reason for wanting to get it up to give us a quick alert
on a solar explosion and all that radiation, and so it is out
there, a million miles. This is now called Discover, and it
warns us of the solar radiation that is coming so that we can
determine, our satellites as well as our ground stations, when
that solar explosion is coming at us.
University of New Hampshire, you are right, is a leader in
the field of heliophysics. The decrease in the Space Weather
Program, which was $2.7 million, or, as you stated, 12 percent,
is due to a ramp down in the spending on space weather
monitoring on an instrument called HERMES, which stands for
Heliophysics Environmental And Radiation Measurement Experiment
Suite, and will complete its integration and test this coming
December. Now, there were a bunch of things going on in
science. This was the decision since every now and then we get
arbitrary amounts that are handed to us, and scientific
decisions had to be made, but there is also a truth that the
President proposes and the Congress disposes.
PROJECT COST OVERRUNS
Senator Shaheen. Okay. I appreciate that response. The
other concern that I want to raise is a report from the GAO
because, at the direction of this Committee, the Government
Accountability Office analyzes the cost and scheduled
performance of major NASA projects. And I do not think this is
a problem of your leadership or even your predecessor's
leadership. It is a long-term problem at NASA. What the GAO
found was that NASA projects are experiencing the largest
collective cost and schedule overruns since they began
reporting in 2009. The overruns cannot be attributed to COVID
alone. Many projects had late-stage design changes that led to
costly modifications and schedule slippage, and the collective
budget pressure is delaying launch dates and squeezing out
newer projects.
So can you help us understand what you are working on to
improve this project management, and do you see improvement
anytime soon in our ability to manage those big projects?
Senator Nelson. Madam Chair, there better be, and you are
exactly right. There is no excuse for cost overruns, but the
old way of doing things was always cost-plus.
Senator Shaheen. Mm-hmm.
Senator Nelson. And because of the competition that we have
been talking about, we have been moving to the fixed price,
where we can, under procurement law. In those that we cannot do
cost-plus, we are moving to really crack down on them. I want
to give you an example because Bechtel underbid on a cost-plus
contract in order to, what appears, to get the next mobile
launcher for the larger version of the SLS. The larger version
has an enhanced upper stage that will carry more payload,
including the gateway, which is like the mini space station
that will be in lunar orbit. And they underbid it, and then
they could not perform, and NASA is stuck.
And what I have done is I have called in the CEO of
Bechtel, who, by the way, is the grandson of the founder. His
name is Bechtel. And they have readily acknowledged it, but
there is no way under the contract, since it is a cost-plus
contract, that we can do anything but eat it, and that is not
right. And times are a-changing, and so what I have done
specifically, other than jawboning and giving a lecture to all
of our managers about tightening up on all of this, and,
particularly, going forward, I have specifically named the
deputy administrator, Colonel Pam Melroy, an astronaut
commander, to serve as the Agency's chief acquisition officer
to elevate the importance of acquisition.
We are working closely with GAO and our inspector general
at NASA on the recommendations. I think we are beginning to
make some progress in closing out the GAO recommendations
related to strengthening this acquisition process. We are
committed to improving our management of our cost and our
schedule commitments. And I have also established a new chief
program management officer dedicated to strengthening NASA's
oversight of its enterprise, of its management, and of its
program management policies. Under the law, that is what I can
do, and going forward, if we take this competition seriously,
we are going to be able to do a lot more cost-plus contracts
well.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. I appreciate that
explanation, and it sounds like progress. Obviously we will
want to continue to stay in touch with what you are seeing and
what we can do to be helpful as you look at whether you need
any new authorities to address what is happening. My final
question, Dr. Panch, is for you because, in addition to space,
which is really a new frontier not just for research,
unfortunately, for our security, so is that the Arctic is a new
frontier--
Dr. Panchanathan. Yes.
Senator Shaheen [continuing]. Both for research and for our
national security.
Dr. Panchanathan Yes.
Senator Shaheen. And as we look at the inroads that some of
our competitors are making in the Arctic, it raises serious
concerns about what we should be doing there. So can you
describe NSF's plans for expanding Arctic research and how you
see that rolling out?
ARCTIC AND ANTARCTIC RESEARCH
Dr. Panchanathan. Senator, thank you so much for the
interest. Cleary, you know, the Arctic and Antarctic are of
great interest to NSF, and we have a lot of work that we invest
in, in both the Arctic and Antarctic. As you know, in the
Arctic case, we also, you know, look at the North Atlantic as a
huge partnership, not only what we do within the Nation but
also with our partners in Europe, Canada, and others. So this
is critical for economic as well as security in making sure
that we are building resilience into the future.
And so one of the things that we are doing is, you would be
happy to know that we are working closely with the Arctic
communities because we need to make sure that we are including
them in the conversations. And so increasingly, NSF is very
sensitive to the idea of making sure that our Arctic colleagues
living in the Arctic are, you know, party to conversations, and
that is why you will find that we are taking a social/
behavioral, not just a scientific approach only, a social/
behavioral humanistic approach in terms of how we are devising
the future for the Arctic. So clearly, there is an investment
area that NSF has always made, and we plan to continue to do
that.
And I am very pleased to say that it is not just, you know,
in a few States. You know, many States across the Nation
participate in this, all the way ranging from Alaska to New
Hampshire, and so we expect that this will continue into the
future, and that is the way I see it.
Senator Shaheen. Well, good. Thank you very much. Are you
all set, Senator Moran?
Senator Moran. Yes.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Shaheen. Let me just point out that if there are no
further questions, Senators have until May 10 to submit
additional questions to the subcommittee's official hearing
record, and we request that NASA and NSF respond within 30 days
to any questions that you might receive.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration for response subsequent to the hearing:]
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR DIANNE FEINSTEIN
Questions Submitted to Administrator Bill Nelson, National Aeronautics
and Space Administration
Question 1. The Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy
(SOFIA) was scheduled for termination again this year, following
several previous years in which NASA has recommended eliminating its
budget. I understand that this is based on the recommendation of many
astronomers and astrophysicists, but I do want to note that the SOFIA
program has made several key discoveries during its life, including
confirming the presence of water ice on the Moon, which is now of key
interest for the Artemis program. SOFIA also discovered the presence of
helium hydride in interstellar space, which was first theorized in the
1970s.
Now that the program is slated for termination in October, I am
concerned that scientists who have relied on SOFIA do not have
sufficient time to close out their research. This is even more critical
since there are no alternatives to SOFIA's observational capabilities.
Additionally, Administrator Nelson described in the hearing with the
Appropriations Committee how critical it was that the DSCOVR project
was put into storage and was able to launch once interest in its
capabilities revived. Administrator Nelson, will all remaining accepted
science proposals using the SOFIA instrument be completed by the
termination of activities? If not, what support does NASA require in
order to ensure that those planned flights occur?
Answer. SOFIA will conclude its science operations at the end of
September 2022. During fiscal year 2022, SOFIA will continue to carry
out a full program of science operations that has included multiple
deployments to the southern hemisphere. As of June 5, 2022, SOFIA has
54 science flights planned for the remainder of fiscal year 2022, which
includes 32 flights for its annual deployment to New Zealand during
June-August 2022 and an additional 18 flights from Palmdale,
California, in September 2022. During fiscal year 2022, SOFIA is
prioritizing the completion of legacy surveys to establish an enduring
archive of data for community use. Most selected proposals from Cycle 9
will be completed; however, some selected proposals will not be
conducted due to scheduling conflicts. With the remaining planned 54
flights, 80 percent or more of Cycle 9 programs are expected to be
complete before the end of fiscal year 2022, which will be the highest
completion rate achieved for any cycle over the lifetime of the SOFIA
project. Of the nine multiple-cycle SOFIA legacy programs, four legacy
programs and two pilot legacy programs are anticipated to be fully
completed, while the majority of the remaining two legacy programs and
one pilot legacy will be completed. In addition to completing U.S.
programs, SOFIA is ensuring that our German partners are also able to
complete their programs.
The SOFIA project is developing a project closeout plan for fiscal
year 2023. That plan will include completion of data reduction and
archiving; training of personnel at the Infrared Science Archive
(IRSA), where all the SOFIA science and (housekeeping) observatory data
will reside; user support for completed Cycle 9 observations;
documentation and tools on how to use or reprocess SOFIA observations;
and general observer funding for completed observations.
Question 2. Administrator Nelson, can you describe the plan for the
SOFIA aircraft and telescope? Has NASA looked at the possibility of
keeping the technology like it did with DSCOVR?
Answer. The SOFIA project is developing an orderly project closeout
plan for fiscal year 2023. As a part of that closeout plan, SOFIA will
follow the standard NASA disposition process. As a part of that
process, NASA will determine if any part of the SOFIA mission, such as
one or more of its instruments, may be used in support of another NASA
or other Federal agency mission, and, if so, will be dispensed in
support of that mission. The SOFIA telescope is the property of the
German Space Agency (DLR), and discussions are underway with DLR as to
how they would like to proceed.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Brian Schatz
Question 1. The United States is a leader in both ground- and
space-based astronomy due to six decades of sustained commitment to
develop, fund, and operate cutting edge instruments. In spite of this
long-standing history, there is no funding in either NSF's or NASA's
fiscal year 2023 budget to begin implementation of any of the
recommendations in the decadal survey of astronomical science,
Astro2020.
A. Please explain the absence of implementation funding in
either the NASA or the NSF budget.
B. Does the lack of implementation funding signal that the
Administration intends to pivot away from our nation's six-
decade commitment to astronomy? If the Administration is
turning away from astronomical science, please explain why.
C. If not, why is there no mention of either ground- or
space- based priorities in its budget request?
D. If the Committee were to provide near-term funding to
start implementation of Astro2020, may I have your commitment
that you begin as soon as the funds become available?
Answer. The Administration is not turning away from astronomy as
evidenced by NASA's fiscal year 2023 budget request. NASA's fiscal year
2023 budget request includes funding for space-based astronomy. This
request for NASA Astrophysics proposes a program balanced between
realizing the science of the world's greatest portfolio of space
telescopes (including increased funding for realizing the science from
the Webb Space Telescope and operation of the newly launched IXPE) and
completing and launching missions under development (including the
Roman Space Telescope, SPHEREx, and the newly selected COSI). Due to
the delay in the publication of the Decadal Survey, NASA had limited
time to incorporate Decadal Survey recommendations into the fiscal year
2023 Budget Request. The fiscal year 2024 budget request will be fully
informed by the Decadal Survey recommendations.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Joe Manchin
Question 1. I'm looking forward to seeing you in a few weeks May
15th for the Robotics Championship at Fairmont University.
Last year, I spoke to you about the importance of NASA's IV&V
Facility, which is proudly named after the incredible Katherine Johnson
and just down the road from Fairmont State.
Through their work in communities across the state, staff at the
IV&V Program have done an incredible job educating the next generation
of West Virginians. Over the last year, they engaged over 8,000
students in student workshops, STEM competitions, events, and hands-on
activities. The IV&V Program has also trained 200 teachers in educator
workshops which will have far reaching, and continuing, impacts to the
students of West Virginia.
West Virginians have played a key role in our nation's developments
and achievements in space, from the contributions of `Hidden Figures'
like Katherine Johnson and `Rocket Boys' like Homer Hickam. We need to
make sure we are seeking out the next generation of these rural
students.
A. What are you doing to use the resources of NASA to help
reach the next generation of rural students?
Answer. NASA is focused on broadening student participation, which
includes reaching students in rural areas. Here are a few examples of
these efforts:
NASA CONNECTS is a community of practice for K-12 teachers, aimed
to reach teachers through a virtual platform and enable increased
accessibility to NASA learning opportunities and resources for them and
their students. NASA CONNECTS is reaching students where they are.
NASA has also established the TEAM II Community Anchors, now in its
first year, to include small-medium sized informal education
institutions in providing more direct access to NASA experts and
resources. TEAM II investments in science centers, museums, and other
informal education organizations, have yielded programs and resources
that are focused on reaching underserved and underrepresented students
including those in rural areas.
In December 2021, NASA selected a group of 21 diverse projects,
called Community Anchors, from museums, science centers, library
systems, and other informal education organizations across the country.
Designation as a Community Anchor recognizes an institution as a local
community resource, allowing access to rural areas. These 21 projects
are bringing space exploration to traditionally underserved areas and
broaden student participation in STEM fields.
In January 2022, NASA's Teams Engaging Affiliated Museums, and
Informal Institutions (TEAM II) program selected three informal
education organizations to help inspire the next generation of
explorers through STEM learning--and to expand student participation in
STEM, including rural communities. One of the selected institutions,
Franklin County Historical Society, Ohio, created the NASA Learning
Lunchbox, with the goal of feeding STEM diversity and serving
underserved youth across the Nation, including in rural areas. The
Center of Science and Industry (COSI) distributed 30,000 kits at local
food banks across the United States. In fact, NASA Learning Lunchboxes
were sent to Wheeling, West Virginia. A West Virginia news article
features this website, with the following quote: ``This unprecedented
effort has already reached all corners of Ohio, Tennessee, West
Virginia, Kentucky, and more, while bringing together over 400+
partners to help address the education needs.''
In NASA's Sparking Participation and Real-world eXperiences in STEM
(SPARX) program, K-12 students participate in challenges, competitions,
and hands-on activities at after-school programs. NASA SPARX is a Next
Gen STEM pilot initiative that aims to broaden student participation in
Agency STEM opportunities with a focus on underserved and
underrepresented communities, including rural areas.
Question 2. The bipartisan U.S. Innovation and Competitiveness Act,
which passed the Senate in June last year, authorizes $10 billion for
NASA to choose another company to compete for the Human Landing System
within the Artemis program to land astronauts on the Moon.
Some are arguing that locking in competition for this system will
ensure long-term cost savings, while redundancy will ensure that we're
not relying on foreign companies to take us to the Moon. Others argue
this is a bailout for rich billionaires like Jeff Bezos.
We're likely going to have a vote today on this provision.
A. What do you view as the importance of having a second
Human Landing System?
Answer. Per NASA's mission schedule for the Artemis program, the
Human Landing System (HLS) will be employed for the first crewed lunar
landing in 2025, and the second Artemis crewed lunar landing is planned
as soon as 2027. SpaceX's Starship-based HLS will be employed for the
2025 landing. In fiscal year 2023, NASA plans to enlist a second HLS
development contractor for subsequent crewed lunar landings, and this
approach is important to maximize the likelihood of satisfying the
overall Artemis schedule and to avoid potentially costly impacts that
an HLS delay would create for other elements of the Artemis
architecture (e.g. the Space Launch System, Orion spacecraft, Gateway,
EVA spacesuits, etc.) that also support crewed lunar missions.
B. What role do redundancies play in the safety and security
of our astronauts and missions?
Answer. As a tool to ensure mission success and crew safety,
redundancy may be applied to individual components, such as backup
computers, or to larger elements, such as complete spacecraft. This can
be done using the same or different designs that can perform the same
function. Each approach has its strengths and weaknesses, and the ideal
case allows both to be implemented as appropriate. Space exploration
programs, by their nature, expand the limits of our capabilities.
Because space exploration programs operate at the edge of our
experience base, we must address the potential for problems, including
the use of backup designs and suppliers. The Commercial Crew Program
faced a similar challenge, which was addressed by contracting with both
Boeing and SpaceX. This resulted in one of the vendors successfully
providing crew transportation to the ISS even when the other vendor had
technical problems that delayed their capability. This freed the United
States from dependency on Russian services years sooner than might have
occurred.
As the first human rated lunar landers to be built in over 60
years, the Human Landing Systems will need to address the highest risks
in the Artemis program. The SpaceX design is highly innovative and
offers the potential for outstanding performance, and it will need to
demonstrate equitable levels of safety to validate its performance
prior to crewed missions. While NASA has much confidence in the SpaceX
team and their design, good program management practices encourage
including additional suppliers and designs when practical.
Question 3. West Virginia benefits from a program called EPSCoR
that is designed to allow states that are underrepresented in Federal
research projects, including those at NASA and NSF, to participate in
research. Because of this program, West Virginia researchers have
received funds to investigate the effects of solar activity and space
weather on Earth and its magnetic field, played a role in building an
autonomous rover for Mars exploration, and created 3D printed materials
and devices suitable for space usage. It's clear that Federal research
funding has economic and quality of life implications for our states
and communities.
Unfortunately, that Federal research funding is not widely
distributed. The 25 EPSCoR states and jurisdictions, including WV,
receive just 10.15 percent of NSF research funding. In contrast, the
top five states that receive the most NSF grants account for nearly 40
percent of the total. The U.S. Innovation and Competition Act (USICA)
includes a provision that would set aside 20 percent of NSF and
Department of Energy research funding for the 28 EPSCoR states that are
underserved by research funds.
A. Administrator, can you speak to the importance of this
program and can we work together to ensure that future budget
requests for the NASA EPSCoR program are more robustly funded?
B. Administrator, West Virginia researchers have told me
that they benefited from a NASA program called the Technical
Interchange Meeting (TIM), but NASA recently made changes to
the programs so that it is less research-focused. Can we work
together to ensure that the research needs of EPSCoR states
like mine can continue?
Answer. A. NASA's EPSCoR program continues to provide sustained
support to jurisdictions and their institutions through a broad set of
competitive research opportunities to build research capacity within
the underrepresented (EPSCoR) states. This accountability entails close
partnership and effective collaboration with the NASA Mission
Directorates. Additionally, the fiscal year 2023 budget request
accelerates NASA efforts related to K-12 partnerships, and broadening
student participation, which supports the Administration's initiatives.
NASA EPSCoR's contribution to these goals is more indirect and can be
sustained with the fiscal year 2023 budget request as submitted.
Answer. B. In the past, the EPSCoR Technical Interchange Meeting
(TIM) was a stand-alone EPSCoR-only meeting that took place at a NASA
Center. EPSCoR would conduct a meeting between the 28 EPSCoR
jurisdiction researchers and researchers at the host Center to discuss
possible collaborations on EPSCoR-funded research within the
jurisdiction. Now that NASA OSTEM has moved to an enterprise approach,
which involves integrating operations across geographic locations to
allow for an optimum service delivery approach to meet mission needs,
the need to create even broader connections has been paramount. Thus,
the term ``TIM'' was dropped, and the activity was integrated into a
larger meeting called ``Better Together,'' which incorporates more than
just research discussions for a wider audience. The purpose of ``Better
Together'' is to strengthen grantee and stakeholder relationships with
OSTEM and NASA missions, integrate across projects, network, exchange
ideas, and establish new connections. The EPSCoR discussions are now a
smaller part of this larger meeting involving all four of the OSTEM
enterprise projects. Although other audiences such as K-12,
internships, broadening student participation, etc. are addressed at
the ``Better Together'' meeting, EPSCoR is given time for their
jurisdiction researchers, along with MUREP and Space Grant researchers,
to meet with NASA researchers to discuss possible collaborations.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Van Hollen
Question 1. Maryland's Goddard Space Flight Center is home to the
largest group of Earth Scientists in the world and to programs like
Landsat, the longest continuous space-based record of Earth's land in
existence, and the PACE mission, which is set to launch in 2024 and
will advance data on our ocean health and study long-term climate
trends.
How will the Administration continue to strategically bolster
NASA's role in our national response to climate change?
Answer. The fiscal year 2023 President's Budget Request for NASA
invests $2.4 billion in Earth-observing satellites and related research
to improve the Nation's understanding of climate change. The fiscal
year 2023 budget request will enable NASA to continue to provide the
world with climate data from its existing fleet of Earth observing
satellites and will expand its role as a leading provider of satellite
Earth observations by investing in the next generation of missions to
monitor changes taking place on Earth. The future Earth System
Observatory (ESO) will comprise five missions that will enable
scientists to generate a 3D, holistic view of the entire planet and to
better understand, measure, and model the nature of the Earth's
climatic changes. The data from the ESO will also assist with the
evaluation of scenarios and policy options for how society might
respond to climate change. NASA will augment the core of the ESO with a
new class of mission, the Earth System Explorers (ESE), to make
additional high-priority observations, potentially including greenhouse
gases, and encourage innovative solutions through competitive mission
selection.
NASA also continues to advance technology for new measurement
capabilities that can make possible future generations of airborne and
satellite-based measurements of greenhouse gases. The fiscal year 2023
President's Budget Request for NASA includes funding is included to
advance the development and testing of new technologies for space-based
greenhouse gas measurements. These technologies will enable NASA to
improve measurements of carbon dioxide and methane fluxes and trends as
well as global and regional quantification of point sources and
identification of source types.
NASA makes its data, including climate data, freely available to
ensure anyone can access it for use in research or to inform policies
and actions to address the threat climate change poses to economic
prosperity and national security. In addition, NASA trains and works
with hundreds of partners through our Applied Sciences program to
leverage and maximize Earth science data for societal benefit. As part
of a renewed emphasis on providing actionable data and information to a
broad range of users, NASA is planning a new Earth Information Center
(EIC) with an initial focus on prototyping capabilities for a
greenhouse gas monitoring and information system that will integrate
data from a variety of sources. A key goal of the EIC will be to make
its data more accessible and usable to Federal, State, and local
governments; researchers; the public; and other users.
The fiscal year 2023 President's Budget Request for NASA also
invests more than $500 million of the $972 million Aeronautics request
to reduce the climate impacts of the aviation industry, which includes
the Sustainable Flight National Partnership, through which NASA and
U.S. companies will develop and fly a highly efficient, next-generation
airline prototype as early as 2026, and support the global aviation
community's aggressive goal of net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. NASA
Aeronautics is investing in cost-sharing partnerships with U.S.
industry under the Sustainable Flight National Partnership to research
and demonstrate high risk, high payoff technology advancements that
will enable entry into service in the early 2030s of next-generation
single-aisle aircraft that are 25-30 percent more energy efficient with
the capacity to utilize 100 percent sustainable aviation fuel and fly
optimal trajectories. NASA Aeronautics will invest in a focused set of
major technology demonstrations by NASA with industry, including a
first-ever high-power megawatt-class electrified powertrain for large
transport aircraft propulsion, advanced high-efficiency airframes,
advanced composite structures produced four to six times faster than
the current state of the art, and advanced small core engine
technologies based on breakthrough NASA innovations. NASA Aeronautics,
in partnership with the Federal Aviation Administration and airlines,
will pioneer new air traffic management automation tools to safely and
reliably put future aircraft on flight paths optimized for minimal
environmental impact; the next evolution of air traffic management will
safely increase operational efficiency at the vehicle, fleet, and
system-wide levels. Finally, NASA Aeronautics is working with our
nation's universities to pioneer next-generation technologies for a
zero-emissions aviation future through the highly successful University
Leadership Initiative.
Question 2. Hardware and service costs have increased substantially
due to supply chain constraints and logistics impacts because of the
situation in Ukraine and the long-term impacts from COVID-19.
How is NASA planning for and responding to the budget impacts of
these events?
Answer. NASA has on-going efforts underway to assess all of the
areas cited by the question:
COVID-19 has impacted NASA projects in multiple ways. In the early
stages of the pandemic, NASA projects were impacted by facility
shutdowns, restarts, and reduced on-site access due to social
distancing and cleaning protocols; and interruptions to test and
construction efforts. In March 2020, Congress passed the Coronavirus
Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act (Public Law 116-136),
which included $60 million for NASA to help address these immediate
impacts and support continued Agency operations. As the pandemic
evolved, NASA projects already underway deployed cost and schedule
reserves to address increases and delays caused by workforce
availability issues at contractor sites, supply chain disruptions, and
travel limitations which hindered plans for international cooperation.
NASA has used existing risk management systems and tools to track
evolving impacts and develop project-specific mitigation strategies.
During COVID-19, NASA takes these risks and mitigation strategies into
account when establishing Agency baseline cost and schedule commitments
for projects transitioning from formulation to implementation. NASA
also takes into account COVID-19 related impacts during project replans
and rebaselinings.
To date, NASA has notified Congress of nine projects across the
Agency that have experienced cost and schedule growth due in part to
COVID-19 pressures. These projects include the Roman Space Telescope,
James Webb Space Telescope, Geostationary Carbon Observatory (GeoCarb),
Surface Water and Ocean Topography (SWOT), the NASA-Indian Space
Research Organization Synthetic Aperture Radar (NISAR), the Orion
exploration crew vehicle, the On-orbit Servicing, Assembly, and
Manufacturing 1 (OSAM-1) and Solar Electric Propulsion (SEP) technology
demonstration missions, and the Low-Boom Flight Demonstration (LBFD).
Supply chains are another area of impact. Impacts include
significantly reduced availability of materials and services, delays in
products delivery, schedule slips, and increased cost of materials,
resources, and products. Systematically building and maintaining
visibility into the supply chains for mission programs and projects is
the basis for Supply Chain Risk Management (SCRM) supporting
situational awareness, planning, risk analysis and informed
decisionmaking at project and enterprise levels. NASA's Office of
Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA) SCRM program launched the NASA
Supply Chain Insight Central (SCIC) information and analysis services
platform for operational use in March 2021 to collaboratively build
integrated, collective visibility and insight into the supply chains of
NASA programs/projects:
--OSMA collaboration with Agency functions is ongoing to further
develop and implement SCIC capabilities and services to address
key SCRM and industrial base challenges.
--OSMA has identified, as a key priority of the SCIC initiative, the
formulation of NASA policy and requirements for supply chain
visibility reporting to enable SCRM, which is currently
underway in collaboration with the NASA Office of Procurement.
The OSMA SCRM program and its SCIC initiative is also supporting
the Agency's partnership with the Department of Commerce to conduct a
US. Civil Space Industrial Base survey, which is expected to
substantially boost the Agency's insight into current and potential
suppliers and their operating conditions.
NASA also collaborates with key USG space partners in the DOD and
national security community on supply chain risks and vulnerabilities.
Relative to specific impacts of Russia's war on Ukraine, it has had
limited impacts on NASA's programs. Impacts have largely been mitigated
by having had on-hand forward purchases or through securing alternate
U.S. suppliers. The issue of overall economic instability, in
particular rising interest rates, are being monitored.
Question 3. Decadal Surveys from the National Academies have been
``the gold standard'' for NASA to conduct high priority scientific
missions. With the release of Astro2020, the astronomy and astrophysics
Decadal Survey, does NASA intend to continue to follow the guidance of
the Decadal Survey?
Answer. NASA recognizes that decadal surveys are the ``gold
standard'' for recommending prioritized science programs.
Implementation of Decadal Survey recommendations is modified to reflect
existing budgets, particularly when funding for new missions is
different from that assumed in the Decadal Surveys. Specific to the
Astro2020 Decadal Survey, implementation of recommendations will also
depend on the progress of necessary technology maturation.
Ahead of and following release of the 2020 Decadal Survey, NASA has
been developing the strategy and road mapping plans for implementing
Decadal Survey recommendations. The fiscal year 2023 budget request
includes realistic precursor science and technology plans that are the
first steps in an executable plan for the NASA's future astrophysics
mission portfolio. The Decadal Survey recommends a deliberate approach
to beginning future great observatories. NASA is pursuing the
recommendations based on the timelines and opportunities outlined in
the report.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator John Kennedy
Question 1. I understand you made a visit to the Michoud Assembly
Facility this past December. Michoud has weathered multiple hurricanes
over the years, most recently Hurricane Ida. NASA's fiscal year 2023
Budget Request includes $424 million for ``Construction and
Environmental Compliance and Restoration.'' Is this amount sufficient
to ensure Michoud is working on schedule and what is the status of the
damage repairs?
Answer. The ongoing fabrication and assembly of NASA's Space Launch
System flight hardware at the Michoud Assembly Facility (MAF) is
critical to the success of the Artemis program. To ensure timely
completion of this hardware, NASA has been repairing and upgrading the
critical infrastructure at MAF over the last several years through
Construction of Facilities projects funded within the Construction and
Environmental Compliance and Restoration appropriation (CECR), and
through the fiscal year 2022 Emergency Supplemental Appropriation to
repair damage caused by hurricanes Ida and Zeta.
NASA's fiscal year 2023 CECR budget request includes funding for
three (3) repair projects at MAF. These are:
--Building 110/114 Critical Cranes Repairs;
--Building 110/114 Fire Suppression Upgrades; and,
--Steam Systems Upgrades, Phase 2 of 2.
The execution of the NASA fiscal year 2022 Emergency Supplemental
Appropriation to repair damage caused by hurricanes Ida and Zeta is
ongoing. NASA is continuing discussions with the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers to execute all major roof repairs at MAF (B103, B220, B320
and B420). It is anticipated that an agreement will be finalized within
Q4, with roof repair contract awards following immediately thereafter.
Additionally, NASA is continuing execution of several minor repair
projects using available local contracting mechanisms. To date
approximately $20 million has been obligated for these various repair
efforts.
The current pace of funding is sufficient to ensure that MAF is
working on schedule and sufficient to maintain the Artemis schedule.
Question 2. Currently, the SLS Heavy Lift Rocket for Artemis
missions is being tested so that astronauts may return to the moon.
Beyond the planned Artemis crew missions, what specifically will be the
role for the SLS in the next decade? Will SLS be used for cargo-only
missions in support of staying on the moon, or our journey to Mars, or
to launch important science missions?
Answer. As noted previously, the Agency is in the process of
transitioning integrated management of SLS to industry by establishing
an Exploration Production and Operations Contract (EPOC) contract. EPOC
will enable industry to make the SLS available as a cargo vehicle for
other uses, such as commercial, DOD, and science--where relevant
capability is needed, and it is cost effective.
NASA believes that SLS is a national asset, and transition of SLS
Exploration Production and Operations to industry--so that industry can
reduce the rocket's production and operations costs--is the quickest
and most cost-effective way to enhance its use.
Question 3. Administrator Nelson, Louisiana benefits from a program
called EPSCoR that is designed to increase research capacity in states
that are underrepresented in Federal research projects, including those
at NASA. I am concerned that the Office of STEM Engagement's mission
and goals don't align well with the research focus of this program.
Will you work with me to find a better home for this research program
within the agency?
Answer. NASA's Office of STEM Engagement is accountable for the
Agency's STEM engagement function, providing strategic guidance,
integration, and operational oversight of a portfolio of efforts to
support students, educators, and educational institutions, as well as
management of the appropriated STEM engagement program. This
accountability entails close partnership and effective collaboration
with the NASA Mission Directorates.
NASA EPSCoR is fully aligned with the Agency's STEM engagement
strategy and organizationally is positioned in the Office of STEM
Engagement for cross-cutting research efforts and direct contributions
to Mission Directorate needs and priorities. This is accomplished
through an effective structure with established liaisons with Mission
Directorate and Center technical organizations. These liaisons
establish requirements for EPSCoR solicitations, review proposals and
provide support and active engagement throughout the life cycle of the
various EPSCoR activities. NASA EPSCoR ensures that all Mission
Directorate needs are represented through the set of solicitations each
year and works with technical organizations effectively to drive
results that are of value to both NASA and the EPSCoR jurisdictions.
Question 4. In looking over your fiscal year 23 budget request for
the Office of STEM Engagement, can you explain why the allocation for
NASA EPSCoR remained flat? This is a very important program for my
state to build research capacity in areas vital to NASA's mission, and
I am concerned that it is not being prioritized enough in your budget.
Answer. NASA EPSCoR continues to provide sustained support to
jurisdictions and their research institutions through a broad set of
competitive research opportunities. Additionally, the fiscal year 2023
budget request accelerates NASA efforts related to K-12, partnerships,
and broadening student participation, which supports the
Administration's initiatives. NASA EPSCoR's contribution to these goals
is more indirect, and can be sustained with the fiscal year 2023 budget
request, as submitted.
_______________________________________________________________________
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR DIANNE FEINSTEIN
Questions Submitted to Hon. Sethuraman Panchanathan, Director, National
Science Foundation
Question 1. Support for astronomy research has long been divided
between NASA and NSF, with NASA supporting space-based telescopes, and
NSF supporting ground-based telescopes. Traditionally, NSF has relied
heavily on significant private investment in ground-based astronomy.
Astronomy remains one of the few scientific disciplines with no
associated NSF-funded research center. Director Panchanathan, with the
increasing scale and cost of ground-based telescopes putting this
research outside of the scope for anyone but national governments, what
is your plan for research investments?
Answer. The NSF Division of Astronomical Sciences (AST) currently
manages four federally Funded Research and Development Centers
(FFRDCs): NSF's National Optical-Infrared Astronomy Research Laboratory
(NOIRLab), the National Solar Observatory (NSO), the National Radio
Astronomy Observatory (NRAO), and Green Bank Observatory (GBO). These
FFRDCs operate observing facilities, build instrumentation, and develop
data analysis pipelines and archives, while also serving as focal
points for organizing and engaging the U.S. nighttime optical, solar,
and radio communities. These centers play essential roles to build
collaborations and partnerships with universities, not-for-profit
private entities, other U.S. government agencies, and international
institutions that enable NSF to undertake projects of increasing scale
and complexity. Significant examples include the International Gemini
Observatory (an international partnership managed by NSF as part of
NOIRLab), the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA, an
international partnership in which NRAO represents the U.S. interests),
and the soon-to-be commissioned Rubin Observatory (an inter-agency
partnership with the Department of Energy, which will be part of
NOIRLab as it transitions into operations). Such partnerships, along
with those with private entities such as Keck, Simons, Moore, and other
foundations, form a key component of NSF's strategy to undertake the
next generation of optical and radio facilities, and our FFRDCs will
continue to play a central role in building and maintaining these
relationships.
Question 2. The NSF recently launched its Technology, Innovation,
and Partnership (TIP) Directorate, which is focused on supporting
critical technologies, workforce development, and the translation of
basic research for commercial goals. These goals are certainly
laudable, but these goals should be in addition to NSF's existing
activities and not result in decreases to basic science research
funding. Director Panchanathan, will you ensure that basic science
research does not receive decreased funding or support in order to
support the TIP Directorate?
Answer. NSF will continue to support the full spectrum of
fundamental research, from foundational, curiosity-driven, discovery-
oriented research to use-inspired, solutions-oriented research.
Building on NSF's longstanding leadership in science and engineering
research and education, TIP serves as a crosscutting platform and
collaborates with NSF's other directorates and offices to leverage,
energize, and rapidly advance use-inspired, solutions-oriented research
and innovation in critical and emerging technologies and industries.
NSF has long invested in use-inspired research and the translation of
research results into practice through a wide range of programs.
NSF is taking a balanced approach between its existing directorates
that support basic research and TIP in the fiscal year 2023 President's
Budget Request. The request calls for an increase of $1.64 billion for
the Research and Related Activities and STEM Education Accounts over
fiscal year 2022 Enacted, around $430 million would go to TIP as part
of the directorate's initial ``start-up,'' and $1.21 billion would go
to the other research directorates and offices. It will be critically
important for TIP to work closely and collaboratively with all the
other NSF directorates and offices to identify specific areas ripe for
co-investment.
Increased funding for TIP is contingent upon Congressional
appropriations, and NSF greatly appreciates the continued strong
bipartisan support for the agency.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Brian Schatz
Question 1. The United States is a leader in both ground- and
space-based astronomy due to six decades of sustained commitment to
develop, fund, and operate cutting edge instruments. In spite of this
long-standing history, there is no funding in either NSF's or NASA's
fiscal year 2023 budget to begin implementation of any of the
recommendations in the decadal survey of astronomical science,
Astro2020.
A. Please explain the absence of implementation funding in
either the NASA or the NSF budget.
Answer. The delay of the Decadal Survey due to COVID resulted in
the committee recommendations (released in November 2021) arriving well
after the agencies' development of the fiscal year 2023 budget request
and shortly before iterations with OMB. NSF has opened discussions with
the projects prioritized in the Astro2020 report and is working with
them to understand their needs, which have evolved significantly since
their presentations to the Astro2020 committees in late fiscal year
2019. NSF is exploring ways to provide critical funding support for
further design and development activities that respond to the highest
priority recommendations from Astro2020. Any future facilities
ultimately represent significant investments by the U.S. taxpayer,
requiring detailed planning and review through the well-developed Major
Facility processes at NSF, which are designed to ensure the success of
such large projects and to secure return on those investments.
B. Does the lack of implementation funding signal that the
Administration intends to pivot away from our nation's six-
decade commitment to astronomy? If the Administration is
turning away from astronomical science, please explain why.
Answer. NSF remains committed to the continued support of astronomy
and is developing a broad and thoughtful response to Astro2020,
including evaluation of the recommended next- generation facilities as
well as planning for the recommended investments in other areas
highlighted as critical to ensuring a healthy and vibrant U.S.
astronomical community. The facilities discussed in the Decadal Survey,
both those NSF currently operates and potential future telescopes, form
a system of research infrastructure across many scales that will
continue U.S. leadership in the key fields of astronomy and
astrophysics (e.g., radio, optical, gravitational waves) and provide
scientific data to thousands of scientists across the U.S. The
democratization of science--allowing researchers from many different
states, universities, and institutes to participate in world-leading
research activities--has been an enormous strength of the U.S.
scientific environment. NSF will continue this tradition through a
balanced portfolio that provides support for members of the research
community coupled with open access to the advanced tools and datasets
that they need to do world-leading science such as that prioritized in
Astro2020.
C. If not, why is there no mention of either ground- or
space- based priorities in its budget request?
Answer. The unfortunate timing of the release of Astro2020 did not
provide NSF sufficient lead time to incorporate specific initiatives in
the fiscal year 2023 budget request. The request does, however,
highlight the roles of two of NSF's federally Funded Research and
Development Centers (FFRDCs) - the National Radio Astronomy Observatory
(NRAO) and NSF's National Optical-Infrared Astronomy Laboratory
(NOIRLab) - inleading development efforts for the next generation
facilities prioritized by Astro2020 and in supporting the broad
scientific priorities described in the report. Of note is the ramp up
in operations funding for the Vera C. Rubin Observatory, which was
highlighted as an ongoing priority in the Astro2020 report.
D. If the Committee were to provide near-term funding to
start implementation of Astro2020, may I have your commitment
that you begin as soon as the funds become available?
Answer. NSF greatly appreciates your support of its mission and
specifically the support for continued leadership in the astronomical
sciences. NSF has requested funding for Astronomy in the President's
fiscal year 2023 budget that is sufficient to advance high priority
activities identified in Astro2020, projects in which we have already
invested almost $100 million for development. Of course, allocation and
award of the funding will rely upon our thorough review processes to
ensure that the investments are made in a fiscally sound manner and
will result in the best science opportunities for the U.S. community.
Question 2. The US Extremely Large Telescope Consortium and its
counterpart in radio astronomy have submitted development proposals to
the NSF in recent weeks.
A. What is the schedule to begin the review of these
proposals?
Answer. In general NSF neither publicly acknowledges the receipt of
nor comments on review of proposals. However, we can assure you that we
are communicating and coordinating with the projects prioritized in the
Astro2020 report to understand their near-term needs. NSF strives to
process all proposal requests in a timely manner.
B. If they are deemed meritorious, will the NSF fund them
with the considerable balances in the Agency's research
account, or from unobligated funds elsewhere?
Answer. Again, NSF neither publicly acknowledges the receipt of nor
comments on review of proposals. Being judged meritorious is one of
many factors used in a funding decision. Successful facility design and
development proposals are funded from the Research and Research
Activities (R&RA) account appropriation.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Joe Manchin
Question 1. I was so disappointed that we were not able to schedule
a visit to the Green Bank Observatory last month, but I can tell you
that there was a big ice storm there that day so we both lucked out.
Our meeting would have otherwise had great timing, as it coincided with
the release of the decadal survey on astrobiology by the National
Academies of Science, which highlighted the Green Bank Telescope as
playing a key role in the future of earth's defense against asteroids
and other near-earth objects. For many years, I have been committed to
ensuring the Green Bank Observatory stays open for the next generation
of young scientists in West Virginia and around the world. Through my
seat on this Committee, I have strongly supported Green Bank's work
observing and cataloging near-earth objects, including the development
of new technology that would make it the world's largest moveable
antenna and transmitter.
A. How is Green Bank used in the detection of near-Earth
objects, and how could it be used in the future?
Answer. As highlighted in the newly released Planetary Science and
Astrobiology Decadal Survey 2023-2032, ground-based radar observations
can provide invaluable information to reduce orbital uncertainties of
near-Earth objects by several orders of magnitude and can also yield
detailed characterization of their physical properties that can
influence impact mitigation strategies. NSF's National Radio Astronomy
Observatory (NRAO) and Green Bank Observatory (GBO) are developing new
instrumentation that will enable studies of near-Earth objects to
refine orbits and assess the level of threat they pose. pose. Over the
past two decades, NSF and GBO have worked successfully with NASA and
commercial entities to receive radar transmissions for scientific and
defense purposes. NSF will be discussing opportunities for enhancing
collaboration in the coming years that make use of the capabilities of
the Green Bank Telescope (GBT).
B. How will NSF respond to the recommendations from the
National Academies of Science, particularly its recommendation
for the use of the Green Bank Telescope as a transmitting
station?
Answer. NSF is currently funding a design study for a high-power
(500 kW) radar transmitter for installation on the Green Bank
Telescope, and discussions are underway with the scientific community,
and other agencies as NSF plans the final design and construction of
the system.
Question 2. The collapse of the Arecibo Observatory in Puerto Rico
in 2020 was shocking. While the Green Bank Telescope was built much
more recently than Arecibo, the collapse of Arecibo does call into
question NSF's assets around the world, and whether they too are in
need of maintenance. With the establishment of the new Tech Directorate
at NSF, it is particularly important that NSF does not lose sight of
its traditional research responsibilities. I understand that NSF is
conducting a review of its facilities in the wake of the Arecibo
collapse.
A. Have you reviewed the status of Green Bank? How would you
grade the infrastructure at the site?
Answer. Yes, NSF regularly assesses the condition of the Green Bank
facilities, undertaking a thorough external review roughly every 3
years in addition to the annual maintenance activities. The most recent
assessment is currently being completed. Although the preliminary
report has identified no urgent safety or structural issues, it does
identify several elements of site infrastructure that will soon need
significant investment to address maintenance typical of a facility
that is twenty years old. These include work on the azimuth track as
well as a need for large-scale repainting to ensure the structure
remains sealed and protected from the elements, enabling it to
withstand another twenty years of operations. NSF will work with the
awardee, AUI, and Green Bank Observatory staff to determine the
preferred approach and appropriate timescales for addressing the issues
identified by this recent assessment.
B. Please keep in touch with my office with respect to any
needs or requirements for maintenance for Green Bank. It would
be devastating to lose the capabilities that Green Bank
provides.
Answer. Thank you--NSF agrees completely!
Question 3. West Virginia benefits from a program called EPSCoR
that is designed to allow states that are underrepresented in Federal
research projects, including those at NASA and NSF, to participate in
research. Because of this program, West Virginia researchers have
received funds to investigate the effects of solar activity and space
weather on Earth and its magnetic field, played a role in building an
autonomous rover for Mars exploration, and created 3D printed materials
and devices suitable for space usage. It's clear that Federal research
funding has economic and quality of life implications for our states
and communities. Unfortunately, that Federal research funding is not
widely distributed. The 25 EPSCoR states and jurisdictions, including
WV, receive just 10.15 percent of NSF research funding. In contrast,
the top five states that receive the most NSF grants account for nearly
40 percent of the total. The U.S. Innovation and Competition Act
(USICA) includes a provision that would set aside 20 percent of NSF and
Department of Energy research funding for the 28 EPSCoR states that are
underserved by research funds.
A. Director, what steps can NSF take beyond EPSCoR to
improve its investments in smaller, more rural states like WV?
Answer. NSF is committed to expanding its geographic engagement to
spur innovation that provides an opportunity to capitalize on talent
across the U.S. NSF has a critical role in catalyzing networks of
institutions, through partnership opportunities, to build the next
generation of centers focused on innovation and contribute to local
economies. As of fiscal year 2021, approximately 13 percent of NSF
funding (i.e., R&RA, EHR, and MREFC appropriation accounts) was awarded
to institutions in EPSCoR jurisdictions. The five initial EPSCoR
jurisdictions that joined NSF EPSCoR in 1980 have increased their
proportion of NSF's total research funding by 76 percent over the past
42 years. Other cohorts that entered in later years have also shown
remarkable gains, with each cohort showing an increase in research
competitiveness over the periods of participation.
NSF has two specific activities planned for increasing investment
in EPSCoR states. In fiscal year 2023, NSF has proposed a new cross-
agency activity, Growing Research Access for Nationally Transformative
Equity and Diversity (GRANTED). Through GRANTED, NSF will engage under-
resourced and under-served institutions, including MSIs, community
colleges, rural institutions, predominantly undergraduate institutions,
and emerging research institutions, to build and enhance their research
support capacity. As a result, investigators at under-resourced
institutions, including institutions within EPSCoR jurisdictions, will
be equipped to submit more competitive research proposals to programs
across NSF.
NSF will also support specific targeted research capacity building
activities for EPSCoR-eligible states. The EPSCoR program will explore
mechanisms that will foster partnerships and collaborations among
eligible institutions not previously engaged in EPSCoR research
capacity building activities. These activities will include additional
enhancements to existing Research Infrastructure Improvement (RII)
tracks, possible new funding opportunities that will leverage the
success of EPSCoR's fiscal year 2022 RII Bridging EPSCoR Communities
initiative in response to American Rescue Plan funding, and
partnerships with cross-directorate funding activities aimed at
enhancing the delivery of benefits from EPSCoR research to the
respective jurisdiction's economic, industrial, and research
development.
Beyond GRANTED and EPSCoR, NSF has multiple programs designed to
increase research capacity and leverage realized research
infrastructure from across the Nation, including in EPSCoR
jurisdictions. Examples of additional NSF programs that may enhance the
research capacity of EPSCoR jurisdictions include Mid-scale Research
Infrastructure Track 1, National Artificial Intelligence (AI) Research
Institutes, the Expanding Capacity in Quantum Information Science and
Engineering (ExpandQISE) program, and the recently announced Regional
Innovation Engines, which is being coordinated by the newly established
Directorate for Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships (TIP).
Question 4. The cybersecurity of our nation's critical
infrastructure and government systems is very important to me. We
cannot have a strong cybersecurity defense without the workforce to
maintain these systems. I am concerned about the state of our
cybersecurity workforce, in particular attracting new talent to work in
government agencies. I am pleased that the National Science Foundation
is providing CyberCorps Scholarships to students who agree to work in
cybersecurity jobs for Federal, state, local or tribal governments
after graduation. As I understand, most of these scholarships are given
to students from four-year collegiate institutions and community
colleges can only put forth nominees if the student agrees to transfer
to a four-year college to complete a bachelor's degree.
A. I think that we are missing out on a population of
individuals who can be very valuable to the cybersecurity
workforce with an associate's degree or certifications provided
through trade school programs. Would you be willing to consider
adjusting the scholarships to drop the four-year college
requirement?
Answer. NSF appreciates your recognition of the important aim of
the CyberCorps Scholarship for Service (SFS) program, to attract
talented students to work in Federal, state, local, or tribal
government organizations following their graduation. Community colleges
do play an important role in the efforts to develop the cybersecurity
workforce necessary for the Nation's cybersecurity missions. They offer
an important pool of students who could be recruited to fill the
cybersecurity needs of government.
Historically, SFS supported only students in their junior and
senior years so community colleges were not participating. The
Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2014 introduced the opportunity to
provide 3 years of SFS support and, subsequently, community college
(CC) students were included in the SFS program via a ``CC Pathways
track'' where second-year students at community colleges became
eligible for 1 year of support and could then transfer to a four-year
SFS institution to be supported for two more years. As of December
2021, there were 28 community colleges participating in the CC
Pathways, in addition to the 83 four-year SFS schools.
The CC Pathways approach was intended to mitigate a problem with
placing SFS students without a four-year degree in Federal government
positions until government hiring practices evolve towards a
competency-based approach. The National Defense Authorization Act for
fiscal year 2018 authorized an alternative approach, the Community
College Cyber Pilot (C3P) program. Specifically, it authorized SFS
scholarships for community college students who are pursuing associate
degrees or certifications and who already have bachelor's degrees or
are veterans of the Armed Forces. The C3P Pilot consists of 8 community
colleges that in September 2018 received grants for a three-year
period. However, due to the impact of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic,
the pilot has been extended to the fourth year and will conclude in
September 2022. It is expected that the final evaluation of the C3P
pilot outcomes will be available by January 2023.
In addition to the above options, the SFS program has considered
other changes including dropping the four-year college requirement
(currently, only veterans of the Armed Forces are eligible). However,
NSF would need to proceed with caution because the students who are
unable to fulfill their government service see their scholarship
converted into a Federal Direct Loan. This situation presents a grave
risk.
An additional factor is that as more and more scientific advances,
such as artificial intelligence or quantum science, are incorporated
into cybersecurity education, the coursework demands are increasing. In
fact, a workforce with integrated AI and cybersecurity competencies is
one of the strategic directions for the SFS program. Under this
scenario, fulfilling the necessary course requirements in a two-year
program of study may prove challenging.
At the same time, NSF will use any opportunity to pilot and
evaluate new models to recruit the first- or second-year community
college students and mentor them to successfully compete for entry-
level cybersecurity positions.
In addition to the SFS program, NSF also supports cybersecurity
development at community colleges through the Improving Undergraduate
STEM Education: Computing in Undergraduate Education (IUSE:CUE) program
which invests in computing curricular development and has a community
colleges track. The Advanced Technological Education (ATE) program,
which focuses on the community college education of technicians of the
future in advanced technological areas, also invests in cybersecurity
education including both national centers of excellence, and the
engagement of institutions new to NSF.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Shelley Moore Capito
Question 1. Since its dedication in 2000, the GBT has been a
fundamental instrument for planetary science and planetary defense,
observing NEOs and Potentially Hazardous Asteroids, the Moon, and the
terrestrial planets as a receiver for radar projects. Now, thanks to
new technology under development for the GBT, it is the largest fully
steerable antenna in the world capable of transmitting radar signals
for research. The GBT's 100- meter diameter makes it an impressive tool
for radar work. The location of the GBT and its maneuverability permits
it to observe 85 percent of the celestial sphere, allowing it to
quickly track objects across its field of view.
Director, for several years I have had to talk to previous
Directors imploring them to not mothball the Green Bank Telescope. We
have a new director there, Dr. James Jackson, and I wonder if you could
talk a moment about the possibilities and promise of radar systems in
the area of planetary defense. The National Academy of Sciences has
written on the dangerous effects of the impacts of Near Earth Objects.
A. I believe Green Bank can play a role here, what are your
thoughts?
Answer. GBT can play a significant role in determining the orbits
and characterizing the physical properties of NEOs, particularly in
conjunction with NASA's Goldstone Solar System Radar (GSSR) systems.
GBT already occasionally operates as part of a bistatic radar facility
in which the GSSR transmits radar pulses and the GBT receives the faint
return signals from the reflection of those pulses by NEOs. NSF is
currently funding a design study for a high power (500 kW) radar
transmitter for installation on the GBT that will be complementary to
the GSSR. Discussions are underway with NASA and national security
agencies about how partnerships building upon this development may be
able to enhance current capabilities.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Bill Hagerty
Question 1. In my previous role as the U.S. Ambassador to Japan, I
saw firsthand the importance of maintaining U.S. superiority in
technology and innovation. I'm very concerned by the rapid growth in
China's R&D investments and what this means for U.S. global
competitiveness. According to the National Science Board's 2022 Science
and Engineering Indicators, ``The share of global R&D performed by the
U.S. declined from 29 percent in 2010 to 27 percent in 2019, whereas
the share by China increased from 15 percent to 22 percent.'' Dr.
Panchanathan, how do you see NSF's role evolving as U.S. leadership is
being challenged?
Answer. Our Nation's economic and national security depends on its
ability to:
--Invest heavily in the technologies of today and tomorrow;
--Unleash innovation everywhere by building ecosystems of innovation
in every region of the country; and
--Quickly develop our domestic talent across every geographic and
demographic background.
The technologies of today--from artificial intelligence to quantum
information science to semiconductors and microelectronics--hold
massive implications for national and economic security. It is
imperative that NSF double down now on these critical technology areas
and the research that will seed the technologies of the future.
For decades, NSF has seeded high-risk and nascent ideas that have
over time developed into applied technologies with transformative
impacts on our economy and society. For instance, Google and Qualcomm,
now multibillion-dollar companies, each started with a single grant
from NSF. Similarly, the AI revolution that we are witnessing today
traces its roots to investments by NSF in the 1980s and 1990s. As an
example, when a streaming service recommends the next show that you
should watch based on what you watched the night before--that
capability is fueled by NSF-funded research on a technique called
collaborative filtering. And the convergence of the NSF-funded page-
rank algorithm that led to Google, wireless networking, touchscreen
interfaces, and other innovations has catalyzed unanticipated
industries like mobility and e-commerce in which the U.S. dominates
today.
Global R&D investments have tripled over the last two decades, and
while US investment has also grown, the U.S. share has gone down, with
the rate of growth steeper in other Nations. While the top-down
structures in non-democratic nations do not foster sustained
innovation, it is nonetheless imperative that we strengthen our
investments and our overall approach to R&D in critical and emerging
technologies at speed and scale. The risk of falling behind is simply
not an option.
That is why NSF launched a new directorate--our first in more than
three decades--called Technology, Innovation and Partnerships, or TIP.
The goal of the TIP directorate is to do precisely as described above--
to leverage, energize, and rapidly advance use-inspired, solutions-
oriented research and innovation in critical and emerging technologies
and industries. By collaborating with NSF's other directorates, the
rest of the Federal enterprise, and the private sector, TIP will
advance technology and address national, societal, and economic
challenges, including regional opportunities present across the Nation;
accelerate the translation of research results to the market and
society; and tap into the vast talent base that exists throughout the
Nation and has for too long been left behind when it comes to the U.S.
research and innovation enterprise.
This is not the type of research the private sector will support by
itself. The U.S. has led because of the uniquely American innovation
ecosystem that has brought together academia, industry, and government
in a powerful way, with Federal investments in academic research
seeding industry uptake leading to new products and services.
Investments by both are necessary in order to stay ahead. Indeed, the
U.S. innovation ecosystem is the envy of the world--and now is not the
time to let up. Sustained growth in NSF, the Federal Government's basic
research agency, is critical to ensuring the U.S. remains in the
vanguard of global competitiveness.
Dr. Panchanathan, NSF recently announced a new Technology,
Innovation, and Partnerships (TIP) Directorate to focus on creating
breakthrough technologies to meet the societal and economic needs of
our country. I understand that NSF has already moved some existing
programs into the TIP Directorate and has begun to make new funding
announcements.
Question 2. Can you speak to whether the process TIP will use to
review grants will be modified to match the goals of the directorate?
Answer. The TIP directorate will build upon NSF's longstanding
merit review process in developing an approach that best aligns with
the directorate's mission while enabling the selection of the best
proposals for funding. The directorate anticipates incorporating broad
and diverse expertise in its review process, including individuals from
government, industry, and nonprofits in addition to academia, along
with detailed program-specific review criteria. TIP will also pursue
pilots to enhance the review process, accelerate the proposal review
and award timeline, and ensure milestone-based assessment of active
awards.
Question 3. Are there new, more nimble and flexible funding
mechanisms and processes that you plan to implement that would be
unique to the directorate?
Answer. TIP is actively exploring new funding mechanisms and
oversight processes. For example, in the beginning of May, NSF launched
the NSF Regional Innovation Engines program by issuing a Broad Agency
Announcement--a relatively novel approach for NSF. The goal with this
approach is to engage the broadest set of stakeholders, beyond the
traditional academic community with which NSF usually engages. A recent
webinar for this program drew over 2,600 participants, almost 50
percent of whom were from non-academic institutions--an initial sign of
success for this approach.
More generally, NSF has partnered with a firm to run a series of
visioning workshops and is in discussions with the Federation of
American Scientists to explore new funding mechanisms that would help
to accelerate research and innovation.
Question 4. Institutions in Tennessee tell me that they are eager
to take advantage of the programs TIP intends to launch, particularly
possible expansions to the I-Corps program. Can you speak to your
vision for this important entrepreneurial program? Will anything about
it change now that it is part of TIP?
Answer. The NSF Innovation Corps (I-CorpsTM) program, an
experiential entrepreneurial education program, will continue to
further the Nation's innovation ecosystem by equipping researchers with
the tools needed to transform discoveries into innovative technologies.
I-CorpsTM connects the technological, entrepreneurial, and
business communities, addressing skill and knowledge gaps to accelerate
the transformation of basic research into deep technology ventures.
Over time, NSF anticipates enhancing and optimizing the agency's
current ``Lab-to-Market Platform,'' which includes the I-
CorpsTM program. This will allow researchers to pursue
additional prototyping, demonstration, and scale-up work, giving rise
to new startups and small businesses that will lead to new markets and
economies of scale. For example, through the I-CorpsTM
program, NSF will build out I-CorpsTM Hubs so that every
part of the country has easy access to these ``national resources'' and
support an increasing number of Teams each year. With increased
funding, NSF would be able to support partnerships between I-
CorpsTM and other NSF programs such as the Convergence
Accelerator and NSF Regional Innovation Engines.
Question 5. As NSF launches the TIP Directorate and is placing
increased attention and resources towards more use-inspired research in
key technology areas, we must be mindful not to duplicate efforts of
other research agencies, including the Dept. of Energy. For over 70
years, NSF's strength has been its ability to promote scientific
progress across basic scientific and engineering disciplines as the
cornerstone of America's basic research enterprise. How is NSF
balancing these other fields of basic research versus the more applied,
technology-driven research it is now pursuing? What will the future of
other directorates look like as TIP ramps up? And how is NSF
collaborating with other agencies, such as DOE, to ensure taxpayer
dollars are being used efficiently?
How is NSF balancing these other fields of basic research versus
the more applied, technology-driven research it is now pursuing?
Answer. NSF has consistently supported the full spectrum of
fundamental research, from foundational, curiosity-driven, discovery-
oriented research to use-inspired, solutions-oriented research. Indeed,
this synergy between discovery and innovation constitutes NSF's
``DNA,'' if you will. It is how transformational leaps forward happen.
In a similar fashion, NSF's investments in science and technology are
also intertwined. The scientific pursuit of knowledge and understanding
cannot be separated from the development of new technological
capabilities. In turn, new technology capabilities enable the pursuit
of new scientific research questions that were previously out of reach.
NSF has long invested in use-inspired research and the translation
of research results into practice through a wide range of programs. The
TIP directorate constitutes a once-in-a-generation opportunity to
double down on this type of work to focus on pivotal challenges and
positively transform society, and to do so through public and private
partnerships that help to inform, coordinate and grow NSF's research
and education investments. Together, TIP and the other NSF directorates
and offices will advance technology; address national, societal, and
economic challenges, including regional opportunities present across
the Nation; and tap into the vast talent base that exists throughout
the Nation and has for too long been left behind when it comes to the
U.S. research and innovation enterprise.
What will the future of other directorates look like as TIP ramps
up?
Answer. Building on NSF's longstanding leadership in science and
engineering research and education, TIP serves as a crosscutting
platform and collaborates with NSF's other directorates and offices to
leverage, energize, and rapidly advance use-inspired, solutions-
oriented research and innovation in critical and emerging technologies
and industries. In general, NSF plans to take a balanced approach
between its existing directorates that support basic research and TIP.
For over seven decades, NSF has been investing in fundamental research
in all fields of science and engineering, delivering foundational and
use-inspired outcomes, and will continue to do so.
And how is NSF collaborating with other agencies, such as DOE, to
ensure taxpayer dollars are being used efficiently?
Answer. Within the Federal research and development enterprise,
NSF's investments complement those of other agencies. Specifically,
many other agencies invest in R&D focused on their mission needs. NSF
investments in fundamental research often involve partnerships with
other agencies to leverage that research and help meet those agencies'
needs. For example, NSF has collaborated with the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) on the NSF-led National Artificial Intelligence
Research Institutes program, with USDA's National Institute of Food and
Agriculture fully funding four food and agricultural institutes to
date. Beyond these partnerships, NSF stands ready to rapidly scale use-
inspired and translational research, complementing and enhancing R&D
investments across the Federal government.
TIP serves as an agency-wide resource to catalyze and scale public
and private partnerships to amplify and further the impact of NSF
investments in research, innovation, and education. Specifically, TIP
provides expertise and support to build partnerships, along with co-
funding to strategically advance high-impact relationships that will
deepen and advance NSF's mission across science, engineering, and
education. TIP ensures these partnerships expand the reach of, and
exponentially increase the return on, NSF's investments across all
directorates and offices.
Senator Shaheen. This was a very informative hearing. It
feels like our science future is in good hands, and we very
much appreciate the work that both of you are doing--
Dr. Panchanathan. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen [continuing]. And look forward to
continuing to collaborate and cooperate with your efforts.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Shaheen. At this point, the subcommittee stands in
recess until Wednesday, May 11, at 2:00 p.m., when we will hold
a hearing on the budget request of the Department of Commerce.
Thank you both.
Dr. Panchanathan. Thank you, Madam Chair and Ranking Member
Moran.
[Whereupon, at 11:55 a.m., Tuesday, May 3, the subcommittee
was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of the Chair.]
COMMERCE, JUSTICE, SCIENCE, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2023
----------
WEDNESDAY, MAY 11, 2022
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 2:00 p.m., in room SD-192, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeanne Shaheen (Chair), presiding.
Present: Senators Shaheen, Feinstein, Reed, Schatz, Van
Hollen, Moran, Murkowski, Collins, Capito, Hagerty, and Braun.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JEANNE SHAHEEN
Senator Shaheen. Good afternoon. The Subcommittee on
Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies will come to
order.
We are delighted to have the Secretary of Commerce, Gina
Raimondo here, to speak to the President's fiscal year 2023
funding request for the Department. It is great to have you
back before the subcommittee.
We have three votes that are supposed to be starting at
2:30, and in the interest of time I am going to submit my
opening statement for the record.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Jeanne Shaheen
Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to today's hearing to review
the President's fiscal year 2023 funding request for the Department of
Commerce. Our witness today is Secretary Gina Raimondo.
Secretary Raimondo, it's great to see you again.
At its core, the Department of Commerce's mission is to help
American workers and businesses thrive.
To achieve this goal, the Department relies on a talented workforce
spread across all 50 States, every U.S. Territory, and dozens of
countries around the world. I want to thank the more than 40,000
Department employees for their work.
With its unique tools, the Department is often called upon to meet
our country's most complex challenges.
The Department's trade experts enforce sanctions that are the
lynchpin of our county's response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Its
world-class scientists are on the front lines of responding to the
climate crisis.
And the Department's economic development staff are helping
communities bounce back from the recession caused by the COVID-19
pandemic. The Department really is America's Swiss Army knife.
To maintain the Department's diverse capabilities, this
Subcommittee must ensure that the Department has the resources it needs
to succeed.
To that end, the fiscal year 2022 omnibus spending bill included
$9.9 billion for the Department of Commerce.
This year, the President's fiscal year 2023 budget request for the
Department of Commerce is $11.7 billion--an 18 percent increase
compared to the fiscal year 2022 enacted level for the Department.
This proposal builds off of the Department's ongoing work to help
American workers and businesses compete.
To do so, this budget proposes increasing funding for NIST by
nearly $240 million.
This investment would boost advanced manufacturing research and
strengthen manufacturers around the country--all to support good-paying
American jobs and improve U.S. competitiveness.
The budget also proposes a nearly billion dollar increase for the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
With this investment, NOAA will expand climate and weather research
and operations, upon which New Hampshire's Seacoast communities and
fisheries rely.
Turning to international trade, I was especially pleased to see the
budget propose a $26 million increase to support small- and medium-
sized American businesses through Global Markets at the International
Trade Administration.
This is a big deal for small states like New Hampshire, which were
adversely impacted by the trade policies of the previous
administration, and are trying to recover as we fight to put COVID-19
in the rearview mirror.
Every effort should be made to assist our local businesses.
When I was Governor of New Hampshire, I led the first trade mission
outside of North America, so never count the little guy out--we're
always looking for ways to increase the size of our footprint in the
global market, and international trade programs allow us to do that.
And on that note, this office helps American businesses tap into
new markets abroad. The potential return on investment for this funding
is enormous.
In 2020, New Hampshire exported $5.5 billion in goods to the world.
Increasing that amount by even a fraction would benefit my entire
State.
The budget proposal also would strengthen the Bureau of Industry
and Security's efforts to stop illegal exports to Russia and to enhance
trade export control partnerships with allies.
As you know, we included $22 million for these efforts in the first
Ukraine supplemental appropriations bill, which passed as part of the
omnibus earlier this year.
Because the situation with Russia continues to evolve, I would be
interested in knowing whether the resources requested fully capture the
Department's needs to administer and enforce the export sanctions.
Finally, turning to the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration, I know that many members of this Subcommittee would
like an update from our hearing earlier this year regarding the
Department's progress in administering the broadband programs from the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
On Monday the White House announced that 20 Internet providers
committed to reducing prices and increasing speeds for households
enrolled in the FCC's Affordable Connectivity Program.
This was welcome news for millions of Americans.
And while the FCC is not under this subcommittee's jurisdiction, as
an author of the broadband provisions in the bipartisan infrastructure
law, I was glad to see this progress.
However, more must be done if we are to truly address longstanding
issues to close the digital divide and ensure broadband access for
unserved and underserved regions of the country.
Secretary Raimondo, as you can see, there is plenty to discuss
today, and we very much look forward to your testimony.
With that, I now would like to recognize the CJS Subcommittee Vice
Chair, Senator Moran, for his opening remarks.
Senator Shaheen. And Senator Moran is on his way, so we
will give him the option when he gets here, of either
submitting for the record, or speaking. But that will allow us
to move to questions, hopefully, before we get to the votes
that are being called.
So with that, Secretary Raimondo, I will turn the
microphone over to you.
STATEMENT OF HONORABLE GINA RAIMONDO, SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Secretary Raimondo. Okay. Thank you. Good afternoon, and
thank you, Chair Shaheen, for this opportunity, and to the
Members of the Committee.
The priorities funded in this budget build upon the
investments that you--
Senator Shaheen. Excuse me, Madam Secretary; maybe you
could pull the microphone a little closer, so that everyone can
hear better?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Sorry. Is this better?
Senator Shaheen. Yes.
Secretary Raimondo. Much better. Sorry. I apologize.
Okay. So, as I was saying, the priorities funded in the
budget build upon the investments that you all enacted in
fiscal year 2022. And I will say, I am so very grateful for
your support, as we look forward to accomplishing even more in
2023.
COMMERCE FUNDING PRIORITIES
The budget request includes $11.7 billion for the
Department, which is an 18 percent increase above fiscal year
2022 enacted. And I would just like to go through the six key
priorities in areas of investment that comprise the $11.7
billion.
First, the President's budget strengthens the Nation's
supply chains by investing in domestic manufacturing.
Specifically it calls for $1.46 billion to support the work of
NIST, including $275 million for NIST Manufacturing Extension
Program (MEP), and $97 million to expand NIST's role in
Manufacturing USA. This, as you all know, will help small and
medium-sized manufacturers improve their competitiveness.
The budget also proposes $16 million to augment the
Commerce Department's data tools and expertise to support more
secure and diversified supply chains.
Second, the budget positions us to compete globally,
protect our national security, and continue to lead a global
coalition, united in condemnation of Russia's aggression
against Ukraine. Specifically, it calls for $630 million for
ITA to enhance commercial diplomacy, it provides BIS $200
million to apply and enforce export controls, and strengthen
efforts to counter new threats from Russia and China.
Third, the budget invests in equitable and inclusive
economic growth for all Americans. I believe that America's
greatest strength and core to our competitive advantage, is our
diversity. Accordingly, the budget proposes $500 million for
the EDA to help communities experiencing economic distress take
control of their future and position themselves for future
prosperity.
It also proposes $110 million for the Minority Business
Development Agency, which will meet the full authorization that
was included in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. And very
importantly, for those of you representing rural States, part
of this funding will be used to open new regional offices, and
establish rural business centers.
Fourth, the budget takes historic action to combat the
climate crisis. It includes $7 billion for NOAA to continue
providing data, strategies, and expertise necessary to address
the climate crisis. The request also supports programs to
catalyze wind energy, restore habitats, protect oceans and
coasts, and improve NOAA's ability to predict extreme weather
associated with climate change.
An area that I know is of interest to this committee, the
budget also proposes $87 million for the Office of Space
Commerce. This is a significant increase, and this increase in
funding will be dedicated to standing up civil operational,
space situational capability at NOAA.
Fifth, the budget expands opportunity and discovery through
data. Timely data is crucial to supporting American
competitiveness, innovation, and growth. The budget provides
the Census Bureau with $1.5 billion to continue its
transformation to a 21st century data-centric model. It also
calls for $141 million for the Bureau of Economic Analysis to
support new data on the supply chain, income distribution
statistics, and the growth in Space Commerce.
Sixth, and finally, the budget ensures that the Department
can provide 21st century service to the American people. It
proposes new funds to enhance our own cybersecurity, and
increase the diversity and equity of our own workforce.
Before concluding on this budget, I would be remiss if I
didn't take just a second to thank you for the $22 million that
you provided to the BIS in the Ukrainian supplemental to
implement and enforce the increased export controls on Russia.
And I would be happy to talk about that today.
And I would also be remiss if I didn't thank you for your
work to advance the United States Innovation and Competition
Act (USICA). I cannot emphasize enough the urgency with which
we must move to pass USICA. And I will tell you that I and my
team are fully and totally committed to do anything that we can
to assist you as you get that critical piece of legislation to
the President's desk.
The Commerce Department has key priorities in the bill,
including the tech hubs, supply chain authorities, and the
CHIPS funding. And I will say chip manufacturers have made
clear that they are going to build new chip facilities, the
question is: Will they be built in the United States of
America? And the answer will depend on how quickly we can move
forward with the USICA bill.
So, I am delighted to be here, and of course happy to take
all of your questions.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Secretary Gina Raimondo
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and members of the Committee,
thank you for this opportunity to discuss President Biden's fiscal year
2023 Budget Request for the U.S. Department of Commerce. The priorities
reflected in this Budget build upon the important investments you
enacted in fiscal year 2022 through annual appropriations, the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and the Ukraine Supplemental
Appropriations Act. I am grateful for your support of the Department as
we look forward to accomplishing even more in fiscal year 2023.
The President's Budget Request includes $11.7 billion for the
Department of Commerce, an 18 percent increase above the fiscal year
2022 enacted level. The investments proposed in this budget will
position us to continue fulfilling the Department's mission to create
the conditions for economic growth and opportunity for all communities,
implement the recently published 2022-26 Departmental Strategic Plan
(Innovation, Equity, and Resilience: Strengthening American
Competitiveness in the 21st Century), and support the President's
economic vision for America--to build our economy from the bottom up
and the middle out.
Today, I will focus on six key areas of investment within the
President's Budget for the Department of Commerce.
First, the Budget strengthens the Nation's supply chains by investing
in domestic manufacturing.
Rising costs for working families and ongoing supply shocks
underscore the urgency of building long-term resilience across critical
supply chains, strengthening domestic manufacturing, and beginning to
institutionalize supply chain resilience within the Department of
Commerce.
The Budget calls for $1.46 billion to support the work of the
National Institute of Standards and Technology, or NIST, including $275
million Manufacturing Extension Program, or MEP, which is an increase
of $117 million over fiscal year 2022. Today, there are 51 MEP centers
that work with manufacturers to help them develop new products and
customers, expand and diversify markets, adopt new technology, and
enhance value within supply chains. The additional investment in MEP
will enable the centers and their clients to respond quickly to new
market opportunities by working at all levels of the supply chain, from
original equipment manufacturers to suppliers, and with state and
Federal governments. It will also facilitate initiatives to expand the
pool and diversity of workers in the manufacturing sector, by
partnering with workforce organizations to coordinate and tailor
services to meet the needs of local manufacturers.
The Budget also includes $97 million to expand NIST's role in
Manufacturing USA. The U.S. government currently funds 16 Manufacturing
USA Institutes, one of which is sponsored by the Department of
Commerce. Each Manufacturing USA Institute is a public-private
partnership with a distinct technology focus, such as advanced
composites, additive manufacturing, biofabrication, smart
manufacturing, and sustainable manufacturing. Each institute works to
secure the future of U.S. manufacturing through innovation, education,
and collaboration. With this request, the Department of Commerce will
maintain funding for our current institute, which focuses on
biopharmaceutical manufacturing, and sponsor four new Manufacturing USA
Institutes that will promote collaboration on industry-relevant
research and development to spur manufacturing innovation in the U.S.
The Budget also proposes $16.1 million to augment the Commerce
Department's data tools and expertise to support more secure and
diversified supply chains. This investment will provide Bureau of
Economic Analysis (BEA) $5.2 million and 15 positions to better collect
data on U.S. participation in global supply and distribution chains and
will provide the International Trade Administration (ITA) $10.9 million
for 38 positions for additional capacity needed to strengthen supply
chain resilience by allowing us to track the supply of goods and
services and respond to acute disruptions.
Second, the Budget positions us to compete globally, protect our
national security, and continue to lead a global coalition
united in condemnation of Russian aggression against Ukraine.
The Budget calls for $630.8 million for the International Trade
Administration (ITA), $72 million above the fiscal year 2022 enacted
level. Within this, the Budget calls for investments to strengthen
commercial diplomacy in targeted areas of high economic and
geostrategic value, including the Indo-Pacific region, which will
assist U.S. companies competing in these important markets.
The Budget provides the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS)
$199.5 million, representing an increase of $58.5 million, or 41
percent more than the fiscal year 2022 enacted level, to apply and
enforce export controls to advance our national security objectives.
Within this, the Budget includes $36 million to secure the information
and communications technology and services (ICTS) supply chain and $10
million in new funding to strengthen national security efforts to
counter current and emerging threats from Russia and China.
Third, the Budget continues a focus on equitable and inclusive economic
growth for all Americans.
We fail to meet our full potential as a nation if we are not
investing in all underserved communities, workers, inventors, and
entrepreneurs.
The Budget provides $502.5 million for the Economic Development
Administration (EDA) to help communities experiencing economic distress
take control of their future and position themselves for economic
prosperity and resiliency. Within this, the Budget includes $50 million
for the new Recompete Pilot Program, which will provide grants to
communities experiencing high prime-age employment gaps. It also
increases funding for the Assistance to Coal Communities program, to
continue to assist communities economically impacted by changes in the
coal industry. The most directly comparable portion of EDA's American
Rescue Plan Act Coal Communities Commitment was the Economic Adjustment
Assistance portion, and this was significantly oversubscribed with
applications totaling more than twice the $200 million in funding
available. With additional funding, we would be able to better support
these and so many other communities.
The Budget proposes $110 million for the Minority Business
Development Agency (MBDA), double the fiscal year 2022 enacted level,
necessary to meet the full authorization this Committee put forth in
the Minority Business Development Act included in the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law. This funding will build MBDA's capacity and expand
existing grant programs, including the flagship business and specialty
center programs, opening regional offices, and establishing a Rural
Business Center program.
Fourth, the Budget takes historic action to combat the climate crisis.
The coast-to-coast devastation caused by extreme weather events has
been heartbreaking to watch. Extreme winds, tornadoes, hurricanes,
wildfires, heat, and floods threaten lives, families, homes, and
businesses. Addressing the climate crisis is an essential component of
the Department's mission to create the conditions for economic growth
and opportunity.
The Budget includes $6.9 billion for the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), an increase of $986 million from the
2022 enacted level to ensure the Department is providing decision-
makers across the public and private sectors with critical, actionable
data, strategies, and expertise to address the climate crisis. The
Department will bolster equity in its service delivery to ensure that
our most vulnerable communities, including tribal, rural, and other
underserved populations, have access to the information and tools they
need to make climate- smart decisions. The Budget includes additional
funding for the Climate Competitive Research Program to provide
decision-makers with the information and tools they need to respond to
climate change, and to provide climate change projections out to 2050.
Our budget request for NOAA also supports programs to catalyze wind
energy, restore habitats, protect the oceans and coasts, continue
education and outreach efforts in local communities, and improve NOAA's
ability to predict extreme weather, including events associated with
climate change. It also includes $2.3 billion to support the nation's
weather and space weather satellite enterprise, which is a $667 million
increase above the fiscal year 2022 enacted level, to ensure the
continuity of our world-class weather observation capability. The next
decade is a critical time to address the climate crisis, and with this
Budget, NOAA has a once in a generation opportunity to advance climate
resilience and promote economic growth.
Additionally, the Budget proposes $87.7 million for the Office of
Space Commerce, a $71.7 million increase above the fiscal year 2022
enacted level. The U.S. commercial space industry pioneers innovative
technologies that transform our daily lives, gather critical data,
enable communications, and help secure the Nation. This significant
increase in funding for the Office of Space Commerce will be dedicated
to standing up a civil, operational Space Situational Awareness (SSA)
capability at NOAA that meets the industry's needs.
Fifth, the Budget expands opportunity and discovery through data.
The Nation's economy, technology, and demographics are changing
rapidly and profoundly, making timely data crucial for developing the
insights needed to support American competitiveness, innovation, and
growth of quality jobs. The Budget provides the Census Bureau with $1.5
billion to enable it to continue its transformation from a 20th century
survey-centric model to a 21st century data-centric model that provides
more timely and relevant data products to our stakeholders. The Budget
also calls for $141 million for BEA, $25 million more than the fiscal
year 2022 enacted level, to support new data on the supply chain,
income distribution statistics, healthcare spending, and growth of the
space economy to better inform decision-makers.
Sixth, and finally, the Budget ensures the Department can provide 21st
century service to the American public.
The Budget proposes new funds to enhance cybersecurity and increase
the diversity and equity of our workforce. It also proposes investments
to improve technology and customer experience. These investments will
ensure that the Department can provide best in government services to
the American public. The mission of the Department could not be carried
out without our dedicated employees. They have persevered through new
challenges and emerged more resolute to help the Department achieve new
heights.
Together, in the face of extraordinary challenges, we are building
a 21st century economy that is keeping America competitive globally and
positioning America's workers and businesses for success. We are
already witnessing historic levels of job creation and economic growth.
But there is more work to do. I look forward to working with you to
enact the President's fiscal year 2023 Budget for the Department of
Commerce to do that work. I am happy to take your questions.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you very much. Again, when
Senator Moran arrives we will go to him. But in the meantime we
will open for questions based on order of arrival; 5 minute
question rounds. And I want to begin where you concluded, which
is talking about the action to impose export controls on Russia
and Belarus in response to their invasion in Ukraine.
And I know that we provided funding earlier this year in
the supplemental to help do that, but can you speak to the
scope of these efforts? How they are progressing? If you see
any signs that it is having an impact? And then also, what are
the needs of the Department as we go forward, recognizing that
the situation is going to be changing? And we need to make sure
you have the resources you need.
EXPORT CONTROLS
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Thank you. So as it relates to the
scope, the scope is unprecedented, it is broader than anything
the United States has ever done with respect to export controls
insofar as the United States, the Department of Commerce led a
coalition of 37 other countries to join us in aligning our
export controls.
And our approach was to deny Russia technology which would
cripple their ability to continue a military operation and that
is exactly what we are doing. U.S. exports of technology to
Russia have fallen by nearly 70 percent since we imposed these
export controls. And you are starting to see it.
You see two tank manufacturing facilities have shut--Lada,
the auto manufacturer, has furloughed workers and closed down.
I met a few weeks ago with the Prime Minister, and we have
reports from Ukrainians that when they find Russian equipment,
military equipment, on the ground, it is filled with
semiconductors that they took out of dishwashers and
refrigerators.
And so, the point is, we are having a very serious effect.
What we need to do in order to continue this is enforcement,
enforcement, enforcement.
As I said, thank you for the resources. We will come back
to you if we think we need more. I would just say, I am
extremely proud of the team. And I am deadly serious about
enforcing, and have been crystal clear, particularly with
China, that we won't tolerate any circumvention of these export
controls.
Senator Shaheen. I am delighted to hear that. And so
pleased to hear also that you are seeing the impact of what we
are doing.
Senator Moran, just so you are up to date on where we are.
Because of the votes, I submitted my statement for the record.
Senator Moran. No peer pressure. But I will do the same.
Senator Shaheen. So I was going to go ahead and finish my
questions, and then turn it over to you, for either your
statement, or to start your questioning, whichever you prefer.
Senator Moran. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. I want to go to another issue that I
recognize you don't have control over, but I do think you have
an important voice in this discussion. And that is the
increasing challenges that we are having in New Hampshire, in
particular industries around workforce.
It is a general challenge throughout the State, but when it
comes to our seasonal businesses, the tourism industry, they
are facing severe workforce challenges, and a key reason for
that is because of the lack of sufficient H-2B visas being
available to them.
And I had the opportunity to ask Secretary Mayorkas about
this issue last week, and he said that they are moving in the
Department of Homeland Security with--he used the term
``lightning speed''--now, I have to say that is a disturbing
characterization of what has been an alarmingly slow process.
Tell me what we can do to speed this along? How can your
agency help us as we try and support those businesses that are
really desperate for workers? And, you know, we have lost two
seasons because of the pandemic, our season starts on Memorial
Day. I know you know this because you were governor of Rhode
Island, so you were dealing with these same issues. What can we
do to move this debate?
WORKFORCE FOR THE TOURISM INDUSTRY
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. So first of all, I appreciate you
bringing it up. As you said, Rhode Island is heavily, heavily
dependent on tourism, particularly in the summer. These
businesses make all of their living between Memorial Day and
Labor Day, and they are utterly reliant on visas--short-term
visas, work visas, student visas.
So, I sympathize with where you are coming from. As you
mentioned Secretary Mayorkas, he and Secretary Walsh
temporarily increased the visas, 35,000 additional. I will tell
you, I convened the TTAB, the Travel and Tourism Advisory
Board, and I heard an earful from industry that we need to do
more, we need to go faster, and we should consider a statutory
increase on the cap.
What I am doing, and what I will continue to do even more
so at your urging, is make sure the voices of industry are
heard in the administration that we do go faster, but also we
ought to think about longer term solutions.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you very much. I appreciate
that and look forward to working on those longer term
solutions.
Senator Moran?
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JERRY MORAN
Senator Moran. Chair, I would ask unanimous consent that my
opening statement be made a part of the record.
Senator Shaheen. Without objection.
Senator Moran. And Madam Chair, I would yield to the
Senator from Alaska so that you and I can spend time and figure
out who is going to be chairing when the votes actually occur.
Senator Shaheen. Very good point. Senator Murkowski.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you
Senator Moran, appreciate that.
Madam Secretary, welcome. Good to see you. I want to start
my questions with fisheries surveys. You know I always want to
talk about fish first.
As you are well aware, we are still trying to address this
mismatch between survey coverage and the stocks that NOAA is
trying to quantify. Going forward more funding is going to be
needed to maintain both the historic survey coverage in Alaska,
and support new survey missions within the North Bering Sea,
and even the Arctic.
But I want to thank you and NOAA for the work that you have
done to prioritize fisheries surveys in the Bering Sea, and in
the Gulf. And I would ask that you keep us updated on any
challenges that you may be encountering with regards to this
year's survey plan.
We had one vessel, the Oscar Dyson, that was held back a
little bit, but you know full well we have had the opportunity
to discuss what happens when we have those gaps in data. Lost
surveys are more harmful than ever as we are seeing these
changes in our marine environment. We missed a year of crab
data in 2020, and then next year the Bristol Bay Red King Crab
Fishery was closed for the first time in decades. And believe
me, I am hearing from fishermen and managers on this issue.
Can you share with me what resources NOAA needs in either
manned or unmanned technology, to really help us gather this
data in a more reliable way so that we can work to address
these challenges that we are seeing with the resources in our
oceans due to the impact from climate change?
FISHERIES SURVEYS
Secretary Raimondo. Yes, thank you. We have talked about
this. And I have to say, even listening to you, it is tough to
hear, because slow data, lack of data I know affects people's
livelihoods. The budget calls for $3.3 million for additional
resources into the surveys, and we believe that this will help
us, significantly with our data collection, with the speed with
which we do it, with the continued modernization with which we
do the work.
We are, as you mentioned, un-crewed. We are very definitely
looking at that, and I think that the team thinks that that has
great potential in the future. Another thing that we are doing,
as you know, we have had issues with--mechanical issues with
vessels, and while it is tough to predict these things, what we
have instituted now is a kind of a proactive maintenance review
of the vessels, in an effort to prevent maintenance failures of
the vessels which was what happening in the past.
So, I guess what I can tell you is, the investment of the
millions should help, we are committed to it. And I would just
ask that we stay in close contact so that I can continue do
what I can to manage the team.
Senator Murkowski. Well, we will certainly let you know
where those issues are arising. I want to shift now to
broadband. We had the opportunity in the Senate Committee on
Indian Affairs last week to be able to inquire a little bit
more from some of your team on the Tribal Broadband
Connectivity Program.
We were looking for a little more granularity on the
program funding levels, and so today I would ask for your input
here, when you combine the previous appropriations, as well as
the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, we have got available
funding for the TBCP at about $3 billion. We also understand
that the subscription rate is well above $5 billion.
So what I was hoping to get last week, and what I would ask
for your help today is, is more details on this difference
here, between what we have made available, and then really what
that need is, what that subscription rate is. And when you look
at redundant applications that have come in, and then the non-
qualifying applications, how does this all factor out?
So in this year's budget you have asked for about another
billion, but what I am hoping to understand is how you came to
this one billion dollar figure. Is it really going to cover the
difference that we see after you take into account the non-
qualifying applications, the redundant applications, is this a
space where we think we are actually going to be addressing the
need?
BROADBAND
Secretary Raimondo. Okay. I tried to capture all that. I
will follow up with your team to get into the details. I think
the answer is yes, but I do want to clarify something which is
very important. The final allocation for Alaska, for all of
your States, cannot be made until we have the Federal
Communications Commission, FCC maps.
Senator Murkowski. And we have talked about those, yes.
Secretary Raimondo. And the FCC is starting to collect data
to go into the maps June 30. And they are forecasting possibly
November for the maps. So, I guess what I am trying to say is,
our intention is to make sure that every State gets enough
money so that everyone is covered. And if you have a large,
unserved population, as you currently do, you will receive,
more money through the formula, and the intention would be that
you would, receive enough.
Also, the program includes a 10 percent set aside for high-
cost locations, and I have to believe, that given your
geography, it would be a high-cost location. So, in any event,
I will follow up specifically, but we are very committed to
making sure whoever is not now served, will get served.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you for your responsiveness. Thank
you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you Senator Murkowski. Senator
Feinstein.
Senator Feinstein. Thanks very much, Madam Chairman. And
welcome.
As you are aware, job growth has been excellent, however
the public, I think, is more focused on inflation which has
been at the highest level since the 1980s. And much of this has
been brought on by dynamics the administration can't solve in
the short run, such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the
global supply chain crisis, et cetera.
There has been some debate about whether reducing the
substantial tariffs the Trump administration put into place,
would reduce inflation. But whether or not tariffs cause
inflation, they significantly raise prices on U.S. families and
businesses, so even if tariffs are not inflation, per se, they
similarly impact on people's finances.
I think there may be cases where tariffs can make sense.
However, the costs we impose are mostly borne by U.S.
businesses and families, reducing them would leave people more
resources to deal with rising prices. If so, what is the
administration's plan to reduce the burden of tariffs?
TARIFFS
Secretary Raimondo. Thank you for the question. Let me say
since I have been Commerce Secretary, we have been able to
eliminate the Trump 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum from the
EU, Japan, and the U.K. And I have heard from industries that
consume steel and aluminum that this has been a benefit.
What the President has said with respect to the 301
tariffs, the China tariffs, is that we don't believe Trump's
process was strategic. And so, as the President said yesterday,
we right now, as a team, are in the middle of an evaluation of
those 301 tariffs to see, you know, whether any changes might
be warranted.
Obviously, it is the USTR that leads in that effort but,
the President has been clear, we need to look at every single
tool in our toolbox to fight inflation. It is the number one
priority, and so we are looking at it holistically.
Senator Feinstein. So it is not inconceivable that you
could reduce tariffs; is that right?
Secretary Raimondo. It is not inconceivable, right.
Senator Feinstein. How positive might the thought be?
Secretary Raimondo. I can't say. I can't say, and I would
defer to the White House and USTR, but the President has been
clear that the Trump tariffs imposed on China were not done in
a thoughtful way, and so we are, as a team, taking a look at it
and considering a more strategic approach.
Senator Feinstein. Thank you very much. And I might follow
up in writing, and perhaps you can inform us with what you do.
I would appreciate that very much.
Secretary Raimondo. Thank you.
Senator Feinstein. Thank you. Thank you Madam Chairman.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you Senator Feinstein.
Senator Moran.
Senator Moran. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
And Secretary, welcome. Thank you for the conversation we
had when you were working, and I was working on Saturday
morning last.
I want to talk about a pilot program, not a pilot program,
but a program for pilots. Congress provided appropriations in
the fiscal year 2022 Omnibus Bill to sustain an Aviation
Ascension Training Program, as authorized in the NOAA
Commissioner Officer Corps Amendment Act.
PILOT TRAINING PROGRAM FOR NOAA
Secretary Raimondo. Okay.
Senator Moran. So Congress authorized that pilot training
program for NOAA, what we are really talking about is,
hurricane hunters; that type of pilot. Last fall I had the
opportunity to have Rear Admiral Hahn, and the K-State Salina,
Dean, Dean Starkey, they signed a memorandum of understanding
to create a unique program involving those two entities to
train pilots.
This partnership leverages some existing experience while
ensuring a pipeline for NOAA to have pilots. NOAA has relayed
that they are currently working on establishing guidelines and
regulations to move this program forward. I am not certain that
you would know about this program, but I am asking you, would
you share with me when these will be established allowing this
memorandum of understanding between NOAA and K-State Salina to
move forward. And if you don't know about it--
Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
Senator Moran [continuing]. Then the purpose of my question
is to give you the chance to get acquainted with this topic.
Secretary Raimondo. Exactly, I will get you an answer, by
the end of the day. I don't have an answer. I am familiar--I
have been in a hurricane hunter, and I can tell you we do need
help upgrading, and getting new ones. But with respect to this
training program, I have to get you a proper answer.
Senator Moran. The Senate Commerce Committee worked with me
to get legislation to increase the pipeline of pilots.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes, yes.
Senator Moran. Which, there is a tremendous shortage
everywhere, but evident that NOAA, and hugely important. Let me
ask an anti-circumvention inquiry. I think we have had a
conversation, and several of us have introduced legislation,
and written you about what is going on in the solar panel
industry.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
Senator Moran. I won't go into the description of the
problem. But why is there no industry-supported threshold to
initiate this anti-circumvention inquiry? Would legislation be
helpful? When I have asked you this question I think the answer
has been: Our hands are tied.
Secretary Raimondo. Mm-hmm.
Senator Moran. And I am trying to figure out how to untie
your hands, because there is a process, at least on solar
panels, that is being utilized to keep tariffs in place to the
detriment of the industry, by one small company who made the
claim. And you know, should a small, single company, without
access to confidential information, actually provided necessary
data to meet the statutory requirements to initiate the
inquiry?
So I am suggesting to you that the Department may have an
opportunity to deny this kind of inquiry, specifically: Did the
Department of Commerce staff make a finding, also required by
the statute, that the investigation itself met the
appropriateness criteria? So there is criterion in statute, did
the make the finding that the company met that criteria? And I
guess if the answer is yes, then what more can we do to keep
this kind of thing from occurring, which I think is pretty darn
damaging to businesses in the United States?
SOLAR SUPPLY CHAIN
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Okay. There was a lot in that, and
I will do my best in a minute. First of all, I have heard from
many of you, and many in the industry, and I share the sense of
urgency. I understand how fragile the solar supply chain is,
and how we need to move forward quickly.
Having said that, as you well know, Senator, this
particular statute, which we are obligated to implement, is
very circumscribed; there are five criteria, and five criteria
only, that ITA can look at in deciding whether to initiate. And
if they find that the case meets the threshold of the five
criteria, we are obliged to initiate, which is what we are
doing, and we are going to move as fast as we can.
Having said that, you know, I have been asked: Why don't
you consider climate as a factor? Why don't you consider policy
as a factor? Why don't you consider the disruption to the
supply chain as a factor? The answer is, statutorily, there is
no discretion.
So the answer to your question, could you help? That is of
course your decision, but were you to institute some
discretion, then we could implement it according to those
changes.
Senator Moran. I would ask you, if the Department would
like to work with us to provide some legislative suggestions
that might address the discretion, or at least create greater
list of criteria, for the decision to be made on. And then I
would ask you to make certain that the findings that are
required by the statute have actually been met--
Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
Senator Moran [continuing]. In this solar panel
circumstance. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Senator Reed.
Senator Reed. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Let me just follow up briefly on Senator Moran's question,
which is important now, because there has been a lot of
rhetoric suggesting that this is an indication of the
administration's lack of support for green economy, for
alternate energy.
As I understand it, and you can confirm it, Madam
Secretary, that the President is proposing the most ambitious
climate package in the history of the United States, with $555
billion in tax cut spending, and other incentives, to promote
wind, solar, power, and other renewables. And I believe that is
accurate. Can you confirm that?
CLIMATE
Secretary Raimondo. Absolutely, yes.
Senator Reed. Yes. And you are a strong supporter of this
effort?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
Senator Reed. And I am also, not only from the perspective
of the economy, but also national security, as we are
witnessing now, if we weren't as reliant on hydrocarbons we
would have much more leverage in many places than we need it.
So thank you.
You have answered, I think in detail, the particular
important question Senator Moran asked, and I think that answer
stands.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Thank you.
Senator Reed. One other area that we are concerned about,
again it comes from a national security perspective; the
President was down in Alabama at the factory manufacturing
Javelin Missile systems, and one of the issues that came up is
the lack of semiconductors.
But again, from my chairmanship on the Armed Services
Committee, practically every system we have in the military
today has a microchip somewhere in it. And I presume, and you
can confirm that, the lack of domestic supply, or a reliable
supply from an ally, is a great concern to the administration,
as it is to the contractors.
CHIPS AND SEMI-CONDUCTORS
Secretary Raimondo. Absolutely. I hear regularly from
contractors that chips are a rate-limiting factor, for their
ability, over time, to continue to replenish. There are just
over 200 chips in every Javelin launching system. There are
hundreds of chips in every satellite, and on, and on.
And even more worrisome, the most sophisticated chips, of
which we make none in the United States, and are totally
dependent on Taiwan for, are exactly the kind of chips that are
needed in sophisticated military equipment, which is why, in my
opening statement, I am saying to the Committee, I really
believe it is time to take action on this. I have also heard,
Senator, from semiconductor companies, who tell me they are
going to expand their facilities, and they have to make those
decisions this year in order to meet the demand.
Germany, Singapore, Taiwan, Japan, Spain, France are all
putting huge subsidies in front of these companies, and if we
don't pass this USICA bill this year they will have no other
choice but to build overseas, which does us no good.
Senator Reed. Well, thank you. I have the same observations
from the perspective, to not only the economy, but I suggest to
national security.
One issue that is a little close to home is that we have
been working closely with NOAA about infrastructure at Newport,
which would support their operations in a much more efficient
way than currently they conduct them, were 100 percent
designed, but we have to get into the next phase. And I would
ask if you could look at that, and any support would be deeply
appreciated.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes; absolutely. I have talked to you
about it. I, of all people, know how important it is to the
state, and we are going to work with you.
Senator Reed. We talked about semiconductors, and we also
talked about, you know, alternate energy, and one of the areas
where you have very personal experience is offshore wind. And
do you think that NOAA and BOEM have the tools they need to
maintain, and indeed accelerate the pace of offshore wind being
deployed?
OFFSHORE WIND DEPLOYMENT
Secretary Raimondo. It is an excellent question. I think,
yes, yes I think is the answer, although I will go back and ask
if we need more tools. But we need to do a better job of
accelerating the permitting process, I think we have the tools,
I think we need to continue to increase our sense of urgency,
and frankly, kind of just break down the bureaucracy between
BOEM at the Department of Interior, and NOAA, and that is what
we are doing.
In fact, Janet Coit, who ran the Department of
Environmental Management for me in Rhode Island, has come here.
She is Head of Fisheries, and that is what we are doing. We
have executed an MOU, between Interior and Commerce, and it is
just a constant push to make sure we move more quickly.
Senator Reed. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Reed.
Senator Hagerty, I am told that you were here at the gavel
before you left. So you are next.
Senator Hagerty. Thank you, Madam Chair.
And Secretary, it is good to have you here.
Secretary Raimondo. Thank you.
Senator Hagerty. I would like to just follow up on the
discussion you have the Senator Reed for a brief moment. You
and I have talked about this before, but every Member in this
Committee, and every Senator here, has actually supported a
piece of legislation that is essentially a fast-track
permitting process for chip fabrication facilities here in
America. It takes roughly a 5 year program--
CHIP FABRICATION FACILITIES PROCESS
Secretary Raimondo. Mm-hmm.
Senator Hagerty [continuing]. A 5 year permitting process
down to about 18 months. So I would encourage and appreciate
any help from the Department as well getting support in the
House to move this through. I think it fits right in line with
what you are talking about from a strategic standpoint.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. I would be happy to work with you
on that. It is an issue. For these facilities, permitting often
holds them up.
Senator Hagerty. Yes, and I think we are--
Secretary Raimondo. For 1, 2 years at a time.
Senator Hagerty. I think we are very aligned on that. I
would like to turn just a minute to talk about the census,
excuse me. It is a function that is required, you know, by the
Constitution. In looking at the 2020 Census, there are a lot of
questions about the statistical methods and the assumptions
that are used to supplement the actual data that is collected.
There are methods like group quarters imputation, or
differential privacy that are employed. I am not sure if you
are familiar with these methodologies.
STATISTICAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS USED BY CENSUS
Secretary Raimondo. Somewhat, I mean, obviously I am not a
statistician, but somewhat.
Senator Hagerty. Yes. I am, like you, somewhat familiar
with, I understand the principles of them, but it seems to me
that the employees at the Department of the Census, are really
the only ones that fully understand and appreciate the
assumptions, the models, what goes into them; and you know,
they are the ones that are actually charged with looking at the
actual numbers, making adjustments, changing the numbers, and
coming up with the final report.
I just feel the American public, certainly the Congress,
would be well served to have a little more oversight and more
visibility into what those methods are, and how they are being
deployed.
And I wanted to bring this up to you, if you could be
supportive of perhaps putting in place a bipartisan panel that
would overlook the way the census is conducted, the
methodologies. Again, this should be a nonpartisan issue I
think for us, and a bipartisan panel has been done before, it
strikes me this may be a way to get some more transparency and
oversight in place.
Secretary Raimondo. You know, this is the first I am
hearing of it, but I am open to following up with you. What I
can tell you, is I have set the tone at the top of the Commerce
Department, that the Census Bureau should be fact-based, data-
based, science-based, statistical-based. And Rob Santos, who is
the new Census Head, has a strong statistical background.
And I feel confident that is the way he is running the
Bureau. Having said that, more transparency is always better.
Senator Hagerty. I will provide a few more questions for
the record on that, but I look forward to working with you in
that regard. And I appreciate the Chair, perhaps, having an
oversight meeting soon about what the Census is doing, and it
would be great to get that on our agenda.
The next place I would like to turn has to do with our
competitiveness in the Indo-Pacific. And I know you have spent
a good deal of time on that. Our economic leadership in that
region I think is terribly important for a national security
interest, it is important for good jobs here in America. As a
former governor you appreciate that, I am certain, very much.
I just led a bipartisan delegation to Japan a couple of
weeks ago, worked very closely with my successor, Ambassador
Rahm Emanuel, we visited with the Prime Minister, with his
cabinet, with a number of business leaders, and in all of those
meetings it was clear to me that it is as important as ever
that we continue to find ways to deepen our economic ties in
the region, particularly given what is happening with the
Chinese Communist Party, their aggressive posture, whether it
be from a diplomatic standpoint, a military standpoint, and
certainly from an economic standpoint, we see the Chinese
Communist Party moving in every direction in that region.
Also, when I served as Ambassador, prior to Ambassador
Emanuel, I worked very hard to put in place a trade agreement
between the United States and Japan. That helped deepen our
agricultural ties, help deepen our industrial ties. And
importantly, it had an element in it of digital trade, a high-
standard digital trade component to it, that I think could
serve as a model for the broader region. And I would look
forward to working with you on that to get your thoughts on how
that might be rolled out. I have discussed this with Ambassador
Emanuel, and I think it holds, it holds some real promise.
My first question for you specifically is, under the aegis
of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, that has been discussed
heavily, and I think it will be discussed much more as
President Biden visit the region; what are your plans to
advance our economic leadership in the region?
COMPETITIVES IN THE INDO-PACIFIC
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. So, a few things: One, I agree
with everything you have said, and will be happy to follow up.
I have already been to Tokyo once. The President will be there
next week. We can't do enough to shore up our economic presence
in the region.
The good news is--by the way, Emanuel Rahm has me on speed
dial, we talk several times a week. We are a digital supply
chain, aligning on export controls, investments.
Senator Hagerty. Okay.
Secretary Raimondo. There's a lot there. If you think about
semiconductor export controls, there are only three countries
that have toolmakers, the U.S., Japan, and the Netherlands. So
if we could align on that it could be incredible.
I am one of the co-leads, along with Ambassador Tai, on the
Indo-Pacific Economic Framework. In fact, I met this morning
with the Prime Minister of Vietnam to get them on board. I
hosted Minister Hagiuda last week, because he is my
counterpart, and we are kicking off an economic dialogue, as
between our Commerce Department and Ministry Economy Trade and
Industry.
So you know, time doesn't permit here, but suffice it to
say, this is a top priority of mine. I share your
prioritization, and frankly your concern. We need an economic
strategy there, but frankly, we also need to be a counterweight
to China.
Senator Hagerty. Indeed. And I think there is great
potential. I have watched with great interest what you are
doing with the U.S.-EU Technology Council. I would encourage
you to look at Japan, perhaps, as a way to continue to find
means of agreement and cooperation there. And if there are any
things that you need from this Committee to support that;
please let us know.
Secretary Raimondo. Great; thank you.
Senator Hagerty. Thank you, Secretary.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Senator Schatz.
Senator Schatz. Thank you, Chair. First of all, I want to
just make sure we have a meeting of the minds on this solar
hold up. I want to know that you are alarmed, and I want to
know that you are going to update the Members of the Senate who
have expressed their concerns on a bipartisan basis, with some
pace. Maybe weekly that either you or an assignee can
communicate with us about where we are in the process.
So first, are you alarmed? And second, will you communicate
with us regularly on where we are?
SOLAR STATUTE
Secretary Raimondo. So I would say yes, and yes.
Senator Schatz. Okay.
Secretary Raimondo. You know, as I said to one of your
other colleagues we have to move forward quickly to meet our
climate goals, but as I also said to Senator Moran, there is a
process, there is a law, I have to implement the law.
Senator Schatz. Yes. I got it. I don't want to get into an
argument with you about the law. I will say that this five-part
test in the statute has to meet all five parts, and I would
argue that the allegation that what is happening in terms of
the manufacturing process in Southeast Asia is minor or
insignificant, is just facially not true.
And if you can't go through a fact-finding process on the
frontend, then you are stuck, essentially, having to open up an
investigation, and grind an entire industry to a halt while you
do your fact-finding. So that is one point I would like to
make.
But the crux of this is, Commerce has already asked and
answered the critical question here, which is that what is
happening in Southeast Asia is not minor or insignificant. It
has affirmed this in multiple scope rulings, March 2012,
October 2020, June 2021 that adding a positive-negative
junction is a highly technical production process. And I and I
know you are not looking at revisiting the question of whether
turning a wafer into a cell is minor or insignificant. So first
of all, are we in agreement about that?
Secretary Raimondo. So let me say this. I am not involved.
We are sitting, as essentially, a judge, in a quasi-judicial
capacity. And it is the professionals at ITA who are going
through this analysis.
So, as I said earlier I don't have discretion, or ability
to weigh in on their fact-finding process. And, you know, we
are not permitted even to talk about this extensively. But I
would be happy, I suppose, to let you speak to them with
counsel on the phone, if that would be useful.
Senator Schatz. Yes, a couple of things. First, the
administrative authority in the statute is the Secretary,
right. So it is not, like, assigned to some independent panel
of civil service professionals, that authority is vested in
you, and there is nothing inappropriate about you being more
engaged in the process.
They may not like that but I get that you don't get to
weigh climate goals, or public policy, or anything else. But
what I am saying is the thing that was alleged is just facially
not true, and the manufacturing process that is occurring in
Southeast Asia is not minor or insignificant, because the
Commerce Department has already decided that.
So now the only thing that the Commerce Department is in a
position to make a determination on is, is the thing that is
happening in Southeast Asia actually what is happening in
Southeast Asia. Like, can you just confirm that turning wafers
into cells is what is happening?
And my worry is that although the statute reads you have
150 days to come to a preliminary determination, and then
another--and I think either another 300 days, or a total of 300
days, those are not statutory minimum numbers of days, that is
a maximum.
Secretary Raimondo. Mm-hmm.
Senator Schatz. And so what I want for you to contemplate
is that you do have the discretion to get a little more
personally engaged, it doesn't jeopardize the independence of
the investigation. Informing Congress as to the status of it,
also is not, I think, in any way improper; and finally, that we
are in a major, major hurry because the solar industry in the
United States is at a halt.
I know the pushback you are getting from within the
Department, and I respect the independence of these civil
servants, but the authority is vested in the Secretary.
Secretary Raimondo. Mm-hmm. All right, let me respond to
this. I hear you. You know, I think it is August 29 or mid-
August is the outside limit. There is nothing that prevents us
from going faster, and I assure you we are going to go as fast
as possible, making sure we tick and tie the process and don't
cut corners. But yes, if we can do better than August, we
certainly will.
Secondly, you know, respectfully, having been a governor
and run organizations I know that this is an urgent matter. I
also know how to respect regulators, and make sure that they
have the freedom to do their job. This is complex, and there
are two sides to the story, which is not to say I don't share
the urgency, and I am engaged in an appropriate way.
But there is a point I do want to make. A lot of the--I
think Senator Reed said, rhetoric, or rumor, et cetera, is very
focused on, you hear it, you know, a 200 percent tariff. And I
really want to address that for a second, if I might.
While it is true Commerce would be permitted to impose a
tariff at that excessive level, that is exceedingly unlikely.
That level of a tariff is only reserved in outside cases, where
you can tell the difference between the company and, say, the
Communist Party of China.
The last 150 times we have done this since 2012, we have
come out in the 10, 11, 12 percent range, under 20 percent.
Now, I am in no way, like, predetermining what this will be, if
it will be anything. I do think it is important, though, to say
the 200 percent is an extreme case, and not fitting with the
precedent that we have had.
But, listen, I share your urgency, and I am happy to update
you as regularly as you would like.
Senator Schatz. Thank you very much.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Schatz. Senator
Collins.
Senator Collins. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Secretary Raimondo, it is good to see you. I am going to
start by asking you a very quick question on the implementation
of the Infrastructure Broadband Development Grants that you,
Chair Shaheen, and I worked so hard on, and that are targeted
first for unserved areas and then underserved areas.
My question is this: the NTIA has until May 16 to publish
the Notice of Funding Opportunity for this program, and many
States are eagerly awaiting that notice. In my State, the Maine
Connectivity Authority stands ready to pursue this
transformational assistance. My question is this: will NTIA
meet that deadline?
BROADBAND DEVELOPMENT GRANTS
Secretary Raimondo. Yes, we will. And there is even a
chance we will beat that deadline.
Senator Collins. I am very glad to hear that. Now, I am
going to switch to our usual contentious issue which we
discuss, and that is the onerous new regulations on Maine's
lobster men and women. May 1 marked the first day of these--
implementation of these regulations. It was a dark day for the
industry.
NOAA denied an entirely reasonable request from the
governor, the entire Maine delegation, to delay implementation
of the rules, which we do not think are valid in the first
place, until July 1. What is interesting is NOAA's denial of
this modest extension, was opposed by another Federal agency,
the Small Business Administration's Office of the Advocacy.
And here what the office said: it asserted that NOAA was
putting lobster men and women in quote, ``An impossible
scenario'', and if they are quote, ``Not granted a short delay
of the compliance deadline, they may stand to lose significant
amounts of revenue, or in some instances, their entire
business.''
And this is because of supply problems where the gear being
mandated by NOAA is simply not available. Now, I know that NOAA
has announced a graduated enforcement approach, but that is a
very small comfort. The industry estimates it will lose $7
million in lost fishing time that would have been saved by just
granting that 2 month extension.
Each of Maine's more than 4,500 commercial lobster men and
women, are small, self-employed business owners. That is why
the SBA advocated for them, but NOAA totally ignored what the
SBA asked for, in reinforcing what the industry, the entire
delegation, and the governor also requested.
So now, we are also hearing that NOAA may impose further
regulations on the industry. So how can the industry trust that
NOAA is not going to regulate them out of existence, given that
the agency has rejected recommendations from the SBA's Office
of Advocacy? Not just those of us who represent the State, but
an independent office within the SBA, another Federal agency.
FISHERIES ENFORCEMENTS ON LOBSTER INDUSTRY
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. So, I appreciate you bringing it
up. And as I said last time, I will say again, I really, truly
admire your advocacy on behalf of the lobstermen. I do.
I have a bit of good news in this regard which is that our
Head of Fisheries, Janet Coit, is in weekly, if not daily,
contact with the Maine Commissioner, Pat Keliher, and they have
worked hard to find local suppliers of the new kind of gear,
including Maine Mold, it is a small company you may know, that
they are providing the new gear at an affordable price for the
lobster fishers.
You say that the graduated enforcement isn't much, but I
will assure you that along with our goal of enforcement, we are
trying to assist with compliance, and we will be as lenient as
we can to assist with compliance, instead of a ``gotcha'' sort
of approach.
The final thing I will say is we are on path to have the
$14 million out by the end of June which should help with the
cost for the lobstermen to comply.
Senator Collins. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Collins.
Senator Van Hollen, I am going to turn the questioning over
to you, and ask you to take the gavel so I can go vote, and I
will be right back.
Senator Van Hollen. Will do. Thank you Madam Chair.
Madam Secretary, it is great to see you. I just want to run
through a couple of shared priorities, to underscore my support
for items in the budget to begin with. EDA we look forward to
working with you to make good use of those funds. I can tell
you in the State of Maryland, especially cities like Baltimore,
they have been very important for economic development
purposes.
NOAA, lots of important tools, like the Digital Coast and
Coastal County Snapshot being used by coastal communities in
Maryland, to identify risks from climate change, and prepare
for necessary mitigation. And look forward to working with you
on the NIST budget--excuse me--the NOAA budget.
NIST, I was pleased to see a large request for the
construction research facilities. I know that you and the
President are big supporters of what we are working on here, in
terms of the USICA Bill, the America COMPETES Bill, this is a
critical part of that investment, so I am glad to see it
included here. And the budget requests for Scientific Technical
and Research Services, with respect to NIST, and America's role
in standard setting.
And I am going to get back to that in one second. I do want
to say amen, and I will not go over the comments made by my
colleagues, Senator Schatz and Senator Moran, with respect to
the solar panel issue, this uncertainty is creating havoc. I
heard your testimony but I will leave it at just seconding
their comments.
I know you are not responsible for overseeing our travel
rules, and our visa processing system, but I know that you
recognize the great benefit to our economy and commerce of
international travel here to the United States.
We have huge backlogs in our visa processing offices. I
have raised this issue with the State Department and DHS, but
since can look at it from the hat of, you know, the benefit to
our economy, and not just sort of international relations, and
only security, I am going to ask you to go back on that. We can
clearly meet our security concerns and our health care concerns
and still do a lot better, in my view.
So on the issue of our representation on very important but
little known, at least to the American public, international
standard setting organizations. One of them as you know is the
ITU. The ITU helped set rules governing--international rules
governing control of the Internet, and right now there is a
Russian candidate seeking to be the chair of this, at a time
when we are witnessing, the world is witnessing Putin,
essentially put Russia on lockdown, when it comes to any
freedom of the Internet.
So let me just ask you, Madam Secretary, what is your
assessment of where we are in that international, that vote
that will be taking place with respect to that very important
position?
INTERNATIONAL STANDARD SETTING ORGANIZATIONS
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. I appreciate you bringing this up.
It is something not a lot of people talk about, but it is
incredibly important. China is showing up, more and more
aggressively in technical standard setting bodies
internationally, and NIST is planning to really reassert
ourselves.
We are backing a candidate, Doreen Bogdan-Martin, for the
ITU. We are putting our all into helping her, and supporting
her. In fact, I was in Estonia just trying to shore up support
for Doreen. It is a campaign, it is an election. You cannot
predict the outcome, but I assure you this, it is a priority of
ours, the stakes are high, and I really hope we win.
Senator Van Hollen. Well, I appreciate that. And I think
what we have been, you know, witnessing with Putin's War in
Ukraine, and his shutdown of all, sort of, freedom of the press
and the Internet in Russia, should be a reminder to most in the
world, that we need an open Internet. But obviously there are
countries that have an interest in the authoritarian model as
well.
Secretary Raimondo. No doubt about that.
Senator Van Hollen. So I appreciate your focus on this. My
last questions relate to the export control restrictions and
sanctions, to go after Russia's military and key industries. I
have heard Senator Shaheen ask about that, and I have been
following the progress we are making with respect to some of
Russia's tank manufacturing, and the aircraft industry.
I know you announced some additional restrictions. My
concern here, on the financial side, has been the need to plug
more holes with secondary sanctions, which I don't think we are
doing enough of. On this side I know you are vigilant about it,
but I worry about, you know, Russia's efforts to use shell
companies, especially when they are looking for highly
important military technology.
Can you talk about what we are doing to make sure that they
don't open that back door while we close the front door?
EXPORT CONTROL RESTRICTIONS AND SANCTIONS
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. It is an awesome question, and
something we spend a lot of time on, and it is why we are
requesting more money for enforcement and agents. Look, what we
know now; first of all, Russia has an extensive network. They
have been doing this for decades, trying to get around export
controls. As far as we can see, there is no, like, systemic
backfilling by China, by any particular countries, but we will
monitor it.
Here is one thing that I take comfort in, because we have
done this, multilaterally, with 36 other countries that means
we have 37 countries on enforcement which is unprecedented. And
that, from what we can tell, is like vastly enhancing our
ability to enforce. So, it is a vigilance, it is a constant
vigilance, but at this point in time I feel quite confident
that we are on top of it; and again, because we are not doing
it alone.
Senator Van Hollen. Yes. Thank you. Thank you for your
efforts on that.
Senator Capito.
Senator Moore Capito. Thank you. And welcome, Madam
Secretary. Thanks for being here.
There have been reports in Reuters, and elsewhere, that
China has been pressuring our U.S. executives, companies, and
business groups against the USICA Bill. To your knowledge, is
there any truth to these reports, and the threats that our U.S.
companies are receiving from our Chinese emissaries--from the
Chinese emissaries?
CHINA OPPOSITION TO THE USICA BILL
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Thank you. So, like you, I have
seen the reports. There have been more than one report, and it
doesn't surprise me at all. China doesn't want us to pass this
bill. They know that this bill will enable us to out-compete
them. And in the past handful of years, China has invested $160
billion in increasing their own domestic semiconductor
production, so the last thing they want is for us to invest $52
billion, which will make us stronger.
So, yes, I have heard the report. They are deeply
concerning to me, and it just means we have to act, we have to
act now. As I said to Senator Reed, it is an issue of national
security. And I think the reason China is so against it, is
because they know how important it is for us.
Senator Moore Capito. Right. Thank you. Would you say the
crux of their objections would be that semiconductor portion of
it, because that is going to have the most economic benefits--
it does have the most economic benefit?
Secretary Raimondo. You know, it is a good question. I
don't know. I would say certainly that is what they have
explicitly been against, but the rest of it, increases in
research and development, the tech hubs, all of it goes to
enhancing America's competitiveness.
Senator Moore Capito. Right.
Secretary Raimondo. And so I think they would probably
oppose the whole thing.
Senator Moore Capito. Well, as a supporter of that bill.
Secretary Raimondo. Thank you.
Senator Moore Capito. And I am on that very small
conference committee that is meeting tomorrow. So I appreciate
that.
Today, NOAA has 40 petaflops of supercomputing capability
for weather predicting and research. So I looked up
``petaflop'', because I have no idea what that is. And for our
viewing public, a ``petaflop'' is one thousand million-million
flashing--let us see--floating point operations per second. Or
another way to say it, a quadrillion, which is a thousand
trillion, that is how fast it is.
So I am sure we will all remember that, but I didn't want
to say ``petaflops'' without knowing what it was. As you know,
NOAA's facility in Fairmont, West Virginia, is one of NOAA's
five research and development supercomputers. We are very proud
of that.
In addition, the IIJA provided NOAA with another $80
million for research, supercomputing. We have placed a big
emphasis on the supercomputing capabilities, for a lot of
reasons, for NOAA. So I am proud of the work that we do in
Fairmont. And I guess, could you speak to the vision that you
have for supercomputing, and how West Virginia may play a role
there?
SUPER COMPUTING IN WEST VIRGINIA
Secretary Raimondo. I think West Virginia will play a very
important role. For fiscal year 2023 we are requesting $20
million in the President's budget to recapitalize and maintain
the high-performance computing capacity. And that will enable
consistent capacity increases in R&D through computing sites,
specifically like the one in West Virginia.
Senator Moore Capito. In Fairmont, yes.
Secretary Raimondo. In Fairmont. So, I think artificial
intelligence, high performance computing, these areas are areas
of increasing economics, national security, and climate change.
You know, we need this, we are depending on it, we are
investing in it, and I can firmly say that Fairmont will stand
to benefit from these investments.
Senator Moore Capito. Great. Well, we are very pleased to
have NOAA there and look forward to further investment. Let me
ask you, go back to a quick clarification on a question that
Senator Collins asked about the deadline, you know how
interested I am in--
Secretary Raimondo. I know.
Senator Moore Capito [continuing]. In the digital divide,
you are probably surprised I didn't start with that. But you
mentioned a May 17 deadline. Just so I can clarify for my
Broadband Council at home. That is the deadline that you are
going to then come forward with a request for proposals, or
does the proposal have to be in--
BROADBAND--NOTICE OF FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Exactly, so it is May 16.
Senator Moore Capito. Mm-hmm.
Secretary Raimondo. Monday. It is what the NOFO, so it is a
Notice of Funding Opportunity.
Senator Moore Capito. Okay.
Secretary Raimondo. And it will go out the 16TH. The way it
is going to work, you can tell us to your folks, we will ask
every State to then apply for the money, all they have to do is
submit to us an intention to apply.
Senator Moore Capito. Okay.
Secretary Raimondo. Which they should do quickly. Then we
will be sending them a $5 million dollar planning grant, and
then we will get to work right away on the back and forth of
putting together the proposal.
Senator Moore Capito. Okay. So the planning grant, okay
great; great news. I did have a question on the supply chain
that is needed to deploy all this broadband.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
Senator Moore Capito. But I will save that for question for
the record. And thank you.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. May I say something?
Senator Moore Capito. Yes.
Secretary Raimondo. You asked me last time I saw you, a
week or two ago, what happens if RDOF says someone is covered,
but if they are not covered for 5 years?
Senator Moore Capito. Right, running with this all over the
place, yes.
Secretary Raimondo. The answer is, you are counted as
unserved until you are actually served.
Senator Moore Capito. Really?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. So I wanted to make sure to get
back to you.
Senator Moore Capito. Okay. That is a great clarification.
Thank you.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
Senator Moore Capito. And Senator Braun, I am turning it
over to you. And I am going to go vote. Thank you.
Senator Braun. I guess, I will recognize myself here, so.
[Laughter.]
Senator Moore Capito. It is a little strange.
Senator Braun. The first time that has occurred in a little
over 3 years, but it is the nature of how this place works.
Secretary Raimondo. Here we go. Here we are.
Senator Braun. So back on March 15, I introduced a letter
about the labor negotiations with the West Coast folks, in
terms of having those done by July 1. I understand they may
have started yesterday. So last time there has been a dispute
there, it ended up lasting 10 months, and it probably had more
latitude in terms of how long you could go.
I think that would be devastating for supply chain,
everything else we have come through. I was hoping to get your
opinion as to whether you think we will get these negotiations
done, so that we don't, you know, pass that July 1 deadline.
LABOR NEGOTIATIONS WITH WEST COAST PORTS
Secretary Raimondo. I am sorry; which negotiation?
Senator Braun. Okay. So it would be the upcoming contract
negotiations for the West Coast ports. So it is a labor
negotiation.
Secretary Raimondo. Okay. Okay, sorry. I am not involved in
that, so--
Senator Braun. No. I think I am raising the point in that,
you know, supply chain is part of what you are concerned with.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. No, yes.
Senator Braun. That has been a major bottleneck on supply
chain. And I, and about 17, 18 other Senators put it in a
letter to President Biden, and really have not heard back.
Although I am told that they may have started yesterday. So why
don't you find out how they are going.
Secretary Raimondo. Okay. Fair enough. Yes.
Senator Braun. And to make sure that we don't pass the July
1 threshold, because that would add, you know, right when we
are starting to get a little fluidity.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Yes.
Senator Braun. You know back, I guess, from the frying pan
into the fire. So I will discuss something--
Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
Senator Braun [continuing]. That we both share a concern
with. My business was logistics, distribution. I know how
supply chains have been really rattled, displaced, main trading
partner for many. The Chinese have now done some things in
their own country that look like they are going to be less
dependable when it comes to how it is going to work on key
things we get from their semiconductors.
We know what that has done to many, many different
industries. Those are issues I am hoping that we are going to
somewhat, reflexively bounce back into something that is going
to be more workable. I know you are working on some of the
particulars. We have talked about it before. So I won belabor
that.
I think what I am concerned about mostly, in our American
economy, no one else seems to be, is the fact that the
President put out a blueprint on a budget 10 years out, that
shows us actually growing our structural deficits, taking our
debt from $30 trillion where it is currently, record high in
our country's existence, to $45 trillion.
Love to know how you view that, in terms of being a viable
blueprint. And when do we have to start addressing the
underlying causes, which are tough issues, Social Security,
Medicare, that drive the structural deficits? Or whether it
makes a difference? Whether we can have a blueprint for our
country out there that says, hey, we are going to be $45
trillion, that is taking us into territory way exceeding where
we were post-World War II?
THE AMERICAN ECONOMY
Secretary Raimondo. So, I can assure you that the President
is concerned about fiscal responsibility. In fact, the deficit
shrunk significantly this past year, under his leadership. And
he will be the first to tell you that he is for responsible,
efficiently run government. But we also think it is important
to make investments.
You know, like the investments that we made in the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill, investments in broadband,
investments in clean water, et cetera. So I think that like all
things, it is a balance. But I can tell you the President is
committed to running a responsible government, and fiscal
responsibility.
Senator Braun. Well, I know he said that. To me, the proof
is in the practice and the pudding, so to speak, and pre-COVID
we were borrowing about 23 percent of every dollar we spend
here, marginally. Now, that is up to 30 percent, and we created
the largest deficits in our country's history. Some in a
bipartisan way, in trying to navigate through the pandemic, and
be careful about touting that we are bringing the deficits down
because, still, huge deficits that we created, so the law of
gravity would bring you down.
What I am more concerned about is putting a formal
blueprint out there that averages between now and then, you
know, $1.5 trillion deficits times 10, 15 trillion added to our
debt. I don't think it is a business plan that is sustainable.
I think politicians, including Jay Powell at the Fed,
through whatever this modern monetary theory is supposed to be,
I think it runs us into the ditch in a hard way. And I would
hope that there might be some modification to our country's
business plan that does something other than that; or do you
like, or are you comfortable with a blueprint that shows us
being 45 trillion in debt?
Secretary Raimondo. I am comfortable with the President's
plans but I agree with you that we have to continue to work to
live within our means.
Senator Braun. I guess we will live with that today. Thank
you.
Secretary Raimondo. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Braun. I think Senator
Moran is still coming back, and I have a few more questions. We
still have two more votes which could take a while. So since
you are here, I get to ask questions.
And I want to go back to NOAA, because, as you know, last
year NOAA required increased observer coverage for the
Northeast Groundfish Fishery, which has been an ongoing
challenge for us in New Hampshire, as for other groundfish
fisheries, and throughout New England.
This year with NOAA increasing the coverage requirement to
100 percent from about 40 percent, every fishing trip is going
to have to have an observer on board, and the program costs are
going to significantly increase.
So I have been pleased, over the last 5 years, when we have
worked to see that we cover the cost of at-sea monitors for our
fishing boats. And I was disappointed this year that the budget
request for NOAA actually proposed to cut the funding for this
program from the enacted level. So can you talk about that
decision? And has NOAA actually estimated the full cost of at-
sea monitoring for the 2022 fishing year?
NOAA FUNDING FOR AT-SEA MONITORING
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. So, first of all, thank you for
your support of the at-sea monitoring. It is important to all
the New England States. And yes, they have. I know there has
been a cut, but we have $11 million left over from prior years.
So it is our estimation that the $7.6 million which we have
requested, plus the 11 which we have, will be adequate.
Senator Shaheen. So will you commit to me that NOAA will
cover the full cost of at-sea monitors this year?
Secretary Raimondo. That is the plan, yes.
Senator Shaheen. Great. Thank you. I appreciate that, and
also look forward to seeing how we can help some vessels move
to electronic monitoring.
Secretary Raimondo. Mm-hmm, yes.
Senator Shaheen. Of which I know there has been some
reluctance to do, but I think the more the fishing industry
sees what is happening in that area, and is able to understand
how that would affect them, the more likely they are to be
willing to switch over. So I think that is also a significant
piece of this.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. I agree. Senator Murkowski and I
chatted a little bit about the un-crewed. I mean there is all
sorts of technology that we need to adopt to make this easier.
Senator Shaheen. Great. Sticking with NOAA; the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act provides about $3
billion over 5 years for programs for NOAA, and I was very
pleased to work to try and ensure that the majority of this
funding goes to improve coastal resilience, and restoring
habitat, something that is very important to us as, you know,
in coastal States.
And I know that communities are very eager to receive these
funds, but it has been almost 6 months since the passage of the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Act, and yet NOAA has only released
two of at least ten notices of funding opportunities.
So can you talk about what the reasons are for the delay,
and when communities can expect that they may see more of those
funds?
INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT AND JOBS ACT
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. So, as you say, it was nearly $3
billion, $2.96 billion. That is an unprecedented amount of
money for NOAA to have received, which is not an excuse; it is
just a reality that it is more than they have ever done. We
plan and will have all the Notice of Funding Opportunities out
by the end of June. So that is a commitment, end of June.
Senator Shaheen. Great.
Secretary Raimondo. And we are just going to work towards
that.
Senator Shaheen. And there are ways that we can help alert
our communities that these notices are coming, and they should
be watching for them, and encourage them to be paying
attention, and seeing how we can help communities.
Secretary Raimondo. You know, that is a good question. I
will have my staff follow up with you specifically.
Senator Shaheen. That would be great.
Secretary Raimondo. So I can give you a more specific sense
of when New Hampshire, for example, should start looking for
it.
Senator Shaheen. That would be really helpful. As you know,
one of the--one of the things that I have been very impressed
with in the Seacoast of New Hampshire, is the extent to which
communities are looking towards the impacts of climate change,
and getting ready to address that. And so I know these funds
are going to be very important as they think about what is
coming down the pike.
One final question before I turn it over to Senator Moran.
Is through the CARES Act, the American Rescue Plan, and the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Congress has made
historic investments in the Commerce Department, as well as
many other areas of government and in States, to help get
through the pandemic. And we may soon pass some form of the
U.S. Innovation and Competition Act, hopefully that will add
more funding at the Department, that you are not expecting. And
just as with NOAA, that that is great news, but it presents
challenges for the Department.
ENSURING SUCCESS OF DEPARTMENT INVESTMENTS
Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
Senator Shaheen. And a lot of us are watching because we
are very anxious to see these programs be successful. So can
you talk about how you are ensuring that the Department is
coordinating those investments, and what we can do to ensure
that you have the support you need to do that?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Look, like you, I don't want to
say anxious about it but I have a real sense of focus to make
sure that we implement all this money correctly. It is over a
$100 billion, which is an extraordinary amount. I hope you take
some confidence in the fact that NTIA, which is implementing
almost $50 billion, is going to get that out on time, if not
ahead of time. By the way, by this Friday, every State will
have a State point of contact for broadband.
Senator Shaheen. That is great.
Secretary Raimondo. And I have personally communicated with
all the governors. So what is my point? My point is, we are
gearing up, we are ready, we will implement, we are hiring. I
hope you do pass USICA, and that will send $52 billion for
chips, and we already have done a lot of the work related to
what is the org chart, what kind of talent do we need.
So it will be a partnership between you, and this
Committee, and our team, but I want you to have confidence that
we know it is a heavy lift, and we are prepared.
Senator Shaheen. Great. We look forward to that.
I will turn it over to Senator Moran.
Senator Moran. Thank you. I don't know I was of much help
to you today, but it was unintentional on my part.
Senator Shaheen. Ships through the night.
Senator Moran. Yes. Madam Secretary, Russia's invasion of
Ukraine has created new and complex trade challenges. While the
administration has requested emergency Ukraine-related funding
for the Bureau of Industry and Security, it has not done so for
the International Trade Administration. What is the Department
and ITA doing to promote exports, rural exports in particular,
so U.S. farmers can help meet the emerging global food crisis
that has arisen as a result of the evil Russian invasion?
ITA AND PROMOTING EXPORTS
Secretary Raimondo. Thank you for that question. We are
requesting an increase in the President's budget for ITA, and
that it is specifically for export promotion. And there is a
team within ITA looking at strategies specifically to respond,
as you just said. And with respect to food, there is a great
deal of work going on within the Administration, in the
interagency, around how we can meet the needs that have been
created by the invasion.
Senator Moran. Is there money within the budget to help
U.S. industries address emerging supply chain challenges and
disruptions that have arisen as a result of the war in Ukraine?
FUNDING FOR THE SUPPLY CHAIN CHALLENGES
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. We are requesting $16 million
additional for supply chain work, whether that is specifically
for Ukraine, no, is the answer. But it will be used for that. I
will say this, that $16 million is what we are asking for to
address the existing crisis. The crisis you are referring to
the existing crisis.
What this country really needs is what is in USICA, or
whatever we call it; the Competition Bill, which is a permanent
supply chain management operation within the Department of
Commerce. If we have learned one thing through COVID, we are
woefully under-resourced as it relates to the Federal
government's ability to map, monitor, manage, and support our
supply chain.
We have lost 25 percent of our small manufacturers in the
last 25 years, probably many in your State, many in my State,
but one of the only countries, industrialized countries, that
doesn't have this. And so that is why I have so much passion
for the supply chain portion of the USICA Bill.
We ought to be continuously monitoring, continuously
providing loans, and such, to small manufacturers, so we are
not constantly reacting to these supply chain disasters.
Senator Moran. Does that provision exist in either the
House or Senate version in one or--
Secretary Raimondo. Yes it does, in both.
Senator Moran. In both?
Secretary Raimondo. In both, yes.
Senator Moran. Okay. So your testimony is you support that
provision that is in those bills?
Secretary Raimondo. Strongly.
Senator Moran. Okay. And then the Department of Commerce,
do you have the capability or--and are you doing so, if you do,
to engage with U.S. companies that--to help them find a role to
play in reconstructing Ukraine?
ROLE OF U.S. COMPANIES IN RECONSTRUCTING THE UKRAINE
Secretary Raimondo. Ah. Thank you for that question. So I
had the opportunity, a couple of weeks ago, to meet with the
Prime Minister, he came to visit with me. We talked mostly
about export controls, because I was trying to gather
information about whether we are being effective. But the
conversation quickly turned to the rebuilding of Ukraine.
And so the answer to your question is, yes, we are already
in process, engaging the private sector, looking at our own
tools within ITA, to figure out how we can lean into the
rebuilding effort. I will tell you this, we are very early
stages, the initial outreach to U.S. industry has been
excellent. And I would say more broadly the U.S. private sector
has stepped up in ways that have supported the administration's
work.
Senator Moran. I just, in between voting, and the State and
Foreign Ops Appropriations Subcommittee that is meeting at the
same time today, where the topic is food aid globally.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
Senator Moran. But certainly Ukraine is maybe a need, and
is a contributing factor, a significant factor in the hunger
that is occurring, or will occur around the world, one of the
answers that Ambassador Beazley provided was that there is no
way to truck grain out of Ukraine to world markets. Does that
make sense to you?
He was responding to someone else's question, and I didn't
have a chance to follow up. But the goal--I mean most of that
grain is shipped out by ship.
FOOD AID IN THE UKRAINE
Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
Senator Moran. I didn't say that very well as, you know,
realizing that--
Secretary Raimondo. No, no. I know what you mean. It does
make sense to me; having said that, I would have to look into
it further to verify it.
Senator Moran. We ought to be--I mean, transportation in
Ukraine may be--that every industry is important in the
rebuilding, and the restructuring, but to help meet global
hunger, agriculture and transportation seem to me to be of huge
importance, as you, and the private companies that you just
mentioned, discuss what the next steps are, those might be the
places that are so valuable, not only to Ukraine, but also to
the world.
Secretary Raimondo. That is an excellent point.
Senator Moran. When we were on the border of Ukraine, the
Ukrainians were particularly asking for diesel fuel, so that
they could actually produce the crops, which captured my
attention. It would be so sad to have crops in a field, or seed
to plant, or crops to harvest, and the absence of diesel fuel
prevents them from doing so.
Assure me, Madam Secretary. It appears to me that there
is--as I would expect--there is significant emphasis in the
administration's budget, in your Commerce Department budget, on
climate change. Having just been in Kansas a weekend ago, and
saw the results of a tornado in Andover, assure me that the
priorities on climate change do not diminish the necessity, or
the capabilities, of providing the current weather, and the
warnings necessary, and the knowledge necessary for people to
protect themselves, and for farmers to make decisions about
planting, and harvesting? And are we--or we make sure we are
not diminishing what we need to do otherwise?
CLIMATE CHANGE AND CURRENT WEATHER PRIORITIES
Secretary Raimondo. No. In fact, we are expanding what we
need to do. In fact I was just meeting with Dr. Spinrad the
other day, around what more investments we are making to
improve our weather forecasting, improve our wildfire
forecasting. And how we can continue to develop data products
that we can provide to businesses, to States, to cities, to do
an even better job with drought forecasting, which of course
leads to fires, et cetera.
So no, I would say if anything we are doubling down on
this, and some of the investments in satellites, and such, are
exactly for that.
Senator Moran. Thank you for your answers.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Moran. I actually only
have one more question. And that has to do with Anomalous
Health Incidents. The Omnibus budget included a provision that
allowed the Department to have up to $5 million to assist
certain employees and family members who may have been affected
by anomalous health incidents. Can you tell us if that funding
has been used? If you have--if you think it is going to be
adequate to address the concerns that you are hearing from
employees, or if you need additional help?
ANOMALOUS HEALTH INCIDENTS
Secretary Raimondo. Yes, I need--permit me to get back to
you on that. I have not heard that it is not enough. And I have
been in close contact on all of these issues, but I will get
back to you, and give you a better answer.
Senator Shaheen. That would be great. Thank you.
Senator Moran, do you have any further questions?
Senator Moran. No. Thank you. I do, but I don't have time
for them.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Shaheen. In that case, if there are no further
questions. Senators have until Wednesday, May 18, to submit
additional questions for the official hearing record, and we
would request the Department responses within 30 days of any
questions for the record.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the
hearing:]
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY CHAIRMAN LEAHY
Questions Submitted to Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo, Department
of Commerce
Question 1. Through the enactment of the Infrastructure Investments
and Jobs Act (IIJA) in November 2021, the National Telecommunications
and Information Administration (NTIA) received $48.2 billion in funding
to augment the efforts of its Office of Internet Connectivity and
Growth to provide communities with the resources and tools necessary to
deploy broadband infrastructure. For largely rural states like Vermont,
where tens of thousands of households do not have broadband access,
these funds will make a substantial difference in their work to ensure
that everyone has affordable and dependable Internet service.
Since negotiations of the IIJA began almost a year ago, the cost of
raw materials and labor needed for deploying broadband have increased
considerably. Further, shipping delays for certain materials and
components have the potential to hinder ability of telecommunications
providers to quickly make use of Federal funds and address the most
immediate broadband needs of their communities.
A. What effect does the NTIA expect the compounding
challenges of higher costs and supply chain constraints to have
on the effectiveness of the broadband funding set aside by the
IIJA?
Answer. The DOC has taken a leading role in addressing supply chain
challenges facing our nation. The Department and NTIA are well
positioned to engage with the telecommunications sector and
manufacturers to ensure that there is sufficient supply of fiber,
equipment, and other necessary materials to implement the broadband
programs. We leverage the resources and expertise within the Department
and work closely with industrial stakeholders to address this critical
issue.
For the BEAD program, each Eligible Entity may choose its own means
of competitively selecting subgrantees for last-mile broadband
deployment projects, though that process must incorporate certain
principles to satisfy the Infrastructure Act's mandates and the BEAD
Program's goals.
B. What steps does the NTIA plan to take to address any
negative impacts, and how can Congress assist in these efforts?
Answer. See response above.
Question 2. On March 28, 2022, the Department of Commerce announced
the launch of an investigation into alleged circumvention of duties for
solar panels imported from four Southeast Asian countries. The
investigation is in response to a petition from Auxin Solar, which
alleged that Chinese manufacturers shifted some production to these
countries in an effort to evade 2012 duties. Solar panel imports from
these four countries account for 80 percent of all solar panel imports
to the United States. The Commerce Department is considering up to 250
percent tariffs on these solar panel imports to be applied
retroactively.
The Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) is forecasting that
solar installations for 2022 and 2023 will be cut by 46 percent due to
these circumstances, resulting in a drop of 24 gigawatts of planned
solar capacity. If this capacity is replaced by fossil fuels, the
United States will emit an additional 364 million metric tons of carbon
by 2035. The SEIA is also projecting that 100,000 American solar
workers will lose their jobs. The consequences to this investigation
contradict President Biden's efforts to reduce greenhouse gas pollution
and support good-paying American jobs in the renewable energy industry.
In SEIA's Broad Industry Survey, 88 percent of Vermont solar
companies responded that the investigation will have severe or
devastating impacts to solar business, and that $10 million worth of
projects have already been impacted in Vermont alone. I have heard from
a number of Vermont solar companies that this investigation threatens
their long-term viability, which would not only result in a loss of
jobs in Vermont, but would also stymy the state's ability to address
carbon emissions moving forward.
In May 2021, the Department of Energy's Solar Energy Technologies
Office released a Multi- Year Program Plan to accelerate the
advancement and deployment of solar technology. One of the Plan's goals
was to expand the solar workforce to 300,000 employees by 2025.
A. What will the Department of Commerce do to negate the
economic and environmental impacts of the market disruption in
the domestic solar industry caused by this investigation?
Answer. Anti-dumping (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) proceedings
are a quasi-judicial process, subject to review in U.S. courts. AD and
CVD proceedings are in response to dumping or state-sponsored subsidies
that harm U.S. industry. The Commerce Department bases its findings on
the factual information on the record of its proceedings, following
methodologies provided under the law, regulations, and long-standing
practices.
When dumping and subsidization cause harm or injury to our domestic
industry, AD/CVD duties are imposed on imports to offset those negative
effects and ensure a healthy system of international trade in which
everyone can compete on a level playing field. With respect to the
specific case you referenced, Commerce was originally scheduled to
announce its preliminary and final determinations in these
circumvention inquiries by August 30, 2022, and January 27, 2023,
respectively. Commerce's determinations will be made in accordance with
U.S. law and be based on the facts on the record as well as in
consideration of comments filed by interested parties. Based on the
complexity of this case, we extended the preliminary determination
until November 28, 2022.
On Monday, June 6, the White House announced that it was invoking
the Defense Production Act to accelerate domestic production of clean
energy technologies, including solar panel parts, grid components,
building insulation, heat pumps and more. The proclamation also calls
for up to a 24-month hold on potential duties on solar cells from
Cambodia, Thailand, Malaysia, and Vietnam which may come as a result of
the ongoing circumvention inquiries. On July 1, Commerce published a
notice in the Federal Register with a proposed rule to implement
certain aspects of the Proclamation. In the meantime, Commerce's
ongoing circumvention inquiry will continue. To the extent
circumvention is found to be occurring, the White House proclamation
authorizes a temporary exception to the requirements to collect certain
estimated duties and duties on imports of certain solar cells and
modules from Cambodia, Thailand, Malaysia, and Vietnam.
B. Does the Department of Commerce support the Department of
Energy's plan to expand the solar workforce and open new solar
markets?
Answer. Commerce is supportive of DOE's efforts to expand the solar
workforce and open new solar markets. Growing a strong domestic
workforce throughout all facets of the solar value chain will be key to
delivering economic prosperity to American families while combatting
climate change and creating the conditions for the U.S. solar industry
to thrive in a competitive global market.
Question 3. Congress is working toward a final agreement to make
substantial investments in microelectronics, which the Department of
Commerce will use for long-needed investments in the United States'
ability to domestically produce critical semiconductors. The United
States has need for both for more advanced chips for processing at
smaller nodes, as well as more capable chips to manage the tremendous
power requirements that 5G wireless connectivity and beyond requires.
In fact, the importance in networking systems has become as significant
a requirement for future technology as the processing capability.
A. How does the Department of Commerce assess the need for
what used to be considered ``legacy'' node chips in light of
the increased demand for connectivity?
Answer. I applaud the members of Congress who worked hard to get
the CHIPS and Science Act to President Biden's desk. My staff have hit
the ground running to operationalize this historic investment in
America's global economic leadership. To assess industry's needs from
legacy to leading-edge node chips, the Department issued RFI on the
chips shortage. Respondents from all organization types noted that if
investments in manufacturing leading-edge nodes and legacy nodes were
equivalent, the return on investment for legacy nodes would be higher
due to the current growing demand and broader capacity in certain
applications. Accordingly, we recognize that investments are needed
across the industry.
B. How in demand are trusted supply chains for chips that
enable 5G wireless networking?
Answer. Building out trustworthy supply chains for chips that
enable cutting-edge applications, including 5G, artificial intelligence
and machine learning, and autonomous vehicles, is critical to the
success of the CHIPS program. This is why it's crucial that we bring
chip production home and construct a semiconductor ecosystem here in
the U.S. My hope is to help bolster our chips supply chains for 5G
networking through the CHIPS program.
C. What value do advanced techniques and materials such as
Gallium Nitride and epitaxial growth provide?
Answer. New materials and processes enable dramatic new properties
and performance of integrated circuits, which are especially important
in areas such as extending battery performance in mobile devices and
electric vehicles, greater reliability in the electric grid, or harsh
environment performance in aerospace.
Leading-edge nodes and compound semiconductor nodes (such as
silicon carbide and gallium nitride) are key areas of focus needed to
maintain future competitiveness, and where aligning facilities,
equipment, and other capacity are critical. In response to the
Department's RFI on the chips shortage, large businesses highlighted
the need for wide bandgap semiconductors, including silicon carbide and
gallium nitride. Scalable end-to- end compound semiconductor
manufacturing facilities with advanced, flexible tooling were thought
to enable the broadest array of semiconductors for applications in 5G/
6G wireless, broadband rural/urban access, data centers, and emerging
augmented reality and virtual reality (AR/VR) products.
Epitaxy, a method of depositing or growing a monocrystalline film,
enables a high-purity starting point for building a semiconductor
device. Epitaxy facilities generally specialize on a limited family of
compound semiconductors. Thus, several facilities are needed to provide
the range of materials and structures needed for a diversity of
essential high performance devices and related technologies.
D. What domestically-available advanced techniques and
materials for chips that 5G wireless networking exist?
Answer. As discussed above, building out trustworthy supply chains
for chips that enable cutting- edge applications, including 5G, is
critical to the success of the CHIPS program. The CHIPS program will
enable more domestic production of these critical chips and restore
U.S. leadership in semiconductor production and innovation.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Dianne Feinstein
Question 1. As you know, the Commerce Department's inquiry
regarding the import of solar cells and modules is causing uncertainty
in the market. A California company is alleging market practices by
some companies that would result in tariffs up to a 250 percent
increase.
While I understand your department's process calls for an
investigation, California is anticipating delays of over 400 megawatts
of hybrid solar plus storage projects that were to come online this
year. This includes 163 megawatts of storage in September, which falls
amid peak wildfire season when the need for renewable energy is even
more important.
A. Secretary Raimondo, how is the Commerce Department going
to provide certainty about the cost of solar panels while the
investigation is ongoing so California can meet its clean
energy goals? And, what is being done to ensure an expeditious
investigation?
Answer. Anti-dumping (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) proceedings
are a quasi-judicial process, subject to review in U.S. courts. AD and
CVD proceedings are in response to dumping or state-sponsored subsidies
that harm U.S. industry. The Commerce Department bases its findings on
the factual information on the record of its proceedings, following
methodologies provided under the law, regulations, and long-standing
practices.
When dumping and illegal subsidization cause harm or injury to our
domestic industry, AD/CVD duties are imposed on imports to offset those
negative effects and ensure a healthy system of international trade in
which everyone can compete on a level playing field. With respect to
the specific case you referenced, Commerce was originally scheduled to
announce its preliminary and final determinations in these
circumvention inquiries by August 30, 2022, and January 27, 2023,
respectively. Commerce's determinations will be made in accordance with
U.S. law and be based on the facts on the record as well as in
consideration of comments filed by interested parties. Based on the
complexity of this case, we extended the preliminary determination
until November 28, 2022.
On Monday, June 6, the White House announced that it was invoking
the Defense Production Act to accelerate domestic production of clean
energy technologies, including solar panel parts, grid components,
building insulation, heat pumps and more. The proclamation also calls
for up to a 24-month hold on potential duties on solar cells from
Cambodia, Thailand, Malaysia, and Vietnam which may come as a result of
the ongoing circumvention inquiries. On July 1, Commerce published a
notice in the Federal Register with a proposed rule to implement
certain aspects of the Proclamation. In the meantime, Commerce's
ongoing circumvention inquiry will continue. To the extent
circumvention is found to be occurring, the White House proclamation
authorizes a temporary exception to the requirements to collect certain
estimated duties and duties on imports of certain solar cells and
modules from Cambodia, Thailand, Malaysia, and Vietnam.
Question 2. Since President Biden took office, the U.S. economy has
created 8.3 million jobs, which is a record pace. At 3.6 percent, the
unemployment rate is near historical lows. However, the economy is
still several million jobs short of pre-pandemic levels in large part
because nearly 1.5 percent of the labor force that existed in early
2020 still has not returned to the job market since the pandemic began.
A. Secretary Raimondo, what are the main reasons that this
substantial number of individuals has not returned to the
workforce and should we be concerned about it? What is the
Administration doing, and what should Congress consider doing,
to make it easier for people to return to the workforce?
Answer. There are about 600,000 fewer workers in the labor force
before the pandemic, and nearly the entire gap is from women. This
frustrates me but does not surprise me at all because accessible
childcare, elder care and family leave policies are essential for
supporting labor force participation, particularly among women. And the
United States falls short on all three.
Women shoulder the burden of caregiving in the United States, and
many had to leave the workforce to take care of their children and
elderly family members full time. Unavailable and unaffordable care is
an economic crisis driving current workforce and economic challenges
across the country. Across the world, affordable childcare is generally
connected to higher maternal rates of employment.
We see the impacts of paid family leave in states that have passed
more robust leave laws. For mothers taking leave to care for children,
paid leave nearly closing the workforce participation gap between women
with young children and other women. For caregivers accessing leave to
care for other family members, paid leave increases workforce
participation.
Caregivers often sacrifice their careers and financial futures by
reducing work hours, taking on debt and tapping into their own
savings--ultimately jeopardizing their own financial security.
Question 3. In recent years, there has been a significant increase
in the amount of space debris orbiting Earth due to collisions and
anti-satellite tests, now totaling more than 30,000 individual objects.
With tens of thousands more satellites proposed to be launched soon,
mitigating the impacts of this debris is increasingly important.
Multiple Federal agencies currently track space debris, including the
Defense Department, NASA, and Commerce. The Commerce Department has
requested a significant increase in its budget for the Office of Space
Commerce this year, from $16 million to $87.7 million.
A. Secretary Raimondo, can you explain how the Office of
Space Commerce plans to spend this funding increase? How does
the Department of Commerce plan to collaborate with other
agencies to set regulations for debris, satellite construction,
and orbital paths?
Answer. The fiscal year 2023 Budget request is based on a thorough
review of the National Academy of Public Administration study and what
it would cost to develop a sound and robust Open Architecture Data
Repository (OADR) and fully staff the Office of Space Commerce (OSC).
The increase is going towards achieving Initial Operating Capability
(IOC) no later than fiscal year 2024, and Full Operational Capability
(FOC) expected by 2025. Without this funding, NOAA cannot meet these
critical milestones.
Receipt of the full request of $87.7 million will allow OSC to
maintain the OADR development schedule, including:
--Continue to hire key staff.
--Support partnerships among OSC and DoD and other Federal agencies,
academia, and commercial industry to share space situational
awareness (SSA) information through the OADR. The additional
funding reflects the importance the Administration places on
the SSA mission and will support NOAA's efforts to accelerate
the development of the OADR from a pilot demonstration to FOC
in 2025.
--Award a contract to a cloud infrastructure and data integration
service provider which would provide cloud services to host the
OADR and deliver SSA products and services, procure commercial
data, services, and infrastructure to populate the OADR; and to
build out the proving ground (or test area) for use by
government, industry, and academia for innovation activities.
--Acquire a variety of commercial capabilities (products, services,
and technologies) that will make key contributions to the OADR,
consistent with the guidance of Space Policy Directive-3.
In addition to the implementation of the OADR, the funding will
allow OSC to maintain its prior commitment to domestic and
international advocacy of the U.S. commercial industry, and to continue
licensing of the operations of private space-based remote sensing
systems commercial licensees.
With respect to our plans to collaborate with other agencies, OSC
is collaborating with DoD, NASA, and other bureaus within the
Department of Commerce as it develops the OADR to provide SSA
information and basic spaceflight safety services to civil and private
spacecraft operators. As the current provider of this information and
services, the DoD is the most critical partner, and OSC is working to
conclude an agreement with the U.S. Space Command and the US Space
Force to govern our collaboration. OSC is currently working with the
White House Space Council and other interested agencies to investigate
what steps might be necessary to reduce orbital debris, and ensure the
future safety of spaceflight operations, pursuant to Space Policy
Directive 3.
Question 4. I continue to be deeply concerned about industrial
waste dumped off the California coast between the 1930s and 1960s that
still remains in our ocean. This toxic waste includes DDT--a chemical
so harmful it was banned in 1972.
We now know that oil and gas-related chemicals are also likely to
have been dumped there as well. Scientific studies point to decades of
detrimental impacts to the marine life, including cancer in dolphins
and sea lions.
The survey conducted by NOAA and partners in March 2021 mapped
approximately 36,000 acres at 3000 feet depth of the sea floor. This
area, known as dumpsite #2, revealed around 26,000 dumped barrels of
industrial waste, and over 100,000 other debris objects. We also know
based on historical record, there are a total of 14 known offshore
dumpsites off the California coast. This is alarming.
Both EPA and NOAA have informed my office a number of times that
they have more questions than answers on this problem and a follow-up
survey mission is the best next step to understand the state of the
barrels, as well as the chemicals in them and around them in the water
and on the sea floor. Yet, more than a year later, neither agency has
provided a funding estimate despite repeated requests by my staff, nor
a plan of action for next steps.
A. Secretary Raimondo, I ask that NOAA and its partners act
with urgency and prioritize this issue. NOAA's expertise is
critical to address this major problem. Can you describe the
next steps NOAA will take to help us better understand the
impacts of this historic ocean dumping?
Answer. NOAA is part of a State/Federal interagency group, led by
EPA, further assessing dumpsite #2. NOAA's technical representatives
have supported two products to better delineate dumpsite #2 and its
potential risks. First, the interagency technical team developed a side
scan sonar survey plan to supplement the March 2021 survey areas.
Additionally, the technical team developed a sediment sampling plan
based on a conceptual model of exposure and risk at the site. The next
steps are to budget the two plans and proceed with implementation. EPA
is the lead for budgeting and implementation with support from NOAA. At
the same time, NOAA is administering fiscal year 2022 Congressionally
Directed Spending for Scripps. NOAA provided timely technical review of
the Scripps proposal and award is expected in the fourth quarter of
fiscal year 2022. The information and data generated by the Scripps
work will further inform and potentially address some of the
interagency needs.
B. This historic toxic dumping is a major problem off the
California coast, but it is coming to light that California's
coastline is not the only place where historic ocean dumping
took place. Although the United States outlawed this practice
decades ago, major problems and risks from these lingering
chemicals still exist.
C. Does NOAA have the statutory authority it needs to
monitor or conduct testing on the impacts of the DDT and other
toxic waste that was dumped decades ago but remains active in
our environment?
Answer. NOAA has sufficient statutory authority to provide support
to lead agencies, primarily under the National Oil and Hazardous
Substance Pollution Contingency Plan and environmental response
statutes, such as Oil Pollution Act (OPA) and Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). This
authority is the principal mechanism for NOAA's current engagement in
the Southern California site supporting EPA and collaborating agencies
in the development of the plan that allows for improved understanding
of potential risk to human health and the environment posed by Dump
Site #2. Also, as a Trustee under CERCLA, OPA, and National Marine
Sanctuaries Act (NMSA), NOAA has the authority in appropriate
circumstances to conduct natural resource damage assessment and seek
damages for restoration.
Question 5. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) released two studies highlighting the detrimental impacts of
ocean acidification on the West Coast. NOAA scientists confirmed in a
December 2019 study on acidification variability in the California
ecosystem that California's waters are rising in acidity at twice the
global average, threatening marine life and adding to a growing number
of costly fishery disasters.
A second NOAA study, published in January 2020 on Dungeness crab
larvae in the Pacific Northwest, documented for the first time (outside
of lab conditions) that ocean acidification can damage the shells and
sensory organ of Dungeness crab, threatening the long term growth of
the one of the most valuable fisheries in U.S. coastal waters.
A. What efforts is the Department taking to combat ocean
acidification? What programs and plans does the Department have
in place as our oceans continue to acidify?
Answer. NOAA is funding and conducting research and monitoring to
understand how ocean chemistry is changing in U.S. waters and how
organisms, like Dungeness crabs, are affected by those changes. This
funding and research are primarily led by NOAA's Ocean Acidification
Program and Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory, and coordinated
across NOAA and other Federal agencies.
NOAA is planning research to better understand the role the ocean
might play in carbon sequestration (also known as marine carbon dioxide
removal or mCDR). In fiscal year 2022, NOAA funded (with the Department
of Energy and ClimateWorks) an mCDR research project. The project
focused on ocean alkalinization as a method of ocean acidification
mitigation and long-term carbon sequestration. Additionally, the NOAA
Carbon Dioxide Removal Task Force is finalizing a strategic plan which
will include an evaluation of mCDR approaches and subsequent impacts.
Subject to the availability of funds, NOAA is pursuing an expanded
Federal funding opportunity on mCDR in fiscal year 23 through the
National Oceanographic Partnership Program which would consist of
funding from NOAA and other Federal agencies.
While NOAA's efforts can help communities mitigate and adapt to
ocean acidification, ultimately, ocean acidification is caused by
rising carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere being absorbed by the
ocean. The most direct solution to ocean acidification is for the U.S.
and the world to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.
Question 6. Due to heightened impacts of climate change, extreme
weather events and pollution, marine environments--as well as inland
waterways and reservoirs--are experiencing prolonged and very harmful
algal blooms. These blooms lead to human and animal illness and
jeopardize commercial fisheries as well as drinking water resources.
A. How is the Department spending congressionally-
appropriated funding related to mitigating impacts or
preventing harmful algal blooms?
Answer. In fiscal year 2021, NOAA spent almost $28 million to
understand, detect, monitor, and forecast HABs, helping communities
with decisionmaking related to their prevention, control, and
mitigation (PCM).
1. About $20 million of fiscal year 2021 spending was on HAB
mitigation--specifically detection, monitoring, and forecasting
to help coastal resource managers, public health officials,
drinking water managers, fishers, recreational users, the
tourism industry, and research scientists plan for and around
HABs. NOAA is developing a National HAB Observation System
(NHABON) and provides operational HAB forecasts for Lake Erie,
Texas, and Florida. Short-term (twice weekly) forecasts
identify which blooms are potentially harmful, where they are,
how big they are, and where they are likely headed.
2. $3.6 million supported the Prevention, Control, and
Mitigation Program (PCMHAB) within NOAA's National Centers for
Coastal Ocean Science's research funding to move promising PCM
technologies through development, to demonstration and
application. NOAA also funds socioeconomic research to assess
impacts of HAB events on coastal economies and societies, and
the costs and benefits of mitigation strategies to aid managers
in devising cost-effective management strategies.
3. $4.4 million was spent across NOAA on early-stage
research to understand the causes and impacts of HABs and their
toxins, which is fundamental to successful management and
mitigation.
With these funds, NOAA actively works to identify cost-effective
adaptive and mitigation strategies for communities to increase their
resilience to future HAB events, identifying the environmental drivers
of HAB events to inform responses to future climate change, including
changes in HAB geographic range, seasonality, and toxicity. NOAA
utilizes advanced technology for remote and autonomous monitoring of
HABs in near real-time and develops forecasts to provide early warning
of HABs for state, Federal, and tribal partners.
In fiscal year 2022, NOAA solicited proposals to establish a HAB
Control Technology Incubator to speed up the development of control
methodologies. By supporting small proposals, the incubator will
quickly and economically test the potential of new approaches. The most
successful proposals could then be submitted to PCMHAB competitions for
a more thorough evaluation. The incubator will also develop a
clearinghouse of regulations and permitting requirements related to the
testing and ultimately application of control technologies. NOAA
anticipates announcing the awardee in late fiscal year 2022.
Question 7. It is crucial we prioritize and accelerate sustainable
fishing gear testing and authorization to protect our marine
environments. Deep-Set Buoy Gear was approved by the Pacific Fishery
Managements Council in September 2019, and provides a sustainable
alternative to Drift Gillnets. I understand that the National Marine
Fisheries Service is now going through the authorization process for
Deep-Set Buoy Gear.
A. What is the current timeline for the authorization of
Deep-Set Buoy Gear and what are the steps that need to be taken
to authorize new gear?
Answer. NOAA Fisheries is currently preparing a proposed rule to
implement the Pacific Fishery Management Council's (Council's) proposed
amendment to the Fishery Management Plan for U.S. West Coast Fisheries
for Highly Migratory Species, which NMFS anticipates publishing soon.
We have been coordinating with the Council on regulations to accompany
their transmittal of the amendment, which led to the Council revising
its final preferred alternative for a proposed amendment in March 2021.
In developing the proposed rule, NMFS must establish the
infrastructure to permit, manage, and monitor the fishery. NMFS is
currently working with agency partners to formalize these procedures
and business rules to support the record of decisionmaking. Part of the
effort has included developing and testing a system by which NOAA
Fisheries can qualify individuals for limited entry permits according
to the tiered criteria recommended by the Council, which incorporates a
reliance on data prepared by the California Department of Fish and
Wildlife (CDFW). Additionally, NMFS needs to complete a Section 7
consultation under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).. Revisions to data
collection and permitting procedures under the fishery management plan
that are necessary to implement the proposed action are also subject to
the Paperwork Reduction Act.
Upon publication of the proposed rule, there will be a public
comment period. During that time and subject to completion of the
Section 7 ESA consultation, NOAA Fisheries can respond to comments on
its draft environmental impact statement (EIS), pursuant to the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and prepare a final EIS for
publication. Following a cooling off period on the final EIS, and
consideration of public comments collected on the proposed rule and
fishery management plan amendment, NOAA Fisheries will prepare a record
of decision under NEPA and a final rule for publication.
Upon publication of the final rule, and before limited entry
permits can be issued, NMFS will take several steps to ensure a fair
ranking of applications according to the Council's qualifying criteria
and adherence to Council-recommended limitations on permit ownership
and transfers.
B. How can this process be streamlined and/or accelerated?
Answer. NOAA has been working to streamline implementation of deep-
set buoy gear authorization wherever possible. As discussed above, NOAA
has been coordinating with the Council, as well as the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife, to assess ranking procedures for
qualification for limited entry permits, and to document such
considerations for compliance with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act. Continuing these effective
partnerships is paramount to completing the remaining clearance and
rulemaking processes to implement authorization of deep-set buoy gear.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Brian Schatz
Question 1. Less than 10 percent of the initial appropriation has
been handed out of a program that was authorized in December 2020. What
are you doing to ensure that broadband funding provided through the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Public Law 117-58) is
distributed in a timely manner? Are you concerned about the pace at
which NTIA has processed awards for the Tribal Broadband Connectivity
Fund?
Answer. NTIA has met or exceeded every deadline established for it
by Congress, under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA).
Congress entrusted NTIA with a great responsibility in IIJA: to help
ensure all Americans have access to high-speed Internet and the modern,
digital society. We are working expeditiously to make sure the funds
get to the places in need quickly and without delay.
NTIA must also be good stewards of taxpayer funds and do everything
in our power to ensure that grant recipients have strong plans in place
that reach people in need and are equipped to follow through on their
plans. We must also make sure that, before obligating any funds, robust
oversight measures are in place to prevent any waste, fraud, or abuse.
As we have been working tirelessly to expand our staffing and
technical capacity in response to the new authority and trust granted
to us by Congress, we will move as quickly as possible to obligate
funds.
Question 2. I appreciate NIST's efforts on mitigating AI bias and
the development of the Risk Management Framework. What activities has
NIST planned to provide actionable guidance to reduce the risks from AI
bias? Will you ensure that NIST consults not only with developers and
deployers of AI systems when creating this guidance but also with
communities that are impacted by biased AI systems? What level of
funding and staff is being provided to NIST for these activities?
Answer. NIST contributes to the research, standards, and data
necessary to advance characteristics of trustworthy artificial
intelligence, including mitigation of harmful bias, in order to realize
the full promise of this technology. NIST has significantly expanded
its efforts to identify, understand, measure, and mitigate harmful
bias, with a focus on a socio-technical approach. This reflects a
recognition and increased awareness that AI operates in a larger social
context, in addition to traditional efforts focused on computational
elements. Working very closely with a diverse set of stakeholders, NIST
is building guidance that is flexible and can be applied across AI use
contexts and sectors. Specifically, NIST recently published ``Toward a
Standard for Identifying and Managing Bias in Artificial Intelligence''
(NIST SP 1270), which identifies the concepts and challenges associated
with bias in AI and provides preliminary guidance for addressing them.
Managing bias is also included as one of the key trustworthiness
characteristics outlined in the NIST AI Risk Management Framework which
NIST is developing hand-in-hand with the larger community. This
Framework will provide guidance to organizations on how to manage risks
of AI systems. As a companion to the AI Risk Management Framework (AI
RMF), NIST is developing a Playbook to assist the broad set of
interested stakeholders with actions they can take to implement the
framework, including concrete steps to mitigate the risks from harmful
bias.
Will you ensure that NIST consults not only with developers and
deployers of AI systems when creating this guidance but also
with communities that are impacted by biased AI systems?
Answer. Yes. NIST takes a transparent and stakeholder driven
approach in its development of priorities, research, and guidance to
advance AI trustworthiness. This includes engaging with a diverse range
of stakeholders through multiple public workshops, opportunities for
public comment and feedback on publications, and numerous meetings,
listening sessions, and roundtables with stakeholders from as many
sectors as possible. NIST continues to reach out beyond the U.S. to
international and multinational organizations. Because of the impact AI
can have on individuals, communities, and society, NIST has increased
its outreach to and engagements with civil society organizations and
other advocacy groups--including those focused on fairness, civil
liberties, and the rights of individuals--to provide the perspective of
those who may be impacted by AI bias. NIST seeks to identify new
stakeholders, including those who are directly impacted, to help better
understand this challenging area.
NIST believes it is important for AI developers and deployers to
understand the broader impact AI can have on individuals and society,
in addition to the direct risks to the organization. This perspective
is woven prominently into the guidance included in the draft NIST AI
RMF.
Moreover, NIST is managing the National Artificial Intelligence
Advisory Committee, which reports to the President and the National AI
Initiative Office. That committee's scope includes addressing issues of
bias, and its membership include some of the nation's top experts
concerned about issues of bias.
What level of funding and staff is being provided to NIST for these
activities?
Answer. NIST is investing an estimated $30 million in fiscal year
2022 on artificial intelligence activities across the agency, including
$11 million dedicated to advancing trustworthy and responsible AI. The
fiscal year 2023 President's budget includes an additional $15 million
requested for AI activities to develop a new NIST AI Collaborative
Institute and increase technical expertise in its laboratory research
efforts. Trustworthiness and the issue of harmful bias and its
potential impact on individuals and society are a key component of that
research and are part of multiple programs and projects.
Question 3. Stakeholders, especially those from minority
communities, have raised a number of concerns on the use of facial
recognition technology. The Facial Recognition Vendor Test is an
important program to provide reliable and accurate information on the
performance of commercial facial recognition products. What funding is
being designated to ensure that the Vendor Test continues to expand its
offerings and incorporate more real world scenarios in its testing?
Answer. The NIST Face Recognition Vendor Test (FRVT) program is
funded at approximately $2.5 million in fiscal year 2022 through a
combination funds from NIST and other Federal agencies. Since its
initial development in 2000, the FRVT program has driven research
priorities and standards for the face recognition community. The
program also provides information to organizations so they can
determine whether and how face recognition technology can be deployed.
NIST tests face recognition algorithms for real world relevant use
cases related to 1-1 and 1-N, image quality, morph detection, and
demographic variations defined by sex, age, and race. The tests include
real world data relevant to face recognition. NIST also conducts
relevant research as part of its privacy engineering and artificial
intelligence trustworthy efforts to provide direction on mitigation of
harmful bias and enhancing privacy, which could also apply to the
deployment of face recognition technologies in real world scenarios.
More funding would allow for expanded focus that included needs of
the broader facial recognition community such as additional real world
data sources and relevant use cases.
Question 4. The Commerce Department's Office of Native American
Business Development has been authorized since 2000, but the office is
not yet fully functional and it lacks leadership. What is the status of
the office, including the appointment of a Director? What is the
current funding for the office and what are the plans for the fiscal
year 2023 funding?
Answer. A search for a Director (GS-15) of the Office of Native
American Business Development is in the final stages, and the
Department hopes to be able to announce the director soon. The Office
of the Secretary is preparing for the arrival of the director, and the
important work of the Office of Native American Business Development
continues in the meantime.
The Office was formally transferred from the Minority Business
Development Agency (MBDA) to Departmental Management (DM) in fiscal
year 2022. Funding of $200,000 is requested in the fiscal year 2023
Departmental Management (DM) Congressional Submission.
Question 5. Despite the many challenges of the 2020 census, the
population counts were sound for use in apportionment, and the
Redistricting Data File also passed the Census Bureau's quality
standards. However, that file is filled with impossible and improbable
results due to underlying data quality issues or the new disclosure
avoidance system applied to the 2020 Census. Demographers, budget
officials, urban planners, public health officials, and program
administrators rely on timely, reliable population tract-level data.
Will the Census Bureau flag statistics with questionable reliability?
And if so, how and for whom?
Answer. The Census Bureau releases information about 2020 Census
data quality (https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/decennial-census/
decade/2020/planning-management/process/data-quality.html#metrics) in a
number of ways, including comparing the results to population estimates
, (https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest.html) the Post-
Enumeration Survey , (https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/
decennial-census/about/coverage-measurement/pes.html) and Demographic
Analysis . (https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/decennial-census/
about/coverage-measurement/da.html).
As for the quality associated with the Census Bureau's use of
differential privacy for the 2020 Census, the disclosure-avoidance
error introduced is minimal compared to other known sources of error
(https://www.census.gov/library/fact-sheets/2022/variability.html) in
census counts because of operational and coverage issues. This means
the local population counts and demographic information--often used to
draw congressional districts and for other purposes-- are better
protected, as well as fit for their intended use. The method used for
protecting data in the 2020 Census is a more sophisticated and precise
mechanism for injecting noise into published statistics than the
swapping mechanism used in prior censuses.
Question 6. Stakeholders, and in particular data users, have
consistently raised concerns about the need to improve the American
Community Survey (ACS). For example, the Census Project, an independent
organization, published a report in March 2022, on the ACS. The report
not only reinforces the ACS as the primary source of information
regarding our nation's changing demographic and socio-economic
characteristics for data users in the public, private, and non- profit
sectors, but also raises awareness about the survey's challenges. Among
other things, the report asks Congress and the administration to
provide additional resources that could be used to enhance the survey's
sample size (which has not occurred since 2011), strengthen its content
by revising and adding questions, and improve the survey's response
rate, which has fallen over 20 percent since 2017. What actions is the
Department taking to support the Census Bureau so it can address
challenges facing the ACS.
Answer. The Department of Commerce supports the Census Bureau in
its efforts to continue to modernize and improve the ACS data
collection operations. The Census Bureau met with The Census Project
staff to understand the suggestions in the report. The Census Bureau is
evaluating the suggestions and formulating priorities for future
research and implementation. The Census Bureau continually evolves its
survey operations to balance the needs of individual respondents with
the need for impactful data in our communities. The Census Bureau will
keep improving by using a multipronged approach, focusing on:
--Enhancing respondent mail materials.
--Employing alternative data sources, such as administrative records.
--Modifying the modes and design of the ACS.
--Understanding the survey experience from the perspective of our
respondents.
--Improving group quarters data collection and products.
The Census Bureau explores new research and experimentation with
ACS protocols while still meeting the multi-tiered demands of survey
operations. The Census Bureau is continually building on exhaustive
research to improve the ACS. The Census Bureau's Agility in Action
series (https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/operations-and-
administration/agility-in-action.html) provides more information on the
research agenda.
Question 7. Nearly 700 billion dollars are distributed annually in
states based on population estimates. Over the next 5 years, what
changes to the population estimates program and American Community
Survey are being planned, researched, tested, or implemented? How are
these changes or potential changes being evaluated by data users? How
will outside stakeholders and researchers be included in these
improvement plans or changes? What funding is designated to ensure that
the Census Bureau has the staffing needed to undertake these plans and
conduct meaningful engagement with outside parties?
Answer. The Population Estimates Program (PEP) regularly engages in
research designed to improve the annual estimates. Research tasks are
determined each year based on priorities identified during the previous
vintage of estimates and available resources. Over the next 5 years,
research on potential improvements to the estimates base will be
prioritized. To assist with this work, the Census Bureau has formed the
Base Evaluation and Research Team (BERT), internal experts researching
the feasibility of taking coverage measures from the Demographic
Analysis and Post-Enumeration Survey into account in the development of
the official population estimates. BERT consists of subject-matter
experts in the areas of population estimates, age and sex statistics,
coverage measurement, race and ethnicity, demography, and disclosure
avoidance. The team is taking a phased approach to the research,
beginning with an analysis of 2020 Census data and coverage measures.
Ultimately, the team will make recommendations to the PEP regarding the
incorporation of additional 2020 Census data or coverage adjustments
into the population estimates base. Any proposed changes will be
thoroughly tested and subject to rigorous review to determine whether
the change produces plausible estimates across all demographic
subgroups and geographies. Proposed changes will also be vetted with
advisory groups and other stakeholders. Should changes be successfully
incorporated into the estimates base, the population estimates
developed from that base will also be used by the American Community
Survey (ACS) and the Puerto Rico Community Survey as survey controls so
that the population totals from the survey conform to the updated
population estimates.
The ACS program is actively investigating and enacting options for
survey enhancements, as well as making research-based changes to how
the program operates and engages with respondents. To ensure better
data, the Census Bureau tests new and modified questions for the ACS
approximately every 5 years to ensure the survey stays relevant as
society changes and Federal agency data needs evolve. Starting in
September 2022, the Census Bureau will begin the field test to gauge
how new and modified questions perform. A variety of quality metrics
will be used to determine which wording is best understood and produces
the most accurate data. Ultimately, the results of the 2022 Content
Test will determine the recommended revisions to questions and new
questions to be included. Recommended changes will be submitted to OMB
for approval and inclusion in the ACS in 2025. These results allow the
survey to remain dynamic and responsive, capture our nation's trends,
and meet Federal data needs. Additional future research includes plans
to improve messaging, expand monitoring of near real-time operational
and survey data, improve statistical methodology, and adjust the in-
person contact strategy. The Census Bureau publishes research plans for
the ACS on a regular basis in our Agility in Action report series:
https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/operations-and-
administration/agility-in-action.html.
How are these changes or potential changes being evaluated by data
users?
Answer. At this time, research conducted by the Base Evaluation and
Research Team (BERT) is in a preliminary phase. Therefore, no specific
changes have been proposed. BERT will prioritize transparency and
stakeholder engagement throughout the research process and plans to
offer webinars to data users regarding proposed changes.
Proposed changes to ACS content follow an established process that
includes scientific review and consultation with the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) and the Interagency Council for Statistical
Policy (ICSP) Subcommittee for the ACS. Final question wording must be
vetted by the ICSP Subcommittee and OMB before field testing as well as
prior to implementing in the survey. Through Federal Register Notices
the public (including data users) are given an opportunity to provide
feedback on proposed changes. The ACS program also periodically
conducts data user surveys in order to collect feedback on ACS data
products and services.
How will outside stakeholders and researchers be included in these
improvement plans or changes?
Answer. The Base Evaluation and Research Team will prioritize
stakeholder engagement via briefings and webinars to a variety of
groups including the Federal-State Cooperative for Population
Estimates, Census Bureau advisory committees, and others. These
presentations will include the status of the research and any proposed
changes to the development of the estimates base.
For the ACS Content Test, the Census Bureau, in coordination with
the Office of Management and Budget Interagency Committee for the ACS,
solicited proposals for question changes or additions from over twenty
Federal agencies. The ACS program communicates continuously with
stakeholders through Federal Register Notices, presentations, webinars,
e-mail communications, and the online ACS data user community (https://
acsdatacommunity.prb.org). The Census Bureau has also worked closely
with the National Academy of Sciences and other external experts to
inform ACS research.
What funding is designated to ensure that the Census Bureau has the
staffing needed to undertake these plans and conduct meaningful
engagement with outside parties?
Answer. The ACS program dedicates funds within its annual
allocation to support ACS research and communications. The ACS
program's engagement with stakeholders and external experts is
supported with the current funding levels for the program.
Question 8. The Census Bureau does not produce estimates of
accuracy--i.e., undercounts and overcounts--for areas below the state
level. Nevertheless, we know from independent analyses, as well as the
national estimates of accuracy, that any number of cities, counties,
towns, and Tribal areas were undercounted in the 2020 Census. If the
census numbers are wrong, then annual population estimates--which are
used to allocate Federal assistance to states, localities, individuals,
and families--can be skewed for the next 10 years.
Unfortunately, in the last decade, the opportunity for local and
Tribal governments to challenge their annual numbers was very limited.
Congress is considering support for additional funding for the Census
Bureau's Population Estimates Program, to expand the role of state and
local governments in improving the accuracy of their annual population
estimates through an expanded Population Estimates Challenge Program--
which allows local and tribal governments to challenge their annual
population estimates within 90 days of release of the estimates each
spring. What steps will you take to help strengthen the critical
population estimates program?
Answer. The Census Bureau has formed the Base Evaluation and
Research Team (BERT), a group of internal experts tasked with
researching the feasibility of taking coverage measures from the
Demographic Analysis and Post-Enumeration Survey into account in the
development of the official population estimates. Furthermore, both the
BERT and PEP will create opportunities for stakeholder engagement via
briefings and webinars to a variety of groups including the Federal-
State Cooperative for Population Estimates, Census advisory committees,
and others to ensure external feedback which could potentially
strengthen the program may be received and evaluated.
Question 9. Users of the Survey of Income and Program Participation
(SIPP) have communicated how important the survey has been,
particularly as the economy emerges from the COVID-19 pandemic, for
analyzing the impact of government assistance programs on families and
communities. Despite its value as a unique resource, it has been
largely flat funded by the Census Bureau in recent years, rendering the
agency unable to enhance the survey's sample size, address decreasing
response rates, and improve the survey's content, among other necessary
upgrades. What does the Census Bureau view as the most pressing
challenges facing SIPP? How much does the Department estimate it would
cost for the Bureau to pursue necessary changes to the SIPP?
Answer. The Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) is
the primary source for data that can help policy makers understand the
sub-annual dynamics of program eligibility and receipt in the context
of the family and individual economic and demographic situation, for
example, to measure the needs and change in participation in nutrition
programs, such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)
and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and
Children (WIC) and how those needs change for families across time.
SIPP faces many challenges including managing data quality in a
period of increasing nonresponse, hiring and retaining qualified
interviewers, and evolving to meet these challenges and leverage
enterprise technological changes. Developing a multi-mode framework for
SIPP is essential to meet respondents with the collection modes they
are most comfortable with and reserving the most expensive methods for
the hardest to reach cases. While the development of a multi-mode
framework is important, it is only in the discussion phase, and this
framework has not been decided.
The fiscal year 2023 President's Budget proposes $47 million for
SIPP, which would enable the collection and production of SIPP data for
a sample of 35,000 households.
Question 10. What planning and testing is underway to prevent
quality issues in decennial program products (like the 2020 files,
American Community Survey, and population estimates) from reoccurring?
What is the plan for research and testing for the 2030 census?
Answer. Included in our current research agenda for the 2030 Census
are numerous projects to increase quality such as improved
communications, messaging, and advertising, expanded use of
administrative records, further tailoring of contact strategies, and
near real-time analysis of data. Achieving a complete and accurate
census continues to be a primary goal with objectives of ensuring all
living quarters are associated with an address and accurate response
data are obtained for all identified living quarters.
For the American Community Survey (ACS), research is underway to
incorporate the use of administrative records in the ACS. The use of
administrative records can improve quality of the published data. The
Census Bureau is also conducting a content test this fall (2022) to
ensure the questions on the ACS are up --to date and reflect the needs
of the nation. Future research includes plans to improve messaging,
expand monitoring of near real-time operational and survey data,
improve statistical methodology, and adjust the in-person contact
strategy. The Census Bureau publishes research plans for the ACS on a
regular basis in our Agility in Action report series: (https://
www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/operations-and-administration/
agility-in-action.html.)
To potentially address quality issues from the 2020 Census that may
be carried forward throughout the decade via the official population
estimates (which build off decennial data in the estimates base), the
Census Bureau has formed the Base Evaluation and Research Team (BERT).
The team is researching the feasibility of taking coverage measures
from the Demographic Analysis and Post-Enumeration Survey into account
in the development of the official population estimates. BERT consists
of subject-matter experts in the areas of population estimates, age and
sex statistics, coverage measurement, race and ethnicity, demography,
and disclosure avoidance. The team is taking a phased approach to the
research, beginning with an analysis of 2020 Census data and coverage
measures. Presently, the Population Estimates Program (PEP) only
includes limited data from the 2020 Census in the estimates base from
which the annual population estimates are developed. Ultimately, the
BERT will make recommendations to the PEP regarding the incorporation
of additional 2020 Census data or coverage adjustments into the
population estimates base. Any proposed changes will be thoroughly
tested and subject to rigorous review to determine whether the change
produces plausible estimates across all demographic subgroups and
geographies.
The 2030 Census is currently in the design selection phase. This
phase includes research, testing, and operational planning and design
work to inform the selection of the initial 2030 Census operational
design, targeted for late 2024. This work will factor in past census
experiences, evolving technology, and stakeholder feedback. The Census
Bureau's research agenda includes numerous projects to explore
enhancements to data collection (including group quarters), data
processing, operational infrastructure, and expanded use of
administrative records.
For the 2030 Census, for the first time, the public can formally
give input on planning and designing the next census. Your comments and
recommendations are key for planning and designing the next census.
As announced in a Federal Register Notice posted August 17, 2022,
everyone is encouraged to provide input now through November 15, 2022.
We will use this input to inform the Census Bureau's decisions on the
2030 Census operational design.
Following the design selection phase, the program will move to the
development and integration phase to conduct rigorous testing and to
prepare for peak production.
Question 11. The Census Bureau's Ask U.S. Panel project aims to
create a probability-based online research panel using a cooperative
agreement with a private entity. Please explain the relationship
between the Ask U.S. Panel, the High Frequency Data Program, and the
Pulse Surveys. How does the Bureau distinguish between these various
projects? In what ways are they interconnected?
Answer. The Pulse Surveys--the Household Pulse Survey (HPS) and the
Small Business Pulse Survey (SBPS)--were conceived in March 2020, to
produce near real-time data on the ways in which American households
and small businesses were experiencing the social and economic
disruptions brought on by the Covid-19 pandemic.
The High Frequency Data Program evolved out of a recognition that
the Pulse Surveys had value beyond the pandemic. The High Frequency
Data Program was established in fiscal year 2021, and now serves as the
programmatic framework for the Census Bureau to mature the Household
Pulse Survey and the Business Trends and Outlook Survey (formerly, the
Small Business Pulse Survey), and support them as ongoing Census Bureau
data products.
The Ask U.S. Panel was initiated in 2019 as a research project
within the Census Bureau's Research and Methodology Directorate via a
cooperative agreement with RTI, International . The objective of the
project was to identify a better way to recruit study participants for
Census Bureau studies and improve representativeness of research
outcomes.
How does the Bureau distinguish between these various projects? In what
ways are they interconnected?
Answer. Please see Answer 11-A above with respect to the
distinctions among these projects. With regard to their interconnected
nature, data from the Small Business Pulse Survey (SBPS) and the
Household Pulse Survey (HPS) were quickly embraced by a diverse range
of data users, and it became clear that pulse data had value beyond the
pandemic. With support from Congress in fiscal year 2021, the Census
Bureau established a High Frequency Data Program with the goal of
maturing its ability to produce ongoing timely data products. The pulse
surveys are strategically managed at the Census Bureau within this High
Frequency Data Program framework. Over time, the research on the Ask
U.S. Panel suggested that the concept of a panel had potential beyond
the research activities for which Ask U.S. was originally designed, and
a panel developed internally by the Census Bureau--building on
methodologies used on Ask U.S. and expanding to leverage existing
Census Bureau data sources--could serve to improve the current design
of the HPS. Building on the early research associated with the Ask U.S.
Panel, the Census Bureau recognizes the potential for developing a new
panel, rigorously developed and maintained using high- quality Title 13
data resources to ensure representativeness of the U.S. population, may
have value beyond research. As additional program areas and agencies
became interested in the idea of using a panel for rapid measurement,
the Census Bureau recognized that such a panel could provide a
foundation for the production of official statistics.
Question 12. A recent Federal Register notice from the Department
of Commerce indicates the Ask U.S. Panel is an interagency effort with
representatives from Census, the Economic Research Service, the Bureau
of Labor Statistics, the National Center for Health Statistics, the
National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, the National
Center for Education Statistics, the Department of Defense, Department
of Transportation, Department of Labor, and the Social Security
Administration. Please explain how the interagency effort is
structured. Are the agencies providing financial support for the Ask
U.S. Panel? How much research will each agency receive?
Answer. The Economic Research Service, the Bureau of Labor
Statistics, the National Center for Health Statistics, the National
Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, the National Center for
Education Statistics, the Department of Defense, Department of
Transportation, Department of Labor, the Social Security
Administration, and the Office of Management and Budget have all
contributed to the methodological conversation about the concept and
value of a panel developed and maintained by the Census Bureau.
Further, agencies that contributed financially to the Ask U.S. Panel
Pilot project include the Economic Research Service, the Food and
Nutrition Service, the National Center for Health Statistics, the
National Center for Education Statistics, Department of Transportation,
Department of Labor, and the Social Security Administration.
As set forth in the Interagency Agreements (IAAs) between the
Census Bureau and each of these agencies, each contributing agency
provides input on key sampling domains of interest and topical surveys/
research questions for implementation in the Pilot Study. These
agreements entitle the funding agencies to contribute up to 5 questions
to the baseline survey and the initial topical survey. Lastly, the
Department of Defense has a separate IAA to recruit additional
subsamples of active-duty military and military spouses for a
specialized pilot baseline and topical survey.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Lisa Murkowski
Question 1. Broadband The Senator greatly appreciates the
Secretary's time and attention to the unique needs of Alaska with
respect to broadband deployment. The NTIA's goal of ``Internet for
all'' is extremely laudable and was a big driver for the Senator to
support of the IIJA. As you can understand, the Senator is extremely
interested in the specifics of the BEAD program roll out. If you could
please review and provide responses to these questions, we would
greatly appreciate it.
The BEAD allocation to states relies on the broadband serviceable
location fabric identifying all structures where a broadband connection
can be installed in each state, and which structures are unserved.
Alaska does not have the same mapping data which the fabric relies on
as the Lower 48 states. Review of the preview version of the fabric has
revealed missing data for significant regions of Alaska.
A. How are NTIA and the FCC ensuring that the fabric will be
accurate for Alaska?
Answer. The IIJA directs the Assistant Secretary, in coordination
with the Commission, to allocate BEAD funds amongst the states once the
broadband DATA maps are made public. I agree that accurate mapping--
including the mapping fabric--is vital, and that the FCC's challenge
processes--both for the fabric and for provider data submitted in
conjunction with the new Broadband Data Collection--are critical to
improving their accuracy. With respect to your specific questions about
the fabric and CostQuest, I must defer to our colleagues at the FCC.
B. What additional data has CostQuest identified to fill in
the missing data for Alaska?
Answer. See response above.
C. If additional data for additional surveying, such as
aerial mapping, is needed to create an accurate fabric for
Alaska, how will NTIA and the FCC ensure the fabric is accurate
before allocations are made?
Answer. See response above.
Question 2. The BEAD program sets aside a significant amount of
funding for ``high cost areas'' to help bridge the digital divide. As
you know, there is no place more ``high cost'' than Alaska. The statute
includes factors to be taken into consideration in determining what
areas qualify, including remoteness, lack of population density, and
unique topography--all of which especially describe Alaska. The statute
also gives the Assistant Secretary discretion to rely on ``any other
factor'' in determining which areas are ``high cost'' in a state and
therefore eligible to receive additional resources. Alaska has
historically come up short exactly because we are so high cost. This
set aside is an opportunity to direct resources to those areas of the
country with the highest costs to build and provide service.
A. How are the Department and NTIA thinking about this high
cost set aside as it relates to Alaska?
Answer. NTIA staff are actively developing the definition of
``high-cost area,'' but I cannot at this time predict when NTIA will
release its guidance on that issue. We are working with each Eligible
Entity, including the State of Alaska, to identify and help to resolve
the unique issues that each Eligible Entity faces, and we maintain a
close working relationship with key stakeholders and experts in Alaska.
The Assistant Secretary will soon be visiting your state to get an on-
the-ground view of the challenges facing bringing high-speed Internet
to all Alaskans.
B. What assurances can you give that the Department and NTIA
are committed to ensuring that Alaska gets the sizable
resources needed to connect every Alaskan with affordable
broadband service?
Answer. See response above.
Question 3. In the BEAD NOFO on Page 15, Section C (Definitions),
Subsection U (Reliable Broadband Service), it states, ``The term
``Reliable Broadband Service'' means broadband service that the
Broadband DATA Maps show is accessible to a location via: (i) fiber-
optic technology; (ii) Cable Modem/Hybrid fiber-coaxial technology;
(iii) digital subscriber line (DSL) technology; or (iv) terrestrial
fixed wireless technology utilizing entirely licensed spectrum or using
a hybrid of licensed and unlicensed spectrum.''
A. Are these the only technologies considered to provide
``reliable broadband service''? For example, is satellite not
considered Reliable Broadband Service? In some instances in
Alaska, it may be the only viable option.
Answer. For the purposes of the BEAD Program, locations served
exclusively by satellite do not meet the criteria for Reliable
Broadband Service and so will be considered ``unserved.'' The
Infrastructure Act defines ``reliable broadband service'' as
``broadband service that meets performance criteria for service
availability, adaptability to changing end-user requirements, length of
serviceable life, or other criteria, other than upload and download
speeds, as determined by the Assistant Secretary in coordination with
the FCC.'' IIJA Sec. 60102(a)(L). For the purposes of this definition,
the Assistant Secretary adopts the criteria that Reliable Broadband
Service must be (1) a fixed broadband service that (2) is available
with a high degree of certainty, (3) both at present and for the
foreseeable future, and finds, after coordination with the FCC, that
the definition of Reliable Broadband Service set forth in the BEAD NOFO
best meets those criteria.
With that said, the BEAD Program is designed to give each state
significant flexibility to develop a fair, open, and competitive
processes for selecting subgrantees. If no Reliable Broadband Service
technology meeting the BEAD Program's technical requirements would be
deployable for a subsidy of less than a state's Extremely High Cost Per
Location Threshold at a given location, the state is authorized to
select a proposal involving a less costly technology for that location,
even if that technology does not meet the definition of Reliable
Broadband Service but otherwise satisfies the Program's technical
requirements. We expect there will be no small number of locations or
sets of locations that exceed the ``Extremely High Cost Per Location
Threshold,'' especially in Alaska.
Question 1. Climate Science and Research/Fisheries Disasters
In Alaska, Secretary Raimondo approved a backlog of 14 fisheries
disasters from 2018 to 2021. Iconic rivers like the Yukon and Kuskokwim
are seeing depleted Chinook and chum runs that freezers and drying
racks empty. Every speaker at the Alaska delegation's salmon roundtable
agreed upon the need for better and more accessible science as we see
impacts to fisheries from the warm water blobs in the Gulf of Alaska,
the shrinking of the Bering Sea cold pool, and stock migrations into
colder waters.
A. The Department of Commerce plays a critical role in
preparing our nation for the impacts of climate change through
NOAA's science and research projects. We cannot adapt and
Congress cannot make informed decisions without reliable
information. How much funding does NOAA plan to allocate to
expand climate observation, forecasting, and research? How
would NOAA utilize those funds to better prepare a state like
Alaska that is ground-zero for climate change in the Arctic?
Answer. NOAA's fiscal year 2023 President's Budget request includes
an increase of $261.5M above fiscal year 2022 Enacted to support an
earth system approach to enhance NOAA's authoritative climate products
and services. NOAA's work directly impacts communities across the
Nation and around the globe, from supporting climate-resilient
communities and climate- ready fisheries to improving forecasts and
response to climate-related natural disasters.
The request includes an additional $23.3M in NMFS and $10.0M in
OAR, above fiscal year 2022 Enacted, to support the NOAA Climate-
Ecosystem-Fisheries Initiative (CEFI). This initiative directly
supports NOAA's goals to achieve a climate ready nation, and NMFS'
efforts to deliver climate products and services to help sustain the
nation's valuable living marine resources, and the many businesses and
communities that depend on them. The CEFI will build a national ocean/
ecosystem prediction and decision support system to support climate-
informed fisheries management, protected species conservation, and
adaptation of resource-dependent sectors and communities.
Through CEFI, NMFS will provide direct support for climate
resilience and adaptation in Alaska, the Arctic and other regions in
three ways--providing climate-informed assessments and management
advice to decision makers ($10.0M), maintaining and enhancing survey
operations that are impacted due to climate change ($3.3M), and
bolstering support to state and tribes for their efforts to improve
climate resilience through the Species Recovery Grants Program
($10.0M). OAR's request would support down-scaling global climate
models to regional scales to project climate impacts on key species and
ecosystems. This is a first step for the CEFI, which, with additional
funding, could provide improved understanding of climate changes in
Alaskan waters. These fiscal year 2023 budget requests are essential to
building the CEFI system needed to support climate-informed decision
making.
The fiscal year 2023 President's Budget also includes several OAR
initiatives to improve climate observations and research that will
benefit Alaska and the Arctic. This includes an additional $16.1M for
Sustained Atmospheric Observations, which would create an independent,
transparent evaluation of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and provide a
robust understanding of the allowable cumulative GHG emissions to limit
global warming. Additionally, the $9 million requested for Providing
Climate Projections out to 2050 to inform Risk Management would develop
standardized and accessible climate projections with society-relevant
data delivery services to improve the equity of climate risk
information.
Lastly, the fiscal year 2023 President's Budget request includes $6
million for OAR's Arctic Research activities. Overall, OAR investments
in Alaskan and Arctic sustained observations and monitoring of ocean,
climate, and marine ecosystems will continue to establish baseline
conditions of the region through long-term moorings in the Bering and
Chukchi Sea, the state-wide Climate Reference Network, and Barrow
Atmospheric Baseline Observatory. These observations support improved
modeling and forecasting of ocean, climate, and ecosystems that provide
essential services to communities, partners, and decision-makers.
Continued investments in new observing technologies and capabilities to
overcome the extreme Arctic environment will hone our understanding of
sea-ice, ocean climate, and marine ecosystem changes, and are needed to
realize the full potential of new blue economic opportunities in Alaska
and the Arctic.
Advancing these efforts will directly support production, delivery
and use of the climate related information needed to support resilience
and adaptation to changing climate and marine ecosystems in Alaska.
Specifically, to address climate change in Alaska and the Arctic, NOAA
Fisheries would improve marine ecosystem monitoring (including humans)
and better support predictive capacity to inform management and marine
resource users (commercial and coastal communities). Monitoring would
include consistent support for shipboard oceanographic, fisheries, and
marine mammal observations on the U.S. Arctic shelf in the Bering,
Chukchi, and Beaufort Seas. These observations would support the Alaska
Climate Integrated Modeling project and the Climate Ecosystem Fisheries
Initiative to forecast climate change impacts on fish, shellfish,
marine mammals, fisheries, and fishery dependent communities in the
Bering Sea.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator John Kennedy
Question 1.
Preface:
--In 2014, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) selected 500
(approx. 1/3 of the fleet) Gulf of Mexico Shrimp Permit owners
using a stratified random sampling method to participate in the
Cellular Electronic Logbook (cELB) Program.
--The fiscal year 22 omnibus appropriation bill directed NMFS, in
consultation with the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council
and shrimp industry stakeholders, to continue the development
and implementation of the cELB.
--The cELB collects spatial patterns of fishing efforts for
scientific research under NMFS, it requires cost sharing
between NMFS and the shrimp fleet.
--In December 2020 the 3G network used for cELBs was phased out. To
supplement the data collection, the shrimping industry provided
funding to develop a pilot program using P-Sea WindPlot, an
alternative technology.
Given that the shrimp industry and the Council have already
invested almost $1 million to develop a new scientific data collection
system, based on the widely-used P-Sea WindPlot navigation system, in
the wake of 3G going off line, can you commit NMFS to using the new
technology rather than more expensive alternatives that many smaller
shrimp boats cannot afford?
Answer. The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council is currently
exploring two options for the new Gulf shrimp data collection system,
and funded a pilot study to test the ability of the P-Sea WindPlot
system to be used in concert with one of those options to meet fishery
science and management objectives. That pilot study, along with another
being conducted by NMFS Southeast Fisheries Science Center, is expected
to be complete in early 2023, after which time the Council will
identify its preferred path forward. Shrimpers in the Gulf of Mexico
may have different needs and expenses that are dependent on other Gulf
permits held by a vessel, and those associated permit reporting
requirements, as well as the electronic equipment currently available
on a vessel. To meet the regulatory requirement to report shrimp
effort, the varied needs of Gulf shrimpers, and allow for flexibility,
NMFS will be approving specifications for the Council's preferred new
Gulf shrimp data collection system, which could then be met by multiple
vendors and products. NMFS will support use of the P-Sea Windplot
navigation system as one of several products available to shrimp
fishermen if it is able to meet those specifications.
Question 2.
Preface:
--On April 13, 2021, disaster struck Gulf Coast families when a 129-
foot commercial lift boat, the SEACOR Power, capsized in the
Gulf of Mexico. Six crewmembers were recovered alive, six were
found dead, and seven remain unaccounted for.
--The capsizing of the SEACOR Power is the worst disaster to strike
the Gulf Coast since the Deepwater Horizon blowout in 2010.
--For days, numerous volunteers, including the Cajun Navy, scoured
the skies and seas in an effort to locate missing crewmembers.
--Volunteers intended to use trawling nets to assist in recovery
searches but encountered strong opposition from NOAA related to
Federal regulations concerning sea turtles. Volunteers using
their own shrimp boats wanted to temporarily tie their Turtle
Excluder Devices (TED) for targeted recovery operations, but
were unable to due to Federal red tape.
--Volunteers were given the costly and time-wasting options of either
removing the TEDs entirely or replacing the nets with expensive
alternatives.
--NOAA claims the National Marine Fisheries Service does not have the
authority to waive TED regulations when lives are at stake. The
NMFS has prosecutorial discretion over charging those that
violate TED regulations, and, the Secretary of Commerce can
override their decision.
I understand this issue predates your time as Secretary, can you
ensure a similar situation will be prevented in the future? If so, why
wasn't this discretion utilized to allow volunteers to search for
bodies in the ocean and give closure to these devastated families?
Answer. Shortly following the Seacor lift boat accident, NOAA
Fisheries reviewed our regulatory authority to issue TED exemptions and
determined our authority is limited to responding to certain
environmental conditions or enabling experimentation to improve TED
efficacy. The regulatory authority to grant these exceptions is at 50
CFR 223.206(d)(3) and 50 CFR 223.207(e)(2). 50 CFR 223.206(d)(3)
authorizes NOAA Fisheries to allow compliance with tow- time
restrictions in lieu of TED requirements if the agency's Assistant
Administrator determines the presence of algae, seaweed, debris, or
other special environmental conditions in a particular area makes
trawling with TED-equipped nets impracticable. 50 CFR 223.207(e)(2)
authorizes NOAA Fisheries to issue permits exempting from TED
requirements public or private experimentation aimed at improving the
shrimp retention efficiency of approved TEDs, developing new TEDs, or
conducting fishery research.
In both of those situations, the exemption process did not apply
and, even if it could be used, would have taken longer (one to several
weeks) than NOAA Fisheries' proposed solution. NOAA Fisheries instead
proposed that the trawls could be modified to no longer be considered
shrimp trawls under the regulatory definitions, by removing the TED and
bag end used for shrimping and replacing it with a bag end constructed
of 4" or greater mesh. The 4" or greater mesh webbing is readily
available at net shops, and in many cases may already be owned by the
trawl fishers. Webbing of that size mesh is used for a variety of
purposes, including chafing gear on TEDs and for bag ends when some
shrimp trawlers seasonally convert their gear for fish trawling.
Removal of the TED and bag end, construction of a simple bag end made
of 4" or greater mesh, and attachment to the trawl can be completed in
1-2 hours or less.
Therefore:
--In the unfortunate event that a similar situation occurs in the
future, the solution proposed by NOAA Fisheries would be the
quickest and most efficient means of allowing the trawl fishers
to tow their trawls as part of recovery operations.
--When investigating allegations of violations, NOAA Fisheries
gathers evidence of mitigating and aggravating factors that
contributed to the violation. While it is correct that NOAA's
Office of General Counsel (OGC) has prosecutorial discretion
over charging those that violate TED regulations, such
discretion typically comes into play after a violation has been
detected and mitigating factors, if any, can be evaluated by
OGC.
Question 4.
Preface:
Secretary Raimondo, NOAA has predicted a higher-than normal
hurricane season with a forecast for 19 named storms, nine reaching
hurricane status and four to become major hurricanes. Many of these
communities are in my state along the coast continue to struggle to
recover from past storms, most of which are economically disadvantaged
and racially diverse.
A. How do you justify a budget that claims to promote
diversity and equity and calls for billions of new dollars in
spending, yet doesn't expand our capacity to better predict
hurricane track and intensity? Several of NOAA's key hurricane
buoys in the Gulf of Mexico are inoperable and after Congress
provided $35 million in supplemental funds for NOAA to improve
in part, hurricane intensity forecasting, including through
deployment of unmanned ocean observing platforms. Why are you
failing to use the supplemental funds Congress provided, with
explicit direction, protect the lives of diverse communities in
Louisiana?
Answer. NOAA appreciates Congress' support from the fiscal year
2022 Disaster Relief Supplemental Act (DRSA) and is eager to realize
improvements to its hurricane track and intensity prediction
capabilities. Funding from DRSA includes $35 million for NOAA to
improve hurricane intensity and track forecasting and precipitation and
flood prediction, forecasting, and mitigation capabilities. Upon
Congressional approval of NOAA's DRSA Spend Plan in February 2022, NOAA
has moved aggressively to execute these funds, which supports our work
to protect lives and property.
This funding will benefit diverse coastal communities, including in
Louisiana, by allowing NOAA to accelerate implementation of the
Hurricane Forecast Improvement Project (HFIP), make advancements to the
Hurricane Analysis and Forecasting System (HAFS), improve risk
communications for vulnerable populations, increase ocean observations
including with uncrewed observing platforms, advance ocean/air data
assimilation, develop a new hurricane testbed, and enhance
precipitation prediction and storm surge forecasting. It also includes
funding for the repair and replacement of damaged NOAA and partner
assets in Louisiana and funding for additional response and improvement
efforts that will support the greater Gulf of Mexico region. DRSA did
not cover NOAA hurricane buoy repairs in Louisiana, however, NOAA has
scheduled servicing for the 2 buoy outages in the Gulf of Mexico and is
working with the U.S. Coast Guard to execute repairs on those weather
buoys by the end of August.
NOAA is dedicating approximately $1 million in DSRA funding for the
repair and replacement of damaged NOAA and partner assets in Louisiana.
The DSRA also provides $9 million for additional response and
improvement efforts including mapping, charting and geodesy services
for Louisiana and Texas; ocean observation activities for improving
hurricane intensity forecasts and data assimilation improvements.
NOAA is working with Saildrone to deploy two remotely-controlled
saildrones in the Gulf of Mexico supported by DRSA funds during the
2022 hurricane season. Overall, NOAA will be deploying seven saildrones
for hurricane research in the Atlantic Ocean/Caribbean Ocean/Gulf of
Mexico for the 2022 hurricane season as compared to the five that were
deployed in the Atlantic Ocean/Caribbean Ocean only in 2021. These will
be deployed on a research basis to understand how the collection of
ocean and atmospheric measurements can improve our representation of
air/sea processes in forecast models.
In addition, there are currently four NOAA ocean gliders operating
in the Gulf of Mexico. These gliders collect subsurface ocean
observations to improve hurricane intensity forecasts. Further, NOAA
supports an array of profiling floats and drifting buoys in the Gulf of
Mexico that provide data year-round, including during critical periods
like hurricane seasons. Deployment of additional observing platforms in
the Gulf of Mexico will be greater in 2023 through the integrated field
campaign funded by DRSA.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Bill Hagerty
Question 1. The Census is one of the most important functions of
your Department and a basic institution of government required by the
Constitution. During your hearing you seemed to agree that Congress and
the American people deserve transparency regarding how the Census is
conducted that allows for meaningful oversight of the methods and
assumptions used, is that correct?
Answer. Yes, I do agree. As I said in the hearing, I set the tone
at the top of the Commerce Department that the Census Bureau should be
fact-based, data-based, science-based, and statistical-based. More
transparency is always better.
Question 2. In finalizing the 2020 Census, the Census Bureau used a
methodology called ``group quarters imputation'' to estimate the number
of people living in certain group housing facilities like prisons,
nursing homes, and college dorms. As such, part of the final Census
count reflects people actually counted in the field, and part reflects
Bureau guesswork about how many people live in certain locations.
Shouldn't the Census Bureau publicly disclose how much of the 2020
Census count resulted from actual evidence-based counting in the field,
and how much of the count resulted from guesswork and assumptions, in
order to provide transparency and allow for oversight?
Answer. Count imputation is a statistically valid method of
population counting that has been employed by the Census for decades
and was upheld by the Supreme Court in Utah v. Evans in 2002. It is
universally accepted in the demographic research community that
imputation improves the accuracy of the population count. At the end of
data collection for group quarters (GQs), the Census Bureau realized
many GQs had not provided the necessary information indicating their
occupancy status or population count. To address this issue, the Census
Bureau assembled the GQ count imputation (GQCI) team to remove
reporting errors from GQs and, when possible, to apply a count
imputation procedure when valid responses from occupied GQs were not
available. Among all GQs in the census, the Census Bureau applied GQCI
to about 2 percent. Similarly, among all people enumerated in the
census at GQs, about 2 percent were derived through GQCI. For those
people, the Census
Bureau imputed all their characteristics in the characteristic
imputation operation as part of the creation of the Census Edited File.
More information on the procedure can be found in a brief summary
memorandum. (https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/decennial/2020/
program-management/memo-series/2020-memo-2022_08.
pdf).
The Census Bureau is assessing the GQCI operation and will release
a memorandum this fall providing, among other information, rates of
GQCI by states and separately by major types of GQs. Additionally, on
May 28, 2021, the Census Bureau released additional quality metrics
(https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-
releases/2021/additional-2020-quality-metrics.html) for housing units
looking at how census operations obtained a response for each address.
The Census Bureau released the percentage of occupied housing units in
each state that were enumerated by self-response, in nonresponse
follow-up with household members and proxies, by using administrative
records, by ``other enumerations,'' and by count imputation. The
results are available in this downloadable table (https://
www2.census.gov/
programs-surveys/decennial/2020/data/operational-quality-metrics/
census-
operational-quality-metrics-release_2.xlsx). In Tennessee, for example,
77 percent of occupied housing units self-responded, and 21 percent
were counted by nonresponse follow-up. Less than 0.5 percent were
enumerated by count imputation.
Question 3. There have been suggestions that releasing information
regarding the evidence- based counting numbers and the imputed numbers
might somehow compromise the personal information provided by Census
respondents. Can you explain how releasing statewide totals of people
actually counted in each state, compared to people guessed or assumed
to live in each state, would compromise privacy?
Answer. The Census Bureau is charged with safeguarding the
confidentiality of census information. Pursuant to that responsibility,
the Census Bureau has, for decades, employed disclosure avoidance
techniques to defend against the release of any ``publication whereby
the data furnished by any particular establishment or individual ...
can be identified.'' 13 U.S.C. Sec. 9(a)(2). And the Census Bureau has
assiduously avoided disclosing information ``reported by, or on behalf
of, any particular respondent.'' Id. Sec. 8(b). But computer technology
and processing power have grown exponentially in recent years,
substantially increasing the risk of reconstruction and
reidentification attacks on census data. The Census Bureau has kept
pace (and tried to stay a step ahead) by developing ever-more
sophisticated disclosure avoidance systems to protect the
confidentiality of census information. Still, as with any information
security system, if the system's foundation is undermined, the
information being secured is rendered vulnerable.
Question 4. Another method the Census Bureau used in finalizing the
2020 Census was what it calls ``differential privacy,'' which
essentially involves the Bureau purposefully injecting erroneous data
into the reported data for the supposed purpose of shielding personal
information. For example, 10 people live in Census Block 1, and 40
people live in Census Block 2, the Bureau may report these numbers as
20 people in Census Block 1 and 30 people in Census Block 2--and change
the demographic data, too--to supposedly make it harder to reverse
engineer any personal information. This means the local population
counts and demographic information--often used to draw congressional
districts and for other purposes--are purposefully inaccurate. In
addition to the other assumptions and adjustments made to the evidence-
based count, this further obscures the real data. In your view, is it
problematic that, because of this ``differential privacy'' method the
Census doesn't provide accurate information regarding local populations
and demographics?
Answer. The Census Bureau has employed many methods to protect
respondent confidentiality over the decades. The 2010 Census was
protected using a method called ``data swapping'', where sensitive
records (e.g., a household with unique characteristics relative to
those around them) in one geography were swapped with records from a
household in a nearby geography. That is, the Census Bureau
``perturbed'' the data in 2010 and previous censuses to protect
respondent confidentiality. In reviewing available methods to protect
the 2020 Census, the Census Bureau concluded that statistical noise
calibrated with differential privacy was the best tool currently
available to ensure adequate privacy protection while maximizing data
quality. Balancing statistical accuracy and the confidentiality of
census data has long been at the core of the Census Bureau's work.
Protecting the confidentiality of respondents' information is both a
legal requirement under 13 U.S. Code Sec. Sec. 8(b) and 9, and an
operational necessity if the agency is to maintain the public's trust
that the Census Bureau will properly safeguard the information it
provides. Consequently, the Census Bureau has long relied on a variety
of statistical techniques to protect confidentiality and reduce
disclosure risk in the data products it releases to the public.
Over the years, as disclosure risks have increased because of
advances in computing power and the growing availability of external
data sources that could be used to reidentify census respondents from
published tabulations (https://www.census.gov/data/academy/webinars/
2021/disclosure-avoidance-series/simulated-reconstruction-abetted-re-
identification-attack-on-the-2010-census.html), the Census Bureau has
adapted and improved its disclosure avoidance methods (https://
www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/factsheets/2021/comparing-
differential-privacy-with-older-disclosure-avoidance-methods.pdf) to
keep pace with these growing threats. For the 1970 and 1980 censuses,
the Census Bureau suppressed data for small areas and small
populations. For the 1990 through 2010 censuses, the Census Bureau
injected ``noise'' (statistical error) into published tabulations
through a process called ``swapping.'' The Census Bureau's use of
differential privacy for the 2020 Census is a more sophisticated and
precise mechanism for injecting noise into published statistics than
the swapping mechanism used in prior censuses. The error introduced
into 2020 Census publications by the 2020 Census Disclosure Avoidance
System is necessary to protect against reidentification, and this
disclosure-avoidance error is trivial compared to other known sources
of error (https://www.census.gov/library/fact-sheets/2022/
variability.html) in census counts because of operational and coverage
issues. This means the local population counts and demographic
information--often used to draw congressional districts and for other
purposes--are better protected as well as fit for their intended use.
Question 5. Census Bureau employees are the only people with any
visibility into the real numbers and how they are being changed using
guesswork. And they won't share their methods and assumptions because
they say it will compromise them. So there's no way to oversee these
methods and assumptions. With an important constitutional function like
this, shouldn't the Census Bureau have to disclose its counting
assumptions and modifications to the actual evidence-based count to
allow for meaningful oversight?
Answer. The Census Bureau is always ready to prepare briefings and
informational materials for any Congressional oversight requests. For
the 2020 Census, we spearheaded a 2020 Census Congressional Partnership
Initiative through which Census Bureau staff met with Members of
Congress and their staff from nearly 400 congressional offices in
Washington, DC. Field-based congressional partnership specialists
arranged hundreds of events involving congressional state/district
offices. We also arranged weekly briefings on major 2020 Census
operations for appropriations and oversight staff and periodic
briefings to which all Congressional staff were invited in addition to
the 2020 Census Program Management Reviews.
In addition, before the Census Bureau publishes any statistic, it
applies safeguards that help prevent someone from being able to trace
that statistic back to a specific respondent. The 2020 Census is using
a powerful privacy protection system known in scientific circles as
``differential privacy,'' designed specifically for the digital age.
The Census Bureau is transitioning to this privacy protection system to
keep pace with emerging threats in today's digital world. As part of
this transition, the Census Bureau began releasing demonstration
products in 2019 and requesting public feedback. These demonstration
products allow the public to see the level of ``noise'' that is being
added by the disclosure avoidance methodology through the creation of a
2010 Census data set protected using the new disclosure avoidance
methodology. The public is then able to compare the demonstration data
product to publicly released 2010 Census data to evaluate the
differences. See the Demographic and Housing Characteristics File (DHC)
Development and Production Timeline (https://www2.census.gov/programs-
surveys/decennial/2020/program-management/DHC%20Timeline) for more
information. Additionally, the Census Bureau hosted a second public
workshop with CNSTAT on June 21-22, 2022, to provide opportunities for
data users who rely on more detailed sociodemographic data to assess
and provide feedback on the suitability of the most recent DHC
demonstration data product. (The first public workshop was held in
December 2019.) These data user analyses and feedback will help inform
Disclosure Avoidance System improvements for the next round of
demonstration data, scheduled for release in August 2022, and
ultimately inform final decisions on the 2020 Census DHC production
settings. It is important to note that the Census Bureau's transparency
regarding the implementation of improved data protection methods is
unprecedented. Historically, the impacts of the agency's
confidentiality protections on published data products have largely
been opaque to data users.
In keeping with its commitment to transparency, the Census Bureau
has undertaken a series of unprecedented quality reviews early in the
data release process. This includes enlisting outside experts to
independently evaluate the results, as well as providing frequent
updates through a blog series and through the 2020 Census Data Quality
(https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/decennial-census/decade/2020/
planning-management/process/data-quality.html) webpage. The Census
Bureau works with multiple oversight entities, such as the Government
Accountability Office and the Department of Commerce's Office of
Inspector General, as well as engages with respected members of the
scientific and statistical community to conduct independent assessments
of the 2020 Census. These entities extensively and carefully review the
methods and processes the Census Bureau uses to produce the counts,
disclosure edits, etc., to ensure the results are meeting goals and
statistical standards. The experts are from three groups--National
Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM) Committee on
National Statistics, American Statistical Association Quality
Indicators Task Force, and JASON (an independent scientific advisory
group)--and all three have produced census quality reports. For
example, the NAS Panel to Evaluate the Quality of the 2020 Census
produced, ``Understanding the Quality of the 2020 Census, (https://
nap.nationalacademies.org/read/26529/chapter/1)'' the ASA Task Force
produced, ``2020 Census Quality Indicators, (https://www.amstat.org/
asa/files/pdfs/POL-2020CensusQualityIndicators.pdf)'' and JASON
produced, ``Assessment of 2020 Census Data Quality Processes. (https://
www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/decennial/2020/program-management/
planning-docs/2020-census-data-quality-processes.pdf).''
Question 6. In March, 18 of my Senate colleagues and I sent
President Biden a letter expressing our serious concerns with the
record increases in fertilizer prices that are impacting American
farmers. Since, unfortunately, the situation in Ukraine has only
exacerbated the problem. Since January 2021, according to the most
decent data from USDA' Marketing Services, the prices of key fertilizer
sources have substantially increased. Can you provide me an update as
to what actions your Department has taken to reduce the cost of sky
rocketing prices?
Answer. We at the Commerce Department continue to be very concerned
about the Russian invasion of Ukraine and its many unfortunate
humanitarian, security, and economic consequences. We are maintaining
open communications with the fertilizer industry and sharing their
perspectives with Administration leadership and interagency
counterparts to address this situation.
Question 7. I understand that your Department has a role in the
U.S. Geological Survey's (USGS) designation of critical mineral.
Potash, a key mineral for fertilizer production, has historically been
designated a critical mineral by USGS, but has been removed. Will you
commit to working with the Department of Interior to restore potash as
a critical mineral?
Answer. The Commerce Department, along with other United States
government agencies, is a member of the White House Office of Science
and Technology Policy's National Science and Technology Council
Critical Minerals Subcommittee (CMS). In February 2022, the Department
of the Interior announced the revision of the critical minerals list,
noting that Interior's U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) developed it using
``the most up-to-date scientific methods to evaluate mineral
criticality''. According to USGS, ``[T]he 2022 list of critical
minerals is based on a methodology developed over several years with
leadership by the USGS and interagency input coordinated by the CMS.
The USGS published the new methodology in 2020 and this methodology was
used to create the draft list and update it in 2021-2022.'' Commerce
would refer you to USGS for any further information.
Question 8. Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) is a major input cost for
fertilizer production. Have you spoken directly with Secretary
Granholm, the White House, or any other Cabinet official about the
impact record LNG prices are having on the cost of fertilizer
production? Are there any plans underway to change regulatory policy
and stymie the Biden Administration in a manner that could be expected
to lower LNG prices?
Answer. The Administration has taken actions to address the
disruptions to the global supply chains for fertilizer due to Putin's
unjustified invasion of the Ukraine, In May, President Biden announced
that USDA was doubling funding for domestic fertilizer production from
an initial $250 million investment to $500 million. This action should
help lower costs and boost availability for farmers, so they can obtain
the inputs they need at prices they can afford to maximize yields.
Question 9. On July 11, 2021, Congressman Michael McCaul and I
wrote to urge you to add Yangtze Memory Technologies Company (YMTC) to
the Entity List. YMTC is China's state- owned national champion for
memory chips, with ties to the CCP military. Unfortunately, since then,
our dependence has continued to grow on Chinese companies like YMTC
with clear ties to the Party-state and military that are threats to our
national security. Witness Apple's recent disturbing decision to
consider relying, in part, on YMTC chips for its phones. My colleagues
and I are now finalizing bipartisan legislation that aims to preserve a
secure chip and memory supply for the United States. Your executive
power could greatly facilitate achieving this goal. Why have you not
yet added YMTC to the Entity List?
Answer. The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) shares your
concerns about efforts by the People's Republic of China (PRC)
government and PRC companies to threaten U.S. national security and
foreign policy interests. A core objective of BIS is to impair the
PRC's goal of parity in leading- edge semiconductor technology. BIS
continually assesses available open-source, proprietary, and classified
information, in coordination with our interagency partners, for the
addition of other Chinese parties to the Entity List, all while
ensuring U.S. technological leadership. Since the start of the Biden
Administration, BIS has placed over 100 PRC parties on the Entity List
and maintains nearly 600 PRC parties on the Entity List to date. While
the Entity List is a powerful tool, it is not the only tool BIS
possesses to address activities that threaten our national security and
foreign policy interests. BIS uses ``Is Informed'' letters--letters to
individual companies informing them of additional license requirements
related to specific parties and/or items--and imposes additional
license requirements because of end-use or end-user concerns, such as
unacceptable risk in or diversion to weapons of mass destruction (WMD)
programs in certain countries. BIS also aggressively pursues criminal
and civil penalties related to unauthorized exports to China, and
investigations are carried out by law enforcement officers whose
mission is to investigate such violations and pursue them criminally
and administratively.
Under the Export Administration Regulations (EAR), all additions to
the Entity List are subject to an interagency review process and
require a majority vote of the End-User Review Committee (ERC), which
is chaired by the Department of Commerce, with representation from the
Departments of State, Defense, Energy, and where appropriate, Treasury.
The ERC determines whether the entity has been involved in, is involved
in, or poses a significant risk of being or becoming involved in
activities that are contrary to the national security or foreign policy
interests of the United States.
BIS welcomes the opportunity to provide technical assistance on any
draft legislation upon request.
Question 10. You have been a vocal advocate for increasing U.S.
semiconductor manufacturing. I'm also very supportive of increasing
American chip manufacturing, which will create American jobs and
bolster our national security interests vis-`-vis China. In March, you
noted that twenty years ago we made nearly 40 percent of the world's
chips, and now we make only 12 percent. You noted that we buy 90
percent of our most sophisticated chips from Taiwan--the same Taiwan
that China has its sights set on. Is that kind of dependency a
significant vulnerability for American national and economic security?
Answer. Yes. American dependency on chips manufactured abroad is
absolutely a significant vulnerability for national and economic
security. I applaud the members of Congress who worked hard to get the
CHIPS and Science Act to President Biden's desk. My staff have hit the
ground running to operationalize this historic investment in America's
global economic leadership and to shore up these vulnerabilities.
Question 11. The United States continues to lead the world in chip
design, software, and equipment, so it seems the problem is that it has
become too costly or uncertain for chip manufacturers to locate in the
United States. Chip manufacturers have told me that this problem cannot
be solved with dollars alone--as proposed by the CHIPS Act Congress is
now considering. Even well-funded projects cannot be completed if they
are tied up with multi-year permitting processes. In fact, our
permitting process is one of the reasons manufacturers chose to
relocate in places like Taiwan in the first place. Given the dire need
to encourage chip manufacturing in the U.S., do you agree that,
conceptually, it makes sense to allow chip manufacturers to utilize an
existing Federal program that improves the Federal permitting process
if it helps speed up domestic chip manufacturing projects?
Answer. I was pleased to support your bill (S. 3451) to add
semiconductor facilities to the existing FAST-41 process. Lengthy
permitting processes cannot delay the impact of this historic
investment in American semiconductor manufacturing.
Question 12: Do you support legislation, which has been approved
unanimously by the U.S. Senate (S. 3451), to utilize existing Federal
programs to streamline the Federal permitting process an bring chip
manufacturing back to the U.S.?
Answer. Yes. I supported S. 3451, and I am pleased that the bill
became law.
Question 13. Will you work with my office/staff to convey the
benefits/push for legislation in the House, etc.?
Answer. As per the Energy Act of 2020, at least every 3 years the
Department of the Interior must review and update the list of critical
minerals. We refer you to USGS, which is a part of Interior, for
further information on its plans for the next revision.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Shaheen. The subcommittee now stands in recess,
subject to the call of the Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 3:29 p.m., Wednesday, May 11, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
the Chair.]
COMMERCE, JUSTICE, SCIENCE, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2023
----------
WEDNESDAY, MAY 25, 2022
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 2:00 p.m., in room SR-192, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeanne Shaheen (Chair) presiding.
Present: Senators Shaheen, Leahy, Moran, Collins, Graham,
Boozman, Moore Capito, Kennedy, Hagerty, and Braun.
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JEANNE SHAHEEN
Senator Shaheen. The Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice,
Science, and Related Agencies, will now come to order.
Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to today's hearing, to
review the President's fiscal year 2023 funding request for the
Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Our witness today is FBI Director, Christopher Wray.
Director Wray it is very nice to have you before the Committee
again.
I must admit, however, that I rewrote my opening statement
for today's hearing, based on the tragic events in Texas. But I
want to begin by recognizing the more than 36,000 employees of
the FBI who protect our country from violent criminals,
terrorists, and others who would mean us great harm. And I want
to thank everyone at the FBI for their dedication and service
to the country.
The FBI remains on standby to jump into action to assist
their State, local, and Tribal partners with investigating
criminal activity. And the most recent example of this was
assisting in the horrific aftermath of the shooting at Robb
Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, yesterday, a shooting that
has so far claimed 21 lives, 19 of them children.
As a mother and grandmother I can only--really I can't
begin to imagine the pain that these families are going
through. I want to thank the FBI for sending the agents in and
other key staff so quickly, to what I know has been a very
difficult crime scene.
I understand that the FBI has also made Victim Specialists
available as part of the response, and I hope they are able to
remain in this community as long as they are needed. And if
this Committee can provide resources to help make that happen,
please let us know.
I know that we don't know yet what motivated this killer. I
do know that several of our colleagues have already called for
better mental health screening, from enforcing laws that keep
guns out of the hands of felons, and for hardening schools.
I would agree with all of those recommendations, but I also
think Congress needs to act to strengthen background checks,
and to stop allowing the sale of weapons of war.
As, my colleague, Senator Murphy rightly pointed out
yesterday, mental illness is not unique to the United States,
but the devastating rate of gun violence is. We can't accept
this status quo, the lives of Americans, of our children depend
on Congress being willing to enact meaningful policies to
address the scope of this crisis and to keep people safe.
Weapons of war enable mass shootings like the one at Robb
Elementary, where we don't know the motive. And others like the
shooting at Tops market, where we know the motive all too well.
People who are simply going about their everyday lives, whether
it is attending religious services in Pittsburg, in Charleston,
shopping at Walmart in El Paso, dancing at a night club in
Orlando, or getting groceries in Buffalo. They were all
murdered by individuals motivated by hate.
The FBI's budget request of $10.8 billion includes
additional resources for combating domestic terrorism, and mass
violence. We have discussed this topic before here, in this
Committee, yet again, and again, we have witnessed White
supremacist targeting others based on their gender, sexual
orientation, or faith.
Now, we are fortunate that technological progress has given
us advances in medicine, science, and manufacturing, as well as
improving the ease of how we can communicate with others. But
unfortunately, new technologies have also allowed the rapid
spread of hate, conspiracy theories, and disinformation to
wider audience, and they have allowed those with extremist
views to find a community. I hesitate to call it a
``community'', because I think of community as something
positive. To find others who share those extremist views.
While we should be able to freely express our ideas, it
should not come at the expense of someone's life or wellbeing.
We clearly need to find better solutions and actions to stem
future violence, and I know that the FBI will be part of those
solutions.
Just as the FBI rapidly responds to crisis situations, I
believe Congress needs to also find a way to more quickly and
appropriately respond to the issue of mass violence, including
those committed with firearms and domestic terrorism.
I am certainly ready to work on common-sense legislation
that I think the majority of Americans can support, and I am
sure that many of my colleagues on this Committee who will join
me as well.
So, Director Wray, I look forward to your testimony, and to
the discussion today.
With that, I would like to recognize the CJS Subcommittee
Vice Chair, Senator Moran, for his opening remarks.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JERRY MORAN
Senator Moran. Chairman Shaheen, thank you very much, thank
you for convening this hearing.
Director Wray, welcome back to the subcommittee.
I, too, before considering the budget request, would like
to make a brief word on yesterday's senseless act of violence
that stole the lives of nineteen children and two teachers.
My wife and I have had this conversation. It is
heartbreaking. The murder of these innocent children is
horrific. In a small town, tight-knit community like Uvalde, it
is the size of a town I grew up in, I know there will not be a
single member of the community who is not touched by this
tragedy.
Director Wray, I am confident that you will bring the full
investigative powers of the FBI to bear, in determining the
motives, the warnings, and how, and why. I am also confident
there will be an introspection, examining whether all laws,
NICS Section policies were properly followed, and we await your
findings.
The FBI is requesting $10.7 billion for salaries and
expenses in 2023. That amount is 605 million, or 6 percent
above the fiscal year 2022 enacted. But as we have demonstrated
in Texas, and in Buffalo, and nearly every city across the
country violent crime, including murders, assault and robberies
is on the rise.
I can give this Committee statistics, percentages on the
rise of crime, but no one here, especially after yesterday's
tragic shooting, doubts that violent crime is a growing problem
in our country. We have also seen a dramatic increase in
violent attacks on law enforcement officers.
This is a matter that I know, you, Director Wray, care
about deeply. I have seen it in your conversations, I have
heard it in your testimony. I experience it on our telephone
all yesterday, and I appreciate your efforts, your care, and
concern, and your efforts to raise awareness about the violent
crime occurring across our country.
While I note the Bureau is working to keep us safe here at
home, we also face ever-evolving threats from foreign
adversaries as well. I recognize your job is really endless,
you know, there is never enough that can be done. You have
repeatedly warned that nothing presents a broader, more severe
threat to our ideas, our innovation, and our economic security
than the Chinese Government.
I understand that as of January of this year, the FBI is
investigating more than 2,000 cases of Chinese Government
trying to steal our information in technology, and the FBI is
opening a new counterintelligence case every 12 hours.
I am interested to learn about the FBI's efforts to address
cyber crime, and ransomware. The Bureau made transformational
changes after 9/11, and these changes help keep our nation safe
from acts of terrorism.
Today, changes of a similar magnitude may be needed to
combat cyber threats, including threats from both criminal
organizations, and state actors.
I appreciated your comments to the students of the
University of Kansas when we were there together this past
March, where you emphasized how important it will be for them
to bring their talents to the frontline of the cybersecurity
workforce.
Director Wray, I look forward to hearing today about the
Bureau's budget, your budget request. And I hope to be able to
help you and the FBI address all of the challenges that we face
in this country, related to law enforcement. The challenges are
tremendous, the ones that we saw, reminded of again yesterday,
are at the forefront, that the world is a dangerous place,
every place we turn.
I welcome you to the Subcommittee, and I look forward to a
somber and sober discussion of the circumstances we find
ourselves in.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Moran. At this time the
Chair of the Full Appropriations Committee, Senator Leahy would
like to make a statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY
Senator Leahy. Thank you, Chair Shaheen, and Vice Chair
Moran for your comments.
Director Wray, we have known each other for a number of
years, and I will just tell you some of my concerns. Twenty-one
victims; that is 21 families waking up this morning with broken
hearts. Those of us who have had, whether we have had children
or not, but those who have had children and grandchildren, we
think 19 children, murdered.
Gun violence is an epidemic. It can't be ignored, it can't
be overstated, it can't be hidden behind the guise of an
unassailable Second Amendment argument.
And I don't want to politicize or overreact, I am just, I
am angry, I am extremely angry that 19 more children, and two
adults who were fighting to protect them have been murdered,
murdered. Murdered!
I am angry that today too many in Congress are just willing
to accept these mass shootings as another breaking news story,
as just another part of our daily lives. Oh, we are praying for
the victims. Of course we are praying for the victims, but what
the hell are we doing to stop further victims?
I have owned firearms responsibly my entire life. I support
a strong Second Amendment. I spent 8 years in law enforcement,
but simple common sense and what should be our shared humanity,
compel us to not simply quietly acknowledge the crisis. We all
know that it is a crisis, but we need to do something about it.
Nearly 10 years ago, a murderer took the lives of 26
people, including 20 children, at Sandy Hook. I led the Senate
Judiciary Committee's action to advance legislation to help
address the epidemic of gun violence. And over 2 years ago, as
then Vice Chairman of the Appropriations Committee, I worked to
break through the years long refusal to provide the CDC and the
NIH with resources to simply study the roots of gun violence.
The gun lobby had blocked those resources for years, even
just having a study of gun violence, but now we need more! And
we have got to stop saying, well, next week, next month, next
year, we have to do it now. How many more people will die
before this country says, enough is enough? I will say it
today. It is enough.
So Director Wray, thank you for being here today, as the
Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation you have a
critically important job. You have to protect our country from
threats of terrorism, and crimes, both foreign and domestic,
and, while you are doing it, you have to uphold the rights and
values that make this a great democracy.
I don't envy that task. I respect that task, but the
heinous mass shooting in Buffalo, New York, earlier this month
is a stark reminder that domestic terrorism is still very much
present in the United States. It is also a somber reminder that
the majority of domestic terrorism perpetrated against innocent
Americans is driven by those espousing white supremacists and
racist ideologies.
Now, that is not a controversial statement, it is a simple
fact. And that is what makes this moment so dangerous. When
facts are distorted into untruths, and parroted by those with a
pulpit to do so, we tread dangerously far from the core tenets
of our democracy.
If we can't clearly and unequivocally condemn the actions
of white supremacists, or simply acknowledge the January 6,
2021, attack on our Capitol for what it was, an insurrection,
we fan the flames of hatred and violence, and we allow them to
grow. It is alarming to me. It should be to every American. It
is in my State of Vermont, whether you are Republicans, or
Democrats, Independents, it is alarming.
But I will also further highlight the importance of the
work of the dedicated men and women of the Bureau, and your
leadership there, Director Wray. Each year this Appropriations
Committee wrestles with how best to dedicate valuable taxpayer
dollars. Next week I am going to have binders about this thick
at my home in Vermont where it is nice and quiet, reading
through all these budget requests. But in exchange, of course,
for the money, we said we expect the FBI to confront
forcefully, head on, the threat of domestic terrorism. We
expect you to faithfully and fully adhere to the rule of law to
investigate whatever crime is committed, to work with the
Department of Justice and State and local law enforcement to
hold the perpetrators of any crime accountable.
I stand ready to support you. But I also want you to
respond when we have questions, either Republicans or
Democrats, on this Committee.
So I can say a lot more. I won't. I would rather hear the
Director, Chair Shaheen. But thank you for the courtesy.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Leahy.
Director Wray, the floor is yours.
STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER WRAY, DIRECTOR, FEDERAL
BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Mr. Wray. Well, thank you. Good afternoon, Chair Shaheen,
Ranking Member Moran, Chair Leahy, Members of the Subcommittee.
I know, of course, that we are here to talk about the FBI's
budget, but like all of you, I want to begin with what is on
everybody's hearts and minds.
Yesterday we got the news that we all dread, including
those of us in law enforcement, we do this work for the
victims, both the actual victims, and the victims we are trying
to prevent from being victims, and there is no category of
victims that more motivates the men and women of law
enforcement, including the men and women of the FBI, than
children.
And parents got calls yesterday that are too devastating to
even fathom, and a community, really a whole Nation, was shaken
by another horrific mass shooting, this time, once again, at an
elementary school, full of young kids just days, days away from
finishing their school year, and my heart goes out to the
families of the victims, and to the entire community of Uvalde.
I know that you are experiencing unimaginable pain and
trauma, and the entire FBI family feels your heartbreak and
stands with you.
There will certainly be more that we are going to learn
about this heinous attack in the days ahead, and I know the
American people, and especially the people of Uvalde, are
looking for answers. I do want to acknowledge the heroism of
all law enforcement who responded immediately to the scene.
For our part, the FBI will continue to work around the
clock with the Texas Department of Public Safety and the Uvalde
Police Department, and our other State, local, and Federal
partners, to assist in any way we can. We are dedicating the
full resources of the FBI San Antonio Field Office, and a whole
host of other FBI divisions to helping the Texas DPS, and the
Uvalde Police, who have the lead in the investigation.
On top of that we are devoting significant national
resources, including investigative and analytical resources, in
evidence response, and laboratory personnel, Victim Services
professionals to assist the families of the victims, crisis
management and behavioral analysis units.
So bottom line, we are absolutely heartbroken about
yesterday's tragic events, and committed to doing our part to
support our partners in the investigation and the community of
Uvalde, as we begin to try to move forward.
Of course the range of criminal cyber and
counterintelligence threats we face as a Nation has never been
greater, or more diverse, and the demands and expectations
placed on the FBI have never been higher.
And before I take your questions, I want to spend just a
few minutes talking about the FBI's efforts in some of those
areas, namely, our efforts to combat terrorism both domestic
and international, and our efforts to help tackle the rise in
violent crime.
Unfortunately this tragedy, as well as the recent tragedy
in Buffalo, and way too many before, reinforce what we in the
FBI have been so concerned about for so long, and that is the
threat of lone actors who look to attack regular, everyday
people going about their regular, everyday lives. And in fact
it is that threat that we continue to be most concerned about
here in the homeland.
And while it is too soon to be commenting on the motivation
behind yesterday's tragedy, and I don't want to get out ahead
of Texas DPS which has the lead on that, as the horrific attack
a little over a week ago in Buffalo shows, we have got to
continue to stay laser focused on our efforts to counter
violence motivated by hate and extremism.
Even on the international terrorism side we are seeing
home-grown violent extremists, inspired by groups like ISIS,
like al-Qaeda, acting alone or in small groups, and leaving
fewer dots to connect, and less time in which to connect them,
and countering fast-moving threats like these requires a team
approach, so we have requested an enhancement not just for
additional investigators but also support personnel to help us
perform the important outreach, and partnership building that
is so essential to countering this threat.
The scourge of violent crime, of course, extends beyond
mass shootings, and beyond crimes motivated by extremist
ideology. In fact, rising violence is the number one concern I
hear about from chiefs and sheriffs all across the country with
whom I speak just about every week.
With those partners we are leading hundreds of task forces
to get the worst of the worst off the streets. We are sharing
intelligence to focus our collective efforts, and we are
providing technical resources and expertise to bring more
violent criminals to justice.
Last fiscal year those task forces focused on violent
crime, made more than 17,000 arrests, seized more than 8,000
illegally possessed firearms, and dismantled nearly 300 gangs
and criminal enterprises across the country. And that is all
separate and apart, and in addition to all of our Joint
Terrorism Task Force work on the counterterrorism side,
domestic terrorism, international terrorism.
I should add that with this hearing falling 2 years to the
day, after the murder of George Floyd, I do want to emphasize
that we and our State and local partners are also focused on
improving interactions between law enforcement and the
communities we all serve, to ensure equal justice for all.
Of course these are just a few of the threats we are
tackling. The FBI's budget request this year reflects the
breadth, depth, and complexity of those threats. In addition to
the things I have already mentioned each and every day our
folks are also dealing with an ever-expanding array of threats
on the cyber front from ransomware, and the theft of trade
secrets, and personal information, to malign and influence
campaigns, to intrusions targeting our critical infrastructure.
And that includes working with our private sector,
government, and foreign partners to meet the danger from
Russian cyber actors during this time of Russia's unprovoked
aggression in the Ukraine.
We are also taking on the Chinese Government's broad-scale
economic espionage campaign that targets our innovation, our
ideas, our economic security. And today, as we mark the 40th
National Missing Children's Day, it is important to highlight
the work of our 400 FBI personnel and nearly 800 additional
officers who serve on our Child Exploitation and Human
Trafficking Task Forces, that we have dedicated to
investigating crimes against children, and to identifying and
locating child victims.
Our fellow citizens look to us to protect the United States
from all those threats, and a whole bunch more, and I am proud
to see the men and women of the FBI step up and rise to meet
those challenges every day.
I would like to again thank this subcommittee for all the
support you have provided the men and women of the FBI over the
years.
And to the community of Uvalde, we will provide whatever
resources we can, we will support you however we can, and we
will stand with you in our thoughts, and our prayers.
And thank you. I am happy to take your questions.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Christopher A. Wray, Director, Federal Bureau of
Investigation
Good afternoon, Chairwoman Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and
Members of the Subcommittee. Today, I appear before you on behalf of
the men and women of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (``FBI''), who
tackle some of the most complex threats every day with perseverance,
professionalism, and integrity--sometimes at the greatest of costs. I
am extremely proud of their service and commitment to the FBI's mission
and to ensuring the safety and security of communities throughout our
nation. On their behalf, I would like to express my appreciation for
the support you have given them in the past, ask for your continued
support in the future, and pledge to be the best possible stewards of
the resources you provide. I would like to begin by providing a brief
overview of the President's fiscal year 2023 budget request for the
FBI, and then follow with a short discussion of key threats and
challenges that we face, both as a nation and as an organization.
fiscal year 2023 budget overview
The fiscal year 2023 budget request proposes a total of $10.8
billion in direct budget authority to carry out the FBI's national
security, intelligence, criminal law enforcement, and criminal justice
services missions. The request includes a total of $10.7 billion for
Salaries and Expenses, which will support 36,945 positions (13,616
Special Agents, 3,287 Intelligence Analysts, and 20,042 professional
staff), and $61.9 million for Construction. The request includes eleven
program enhancements totaling $324.6 million. These enhancements are
proposed to meet critical requirements and close gaps in operational
capabilities, including $52.0 million to enhance cyber investigative
capabilities, $48.8 million for additional personnel and tools to
investigate and counter acts of mass violence and address threats to
public safety, $34.1 million to mitigate threats from foreign
intelligence services, $20.6 million to combat crime and corruption,
$17.8 million to address the increase in civil rights investigations,
$36.9 million to enhance the FBI's cybersecurity posture and protect
internal networks, $25.0 million to address data analytics/technical
tool development and technical surveillance, $27.4 million to support
infrastructure needs related to the use of Body Worn Cameras, $39.4
million for operations and maintenance of FBI-owned facilities, and
$22.5 million to support the expansion of Federal jurisdiction for
crimes committed on Tribal lands in response to the McGirt Supreme
Court decision. When compared against the fiscal year 2022 President's
Budget, the fiscal year 2023 request level represents a total increase
of $527.8 million, all of which falls in the Salaries and Expenses
account.
key threats and challenges
Our nation continues to face a multitude of serious and evolving
threats ranging from homegrown violent extremists to hostile foreign
intelligence services and operatives, from sophisticated cyber-based
attacks to Internet facilitated sexual exploitation of children, from
violent gangs and criminal organizations to public corruption and
corporate fraud. Keeping pace with these threats is a significant
challenge for the FBI. As an organization, we must be able to stay
current with constantly evolving technologies. Our adversaries--
terrorists, foreign intelligence services, and criminals--take
advantage of modern technology, including the Internet and social
media, to facilitate illegal activities, recruit followers, encourage
terrorist attacks and other illicit actions, to spread misinformation,
and to disperse information on building improvised explosive devices
and other means to attack the U.S. The breadth of these threats and
challenges are as complex as any time in our history. And the
consequences of not responding to and countering threats and challenges
have never been greater.
The support of this Committee in helping the FBI do its part in
thwarting these threats and facing these challenges is greatly
appreciated. That support is allowing us to establish strong
capabilities and capacities to assess threats, share intelligence,
leverage key technologies, and--in some respects, most importantly--
hire some of the best to serve as Special Agents, Intelligence
Analysts, and professional staff. We have built, and are continuously
enhancing, a workforce that possesses the skills and knowledge to deal
with the complex threats and challenges we face today--and tomorrow. We
are building a leadership cadre that views change and transformation as
a positive tool for keeping the FBI focused on the key threats facing
our nation.
Today's FBI is a national security and law enforcement organization
that uses, collects, and shares intelligence in everything we do. Each
FBI employee understands that, to defeat the key threats facing our
nation, we must constantly strive to be more efficient and more
effective. Just as our adversaries continue to evolve, so, too, must
the FBI. We live in a time of acute and persistent terrorist and
criminal threats to our national security, our economy, and indeed our
communities. These diverse threats underscore the complexity and
breadth of the FBI's mission: to protect the American people and uphold
the Constitution of the United States.
national security
Top Terrorism Threats
Preventing terrorist attacks, from any place, by any actor, remains
the FBI's top priority. The nature of the threat posed by terrorism--
both international terrorism (``IT'') and domestic terrorism (``DT'')--
continues to evolve.
The greatest terrorism threat to our Homeland is posed by lone
actors or small cells who typically radicalize online and look to
attack soft targets with easily accessible weapons. We see these
threats manifested within both Domestic Violent Extremists (``DVEs'')
and Homegrown Violent Extremists (``HVEs''), two distinct threats, both
of which are located primarily in the United States and typically
radicalize and mobilize to violence on their own. Individuals who
commit violent criminal acts in furtherance of social or political
goals stemming from domestic influences--some of which include racial
or ethnic bias, or anti- government or anti-authority sentiments--are
described as DVEs, whereas HVEs are individuals who are inspired
primarily by global jihad but are not receiving individualized
direction from Foreign Terrorist Organizations (``FTOs'').
Domestic and Homegrown Violent Extremists are often motivated and
inspired by a mix of socio-political, ideological, and personal
grievances against their targets, and more recently have focused on
accessible targets to include civilians, law enforcement and the
military, symbols or members of the U.S. Government, houses of worship,
retail locations, and mass public gatherings. Selecting these types of
soft targets, in addition to the insular nature of their radicalization
and mobilization to violence and limited discussions with others
regarding their plans, increases the challenge faced by law enforcement
to detect and disrupt the activities of lone actors before they occur.
The top threat we face from DVEs continues to be from those we
categorize as Racially or Ethnically Motivated Violent Extremists
(``RMVEs''), including those who advocate for the superiority of the
white race, who were the primary source of lethal attacks perpetrated
by DVEs in 2018 and 2019. It is important to note that we have also
recently seen an increase in fatal DVE attacks perpetrated by Anti-
Government or Anti-Authority Violent Extremists, specifically Militia
Violent Extremists and Anarchist Violent Extremists. Anti-Government or
Anti-Authority Violent Extremists were responsible for three of the
four lethal DVE attacks in 2020. Also, in 2020, we saw the first lethal
attack committed by an Anarchist Violent Extremist in over 20 years.
These Anti-Government/Anti-Authority Violent Extremists have
specifically targeted law enforcement and the military as well as
institutions or members of the U.S. Government.
The number of FBI investigations of suspected domestic violent
extremists has more than doubled since the spring of 2020. A few months
ago, we marked the 1 year anniversary of the January 6 assault on the
U.S. Capitol, which has led to unprecedented efforts by the Department
of Justice, including the FBI, to investigate and hold accountable all
who engaged in violence, destruction of property, and other criminal
activity on that day. To date, the department has arrested and charged
nearly 800 individuals who took part in the Capitol assault.
The FBI uses all tools available at its disposal to combat domestic
terrorism. These efforts represent a critical part of the first-ever
National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism, which was released
in June 2021, and which sets forth, for the first time, a
comprehensive, whole of government policy to address the many facets of
the domestic terrorism threat.
The FBI assesses HVEs are the greatest, most immediate
international terrorism (``IT'') threat to the Homeland. As I have
described, HVEs are people located and radicalized primarily in the
United States, who are not receiving individualized direction from
global jihad-inspired FTOs but are inspired largely by the Islamic
State of Iraq and ash-Sham (``ISIS'') and al-Qa'ida to commit violence.
An HVE's lack of a direct connection with an FTO, ability to rapidly
mobilize without detection, and use of encrypted communications pose
significant challenges to our ability to proactively identify and
disrupt it.
The FBI remains concerned that FTOs, such as ISIS and al-Qa'ida,
intend to carry out or inspire large-scale attacks in the United
States. Despite its loss of physical territory in Iraq and Syria, ISIS
remains relentless in its campaign of violence against the United
States and our partners--both here at home and overseas. To this day,
ISIS continues to aggressively promote its hate-fueled rhetoric and
attract like-minded violent extremists with a willingness to conduct
attacks against the United States and our interests abroad. ISIS'
successful use of social media and messaging applications to attract
individuals seeking a sense of belonging is of continued concern to us.
Like other foreign terrorist groups, ISIS advocates for lone offender
attacks in the United States and Western countries via videos and other
English language propaganda that have, at times, specifically advocated
for attacks against civilians, the military, law enforcement and
intelligence community personnel.
Al-Qa'ida maintains its desire to both conduct and inspire large-
scale, spectacular attacks. Because continued pressure has degraded
some of the group's senior leadership, we assess that, in the near
term, al-Qa'ida is more likely to continue to focus on cultivating its
international affiliates and supporting small-scale, readily achievable
attacks in regions such as East and West Africa. Over the past year,
propaganda from al-Qa'ida leaders continued to seek to inspire
individuals to conduct their own attacks in the United States and other
Western nations.
Iran and its global proxies and partners, including Iraqi Shia
militant groups, continue to attack and plot against the United States
and our allies throughout the Middle East in response to U.S. pressure.
Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Qods Force (``IRGC-QF'')
continues to provide support to militant resistance groups and
terrorist organizations. Iran also continues to support Lebanese
Hizballah and other terrorist groups. Lebanese Hizballah has sent
operatives to build terrorist infrastructures worldwide. The arrests of
individuals in the United States allegedly linked to Lebanese
Hizballah's main overseas terrorist arm, and their intelligence
collection and procurement efforts, demonstrate Lebanese Hizballah's
interest in long-term contingency planning activities here in the
Homeland. Lebanese Hizballah Secretary- General Hasan Nasrallah also
has threatened retaliation for the death of IRGC-QF Commander Qassem
Soleimani.
As an organization, we continually adapt and rely heavily on the
strength of our Federal, State, local, Tribal, territorial, and
international partnerships to combat all terrorist threats to the
United States and our interests. To that end, we use all available
lawful investigative techniques and methods to combat these threats
while continuing to collect, analyze, and share intelligence concerning
the threat posed by violent extremists, in all their forms, who desire
to harm Americans and U.S. interests. We will continue to share
information and encourage the sharing of information among our numerous
partners via our Joint Terrorism Task Forces across the country, and
our Legal Attache offices around the world. The fiscal year 2023
Request includes an additional 208 positions (including 55 Special
Agents, 18 Intelligence Analysts, and 135 professional staff) and $48.8
million to counter terrorism and the increasing acts of domestic
terrorism, including acts of mass violence and threats to public
safety, occurring across the United States.
Cyber
Over the past 2 years, nation-state and criminal cyber actors took
advantage of people and networks made more vulnerable by the sudden
shift of our personal and professional lives online due to the COVID-19
pandemic, targeting those searching for personal protective equipment,
worried about stimulus checks, and conducting vaccine research.
Throughout these last 2 years, the FBI has seen a wider-than-ever
range of cyber actors threaten Americans' safety, security, and
confidence in our digitally connected world. But these threats will not
disappear when the pandemic ends. Cyber-criminal syndicates and nation-
states keep innovating ways to compromise our networks and maximize the
reach and impact of their operations, such as by selling malware as a
service or by targeting vendors as a way to access scores of victims by
hacking just one provider.
These criminals and nation-states believe that they can compromise
our networks, steal our property, and hold our critical infrastructure
at risk without incurring any risk themselves. In the last few years,
we have seen--and have publicly called out--China, North Korea, and
Russia for using cyber operations to target U.S. COVID-19 vaccines and
research. We have seen the far-reaching disruptive impact a serious
supply-chain compromise can have through the SolarWinds intrusions,
conducted by the Russian SVR. We have seen China working to obtain
controlled defense technology and developing the ability to use cyber
means to complement any future real-world conflict. We have seen Iran
use cyber means to try to sow divisions and undermine our elections,
targeting voters before elections and threatening election officials
after. As these adversaries become more sophisticated, we are
increasingly concerned about our ability to detect and warn about
specific cyber operations against U.S. organizations. One of the most
worrisome facets is their focus on compromising U.S. critical
infrastructure, especially during a crisis.
What makes things more difficult is that there is no bright line
where nation-state activity ends and cybercriminal activity begins.
Some cybercriminals contract or sell services to nation-states; some
nation-state actors moonlight as cybercriminals to fund personal
activities; and nation-states are increasingly using tools typically
used by criminal actors, like ransomware.
So, as dangerous as nation-states are, we do not have the luxury of
focusing on them alone. In the past year, we also have seen
cybercriminals target hospitals, medical centers, and educational
institutions for theft or ransomware. Such incidents affecting medical
centers have led to the interruption of computer networks and systems
that put patients' lives at an increased risk at a time when America
faces its most dire public health crisis in generations. And we have
seen criminal groups targeting critical infrastructure for ransom,
causing massive disruption to our daily lives.
We are also seeing dark web vendors who sell capabilities in
exchange for cryptocurrency increase the difficulty of stopping what
would once have been less dangerous offenders. What were once
unsophisticated criminals now have the tools to paralyze entire
hospitals, police departments, and businesses with ransomware. It is
not that individual hackers alone have necessarily become much more
sophisticated, but--unlike previously--they are able to rent
sophisticated capabilities.
We must make it harder and more painful for hackers and criminals
to do what they are doing. The FBI, using its role as the lead Federal
agency with law enforcement and intelligence responsibilities, works
seamlessly with domestic and international partners to defend their
networks, attribute malicious activity, sanction bad behavior, and take
the fight to our adversaries overseas. We must impose consequences on
cyber adversaries and use our collective law enforcement and
intelligence capabilities to do so through joint and enabled operations
sequenced for maximum impact. And we must continue to work with the
Department of State and other key agencies to ensure that our foreign
partners are able and willing to cooperate in our efforts to bring the
perpetrators of cybercrime to justice.
An example of this approach is the international seizure in April
2022 of Hydra Market--the world's largest and longest-running darknet
market. Hydra was an online criminal marketplace that enabled users in
mainly Russian-speaking countries to buy and sell illicit goods and
services, including illegal drugs, stolen financial information,
fraudulent identification documents, and money laundering and mixing
services, anonymously and outside the reach of law enforcement.
Transactions on Hydra were conducted in cryptocurrency and Hydra's
operators charged a commission for every transaction conducted on
Hydra. In 2021, Hydra accounted for an estimated 80 percent of all
darknet market-related cryptocurrency transactions, and since 2015, the
marketplace has received approximately $5.2 billion in cryptocurrency.
The seizure of the Hydra servers and cryptocurrency wallets containing
$25 million worth of bitcoin was made in Germany by the German Federal
Criminal Police (the Bundeskriminalamt), in coordination with the FBI
and our other Federal partners in the Drug Enforcement Administration,
the Internal Revenue Service, U.S. Postal Inspection Service, and
Homeland Security Investigations. The FBI used sophisticated
techniques, our unique legal authorities, and, most importantly, our
worldwide partnerships to significantly disrupt this illegal
marketplace.
Last year, cybersecurity companies including Microsoft disclosed
that hackers were using previously unknown vulnerabilities related to
Microsoft Exchange software to access email servers that companies
physically keep on their premises rather than in the cloud. These
``zero day'' vulnerabilities allowed the actors to potentially exploit
victim networks, engaging in activities such as grabbing login
credentials, installing malicious programs to send commands to the
victim network, and stealing emails in bulk. The FBI issued a joint
advisory in partnership with the Department of Homeland Security's
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (``CISA'') to give
network defenders the technical information they needed to mitigate the
vulnerability. However, while many infected system owners successfully
removed the web shells, others were not able to do so. That left many
systems vulnerable to adversaries who could continue to steal
information, encrypt data for ransom, or potentially even execute a
destructive attack. In response, through a court-authorized operation
in partnership with the private sector, we were able to copy and remove
malicious web shells from hundreds of vulnerable computers in the U.S.
running Microsoft Exchange Server software. This is another example of
how the FBI used its unique authorities, in this case, court-issued
legal process, and its partnerships with the private sector to have
tangible, real-world impact on the problem.
We took over 1,100 actions against cyber adversaries last year,
including arrests, criminal charges, convictions, dismantlements, and
disruptions, and enabled many more actions through our dedicated
partnerships with the private sector, foreign partners, and at the
Federal, State, and local entities. We also provided thousands of
individualized threat warnings and disseminated more than 100 public
threat advisories by way of Joint Cybersecurity Advisories, FBI Liaison
Alert System (``FLASH'') reports, Private Industry Notifications
(``PINs''), and Public Service Announcements (``PSAs'')--many of which
were jointly authored with other U.S. agencies and international
partners.
We have been putting a lot of energy and resources into all of
those partnerships, especially with the private sector. We are working
hard to push important threat information to network defenders, but we
have also been making it as easy as possible for the private sector to
share important information with us. For example, we are emphasizing to
the private sector how we keep our presence unobtrusive in the wake of
a breach; how we protect information that companies, and universities
share with us. We are also committed to providing useful feedback and
improving coordination with our government partners so that we are
speaking with one voice. But we need the private sector to do its part,
too. We need the private sector to come forward to warn us--and warn us
quickly--when they see malicious cyber activity. We also need the
private sector to work with us when we warn them that they are being
targeted. The recent examples of significant cyber incidents--
SolarWinds, HAFNIUM, the pipeline incident-- only emphasize what I have
been saying for a long time: The Government cannot protect against
cyber threats on its own. We need a whole-of-society approach that
matches the scope of the danger. There is really no other option for
defending a country where nearly all of our critical infrastructure,
personal data, intellectual property, and network infrastructure sits
in private hands.
In summary, the FBI is engaged in a myriad of efforts to combat
cyber threats, from improving threat identification and information
sharing inside and outside of the government to developing and
retaining new talent, to examining the way we operate to disrupt and
defeat these threats. We take all potential threats to public and
private sector systems seriously and will continue to investigate and
hold accountable those who pose a threat in cyberspace. The fiscal year
2023 Request includes an additional 137 positions (including 38 Special
Agents, 15 Intelligence Analysts, and 84 Professional Staff) and $52.0
million to enhance cyber information-sharing abilities and increase
cyber tools and capacities. The Request also includes 9 positions and
$36.9 million to help protect internal FBI networks.
Foreign Influence
Our nation is confronting multifaceted foreign threats seeking to
both influence our national policies and public opinion, and cause harm
to our national dialogue and debate. The FBI and our interagency
partners remain concerned about, and focused on, foreign malign
influence operations--which include subversive, undeclared, coercive,
and criminal actions used by foreign governments in their attempts to
sway U.S. voters' preferences and perspectives, shift U.S. policies,
increase discord in the United States, and undermine the American
people's confidence in our democratic institutions and processes.
Foreign malign influence is not a new problem, but the
interconnectedness of the modern world, combined with the anonymity of
the Internet, have changed the nature of the threat and how the FBI and
its partners must address it. Foreign malign influence operations have
taken many forms and used many tactics over the years. Most widely
reported these days are attempts by adversaries--hoping to reach a wide
swath of Americans covertly from outside the United States--to amplify
existing stories on social media in an attempt to discredit U.S.
individuals and institutions.
The FBI is the lead Federal agency responsible for investigating
foreign malign influence threats. Several years ago, we established the
Foreign Influence Task Force (``FITF'') to identify and counteract
foreign malign influence operations targeting the United States. The
FITF is led by the Counterintelligence Division and is comprised of
agents, analysts, and professional staff from the Counterintelligence,
Cyber, Counterterrorism, and Criminal Investigative Divisions. It is
specifically charged with identifying and combating foreign malign
influence operations targeting democratic institutions and values
inside the United States. In all instances, the FITF strives to protect
democratic institutions; develop a common operating picture; raise
adversaries' costs; and reduce their overall asymmetric advantage.
The FITF brings the FBI's national security and traditional
criminal investigative expertise under one umbrella to prevent foreign
influence in our elections. This better enables us to frame the threat,
to identify connections across programs, to aggressively investigate as
appropriate, and--importantly--to be more agile. Coordinating closely
with our partners and leveraging relationships we have developed in the
technology sector, we had several instances where we were able to
quickly relay threat indicators that those companies used to take swift
action, blocking budding abuse of their platforms.
Following the 2018 midterm elections, we reviewed the threat and
the effectiveness of our coordination and outreach. As a result of this
review, we further expanded the scope of the FITF. Previously, our
efforts to combat malign foreign influence focused solely on the threat
posed by Russia. Utilizing lessons learned since 2018, the FITF widened
its aperture to confront malign foreign operations of China, Iran, and
other global adversaries. To address this expanding focus and wider set
of adversaries and influence efforts, we have also added resources to
maintain permanent ``surge'' capability on election and foreign
influence threats.
These additional resources were also devoted to working with U.S.
Government partners on two documents regarding the U.S. Government's
analysis of foreign efforts to influence or interfere with the 2020
Election. The main takeaway from both reports is there is no evidence--
not through intelligence collection on the foreign actors themselves,
not through physical security and cybersecurity monitoring of voting
systems across the country, not through post- election audits, and not
through any other means--that a foreign government or other actors
compromised election infrastructure to manipulate election results.
The FBI will continue to investigate this threat leading up to the
fiscal year 2022 mid-term election and will not stop working with our
partners to impose costs on adversaries who have or are seeking to
influence or interfere in our elections.
In addition, the domestic CI environment is more complex than ever,
posing a continuous threat to U.S. national security and its economy by
targeting strategic technologies, industries, sectors, and critical
infrastructures. Historically, asymmetric CI threats involved foreign
intelligence service officers seeking U.S. Government and U.S.
Intelligence Community information. The FBI has observed foreign
adversaries employing a wide range of nontraditional collection
techniques, including the use of human collectors not affiliated with
intelligence services, foreign investment in critical U.S. sectors, and
infiltration of U.S. supply chains. The FBI continues to adjust its CI
priorities and posture to address the evolving and multifaceted threat.
The fiscal year 2023 request includes an additional 88 positions
(including 14 Special Agents, 35 Intelligence Analysts, and 39
Professional Staff) and $34.1 million to help combat the threats posed
by foreign, and potentially hostile, intelligence services and other
foreign government actors.
criminal threats
We face many criminal threats, from complex white-collar fraud in
the financial, healthcare, and housing sectors to transnational and
regional organized criminal enterprises to violent crime and public
corruption. Criminal organizations--domestic and international--and
individual criminal activity represent a significant threat to our
security and safety in communities across the Nation.
Violent Crime
Violent crimes and gang activities exact a high toll on individuals
and communities. Many of today's gangs are sophisticated and well
organized and use violence to control neighborhoods, and boost their
illegal money-making activities, which include robbery, drug and gun
trafficking, fraud, extortion, and prostitution rings. These gangs do
not limit their illegal activities to single jurisdictions or
communities. The FBI is able to work across such lines, which is vital
to the fight against violent crime in big cities and small towns across
the Nation. Every day, FBI special agents work in partnership with
Federal, State, local, and Tribal officers and deputies on joint task
forces and individual investigations.
Like the FBI's work combatting gangs, the FBI also investigates the
most serious crimes in Indian Country--such as murder, child sexual and
physical abuse, violent assaults, drug trafficking, public corruption,
financial crimes, and Indian gaming violations. As you are aware, there
are almost 600 federally recognized American Indian Tribes in the
United States, and the FBI has Federal law enforcement responsibility
on nearly 200 Indian reservations. This Federal jurisdiction is shared
concurrently with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (``BIA''), Office of
Justice Services; the FBI works very closely with BIA and other
Federal, State, and Tribal partners across the United States on crimes
in Indian Country.
Over the past year, the FBI's work in Indian Country increased
significantly due to the July 9, 2020, Supreme Court ruling in McGirt
v. Oklahoma, which determined that the territorial boundaries of the
Muscogee Creek Nation (``MCN'') would fall under Federal Indian Country
jurisdiction, expanding the FBI's responsibility for investigating
felony offenses committed by or victimizing a Tribal member. The
principles of the McGirt decision also apply to the status of the
Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Seminole, and Quapaw Tribal territories
in Oklahoma. Combined, all six reservation territories encompass
approximately 32,000 square miles, or 45 percent of the state of
Oklahoma. The total population within the combined borders is roughly
1.9 million, of which approximately 420,000 are enrolled Tribal
members.
This drastic increase in FBI jurisdiction poses significant and
long-term operational and public safety risks given the challenges
associated with the increased number of violent criminal cases now
under Federal jurisdiction within Oklahoma's Indian Country territory.
Since this decision, the FBI's Oklahoma City Field Office (``OC'') has
seen a drastic increase in the total number of Indian Country
investigations and now has the FBI's largest investigative
responsibility. Since the Federal court ruling in the McGirt case, the
FBI's Oklahoma City field office, which previously investigated
approximately 50 criminal cases a year involving Native Americans, has
managed thousands of Indian Country cases, prioritizing cases involving
the most violent offenders who pose the most serious risk to the
public.
To effectively conduct these investigations, the FBI has conducted
temporary duty (``TDY'') rotations of Special Agents, Intelligence
Analysts, Victim Specialists and other professional staff to the
Muskogee and Tulsa RAs, the offices most impacted by the decision. The
FBI has also expanded State, local, and Tribal participation on task
forces to assist with response and investigative efforts. The U.S.
Attorney's Offices in the Eastern District of Oklahoma and the Northern
District of Oklahoma also increased their staffing. To support the U.S.
Attorney's effective prosecution of these crimes, the FBI must have the
capability to sustain an enhanced presence in FBI OC. As such, the
fiscal year 2023 request includes an additional 76 positions (including
45 Special Agents, 1 Intelligence Analyst, and 30 professional staff)
and $22.5 million to support the surge in personnel. In addition, the
fiscal year 2023 Request includes 15 positions (including 10 Special
Agents and 5 professional staff) and $5.3 million to investigate
violence against women, specifically missing or murdered indigenous
persons in the U.S. The Request also includes $27.4 million to fulfill
the Department of Justice's policy and launch a Body Worn Cameras
program for FBI Special Agents across all FBI field offices.
Transnational Organized Crime (``TOC'')
More than a decade ago, organized crime was characterized by
hierarchical organizations, or families, that exerted influence over
criminal activities in neighborhoods, cities, or States. But organized
crime has changed dramatically. Today, international criminal
enterprises run multi-national, multi-billion-dollar schemes from start
to finish. Modern-day criminal enterprises are flat, fluid networks
with global reach. While still engaged in many of the ``traditional''
organized crime activities of loan-sharking, extortion, and murder,
modern criminal enterprises are targeting stock market fraud and
manipulation, cyber-facilitated bank fraud and embezzlement, drug
trafficking, identity theft, human trafficking, money laundering, alien
smuggling, public corruption, weapons trafficking, extortion,
kidnapping, and other illegal activities. TOC networks exploit
legitimate institutions for critical financial and business services
that enable the storage or transfer of illicit proceeds. Preventing and
combating transnational organized crime demands a concentrated effort
by the FBI and Federal, State, local, Tribal, and international
partners.
While the FBI continues to share intelligence about criminal groups
with our partners and combines resources and expertise to gain a full
understanding of each group, the threat of transnational crime remains
a significant and growing threat to national and international security
with implications for public safety, public health, democratic
institutions, and economic stability across the globe. TOC groups
increasingly exploit jurisdictional boundaries to conduct their
criminal activities overseas. Furthermore, they are expanding their use
of emerging technology to traffic illicit drugs and contraband across
international borders and into the U.S. To combat these efforts, the
FBI's fiscal year 2023 Request includes an additional 3 Special Agent
positions and $5.5 million.
Crimes Against Children and Human Trafficking
It is unthinkable, but every year, thousands of children become
victims of crimes, whether it is through kidnappings, violent attacks,
sexual abuse, human trafficking, or online predators. The FBI is
uniquely positioned to provide a rapid, proactive, and comprehensive
response; identify, locate, and recover child victims; and strengthen
relationships between the FBI and Federal, State, local, Tribal, and
international law enforcement partners to identify, prioritize,
investigate, and deter individuals and criminal networks from
exploiting children.
But the FBI's ability to learn about and investigate child sexual
exploitation is being threatened by the spread of lawless spaces
online. For example, currently, there are at least 30 child pornography
sites operating openly and notoriously on the Darknet, including the
Tor network. Some of these child pornography sites are exclusively
dedicated to the sexual abuse of infants and toddlers. The sites often
expand rapidly, with one site obtaining 200,000 new members within its
first four weeks of operation.
The FBI has several programs in place to arrest child predators and
to recover missing and endangered children. To this end, the FBI funds
or participates in a variety of endeavors, including our Innocence Lost
National Initiative, Innocent Images National Initiative, Operation
Cross Country, Child Abduction Rapid Deployment Teams, Victim Services,
80 Child Exploitation Task Forces, 53 International Violent Crimes
Against Children Task Force Officers, as well as numerous community
outreach programs to educate parents and children about safety measures
they can follow.
The FBI combats this pernicious crime problem through
investigations such as Operation Pacifier, which targeted the
administrators and users of a highly sophisticated, Tor- based global
enterprise dedicated to the sexual exploitation of children. This
multi-year operation has led to the arrest of over 348 individuals
based in the United States, the prosecution of 25 American child
pornography producers and 51 American hands-on abusers, the rescue or
identification of 55 American children, the arrest of 548 international
individuals, and the identification or rescue of 296 children abroad.
Child Abduction Rapid Deployment Teams are ready response teams
stationed across the country to quickly respond to abductions.
Investigators bring to this issue the full array of forensic tools such
as DNA analysis, trace evidence, impression evidence, and digital
forensics. Through improved communications, law enforcement also has
the ability to quickly share information with partners throughout the
world, and these outreach programs play an integral role in prevention.
In addition to programs to combat child exploitation, the FBI also
focuses efforts to stop human trafficking--a modern form of slavery.
The majority of human trafficking victims recovered during FBI
investigations are United States citizens, but traffickers are
opportunists who will exploit any victim with a vulnerability. Victims
of human trafficking are subjected to forced labor or sex trafficking,
and the FBI is working hard with its partners to combat both forms.
The FBI works collaboratively with law enforcement partners to
investigate and arrest human traffickers through Human Trafficking Task
Forces nationwide. We take a victim- centered, trauma-informed approach
to investigating these cases and strive to ensure the needs of victims
are fully addressed at all stages. To accomplish this, the FBI works in
conjunction with other law enforcement agencies and victim specialists
on the local, State, Tribal, and Federal levels, as well as with a
variety of vetted non-governmental organizations. Even after the arrest
and conviction of human traffickers, the FBI often continues to work
with partner agencies and organizations to assist victims in moving
beyond their exploitation.
The FBI commends the committee's dedication to these efforts and
appreciates the resources provided to combat these horrific acts. The
fiscal year 2023 Request includes an additional 4 positions (2 Special
Agents and 2 professional staff) and $6.1 million to develop
sophisticated tools to combat technology that allows child sex
offenders to operate on the Dark Web, shielded from law enforcement
action.
Civil Rights
The FBI remains dedicated to protecting the cherished freedoms of
all Americans. Civil rights crimes are among the most egregious
violations of Federal law--they include color of law violations, hate
crimes, Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (``FACE'') Act
violations, and voter suppression. These crimes cause long-term,
enduring damage to communities and economic infrastructure, compromise
law enforcement and judicial system capabilities, and provoke
widespread fear and trauma. We also support the work and cases of our
local and State partners, as needed.
The investigation of hate crimes is the number one priority within
the FBI's civil rights program due to the devastating effect these
types of crimes can have not just on the victims and their families,
but also on entire communities. A hate crime is a criminal offense
against a person or property motivated in whole or in part by the
individual's bias against a race, religion, disability, ethnic/national
origin, sexual orientation, gender, or gender identity. While the First
Amendment to the Constitution allows for the free expression of both
offensive and hateful speech, this protection does not extend to
criminal acts, even those done to express an idea or belief. The First
Amendment also does not protect someone who issues a true threat to
inflict physical harm on individuals or groups, or who intentionally
solicits others to commit unlawful acts of violence on his or her
behalf. The FBI remains dedicated to investigating these types of
crimes. In fact, the number of FBI hate crime investigations increased
63 percent between fiscal year 2019 and fiscal year 2020.
Beyond investigative work, the FBI recognizes proper and thorough
handling of civil rights crimes does not begin the moment they are
reported--it begins before they occur, with a solid and trusting
relationship between the community and law enforcement. Each FBI field
office will be taking specific actions to combat civil rights crimes in
their area of responsibility (``AOR'') to encourage systemic change.
These actions include identifying appropriate partner agencies and
local groups to develop outreach relationships at all levels,
especially those that will spark institutional change; increasing civil
rights-focused working groups and task forces with State, local,
private, public, and non-profit partners; and providing increased
training for State and local agencies and community groups centered on
color of law investigations and hate crimes statutes to provide
education about civil rights violations, promote increased reporting of
hate crimes, and rebuild community trust in law enforcement.
Furthermore, we are focused on working with our State and local
partners to collectively do a better job of tracking and reporting hate
crime and color of law violations to fully understand what is happening
in our communities and how to stop it. Our ability to address
significant national issues, such as the use of force and officer-
involved shootings and jurisdictional increases in violent crime,
depends on fuller statistical understanding of the underlying facts and
circumstances. Some jurisdictions fail to report hate crime statistics,
while others claim there are no hate crimes in their community--a fact
that would be welcome, if true. We are dedicated to working vigorously
with our State and local counterparts in every jurisdiction to better
track and report hate crimes, in an accurate, timely, and publicly
transparent manner.
The fiscal year 2023 request includes an additional 92 positions
(including 33 Special Agents and 59 professional staff) and $17.8
million to effectively address the recent increase in civil rights
violations and proactively mitigate future incidents before they occur.
key cross-cutting capabilities and capacities
Data Analytics and Technical Tools
As criminal and terrorist threats become more diverse and
dangerous, the role of technology becomes increasingly important to our
efforts. We are using technology to improve the way we collect,
analyze, and share information. We have seen significant improvement in
capabilities and capacities over the past decade; but keeping pace with
technology remains a key concern for the future.
The volume of data collected during investigations continues to
rapidly expand. For example, in the case of the 2017 Las Vegas
shooting, the FBI recovered one petabyte of data. Insufficient network
bandwidth and tools necessitated the need for 260 FBI personnel to work
over 10 days to manually review 21,500 hours of video footage. These
bandwidth and data challenges are not limited to major cases or large
offices. It is not uncommon for FBI investigations to generate more
than one terabyte of data per day, an amount that could normally take
two days to transit FBI networks at current bandwidth levels. As a
result, the FBI has made dedicated efforts to upgrade and transform its
information technology platforms to meet the demands of current and
future investigations. We have upgraded hundreds of circuits and have
been able to significantly reduce the time it takes to send large data
files. To keep pace in an era where investigations and analysis will
increasingly be conducted at the petabyte scale, the FBI needs to
continue to build networks that can move bulk data, modernize
investigative data analysis, and reduce reliance on stand-alone, ad-hoc
systems.
In fiscal year 2019, this Committee was instrumental in helping the
FBI begin an IT modernization effort that included investing in network
infrastructure, core data management for advanced analytics, and
cybersecurity. Through this initiative, we have made significant
progress in reducing current IT limitations hindering operational
capacity and diminishing substantial security risks. However, more must
be done.
FBI special agents and intelligence analysts need the best
technological tools available to be responsive to the advanced and
evolving threats that face our nation. Enterprise information
technology must be designed so that it provides information to
operational employees rather than forcing employees to conform to the
tools available. IT equipment must be reliable and accessible, thus
decreasing the time between information collection and dissemination.
Therefore, the fiscal year 2023 Request includes an additional $17
million to ensure the FBI is sufficiently investing in its enterprise
infrastructure to access, manage, transport, protect, and evaluate
information to ensure mission-essential intelligence is reaching FBI
investigators and key partners in sufficient time to comprehensively
and strategically address threats.
conclusion
Finally, the strength of any organization is its people. The
threats we face as a nation have never been greater or more diverse and
the expectations placed on the FBI have never been higher. Our fellow
citizens look to the FBI to protect the United States from all of those
threats, and the men and women of the FBI continue to meet and exceed
those expectations, every day. I want to thank them for their dedicated
service.
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and Members of the
Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I am
happy to answer any questions you might have.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much, Director.
Let me just announce at the beginning that we will have 5-
minute questioning rounds. I will call on people in order of
arrival, and all of the questioners will be in person, we will
not have anyone on WebEx.
I will begin the questions. And I know it is very recent,
but are there any updates that you can give us from Uvalde for
what we have found out about the shooter's motivation? I know
the reports have been that he acted alone, as you pointed out,
but is there any other information that you can share with this
Committee?
Mr. Wray. There is really, unfortunately, it is such a
fluid situation right now, and I do really want to respect the
fact that the Texas DPS has the lead on the investigation, so I
don't want to get out in front of them right now. My experience
teaches me that in these incidents the facts change as we
understand them, often quite rapidly in the first few days.
So with respect, there is not much I can add right now,
beyond what has already been reported in the press.
Senator Shaheen. You said in your testimony that one of the
biggest threats is--and concerns is the threat of lone actors
who attack people they don't know indiscriminately. Do we
have--are there statistics over the years that show that there
is been an increasing percentage of those kinds of crimes? And
do we have any idea, any research into what is motivating those
kinds of lone individuals?
Mr. Wray. So on the first part, on the statistical side, I
don't know that I could quote you statistics right here, but I
can definitely tell you that we at the FBI, and I know I, from
my first few months as FBI Director, have been highlighting
this threat, the lone actors, or effectively lone actors using
readily accessible weapons, attacking what is often referred to
as soft targets, which are essentially, as I said in my
opening, regular, everyday people wherever they are doing their
lives.
As to what motivates them, that is all over the map. I mean
it is everything from the racially motivated violent
extremists, to different sorts of anarchists, and militia
violent extremists, to home-grown violent extremists, which is
a term we use to sort of distinguish people who are here
already in the U.S. but who are inspired by foreign terrorist
organizations, like ISIS, like al-Qaeda.
And then increasingly we are seeing people with this kind
of weird, hodgepodge blend of ideologies. The old-school world
of kind of people with some purity of radical ideology then
turning to violence is often giving way to people who have kind
of a jumble of mixed up ideas. And you know, we have seen cases
where somebody, 1 month is saying they are an ISIS supporter,
and then the next month they say they are a white supremacist.
We had a case in Minneapolis where a bunch of guys that
described themselves as Boogaloo Boys, then ended up deciding
to provide material support to Hamas.
I look at the El Paso shooter in the Walmart there, and if
you look at his so-called manifesto, it is all over the place.
So we are having more and more challenges trying to unpack what
are often sort of incoherent belief systems, combined with kind
of personal grievances.
Senator Shaheen. And there is no doubt, as you pointed out,
that violent crime is increasing. I see that in my Home State
of New Hampshire, and it seems like over the last couple of
years it has been a reaction to COVID, to the opioid epidemic,
to factors obviously, the availability of weapons is another
factor. Are there other things that we are thinking have
happened over the last couple of years that have really
contributed to the violent crime that we are seeing today?
Mr. Wray. Well I would agree with the first, the several
that you listed, I would add to that that we are seeing, for a
variety of reasons, in some places way too many of repeat
offenders, or dangerous offenders ending up back out on the
street, certain prosecution practices or sentences that don't
adequately keep somebody behind bars when they really need to
be.
And I would say that a lot of police departments in this
country, if you talk to most chiefs and sheriffs, which I as I
said, I am doing just about every week, most of them are really
struggling with recruiting and retention, and that certainly
doesn't help. So we need to support the men and women of law
enforcement because that is who stands between us and the
violent criminal element.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Senator Moran.
Senator Moran. Chairman, thank you.
Director Wray, this subcommittee has invested hundreds of
millions of dollars in Stop School Violence Act since its
enactment in 2018. As you would know these programs support
school resource officers, hardening of our schools, anonymous
reporting hotlines, threat assessment programs, and training
for school personnel.
Your team at the FBI has some of the best minds in the
world when it comes to emergency situations. Have you heard
from your experts? What have you heard from your experts about
the most effective ways to prevent and respond to these
terrible events?
Mr. Wray. So I think what I would say is, we are doing a
number of things on this front to try to help harden, if you
will, and I hate the fact that we even have to talk about
hardening our schools, but it is a reality that they have
become targets. So we, in addition to all of our investigative
work, our bread and butter, you know, the cases we are bringing
of different sorts, violent crime, terrorism crime, gang crime,
et cetera, we provide all sorts of support through training,
and capacity building.
So we have trained I think something like 110,000 different
law enforcement officers on active shooter response, we have
put out a whole bunch of different PSAs, and instructional
videos, to schools, to school resource officers, to school
administrators, to houses of worship, to communities, as well
as to law enforcement, to help them better defend. And there is
a host of information in there.
In addition to that we are, obviously, providing forensic
support through our lab, we are doing shooting incident
reconstruction, I mentioned in my opening statement. In Uvalde
we have Evidence Response. That is often one of the things that
we are quickly asked to provide by our State and local
partners. But that is of course after the fact. And what we are
trying to do is figure out how to better get in front of it.
Senator Moran. We would welcome your advice and
suggestions. Last year in this room you and I spoke at least
briefly about counterintelligence threats along the southern
border. Two weeks earlier I had the opportunity to question the
Attorney General about the cartels' activities there.
The purpose of those questions a year ago were to address
what I had learned on my visits to McClelland, Texas, that last
year, just previous to those hearings, which is while
immigration dominates the conversation about the southern
border, there are also grave national security threats there.
This was confirmed just yesterday when an FBI search
warrant unsealed in Ohio, revealed that an assassination plot
against former President George W. Bush included plans to
smuggle assassins into the United States from Mexico.
According to press reports the suspect, an ISIS operative
was recording--was recorded claiming to have just smuggled two
individuals associated with Hezbollah, into the United States.
Yesterday's events compel me to start again on this topic
that we discussed last year: What is the FBI's assessment of
our national security threats along our border, southern border
in particular, but borders generally? And what can you tell us
in this setting about the number of known or suspected
terrorists, or special interest aliens who have crossed into
the United States from Mexico?
Mr. Wray. Well, certainly border security is a major, major
challenge that cuts across a whole host of the programs that we
serve, and the national security piece of it that you are
highlighting is one part of it. Obviously, I am very proud of
the work that our folks did on the Ohio case that you
mentioned. We obviously worked closely with Secret Service on
that to coordinate that, to make sure that it was all done in a
way that prevented any true threat from coming to fruition.
Certainly any porous point of entry is a potential
vulnerability that bad actors, of all sorts, including national
security threats, can seek to exploit. And I have been down to
all of our field offices that have border crossings as part of
their area of responsibility, I have had CBP folks show me
around so I can see firsthand what they are dealing with, and
they have a heck of a challenge on their hands.
And we, through our Joint Terrorism Task Forces, in
particular, work very closely with our DHS partners to try to
bring the counterterrorism dimension to the threat. I think
that is probably all I would be able to say about it in an open
hearing, but certainly you are right to be focused on it as an
issue of concern.
Senator Moran. Perhaps we will have the chance to have a
closed session as well.
Chair, thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you Senator Moran. Senator Kennedy.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Director, I remember when you were
nominated and confirmed, boy, was I glad to see you. I believe
then and I believe now that you are not a politician, I think
your predecessor was. And he and others did immeasurable damage
to one of the most important institutions in American
Government.
Because I believe, as you do, that in addition to the DEA,
the FBI is probably the premiere law enforcement agency in all
of human history, and it should be above politics. For the
record who is Michael Sussman?
Mr. Wray. Well, Michael Sussman is a lawyer who is
currently involved in a trial by the Durham Special Counsel
Team.
Senator Kennedy. His law firm, Perkins Coie, was counsel to
Secretary Hillary Clinton's campaign, right?
Mr. Wray. Senator, I am mindful, as I think you would
expect me to be, that the case is currently in the middle of
trial.
Senator Kennedy. I know----
Mr. Wray. And I am--well we have agents, and I have
assigned agents to work on the Durham Team. I want to be
really, really careful about not getting into a discussion
about a case that is currently in front of a very independent
and strong-willed Federal judge, and a jury right now, so.
Senator Kennedy. Well, Mr. Sussman was counsel to Secretary
Clinton's campaign, and we also know that he was the source of
the information provided to the FBI that the Trump campaign had
a back channel communication to Russia, which we now know
wasn't true.
Is it true that Michael Sussman, a partner at Perkins Coie,
counsel to the Hillary Clinton campaign, and the source of this
information about the allegations regarding the Trump campaign;
is it true that he had a special--he had a badge that gave--an
FBI headquarters badge that gave him special privileges in
entering the FBI Building?
Senator Kennedy. Well, Senator, what I would say to you is
much in keeping with the gracious comments you made at the
beginning about my commitment to trying to make sure I do this
job the right way, that includes making sure that with a case
that is currently in the middle of trial and an investigation
being run by Mr. Durham, that we are actively helping him with,
I just--I don't think I can really get into a discussion of
those topics at the moment.
Senator Kennedy. When the FBI opened the file, to
investigate Mr. Sussman's allegations; is it true that the FBI
concealed Mr. Sussman's identity?
Mr. Wray. Again, I completely understand your interest in
the question, and then I respect it, and I am just hope you
will respect the fact that because I have got agents working
with Mr. Durham on the case, and they are in the middle of
trial right now I just don't think I can get into a discussion
of that here.
Senator Kennedy. When the FBI opened its file to
investigate the allegations that Mr. Sussman, on behalf of the
Clinton campaign made, now known to be untrue, about these back
channel communications between the Trump campaign and Russia.
When the FBI opened the file is it true that the file said the
source of this information was not Mr. Sussman but the
Department of Justice?
Mr. Wray. Again, the same response. These are the very
kinds of questions that are being litigated in front of the
jury and Judge Cooper, right now.
Senator Shaheen. Senator Kennedy, I would just urge you to
follow a separate line of questioning, as Director Wray has
said he is not going to answer questions----
Senator Kennedy. I appreciate that, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen [continuing]. Relative to this case that is
being litigated.
Senator Kennedy. I appreciate that Madam Chair, and, you
know, how much I respect you. I want my time back by the way.
Senator Shaheen. You can have those 3 seconds that I have.
Senator Kennedy. No. You talked for about 10 seconds.
Senator Shaheen. I am happy to give you those 10 seconds.
Senator Kennedy. Thank you, Madam Chair. And I appreciate
your help with my questions, but I can handle it myself.
Chris, at some point you are going to have to address this.
And I understand you don't want to address it in the middle of
a prosecution, but there are millions of Americans that look at
this and think, I am not saying they are correct, that the FBI
has become a political organization. And at some point you are
going to have to address that.
The institution is just too important, and some of my
colleagues may not want to talk about this, but we are going to
have to talk about it at some point.
Mr. Wray. Well, so first off, I totally appreciate your
concern about our institution. And I will tell you that what I
can speak to now is that I have implemented all sorts of
reforms that I have spoken about quite publicly, over 40-plus
corrective measures that deal with a lot of the same issues
that are at the heart of the underlying investigation.
I completely turned over the entire leadership team in the
FBI. We have taken disciplinary action where we could, but we
have also been in close cooperation and coordination with Mr.
Durham, who is the special counsel, and I think that is the
best thing I can do to help address the concerns you are
talking about.
As to the FBI's reputation, I will tell you, having been to
all 56 of our field offices, now almost all of them twice.
Having been New Orleans just earlier this month, and Baton
Rouge just shortly before that, that what I find in talking to
Americans out in the field, law enforcement partners, business
leaders, community leaders, victims, prosecutors, families, is
a widespread, even resounding appreciation, and respect for the
men and women of the FBI.
And you will be, I hope, relieved to know that in Louisiana
over the last 3 years, the last 2\1/2\ years, the number of
people in Louisiana applying to be special agents of the FBI
has doubled what it was in the first few years when I took
over. And so I think that speaks very well of the good citizens
of Louisiana and their appreciation and view of the FBI's
credibility again----
Senator Kennedy. And I thank you for coming, Chris. And I
thank you for all the hard work you have done, but I am going
to stand by my comments. I think at the right time you are
going to have to address this. And assure the American people.
Senator Shaheen. Senator Hagerty.
Senator Kennedy. That the rot is gone. Thank you. Thanks
for being here, Chris.
Senator Hagerty. Thank you, Chair Shaheen.
And Director Wray, it is good to see you here again. I
would like to turn my comments to something very disturbing
that is happening right now with respect to the Supreme Court
justices, and what we have seen in recent weeks are protests at
the homes of Supreme Court justices and their families,
something that I think that should be completely out of bounds.
It also may be illegal.
Federal law prohibits protesting at the residence of a
judge with the intent of influencing the judge, and many of the
protesters are doing just that. Protesting outside judges'
homes, attempting to intimidate them, I think, and to changing
their ruling on the Dobbs case.
So Director Wray, is the FBI in any way investigating these
protesters as a potential crime?
Mr. Wray. So I don't want to get into any particular
predicated assessment or investigation that we may have ongoing
right now. I will say that we are working very closely with the
U.S. Marshals, who, as you may know, are now providing round-
the-clock security at the justices homes, and with the Supreme
Court Marshal and Supreme Court Police, together, they have
responsibility for protection of the judges themselves and
their facilities.
But I will tell you this, my view, and my instructions to
the FBI are: That there is a right way and a wrong way in our
system, and under the Constitution, to express what you are
upset about, and who you are upset with. And violence and
threats of violence, no matter what you are upset about, or who
you are upset with, is not the way to go.
Senator Hagerty. I couldn't agree with you more.
Mr. Wray. We will pursue all lawful and predicated
investigations we can to ensure that.
Senator Hagerty. The U.S. Supreme Court Police recently
reported, I am going to use their quote, ``A significant
increase in violent threats'', to your concern, against Supreme
Court justices and the Supreme Court building. And as FBI
Director it sounds, and I just want you to confirm, that you
have received information that the Supreme Court's members are
facing elevated threats that do warrant increased security,
intelligence, and intelligence resources.
Mr. Wray. As I have said, we are in close contact with
them, receiving tips and leads, and things like that from them,
and without, again, weighing in on what in the way of
assessments and investigations we have open. But my charge to
our people is that we are going to aggressively pursue violence
and threats of violence against public officials, including
against judges.
Senator Hagerty. I appreciate that, Director Wray, and I
think I share your concerns, and I think that many on our
Committee I am working here on our side to make certain that,
along with the extra help that the U.S. Marshals are providing
right now, that if there is any shortfall in monetary resources
needed, particularly in the very near term, to make certain
that the justices and their families are properly protected,
that we address that, because heaven forbid, these threats turn
into, or manifest themselves into the violence, that I think
concerns us both.
I would like to turn to another issue now, and that is at
our southern border. Specifically the case of a Colombian
national named, Isnardo Garcia-Amado, who recently crossed our
southern border and who was flagged by the FBI Terrorist
Screening Center. He was released by Border Patrol agents into
the United States on April the 18.
Then on April the 21, 3 days after his release, the FBI
alerted the Department of Homeland Security that this man was
on the terrorist watch list. You would think that DHS would
have then immediately arrested this person, yet, despite
knowing that a suspected terrorist had been released in the
United States, the leadership of the Department of Homeland
Security didn't even authorize ICE to arrest him until two
weeks later. He was in Florida by that time.
So this Colombian national was caught by DHS, and then
released into the United States before the FBI determined that
he is on the terrorist watch list. Is that your understanding
as well?
Mr. Wray. I will confess, Senator, that I am not sure I am
familiar with this specific case. It has a vague ring of
familiarity from something I got briefed on, but I think I
would have to circle back to you, which I am happy to do.
Senator Hagerty. I would appreciate that. You can see my
concern though. And I guess my broader question is, in your
view, if this were to happen does that jeopardize American
safety to catch and release border crosses before the FBI has
had the opportunity to make that determination, as to whether
or not they are terrorists?
Mr. Wray. Well, certainly I think we need to have close
lash up between FBI agents on the Joint Terrorism Task Forces,
especially in the border States, with their DHS counterparts,
who have a very tough job. Those folks, CBP folks down on the
line there that I have met with, and they usually have people
designated on our task forces which is designed, in part, to
prevent some of the slippage that might----
Senator Hagerty. Now, I would say the slippage is a great
concern. And even further concerning is DHS taking 2 weeks,
after receiving information from the FBI, to actually notify to
arrest a person. I mean does that concern you as well; is a
slippage that could, again, endanger American safety?
Mr. Wray. Well, I certainly understand the concern. I think
I would need to kind of drill in further on the facts to make
sure I have got the full context.
Senator Hagerty. Okay. I would appreciate that. And also
when you come back to me if you could let me know how many
border crossers have been apprehended, that are on the national
terrorist list. I am deeply concerned about this.
When I went to the border myself, a couple of--about 6
weeks ago, I was informed that 157 different nationalities have
been apprehended at our southern border in the past year. That
is a deep, deep national security concern, and I would very
much appreciate your following up with me in terms of, what is
known, and also if you have any estimates on what is not known,
because I think that is an even greater concern, are those
people that are coming here using the border, as Senator Moran
talked about, for some very nefarious purposes. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Hagerty.
Senator Capito.
Senator Moore Capito. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank
you, Director, for being with us today. We are going to be
asked to consider legislation, I believe, tomorrow, regarding
domestic terrorism, and much of your statement, written
statement was devoted to the topic of domestic terrorism. The
DOJ has a unit dedicated to anti-domestic terrorism efforts
presently, and you testified last year that your agency has
significantly boosted resources directed towards these
initiatives.
Can you elaborate on the FBI's existing initiatives on
domestic violence or domestic terrorism prevention and
investigation? And how you are already working with existing
agencies and departments? And I would say that one of the fears
that I would have with this legislation before us, is that we
are creating more stovepipes of information that, in reality,
could slow the flow of information, and accuracy of that. So I
would like to hear your comments on that, please.
Mr. Wray. Well, I would probably decline to weigh in on the
legislation itself, as is our usual practice.
Senator Moore Capito. I figured that. Okay.
Mr. Wray. But as to--you are right, that we are doing a
whole lot on domestic terrorism already. We have, I think, over
the last few years, and this really started, I would say in
summer of 2019, and kind of, has just continued since then.
We have, I think, more than doubled our domestic terrorism
caseload, we have--I think we are now up to about 2,700
domestic terrorism investigations they cover the waterfront of
different types. We have also created a Domestic Terrorism-Hate
Crimes Fusion Cell to bring both those kinds of expertise
together. We have had some very significant plots disrupted
using those efforts, we have our Joint Terrorism Task Forces in
all 56 field offices.
Senator Moore Capito. Right.
Mr. Wray. That is about 4,400, or so, investigators, they
are working on it. But I will also say, in our budget request
before the subcommittee, we are asking for more resources for
domestic terrorism. That is separate apart from any legislative
effort, just in our fiscal year 2023 request.
Senator Moore Capito. Where would you say those extra
dollars, which parts of your investigative domestic terrorism
arm would you see need to be increased, budgetarily? Or is it
just an overall?
Mr. Wray. Well, I would say it is two things. It is
investigators and tools, technical tools, you know,
increasingly in the domestic terrorism space, much like in
other criminal arenas, the terrorists are reverting to use of
technology that makes it harder and harder to connect the dots.
And so that is a part of it.
But the other thing is we have, in the short run, had to
sort of surge resources to handle that domestic terrorism
caseload, and as I mentioned in my opening statement, I do not
think we are in a position where any of these other threats,
the traditional violent crime threat that I hear about from
chiefs and sheriffs all the time, the international terrorism
threat, that has absolutely not gone away.
Senator Moore Capito. Right.
Mr. Wray. That had slightly abated during COVID, the
foreign terrorist threat, but especially in the wake of the
withdrawal in Afghanistan, I think we, the FBI, are going to
have a bigger and bigger role on the foreign terrorist threat.
So partly, our budget request is designed to make sure that
the sort of duct tape approach that we have been using for the
last 18 months to 2 years, is not the way we have to continue
going forward. So we can have a longer standing commitment to
the domestic terrorism load.
Senator Moore Capito. So a more robust and wider reach.
Mr. Wray. Right.
Senator Moore Capito. And that soon you are taking from
something else to----
Mr. Wray. Correct.
Senator Moore Capito [continuing]. To put that into your--I
am curious to know. I think the American public would like to
know. I have no idea what the answer to this question is, I
don't--I think I know. The tragedy in Texas, what role does the
FBI play in this? Or do you play a role in this?
Mr. Wray. So we are in a support role, we are--so Texas
DPS, the Texas State Law Enforcement Agency, which is a
terrific partner of ours; and the Uvalde Police Department,
they have the lead, we are in support role. Now, our support
takes all sorts of forms so we have investigative resources,
analytical resources, we have lab personnel doing evidence
response.
Senator Moore Capito. Right; mm-hmm.
Director Wray: We have other kinds of forensic response, we
have Victim Services professionals, as I mentioned to the
Chair, who are helping the families of the victims. We have
crisis management teams, behavioral analysis teams, so we have
a whole host of things down there, but we--and so while it is a
formidable footprint and engine, it is, at the end of the day,
in support of our great State and local partners.
Senator Moore Capito. Right. Well, thank you for that, and
thank you for those agents that are working in that support.
This is very difficult I am sure, for them as well.
And I would just like to add just very briefly the local
offices that that I hear from my Charleston, West Virginia
folks, I just want to thank them, and you, because they are
very tied to us. I am sure all of us have heard from our local
offices in this time of sort of uneasiness, and I just really
appreciate the efforts at which they go to, to include me, and
my family, and others that might be in precarious situation
from time to time. So please extend my great gratitude for
that.
Mr. Wray. Thank you.
Senator Moore Capito. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Capito.
I am going to turn the gavel over to Senator Collins, to
ask her questions while I go vote, and either Senator Moran or
I will be back shortly.
Senator Collins. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. You know
how much I like having the gavel.
[Laughter.]
Senator Collins. Director Wray, thank you first of all for
being here today. Your agency is so important in so many areas,
and so many ways. All of us are clearly horrified by the
vicious killings that occurred yesterday.
And I want to ask you about one approach that has been
taken, and get your judgment about it. The State of Maine is
among some States that have enacted statutes that we call
either a red- or yellow-flag law.
And the law in Maine which was developed in consultation
with a wide range of groups; essentially allows the court to
have the police temporarily confiscate firearms from someone
who is deemed to be a danger to either him or herself, or to
others.
Importantly, the Maine law includes due process rights, and
a medical assessment. So it can't be just some neighbor's
opinion, or even a family member's opinion, there has to be a
medical assessment as well. And that is to ensure that the
concerns are well founded, and that Second Amendment rights for
law-abiding citizens are protected.
In your experience, how successful have these relatively
new red-flag and yellow-flag laws been?
Mr. Wray. It is a very good question. I would say, I am not
sure that I have seen any kind of rigorous assessment, overall,
of the effectiveness of the so-called red-flag laws. There are
other names for it, as you alluded to. I know that DOJ has
recently published a model statute for States to consider.
I think what I could say to you is that it has been our
experience that with a whole wide variety of shooter
situations, whether it is a terrorist type situation, or more
traditional violent criminal situation, most of the time you
see that there was someone who knew the person, or came into
contact with the person, who saw some change in behavior that
alarmed them. And in the situations where law enforcement has
been successful at preventing an attack it is almost always
thanks to somebody like that coming forward.
And whether it is done through a protective order of the
sort--a protection order of the sort, you are describing, or
whether it is just because they contacted law enforcement, and
law enforcement was able to act, that is the key. And the ones
that haven't been prevented an awful lot of the time, it turns
out there was somebody who maybe didn't know to contact law
enforcement, or was afraid to contact law enforcement, for one
reason or another.
And you hear all the time the saying, ``If you see
something, say something.'' And most people when they hear
that, they picture the unattended backpack, you know, in the
greyhound bus terminal, or something. But what we really need
right now in this country is, if you see something about
somebody, people to say something.
And if they do, whether it is through statutes like the one
in Maine, or through some other mechanism, that can be quite
effective, and certainly, if more States were to adopt these
laws we would, on our end, through NICS and NCIC have to, you
know, make arrangements to be able to then have that
information in the relevant databases to be able to help
prevent them from getting their hands on a weapon. But
certainly it is something we could look at.
Senator Collins. Thank you. Another proposal that I have
long supported would strengthen Federal law by making it easier
for prosecutors to go after gun traffickers and straw
purchasers. And let me describe what I have seen and heard
about in the State of Maine from law enforcement officers.
Gangs and drug dealers target addicts who have clean records,
so they then ask them to purchase guns for them, and they swap
heroin or other drugs for the guns. These guns are then used to
commit horrific crimes in our communities.
Often, far from Maine, there was a gang in Connecticut that
was known for coming to Maine enlisting addicts to buy guns for
them, because the addicts had clean records and could pass the
background check. So this Congress, I once again joined my
colleague, Senator Leahy, in reintroducing the Stop Illegal
Trafficking in Firearms Act, and we would create a new criminal
offense for straw purchasing.
Right now, it is essentially treated as a paperwork
violation, a slap on the wrist. Instead, we would make these
crimes punishable by time behind bars.
What is your opinion of closing that straw purchase, or
loophole that allows for criminal gangs to access guns when
they could not buy them themselves, because of their own
criminal records?
Mr. Wray. Well, I think I would have to study the
legislation more closely to give you a more informed assessment
of that. I will tell you that even back to when I was a line
prosecutor I used to prosecute a lot of these same straw
purchaser cases and typically, as you say, they are prosecuted
as false statements cases, you know, when somebody essentially
lies on the 4473 Form.
And just as you say, what you see over and overall, is
violent gang members who enlist people who are down on their
luck, for one reason or another, either they are, as you say,
they are addicts, or they are financially in distress and so
that the money that comes with it, when they get paid to be the
straw purchaser, they take advantage of people who are down
their luck that way.
I think there might be a difference in the culpability
level for the straw purchaser, versus the gang member who
enlists them, and that is when we--when I tried those cases,
and prosecuted those cases, that was sort of the approach we
took.
But I think you are right to be focused on the straw
purchaser issue as an important ingredient to preventing guns
from getting in the hands of people who are, after all,
prohibited under existing law from having them.
Senator Collins. Right. I actually feel bad for many of the
straw purchasers, because they frequently have serious
substance abuse problems, and they are being manipulated, and
used by these gang members. But that--that is a real problem.
Let me follow up on the drug issue, and as we know America
has set a terrible new record in the number of drug overdoses
in the past year. It is 104,000 Americans died of drug
overdoses. In Maine, an estimated 636 people died of drug
overdoses in 2021. That is a 23 percent increase from the
previous year. But what, to me, is even--or equally chilling,
is the fact that that is actually only a small portion of the
number of overdoses.
The number of overdoses in Maine that we know about was
nearly 9,000. Fortunately, the rest of them were saved. I
talked to Attorney General Garland about this issue, and he
pointed out that the FBI, along with other DOJ components, is
playing an important role in fighting the large-scale drug
trafficking organizations that are bringing drugs into this
country.
I am concerned about what is happening at the southern
border, based on my discussion with Border Control agents. Has
the government's inability to secure the southern border led to
more drugs entering the United States?
Mr. Wray. Well, certainly the influx of drugs across the
southern border is a very important fuel, not just to addiction
in this country, but to violence in this country; and that is
one of the parts that the FBI plays a pretty big role in. You
have transnational criminal organizations in Mexico enlisting
the help of gangs, and other organizations here in the U.S., to
distribute the drugs, and there is violence over turf, over
distribution routes, et cetera.
I know that when I have been down to the border and talked
to the CBP folks there, and to our field offices that have
responsibility in that area, the quantity of the seizures that
they routinely are engaged in make the seizures in other parts
of the country look really quite small by comparison. I mean it
is just another day in the life for a lot of them. And so it is
striking.
And I think you are correct that the overdose death
statistic or the overdose statistic itself, in some ways
underestimates the scope of the problem, in part, because
Narcan, happily, has become so much more widely available, but
that, in turn, ends up almost masking the problem.
Senator Collins. Exactly.
Mr. Wray. So the effectiveness of first response, which is
a good thing, is actually maybe misleading some into thinking
that the problem is not as bad as it really is. And it is
really an epidemic.
Senator Collins. And finally just a quick question. You
were talking about domestic terrorism with Senator Capito.
Would you agree that the sources of domestic terrorism include
groups and ideologies on the left, on the right, from overseas,
such as ISIS? In other words, there is not just one ideological
source of domestic terrorism; is there?
Mr. Wray. Certainly, when we look at domestic terrorism, we
focus on the violence, and the violence--and we are sort of
ideology agnostic, if you will. And the terrorism, the domestic
terrorism threat we see covers the waterfront from people--we
don't use terms like ``left'' and ``right'', but we see the
racially motivated violent extremists, we see militia violence,
and anarchist violence, we see people with this kind of salad
bar of ideologies that don't fit into any category.
And then of course on the--we tend to bucket it under the
international terrorism side, the ISIS-inspired folks who are
here, they are not sent here by ISIS, but they are here, and
they are radicalized online. That is a huge category, and the
plot that we disrupted, that was talked about earlier,
involving the attempt to kill former President Bush is a good
example of that threat.
So I think--I understand the focus on ideology, but for us
the focus has to be on the violence to make sure that we are
not getting--we are not missing something in that regard.
Senator Collins. And that is where it should be. Thank you
very much.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Collins. Senator Braun.
Senator Braun. Thank you Madam Chair.
I can't remember the last time we have had the chance to
speak, but good to have you back again.
I want to go back to, and I think I asked Mr. Garland--or
you know, somebody else this question, but when you go back to
2020, the summer of it, there was a lot of crime in our cities,
and of course what I have been hearing mostly about, and it
would be the arrests that we made associated with January 6.
So can you give me some kind of accounting in terms of all
the various incidents that occurred across our big cities that
had, you know, the crime in the streets, where I think we
actually ended up with more people killed, you know, lots of
downtown businesses, you know, burned and damaged.
Have we been as diligent there, as we have on the January 6
issue, and just give me a general accounting where I know that
we have arrested over 700 individuals associated with it. What
have we accomplished from what was, you know, something maybe
even broader in scope in terms of damage and lives lost?
Mr. Wray. So I don't have exact numbers for you here, but
what I will tell you is that the violence amid all this--amidst
all the civil unrest over the summer of 2020, we used all 56 of
our field offices, we used our Joint Terrorism Task Forces, and
all 56 of our field offices there were hundreds of
investigations, hundreds of arrests.
Now, I should pause on that last part, because often there
is as you know, no domestic terrorism offense, Federal domestic
terrorism offense, so a lot of times what we on our Joint
Terrorism Task Forces, which have State and local officers
assigned to them, part of the reason for that is that sometimes
the most effective charge is a State charge.
So a lot of times the Federal investigations from some of
the activity over the summer resulted ultimately in some State
charge, but we had any number of cases involving Molotov
cocktails, you know, burning and firebombing, you know, police
cars, things like that, and we continue--they don't get a lot
of attention in the press--but we continue to develop cases and
bring charges still from some of the activity back then. So we
have not taken our foot off the gas on those cases.
Senator Braun. You know, I didn't know if you have that
information. I would like to know with a little more
specificity, and get back to the office later, in terms of what
that kind of comparison would be in terms of arrests, and
convictions, based on January 6, versus the whole spectrum of
what occurred back in the summer of 2020, if you would.
Mr. Wray. I will see what we can get you on that.
Senator Braun. Okay.
Mr. Wray. Thank you.
Senator Braun. You know, tragically we have had another
shooting occur. I am interested in that mental health
component. I am interested in whether it is racially motivated,
whether it is just somebody that is out to create havoc, like
just occurred. What are we doing that takes information that in
many cases is broadcast, as aggressively as being in a
manifesto?
Maybe not that direct, but your--we pick up always after
the fact that there has been some telegraphing of what might
happen. So are we doing what you think needs to be done to kind
of figure out what might occur when we find out after the fact
that there has generally been information out there from as
obvious as a manifesto, to maybe a lot of indications that this
could happen? Are you happy with what law enforcement is doing
across the board, especially the FBI?
Mr. Wray. Well, I am very proud of the hard work of the men
and women of law enforcement, not just the FBI, but our State
and local partners, who bear the primary burden for a lot of
what you are talking about. I will say that there is no
shortage of hateful information out there, on the Internet, in
social media in different forms, and we, the FBI, don't just go
out and kind of monitor social media sort of passively looking
for stuff, we rely on proper predication, and then pursue it.
So what that really gets back to, is the exchange that I
had with Senator Collins, about the importance of having the
public come forward. You know, I use the saying that used to be
applied in a different context, ``if you see something say
something''. What we need, what law enforcement needs, is the
public, neighbors, school teachers, relatives, friends,
classmates, whoever, the people who are likely to see
somebody's behavior online, and see it change from just being
somebody just blowing off steam to taking a bit of a turn.
And that is often the same person who would know: This
person has not only just taken a really dark turn, but this
person I know, you know, this member of the public, has weapons
in his or her home.
Senator Braun. Yes.
Director Wray: And calling law enforcement. And when that
happens, that is when we are most effective. And we need to try
to encourage more and more of that, which is why our NTOC, our
public access line, if you will, gets millions of tips a year,
and we are frantically trying to push those out, when we get
them before----
Senator Braun. I think whatever observation tools you use,
whatever algorithms might be in place but, it seems it is kind
of disappointing that so often we hear that that might have--
that was there, and we just needed to do a better job of
ferreting it out.
May I have just another few seconds for a quick question?
Senator Shaheen. Go ahead.
Senator Braun. I was on a School Board for 10 years. I
could not get in my school as a School Board member because we
had a security system in place that had to allow you in. And I
think we had a resource officer there in Texas at that school.
What is the FBI's viewpoint on taking soft targets, like a
school, to where seemingly we rotate into a tragedy too often,
to where having that in place? Why don't we have more of it?
And we had this in place in Indiana in my own school
district back 10 to 12 years ago? Why aren't we doing more
there?
Mr. Wray. Well I think that a lot of those are judgments by
individual school systems, and School Boards that may be based
on resources, other things. I do know that we, on the FBI side,
have tried to help heighten the awareness of things that they
can do to better harden the schools. We have put out PSAs,
videos about--to better harden the school environment.
There is a lot of thinking that has improved in law
enforcement and security over the last 10 or 15 years, about
the best way to protect an otherwise soft target, like a
school. And so we are really trying to get the word out so that
they can--they have the information they need to take some of
those actions. And so as to why an individual school may or may
not have chosen a particular security measure; that probably
depends on the school system.
Senator Braun. Thank you.
Mr. Wray. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Braun. Senator Graham.
Senator Graham. Thank you, Director, very much for coming.
The budget request is how much percent over last year?
Mr. Wray. I don't have the percentage for you right now. I
know that we didn't get quite what we had hoped for last year--
--
Senator Graham. Ms. Chair, what is that number? Do we know?
Madam Chair?
Senator Shaheen. 6 percent.
Senator Graham. Okay. Plus inflation, too high, more than
six percent; I think so.
Mr. Wray. Yes, think so.
Senator Graham. So what I want the American people to know,
is that the budget request for the FBI is below inflation. Do
you agree with that?
Mr. Wray. I am sorry? I couldn't hear you very well.
Senator Graham. The budget request for the FBI is below
inflation.
Mr. Wray. It sounds like it.
Senator Graham. Yes. After listening to you, and everything
you say is a legitimate concern, you have a lot to do. Do you
think the Committee should look at increasing your budget?
Mr. Wray. Well, first let me say, I appreciate the
question.
Senator Graham. And it is not a hard question.
Mr. Wray. I would say that any additional resources the
Committee would see fit to send our way I can absolutely assure
you and the rest of the subcommittee they will be put to good
use.
Senator Graham. Okay, great. I want to ask you to comment
on ongoing investigation, but apparently there was an effort,
some plot maybe to kill President Bush 43. Have you read about
it? Are you familiar with it?
Mr. Wray. I am familiar with it.
Senator Graham. Okay. Let us just make this comment. Is it
fair to say that al-Qaeda and ISIS still exist?
Mr. Wray. Absolutely.
Senator Graham. Is it fair to say there are people thinking
every day about how to get into America to kill a bunch of us
from those organizations?
Mr. Wray. Yes.
Senator Graham. And the FBI is integral in stopping those
plots before they start?
Mr. Wray. Yes.
Senator Graham. So would you say that after Afghanistan the
threat to the homeland has gone up or down?
Mr. Wray. Well, let me say this about the threat. We are
concerned, very concerned about what the threat landscape looks
like in the wake of the withdrawal of Afghanistan for a number
of reasons. One, we are concerned about the loss of sources and
collection over there which means----
Senator Graham. There are no FBI agents in Afghanistan?
Mr. Wray. Not anymore.
Senator Graham. Yes.
Mr. Wray. Or at least not that I can----
Senator Graham. Yes, of course.
Director Wray [continuing]. I am allowed, or not, for their
safety and--so we are concerned about less source coverage,
over time. And I think Director Burns has testified, you know,
just as a matter of fact, that we will lose collection of----
Senator Graham. Just put a fine point on it, because I
don't have much time. Our withdrawal has made us a lot less
aware of the threat coming from Afghanistan than before we
withdrew. That is fair statement, right?
Mr. Wray. I think so, yes.
Senator Graham. And it is a fair statement that al-Qaeda
and ISIS still are present in Afghanistan, and maybe their
influence is growing?
Mr. Wray. Are certainly present, and I think we are
concerned about them growing.
Senator Graham. Yes?
Mr. Wray. Yes.
Senator Graham. Okay. So let us look at domestic terrorism.
Is there any law that you need, that you don't have, when it
comes to investigating domestic terrorism?
Mr. Wray. Well, we always welcome more tools in the
toolbox, but we, I think, have been very effective with the
tools that we do have.
Senator Graham. Okay.
Mr. Wray. Not just Federal charges, but as I said to
Senator Braun, using State charges when appropriate. We have
gotten creative in using hate crime charges, and things like
that, as well. What we really need are more resources more than
anything else.
Senator Graham. Okay. Well, count me in for more resources
to help you deal with this threat as well as other threats. Gun
control, do you know of any system--apparently the fact pattern
is as, we understand it now, that the person in Texas who did
this horrible thing had no criminal record. How would the
system deal with somebody who has never been charged with a
crime, never even investigated for a crime, went out and bought
a gun, what kind of law would stop that?
Mr. Wray. Well, we don't know all the facts yet, as far as
that----
Senator Graham. Yes. But let us just assume that fact
there.
Mr. Wray [continuing]. but these are, depending on the
individual, there are other prohibitors in 922 besides the
Felon----
Senator Graham. Here is the point. If there is something we
can do to deal with this particular situation that we are not
doing, can you get back with us?
Mr. Wray. I would be happy to work with the Committee.
Senator Graham. Okay, great.
Mr. Wray. I think that there is just no one, simple, single
answer to that all.
Senator Graham. Yes. Okay. Well, I am open-minded to ideas.
So finally, from the FBI's point of view, you have been
following the Sussman trial, I would assume?
Mr. Wray. Yes.
Senator Graham. Okay. Well, he is in trial. But let me just
ask you this question. A lot of Americans are concerned with
the fact that a campaign lawyer for the Clinton campaign could
go to the FBI, and provide information to the FBI that led to
an investigation of the opposite party. And it seems to not
have held much water.
Can you understand why people would be concerned about
that?
Mr. Wray. I certainly understand why people are concerned.
Senator Graham. And the Horowitz Review, of the Crossfire
Hurricane. You are familiar with his findings, the Inspector
General.
Mr. Wray. Yes.
Senator Graham. This is your chance to tell the American
people that you are going to make sure that never happens
again, and you are dedicated to making sure that, for whatever
reason, there are no more Carter Pages investigations that seem
to have gotten completely off the rails?
Mr. Wray. So I will I will put the Sussman case to the side
for the moment, because I don't to comment on a case----
Senator Graham. Okay. Sure.
Mr. Wray [continuing]. That is in front of the jury right
now. But let me say this. The conduct that is described in the
Inspector General's Report, I consider to be utterly
unacceptable, and also unrepresentative of the FBI that I see
every day. And my firm instructions to our people, are that we
need to make sure that that never happens again. And we have
implemented over 40 corrective measures that go directly to the
things that are described in that report.
We have made changes of the entire leadership team in the
FBI. And the FBI that I see today, in 2022, is very different
from what is described in that report.
Senator Graham. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Graham.
I have another round of questions. I assume you do as well
Senator Moran.
Senator Moran. I do; right.
Senator Shaheen. I want to talk about something that we
talked--discussed a little bit on the phone this week, and that
is the whole Task Force KleptoCapture, and what we might do to
address, not just Russian officials and oligarchs,
circumvention of sanctions, and export restrictions, but also
what needs to happen to address the ability of transnational
crime organizations, corrupt officials in places like Russia,
from being able to park their money in our financial system in
the United States, and the West? And what we need to do to
prevent that?
And I want to start with the fact that we provided the FBI
with over $43 million in supplemental funding for the KLEPTO--
for the Task Force KleptoCapture, as part of the 2022 Omnibus.
Can you talk a little bit about how you are using that funding,
and what else we ought to be thinking about, as we are looking
at how we address the ability of criminals to use our financial
system for their own benefit?
Mr. Wray. Well, first let me say that those who have been
profiting from corruption in Russia, and treating the world
like it is their playground, by evading sanctions, are people
we are coming after. I am working closely with partners, not
just across the Federal government, but also with a whole host
of foreign partners.
And obviously the new KleptoCapture Task Force is an
integral, really at the heart of that effort. And we have had
some success already in freezing bank accounts, luxury yachts,
artwork, things like that, sometimes that is through enabling--
the FBI provides information to a foreign partner, and they are
able to take action to seize or freeze, and sometimes it is
through us using our own authorities.
We are also going after, and this is important, and it goes
to something I think that you and I talked about on the phone,
it goes to not just the--say, the oligarchs, the sanctioned
individuals themselves, but to the whole ecosystem or
infrastructure that they rely on, the people that they may have
on their payroll, the people that, otherwise, enable them to
engage in the corruption, and the sanctions evasion. And that
is an important part of it.
As to the funds, the $43 million that you referred to, for
which we are very grateful, we are using that in a variety of
ways. Yes, some of it is of course going to our cyber efforts,
and our counterintelligence efforts, related to the Russia,
Ukraine, conflict, but we are using it part for our agents and
personnel on the KleptoCapture Task Force, as well as--and this
is an important piece--our pursuit of the crypto currency,
because that is a an important ingredient for a lot of the bad
actors here, many of whom think that they can hide behind the
anonymization that exists with virtual currency.
And they are not as clever as they think they are; but we
have to continue to evolve our own technologies and tradecraft
to be able to go after them, and we have made some very
significant seizures of cryptocurrency lately, working with the
Department of Justice. And that is going to be an important,
increasingly, important part of this going forward.
Senator Shaheen. So what has been the biggest obstacle in
trying to address activity, particularly with respect to
Russia, and the war in Ukraine, and those sanctions?
Mr. Wray. I think I would say that the biggest challenge
that we face is a lot of these folks are pretty savvy about
relying on opaque other foreign jurisdictions. And so there are
ways in which, by taking advantage of some of those other
systems, they are able to make it more challenging for us to
follow the money, and get after the money.
Not necessarily impossible. And there is a role here for
diplomacy, State Department, Treasury Department, others, in
engaging with some of those foreign partners to work better
with us, to help make sure that we have clamped down on the
system.
Senator Shaheen. Any particular entities that you would
like to name?
Mr. Wray. I think the State Department would probably
appreciate it if I didn't name specific countries in an open
hearing, but.
Senator Shaheen. Although you pointed out we are
cooperating with the international community, and I have heard
from some of--some officials that there are entities that may
be part of other countries that--where countries have cracked
down in-country, but those entities where they still have
significant interest may not have provided the same kind of
crackdown. Is that--I mean I am being pretty opaque here in the
way I am describing it, but.
Mr. Wray. Right, no, ``opaque'' is the right word, both for
the way we have to talk about it, but also what is in some of
these countries. I will say there have been quite a number of
countries where we have gotten more cooperation than we might
have, you know, in years past. So I don't want to make it sound
too bleak. We have had a number of partners that have taken,
for them, more aggressive action than we would historically
have seen. And that is, I think, a measure of the international
community being so appalled by what Russia is up to in the
Ukraine.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Senator Moran.
Senator Moran. Chair, thank you.
Let me talk again about the surging increase in violent
crime. I believe that two of the most effective ways to address
violent crime are through surging FBI resources to the most
affected communities, through Joint Federal Local Task Force,
such as Safe Streets Task Forces.
You and I heard the commentary from law enforcement, local
and State law enforcement when we were together in March in
Kansas, I understand that as of May, I think it is early May,
the FBI surged resources in six field offices, and it secured
significant arrests, and firearm seizures from violent
criminals.
Director Wray, is the FBI considering additional resource
surges over the coming year, or expanding its existing task
force network.
Mr. Wray. So on the surges, I think what you are referring
to is a new team that I created about 6 months, or so, ago,
which is called Our Violent Crime Rapid Deployment Teams, and
what that does is we have been sending it to particularly hard
hit hot spots or cities, at the embrace or request of the of
the--both the FBI field office and our local partners, to
assist.
And we have had very good luck in the six, or so, cities
where we have done that. I know in Buffalo for example, you
know, several months ago we had about a 50 percent decrease in
homicides during the surge. In Milwaukee I think we had a
pretty significant decrease.
But that is by its very nature, somewhat temporary. We
can't send those teams to just be there sort of in perpetuity,
so part of what we are trying to do is both achieve a short-
term, dramatic reduction by listening closely to the locals as
to what they most need, but then also trying to put in place
things that will have a more sustained, durable impact that
will outlive the team's deployment
We expect to continue that model, to keep sending that team
to different places, but ultimately, as you and I, I think,
discussed recently, this is a problem, ``this'' the violent
crime problem, that dominates every discussion I have with
chiefs and sheriffs all the time. You know, had a five--our
last nationwide data is a 5 percent increase in the violent
crime rate, which doesn't sound like much, maybe to some
Americans, until you stop and think: So that means 67,000
people, ``victims'' of violent crime, would not have been a
victim the year before. And the homicide rate went up 30
percent, which is, I think the highest in like 50 years,
increase.
So any resources, the committee--this subcommittee would be
able to send us on the violent crime problem, could immediately
be put to very effective use. And there will be a lot of State
and local partners who would be very grateful as well, because
one of the things we are really trying to do all across the
country, is lean in to see where we can take cases federally to
get some of the worst of the worst, and to dismantle some of
the most significant gangs, and keep them off the streets for a
much longer period of time.
Senator Moran. Director, let me explore just a minute
longer the idea of surging, and the point you make I think is a
good one. Certainly anyone whose life is saved, or property is
not stolen because of a surge, that is a valuable thing, but
what we need is longer term results from that surge.
So is there something that happens structurally? I mean
first of all I would say is we are getting more guns out of the
hands of people who are not entitled to have guns, I assume, in
that surge; and we are putting more criminals, who are likely
to commit violent crimes, to be incarcerated; those ought to
have some longer lasting effect rather than just the amount of
time that your additional resources are in the community?
Mr. Wray. You are exactly right. That there are two key
concepts here, partnership and intelligence; partnership
meaning, it has got to be a team effort, it has got to be, how
do we put the FBI's two together with the State local law
enforcement partners, and ATF, and DEA, and Marshals. Put one
agency's two, with another agency's two, and have it equal more
than four, right; how to get a synergy where the whole is
greater than the sum of the parts.
So partnership is key, and then the second piece,
intelligence, is when you hear ``intelligence'', really what
you should take away from that, what Americans should just take
away from that is, that is better understanding the problem in
order to prioritize going after the thing that is really
driving the violent crime, in order to have a longer lasting
impact.
So that might mean identifying particular gangs that are
wreaking havoc on a neighborhood. It could mean a particular
neighborhood that is disproportionately being fought over by
two gangs. It could be any number of things, but if you get
good intelligence, and then the partnership acts based on that
intelligence with a strategy, that is how you get an impact
that lasts longer, for example.
Senator Moran. I would be interested in knowing, Director,
if there is--any characteristics about the communities that
have the most significant increases in violent crime, the most
prevalent violent crime? When you focus your efforts on a
particular community, what is the common denominator among
those communities? And then perhaps we can try to deal with the
underlying reason that a community is experiencing that
increase.
Mr. Wray. You know, violent crime is, by its nature,
unfortunately, a little bit different everywhere. And that is
why we really have to take not a one-size-fits-all. And so what
I mean by that is, in one community it might be a particular
neighborhood gang that has just run amuck. And if you really
drill down you may find that the homicide rate is being
disproportionately driven by that one gang's activity.
In another community there could be a rampage of commercial
robberies, or carjackings, and that is what is really driving
it. In another place it could be a particular neighborhood, or
particular corridor on a highway that is part of a drug
trafficking route. In another place it could be, and this is
something we are seeing in a lot of places, too many repeat,
dangerous offenders who are either out on bail, or who have
been not serving very long sentences.
And the only thing more frustrating to law enforcement than
having to arrest somebody who should be behind bars; is having
to arrest the same person over, and over, and over, again.
Senator Moran. That is a good point for--that is something
that can that can be pursued. That is a concrete path that
could be advanced.
Let me--I told Senator Shaheen one more question, I meant
one more topic. And in September of last year you testified
before the Senate Judiciary Committee that the FBI's failure
for its mishandling of the Larry Nassar investigation was
quote, ``Inexcusable.'' ``It never should have happened, and we
are doing everything in our power to make sure it never happens
again.''
To that end you testified that the FBI had begun
implementing all four recommendations from the Inspector
General's Report. Could you please provide me with an update on
where those--where that implementation of those recommendations
stand?
Mr. Wray. I would be happy to provide it to you in writing,
maybe afterwards, if that would be helpful.
Senator Moran. Okay.
Mr. Wray. I mean--for the most part I think we have
implemented all of them quite a while ago, and certainly we
took disciplinary action against the one agent who was still
with the FBI, you know, once we--once we learned what had
happened.
And I just--it is hard for me to explain to you how angry
and upset I was when I learned what the FBI did and failed to
do back in 2015. But I am determined to make it right now that
I am here, and we are going to make sure that everybody in the
FBI learns the lessons from that, just a tragic experience.
Senator Moran. I appreciate that. Senator Blumenthal, and
I, and our subcommittee in the in the Commerce Committee spent
a-year-and-a-half exploring, investigating, and providing
recommendations for legislation that became law. And we have
had--we share that frustration, that anger, about how everyone
who should have done something, didn't do it well, or didn't do
anything.
And again as you, I think, would agree, we would expect the
FBI to be among the most--purest in their willingness, desire,
and capabilities to respond to somebody in need. So it is a
terribly sad circumstance, and we await the Department of
Justice making some decisions about what to do, if anything, in
regard to those individuals.
Mr. Wray. And just to be clear, on that part, you know, we
don't--that is really between the Inspector General and the
Department of Justice for that.
Senator Moran. All right. I wasn't suggesting it. It is a
question I asked the Attorney General.
Director Wray: Yes.
Senator Moran. But I wanted to highlight it for his,
perhaps, when he reviews your testimony, he will know that he
has been questioned, once again about this topic.
Thank you, Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you very much for raising that
issue.
And Director Wray, if you do send the response to Senator
Moran, I hope Senator Moran; you will share it with the Members
of the Committee.
Senator Moran. I will do so.
Senator Shaheen. Because I know there are a lot of people
on the Committee who are concerned about it.
Your final exchange for that issue, raised a question for
me, because you were talking about the Federal crimes that you
are investigating. And as we know, the top law enforcement
official in our States when it comes to Federal crimes are,
U.S. attorneys, and I have been very troubled by the delay in
getting U.S. attorneys in place across this country.
And I just wondered if you could speak to what happens if
we don't have somebody in that role? If we have somebody who is
just acting? Or that that the U.S. Attorney has not been
officially put in place to take charge of those investigations,
and what kind of challenges that presents, as you are trying to
bring a case before court?
Mr. Wray. Well, what I--I want to be a little bit careful
here. What I would say is the acting U.S. attorneys around the
country, in my experience, are some of the most dedicated, most
seasoned, most capable prosecutors, Federal prosecutors that
that are out there. And I know a number of them personally, and
have enormous respect for them.
Having said that, it is helpful to a U.S. Attorney's
Office, and to the law enforcement community to have a Senate-
confirmed, presidentially appointed U.S. Attorney, because at
least in some districts that is what is required for important
initiatives to be pursued.
For sometimes, you know, important personnel changes to be
made in an office, having served in a U.S. Attorney's Office,
and having been assistant attorney general, dealing with all
the U.S. attorneys, you know, in my previous time in
government, I know that there is a level of ability to take
action on certain kinds of things, that I think it is a little
bit easier, certainly, for a permanent U.S. Attorney.
But I also want to be very clear that I think the acting
U.S. attorneys that are out there, are doing a terrific job,
and they are working really well with our field offices.
Senator Shaheen. I appreciate that, and I appreciate the
importance of reinforcing the job that those acting U.S.
attorneys are doing. But I would just argue that at this time
when we are facing a lot of challenges with respect to
increased criminal activity that having the top decision maker
in those offices is really critical.
And we need to urge the administration to move those people
if they haven't been nominated, and Members of the Senate to
approve them so that we can get people in place. So that we
have got everybody on the ground that we need in order to
address the challenges that we are facing when it comes to
crime.
Senator Moran. And may I make this bipartisan, please?
Senator Shaheen. Please do.
Senator Moran. I will join the Chair in making the request
of the administration. And I suppose the Senate, should they be
nominated, act expeditiously to get us our U.S. attorneys which
are absent in many places including my home State.
Senator Shaheen. Yes. Thank you. Thank you very much,
Director Wray.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Shaheen. If there are no further questions this
afternoon, Senators may submit additional questions for the
official hearing record. We request the FBI's responses in 30
days.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the National Science Foundation for response
subsequent to the hearing.]
No questions were submitted.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
[Whereupon, at 4:00 p.m., Wednesday, May 25, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
the Chair.]
COMMERCE, JUSTICE, SCIENCE, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2023
----------
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 22, 2022
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 9:34 a.m., in room SD-192, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeanne Shaheen (Chair) presiding.
Present: Senators Shaheen, Feinstein, Reed, Coons, Manchin,
Van Hollen, Moran, Murkowski, Collins, Hagerty, and Braun.
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEANNE SHAHEEN
Senator Shaheen. Good morning. Welcome to today's Commerce,
Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Subcommittee Hearing, to
review the activities in fiscal year 2023 funding request of
the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.
We will recognize members in order of appearance, and there
will be 5 minutes for questions.
Our witness today is Ambassador Katherine Tai, the United
States Trade Representative. Welcome, Ambassador Tai. We are
glad you are here, and it is nice to see you again.
As this committee knows, the Office of the U.S. Trade
Representative is responsible for developing and coordinating
U.S. international trade, commodity, and direct investment
policy, and overseeing negotiations with other countries. As
the U.S. Trade Representative, Ambassador Tai, is the
administration's principal trade advisor, negotiator, and
spokesperson on U.S. trade policy.
In order for USTR to succeed this subcommittee must ensure
it has sufficient resources to carry out its important mission.
To that end, the fiscal year 2022 Omnibus Spending Bill
included $71 million for the Office of the United States Trade
Representative, for fiscal year 2023 the administration
requests $76.54 million for USTR.
So we look forward to hearing how you plan to use that
money and what your priorities are, Ambassador.
While we consider these priorities it is important to also
consider the most pressing trade issues confronting our
country. One of those issues is Russia, following Vladimir
Putin's illegal invasion of Ukraine, the United States led a
broad coalition of allies to swiftly punish Putin and his
cronies with crippling sanctions. During today's hearing I
would be interested in learning more about your efforts to
counter Russia's aggression, especially in light of the
recently signed law revoking Russia's permanent normal trade
relations status.
Another issue is our trade relationship with China. As you
know, China has failed to fulfill obligations outlined in the
Phase One Agreement, particularly its purchase commitments
under that deal. China also, serially, violates human rights
and workers rights despite its assertions to the contrary.
I am interested to hear about the administration's efforts
to ensure China lives up to its end of the deal, and your view
of the future of the U.S.-China trade relationship. I would
also like to learn more about how the administration's recent
launch of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity
fits into that relationship.
Another related issue is the tariffs imposed on goods from
China under Section 301 of the Trade Act. In fiscal year 2022
Omnibus Spending Bill passed in March, Congress directed USTR
to establish and administer an exclusion process for these
tariffs.
Now, I can speak to many New Hampshire businesses that
can't source goods from outside of China, who are
understandably seeking some real relief from tariffs. We look
forward to hearing how USTR is working to comply with this
congressional directive.
And I just want to close by commending you on your
achievements in your first year as U.S. Trade Representative,
through your work the United States ended a decades-long civil
aircraft trade dispute resulting in lifted tariffs on billions
of dollars worth of U.S. exports, ranging from products like
cheese to distilled spirits. We also reached deals with the
United Kingdom, the European Union, and Japan to remove
existing tariffs on steel and aluminum.
And moreover, under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement,
USMCA, USTR has employed the Rapid Response Mechanism to defend
workers' rights. I think that is proved that when done right,
trade agreements can really foster positive movement on labor
and environmental rights, rather than negative ones.
Ambassador Tai, we have a lot to discuss. I thank you for
appearing before us today.
And with that, our Ranking Member is just right on cue, for
his remarks. But while he is getting ready let me just say I
have a statement that I will submit for the record, and that
includes some additional comments that I left out; so I will do
that, without objection.
Senator Shaheen. And if the Ranking Member is ready, I will
call on him.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JERRY MORAN
Senator Moran. Chair Shaheen, thank you very much. And
please know that my tardiness was not related to the moment in
which you concluded your opening remarks.
Senator Shaheen. And that is okay. I told everybody where
you were. So they knew you weren't just playing hooky.
Senator Moran. Thank you very much. Thanks for covering for
me. I appreciate you convening this hearing, and I appreciate
you accepting, honoring my request that we have a hearing
focused on trade, and have the Trade Ambassador before us. And
so, thank you very much.
And Ambassador Tai, welcome. I appreciate you coming to
testify before our subcommittee.
At last year's hearing I stated that you were stepping into
your role at USTR at a time in which trade policy and trade
enforcement has arguably never been more important. I believe
that statement is even more true today, when you consider
record-high inflation impacting Americans at the pump, the
grocery store, and the pharmacy; supply chain disruptions that
continue to ripple through the economy; and China's continued
effort to steal American intellectual property, and always be
our adversary.
Ambassador, due to inflation the American people are
struggling to meet. You have a critical role in helping lead us
out of this economic environment, and helping Americans get
back on their feet. I am very interested in the enforcement of
USMCA, and the Phase One China Trade Deal, as both have
significant impacts on my Home State of Kansas.
Kansans benefit from exporting goods and services in a fair
trade environment. Given that Mexico, China, and Canada are
consistently the top markets for Kansas exports, we must ensure
that these trading partners live up to their commitments in
USMCA, and in the Phase One Agreement.
I am eager to receive an update from you about the current
compliance with these agreements, I support efforts to crack
down on unfair trade practices.
I also want to further understand how you are managing a
full slate of Section 301 investigations. Congress has directed
USTR to ``Immediately establish and administer an exclusion
process for U.S. businesses'', and the inaction of the
administration is putting extra burdens on American businesses,
and upon their workers.
I look forward to hearing from you how USTR plans to
execute an exclusion process, and how you are reviewing expired
exclusions to make certain that businesses have the opportunity
to petition their government for relief.
As we consider USTR's funding needs for fiscal year 2023, I
am looking forward to learning more about President Biden's
trade strategy, and priorities, and also better understanding
what level of resources USTR requires to perform these growing
responsibilities.
I believe the administration's policies have been unclear
thus far, and I hope today that you will provide some clarity
on trade strategies you are pursuing to benefit Kansas, and all
the people of America.
Finally, I am concerned about this administration's failure
to pursue and secure new trade agreements. Other countries are
securing market opening trade agreements and our absence from
large, bilateral, multilateral trade agreements is putting the
U.S. at a disadvantage. This includes seeing little or no
progress on an agreement with the United Kingdom, and continued
unwillingness to join an agreement with our Indo-Pacific
partners, such as the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-
Pacific Partnership.
My view is we can't afford to remain on the sidelines as
other countries enhance their market access and set rules that
may disadvantage U.S. companies and our workers.
Ambassador, thank you. Again, I recognize the challenging
circumstances you find yourself in. And I look forward to
hearing your testimony today, and hope that we can work
productively together to promote free and fair global trade
policies that benefit America, its economy, our workers, and
our families. Thank you, Ma'am.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Moran.
Ambassador Tai, the floor is yours.
STATEMENT OF KATHERINE TAI, AMBASSADOR, U.S. TRADE
REPRESENTATIVE
Ambassador Tai. Well, thank you so much Chair Shaheen, and
Ranking Member Moran. It is an honor to be here with you, and
the Members of the Subcommittee today.
Thank you for inviting me to discuss President Biden's
fiscal year 2023 budget request for the Office of The United
States Trade Representative.
Today, I would like to highlight our progress in
implementing a worker-centered trade policy that increases
American competitiveness abroad, advances the rights of
workers, and establishes the United States as a leader in
shaping a more resilient form of globalization.
Before I begin, I want to be clear that Congress is our
constitutional partner on trade and close collaboration is
critical to developing successful American trade policy.
The President's budget request for fiscal year 2023
provides $76.54 million for USTR. This includes $61.54 million
available directly to USTR, and $15 million allocated through
the Trade Enforcement Trust Fund.
This request will help the agency enforce our existing
trade agreements, strengthen ties with allies, and advance a
trade agenda that supports the middle class, improves labor and
environmental standards, and creates an inclusive prosperity.
Enforcement is a critical component of our administration's
trade agenda. Manufacturers, farmers, and ranchers do not
always get the full benefits of our trade agreements. Workers
and communities suffer due to unfairly traded imports. This
creates a trust gap with the public, which is why enforcement
is needed as part of our worker-centric trade policy.
For example, using the Rapid Response Mechanism in the
U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, we asked the Government of Mexico
to review whether workers at four facilities in Mexico were
denied the rights of free association and collective
bargaining. Thanks to the operation of this mechanism, workers
at the General Motors facility in Silao, Mexico, voted for a
new union that negotiated a better contract, which will provide
higher wages, and that is good for American workers.
Our enforcement efforts also helped to protect the
environment. We initiated consultations with Mexico to prevent
illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing. We also reached
an agreement with Vietnam to keep, illegally harvested or
traded timber out of the global supply chain.
Finally, we are pressing Canada to fulfill its commitment
to U.S. dairy farmers and producers, and recently initiated a
second set of dispute settlement consultations over Canada's
tariff-rate quota restrictions. Canada's actions continue to
prevent U.S. dairy producers from receiving the benefits
promised in the USMCA. We will not give up until our farmers
see those promises delivered.
The next major component of our trade agenda is the
realignment of the U.S.-its commitments under the Phase One
Agreement. Several rounds of difficult discussions made clear
the limits of the PRC's interest in delivering on those
obligations.
And that is why it is time for us to turn the page on the
old playbook. The PRC's non-market industrial policies unfairly
target U.S. workers, businesses, and key sectors. We have to
use all available tools, and develop new tools, to defend our
economic interests and values.
President Biden recognizes market economies must act in
concert to confront policies that are fundamentally at odds
with the modern trading system. And that is why we have also
brought a renewed focus to engagement with our partners and
allies, who also are negatively impacted by the PRC's unfair
trade and economic practices.
Beyond this cooperation, we are deepening our engagement
with key trading partners through new and existing bilateral
and multilateral agreements and arrangements.
Last month, I joined President Biden to launch the Indo-
Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity. We are developing
high-standard commitments for the digital economy, labor,
environment, agriculture, and trade facilitation that promotes
resilience and facilitates sustainable economic growth for our
workers and for our planet.
We also announced the U.S.-Taiwan Initiative on 21st-
Century Trade in June. Under the auspices of the American
Institute in Taiwan, and the Taipei Economic and Cultural
Representative Office, we are developing concrete ways to
strengthen this bilateral trade and investment relationship.
And beyond the Indo-Pacific region, we have stepped up our
trade engagement in many other areas, most recently, at the
World Trade Organization. During the WTO's 12th Ministerial
Conference last week, the United States helped produce
breakthroughs on key issues, including: A multilateral
agreement to prohibit subsidies for those engaged in illegal,
unreported and unregulated fishing; an extension of a
moratorium on customs duties, on electronic transmissions, a
modification of intellectual property protections for COVID
vaccines, for the COVID pandemic, and a ministerial declaration
on food insecurity, and a commitment to examine how we can,
together, facilitate safe agricultural trade to feed a growing
global population.
We are also building on our bilateral engagement with our
transatlantic partners. Last year we reached an understanding
in the Boeing-Airbus dispute and adopted a framework to resolve
the Section 232 steel and aluminum trade disputes that removed
or avoided more than $20 billion in tariffs, all without
surrendering our principles and our interests.
Lowering those tensions helped us begin negotiations on a
global arrangement with the European Union. This will be the
world's first sectoral arrangement on steel and aluminum trade
to tackle emissions and non-market excess capacity. We also
regained access to the EU market for American shellfish for the
first time in a decade, and recently concluded the Second
Ministerial Meeting of the U.S.-EU Trade and Technology
Council.
Our work to use trade as a collective policy tool to raise
standards in the world economy extends to our efforts directed
at eliminating the use of forced labor in global supply chains.
On June 21, which was yesterday, the Forced Labor
Enforcement Task Force launched its enforcement strategy of the
Uyghurs Forced Labor Prevention Act to prohibit the importation
of goods produced entirely, or partially, in the Xinxiang
Autonomous Region of the PRC, or produced by certain entities.
As you can see, we have an ambitious and important agenda.
I look forward to working with the subcommittee to enact our
fiscal year 2023 budget request, so that USTR can fulfill this
agenda on behalf of the American people. Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ambassador Katherine Tai, the United States Trade
Representative
Good morning, Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and Members of
the Subcommittee. Thank you for inviting me to discuss President
Biden's fiscal year 2023 budget request to support the Office of the
United States Trade Representative (USTR).
Before I begin, I want to be clear that Congress is our
constitutional partner on trade and close collaboration is critical to
developing successful trade policy.
The President's budget request for fiscal year 2023 features $76.54
million for USTR. This includes $61.54 million available directly to
USTR and $15 million allocated through the Trade Enforcement Fund.
This request will help the agency enforce our existing trade
agreements, strengthen ties with allies and partners, and advance
President Biden's new approach to trade policy that supports the middle
class, improves labor and environmental standards and creates inclusive
prosperity and new opportunities for our workers, farmers and
businesses.
Enforcement
Our Administration is committed to enforcement as a critical
component of our trade agenda. Manufacturers, farmers and ranchers do
not always get the full benefits of access to new markets and too many
workers and communities suffer due to unfairly traded imports. This has
created a trust gap with the public and is why enforcement is a key
component of our worker-centered trade policy.
For example, using the Rapid Response Mechanism in the United
States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, we asked the Government of Mexico to
review whether workers at four facilities in Mexico were denied the
rights of free association and collective bargaining. Thanks to the
operation of this mechanism, workers at the Silao GM facility voted for
a new union that negotiated a better contract, which will pay workers a
higher wage.
Our enforcement efforts have also helped protect the environment.
We initiated consultations with Mexico designed to prevent illegal,
unreported, and unregulated fishing. We also reached an agreement with
Vietnam to keep illegally harvested or traded timber out of the global
supply chain.
Finally, we continue to press Canada to fulfill its commitment to
U.S. dairy farmers and producers, and recently initiated a second set
of dispute settlement consultations over its tariff-rate quota
restrictions. Canada's actions are preventing U.S. dairy producers from
receiving the market access benefits promised in the USMCA and we will
not let up.
China
The next major component of our trade agenda is the realignment of
the U.S.-China trade relationship.
In October, I announced a new strategy to re-align our engagement
with the PRC, which would begin with direct discussions with its
leaders.
We pressed the PRC to live up to its commitments under the ``Phase
One Agreement.'' Several rounds of difficult discussions made clear the
limits of the PRC's interest in delivering fully on those obligations.
This has become part of a pattern. The United States has repeatedly
sought and obtained commitments from China, only to find that lasting
change remains elusive.
That is why we need to turn the page on the old playbook. The PRC's
non-market industrial policies unfairly target U.S. workers,
businesses, and key sectors. We have to use all available tools, and
develop new tools, to defend our economic interests and values.
President Biden also recognizes that our ability to defend against
unfair PRC economic practices requires that market economies act in
concert to confront policies and practices that are fundamentally at
odds with the modern global trading system. That is why we have also
brought a renewed focus to engagement with our partners and allies, who
also are negatively impacted by the PRC's unfair trade and economic
practices.
Strengthening and Deepening our Trade Relationships
Beyond this cooperation, we are deepening our engagement with key
trading partners through new and existing bilateral, plurilateral and
multilateral agreements and arrangements.
Look no further than our renewed engagement with the Indo-Pacific.
I was proud to join President Biden last month to launch the Indo-
Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) for Prosperity. USTR is leading the
discussions on IPEF's trade pillar
I recently held a productive meeting with our 13 partners in Paris
to discuss our vision and priorities for this pillar. We are beginning
to develop high-standard commitments across several areas including the
digital economy, labor, environment, agriculture, and trade
facilitation that support our larger goals of promoting resilience and
facilitating sustainable and inclusive economic growth that benefits
our workers and our planet.
We also announced the U.S.-Taiwan Initiative on 21st-Century Trade
earlier this month, under the auspices of the American Institute in
Taiwan (AIT) and the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office
(TECRO), to develop concrete ways to strengthen our trade and
investment relationship with Taiwan and advance our mutual economic
priorities.
Beyond the Indo-Pacific region, we have stepped up our bilateral
and multilateral engagement at the G7, G20, OECD, Summit of the
Americas, and, most recently, at the World Trade Organization.
We also continue to build on our bilateral engagement with our
Transatlantic partners. In the last year, we reached an understanding
in the Boeing-Airbus dispute and adopted a framework to resolve the
Section 232 steel and aluminum trade disputes that removed or avoided
more than $20 billion in tariffs--without surrendering our principles
and interests.
Lowering those tensions helped pave the way for us to begin
negotiations on a global arrangement with the EU. While our discussions
are still ongoing, this will be the world's first sectoral arrangement
on steel and aluminum trade to tackle both emissions and non-market
excess capacity. We also regained access to the EU market for American
shellfish for the first time in a decade, and just recently concluded
the second ministerial meeting of the US-EU Trade and Technology
Council.
Our work to use trade as a collective policy tool to raise
standards in the world economy extends to our efforts directed at
eliminating the use of forced labor in global supply chains. We are
doing our own part to set the pace of this important work. On June 21,
the Forced Labor Enforcement Task Force launched its enforcement
strategy of the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act in order to prohibit
the importation of goods produced entirely or partially in the Xinjiang
Autonomous Region of the PRC or produced by certain entities.
The U.S. Customs and Border Protection, in coordination with USTR,
has issued withhold release orders in 35 instances over the years that
flag products coming from the PRC produced partially or entirely with
forced labor. This includes 11 active WROs on products from Xinjiang.
I look forward to working with this subcommittee to enact our
fiscal year 2023 budget request so that USTR can fulfill this agenda on
behalf of the American people.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much Ambassador Tai.
I would like to begin with the 301 Tariffs and the
exclusion process. I was pleased to have the chance to talk
with you a little bit about this on the phone this week, and I
think this hearing gives us an opportunity to explore what USTR
is thinking with respect to the exclusion process, and how this
process is going to move forward.
So, I want to--as I referenced in my opening statement, the
2022 Omnibus Appropriations Bill included a directive for USTR
to what I am quoting here, ``Immediately establish and
administer an exclusion process for U.S. businesses seeking
relief from section 301 Tariffs that are active as of the date
of enactment of this act.'' End quote.
So more than 3 months have passed, and it is not clear what
process has been established, and again, as we discussed this
is a process that is essential for many of our New Hampshire
businesses. I am sure everybody on this subcommittee has
examples in their own States of how businesses are affected.
So, can you update us on how USTR is planning to comply
with this congressional directive?
Ambassador Tai. Thank you for that question, Senator
Shaheen. I appreciate the attention that you and the
subcommittee have paid to the tariff exclusion process, and I
know the particular leadership that this subcommittee has
played in the history of the tariff exclusion process. The
purpose of the Section 301 investigation, and associated tariff
action is to address China's unfair trade practices.
The existing tariffs are there to address China's IP rights
abuses, and also forced tech transfer practices. At the same
time, we are committed to ensuring that the 301 tariffs support
the Biden-Harris administration's deliberative long-term vision
for realigning the U.S. China trade relationship with our
priorities.
So let me just say this, I think that you and, in general,
our Members of Congress have been extremely articulate and
effective in advocating for your constituents in terms of--as
Senator Moran mentioned--very challenging economic
circumstances that we have all found ourselves in over these
past several years.
What I would like to let you know, is that at my office,
USTR, we are taking into consideration in the design of the
tariff exclusion processes that we have implemented, and the
ones that we are looking to implement in the future, all the
feedback that we have gained from Congress and our stakeholders
including the results of a GAO Report addressing the past
administration of the 301 exclusion process.
So, what I would like to convey to you is that we, in the
Biden administration, are moving forward with respect to the
entire China trade relationship, including the tariffs and the
requests for an exclusion process, with a deliberativeness to
ensure that any exclusion processes that we implement, and have
implemented are fair, transparent, administrable, and give our
stakeholders the opportunity to make their case for relief at a
very challenging time in our economy, and the world economy.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. I appreciate there are a
lot of considerations when it comes to tariffs, particularly
when we are looking at the actions of China. But you called
what Congress is asking ``a request'', it is not a request,
Ambassador Tai, it is a directive. And I wonder if you will
commit to us and the subcommittee that you are going to comply
with this directive, and give us some sort of a timeframe on
when you expect that to happen?
Ambassador Tai. Senator Shaheen, on this one I think I
would direct you to the President's comments over the weekend,
that with respect to China tariffs, and next steps on actions,
they are pending with him right now.
Senator Shaheen. So, are you suggesting that the
subcommittee needs to refer this issue to the President and ask
him when USTR is planning to comply?
Ambassador Tai. I think what I am saying to you, Chair
Shaheen, is that these issues are under consideration for a
decision as we speak right now.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Senator Moran.
Senator Moran. Senator Shaheen, thank you for your
highlighting the directive nature of what Congress has told the
USTR Ambassador to do. And while it may take a short amount of
time in order to accomplish that, we have seen no evidence that
the requirement, the directive is being followed.
Ambassador, the pinch of input costs is soaring and very
damaging to American agriculture producers. The invasion of
Ukraine has only heightened the demand for food production, but
tariffs on fertilizer represent an opportunity for you to
relieve some of the pressure on the agricultural community.
Many of these duties are put in place by the Department of
Commerce. Yet USTR can and should play a role, certainly in
expanding markets.
But what can you do? I am talking about phosphates from
Morocco. This administration placed countervailing duties on
fertilizer ingredients coming from Trinidad and Tobago. What
can you do to help lower the cost of imported fertilizer
components?
Ambassador Tai. Ranking Member Moran, I know how important
agricultural production is to the U.S. economy, but also how
important our agricultural production is to the world economy,
and to food security, frankly. And I am also keenly aware of
the exacerbations on global trade and supply that Russia's
decision to invade Ukraine has inflicted on all of us.
With respect to fertilizer trade and supply, and what USTR
can do about it, let me say this: I consider Secretary Vilsack,
our agriculture secretary, to be one of my most important
partners in the administration, and frankly one of my closest
friends, personally. We have been working together very closely
on food security issues, writ large, but also specifically on
the fertilizer pinch that we are all in.
We have been working closely with USDA, both between myself
and the Secretary, and also our teams, to encourage feedback
from a variety of our stakeholders on USDA's American-made
fertilizer initiative, that provides a $250 million grant for
domestic production of fertilizer.
USTR is also working with the inter-agency to encourage
multilateral development banks, the FAO, the Food and
Agriculture Organization, and the International Fund for
Agricultural Development to finance projects to expand
fertilizer production, as well as increase the efficient use of
fertilizer and precision agriculture.
Both areas where American farmers are, frankly, at the
leading and cutting edge of practice in the world, and we will
continue to work internally within the administration, and with
our allies and partners to find additional ways to mitigate the
global fertilizer shortage, and prevent similar shocks in the
future.
The additional thought that I would offer you in your
description of the pinch that we are in is--and I think that
this is an issue that presents itself across the board in many
different areas, and I will be glad to highlight them--is one
of the biggest challenges that we have right now is how to
responsibly and effectively react to, respond to the current
economic challenges and shocks that we have, but with an eye to
ensuring that we are building towards a future system that is
more resilient, that does not throw us back into the crisis
that we are encountering today.
Senator Moran. Ambassador I know Secretary Vilsack well,
myself, and I have encouraged him to be a voice for
agriculture, for agricultural producers throughout this
administration, so I appreciate that you are consulting and
working with him, and he is working with you.
But your answer, it seemed to me, was a list of things that
we are attempting to do but did not include anything on that
list about actually eliminating the tariffs or the
countervailing duties that have been imposed on the phosphates,
and other fertilizer components that come into the United
States.
Ambassador Tai. If I may respond to that specifically, the
anti-dumping countervailing duty programs are run out of
Commerce. And your specific question is: ``What can we do at
USTR'', and that was the filter through which I was responding.
Senator Moran. And so is the answer that you have nothing
to do with eliminating those countervailing tariffs and duties
at the Department of Commerce?
Ambassador Tai. They are not my programs, but I am happy
[speak] with Secretary Vilsack to have those conversations with
the Commerce Secretary.
Senator Moran. Please do. I have had those conversations
with the Secretary, myself.
Madam Chair, I don't think I have the time for another
question.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Senator Coons.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member
Moran.
Great to be with you, again, Katherine. U.S. Trade
Representative Tai, I appreciate your time before our
subcommittee, and look forward to working with the Chair to
pursue our directives to the administration, and our
prerogatives.
I am grateful for the work that you are doing, and your
accomplishments. I am particularly encouraged to hear the
progress on IUU fishing, your openness to working together on
promoting Delaware's chicken exports, our favorite protein,
which for those who have other proteins they really care about,
I am happy to go to bat with anyone about why chicken is the
low-fat, high protein, low cost, low environmental impact
protein that the world needs today.
Senator Shaheen. No commercials here; come on.
[Laughter.]
Senator Moran. Your reputation for bipartisanship, you are
exceeding your capabilities here.
Senator Coons. Thank you for what I think was a marathon
WTO Ministerial in Geneva, and for your work there. And you
know, frankly I have just two quick questions. But I would love
to hear what you see as the path forward in our trade relations
with China, and in trying to make the WTO relevant and
effective in some way.
China, my understanding, has agreed to exclude itself from
the TRIPS waiver for COVID vaccines. Is that an enforceable
commitment in any way?
Ambassador Tai. We see it as a legally binding commitment
that they have made at the WTO, yes.
Senator Coons. And I would be interested in what you see as
the path forward for plurilateral and bilateral negotiations. I
have a bill with Senator Portman, the Trading System
Preservation Act, which would authorize the President to
negotiate sector-specific agreements with like-minded partners
within the WTO system, an area that I think may be fruitful for
work.
And we are introducing today, the Special Relationship Act,
Senator Portman and I; that would authorize a bilateral FTA
negotiation with the U.K. I understand that market access isn't
on the table, in the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, but I am
encouraged that the IPF has been launched. Should we be
negotiating to open foreign markets to U.S. producers? And what
are your priorities for these negotiations?
Ambassador Tai. Senator Coons, that was a number of issues.
Senator Coons. It was.
Ambassador Tai. Well, I am going to work backwards, because
your last question is the one that is freshest in my mind. On
the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework it is true that market
access is not on the table in these negotiations.
What I would like to say on that is, when we talk about
market access in trade terms and trade terminology, we are
talking specifically about tariff liberalization, and that is
what is not on the table. Nevertheless, in our trade
agreements, and our trade arrangements, and everything that we
do in trade it is about markets, and it is about how we work
together.
So, the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework is about market
access. What I would say though is that it is not about tariff
liberalization. It is about ensuring and building partnerships,
and confidence in each other's markets, through our regulators,
through these conversations, and looking at assuring the
quality of the access that we have granted to each other,
through existing rules on tariffs, but also looking at new sets
of rules that frankly go beyond goods trade.
Digital economy issues have not that much to do with
tariffs. What is crossing borders, bits and bytes, but also
what is crossing borders is a set of values, and a desire to
build confidence in how we connect, how we are interconnected
in today's economy. So, I think that this is one of the most
important initiatives that we have ongoing, and also incredibly
important that we are doing it with our partners in the Indo-
Pacific region.
Senator Coons. And what do you think might be our path
forward in U.S.-China trade negotiations?
Ambassador Tai. That is a question about which I,
personally, and my agency spends a lot of our time thinking
about, and working on. What I would like to say is that the
public debate recently has been very, very fixated on the issue
of the tariffs.
What does it mean to remove the tariffs? What does it mean
for our leverage? Let me say this, there are a set of
challenges that we are facing right now, collectively, in our
global economy. We need to look at the tools that we can use to
address that. And I know this Committee has spoken with respect
to tariff exclusions, and the tariff exclusion process.
I just want to be clear, and put this in context, tariff
exclusion is a temporary and targeted relief from existing
tariffs, it does not remove the existing tariffs. That is an
important distinction that has been lost in the public debate.
But also the other piece of what has been lost in the
public debate is, whatever we need to do for ourselves, in this
relationship, around the world to get through the set of
challenges that we are facing today, we will one day find
ourselves on the other side of these challenges, and I think it
is very important that what we do now, not undermine the need
that we have to make ourselves more competitive, and to defend
our economic interests in a global system that, for the past
several decades, has eroded our leadership in many, many
different areas in the economy.
Senator Coons. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you Senator Coons. Senator Collins.
Senator Collins. Thank you. Good morning, Ambassador. In
2018 China imposed a 25 percent retaliatory tariff on U.S.
lobsters, which obviously affects the State of Maine more than
any other State in the Nation. Before the tariff China was the
second-largest importer of American lobster in the world.
During the first month under the new tariffs, however, live
lobster exports to China declined by 64 percent.
Now the 2020 Phase One Trade Deal required China to
purchase more than $500 billion of U.S. exports in 2020, and
2021. I worked very closely with your predecessor to make sure
that lobster was specifically included in that agreement.
According to reports, however, China purchased only $289
billion worth of exports, nowhere near the $500 billion figure
that was committed to.
Now, what is frustrating to me, is I raise this exact issue
with you when you appeared before this subcommittee last April.
Then in February of this year I sent you a letter asking you to
hold China accountable for the purchase commitments it made
under the Phase One Trade Agreement. You did not even respond
to my February letter.
So I am going to try for the third time to get answers from
you. What actions are you taking to hold China accountable to
fulfill its U.S. lobster purchase commitments?
And more broadly, what specific actions are you taking to
respond to China's dismal purchasing record, its overall
performance under the Phase One Trade Agreement?
Ambassador Tai. Senator Collins, let me begin by saying, I
am very sorry if I have not responded yet to your February
letter. I will go home, back to my office, and rectify that
immediately and let you know that we will do better. And you
have my commitment with respect to correspondence with you,
your office, and with the Congress in general.
On China's Phase One commitments, specifically with respect
to lobster, which I know is very important to you and your
constituents in the State of Maine; let me, if you will allow
me, put that in the larger context of China's purchase
commitments in Phase One, because those are the most public-
facing of the commitments that they made in the Phase One
Agreement, and the ones that are most easily checked, and
visible to everyone who has access to public trade data.
It has been very clear to us that China did not hit its
targets in a number of areas, including with respect to
lobsters in the Phase One commitments that they made to the
United States Government.
We have spent several months, starting in October, having
discussions with China around how they are going to fulfill
those commitments now that we see that the numbers do not match
up. I thought it was well worth having that conversation with
China, because I have always perceived, and seen, in my
experience with China, that China does care about its
international credibility.
What we have seen, however, through these conversations, is
that that has not been enough to motivate China to make good on
these purchase commitments in particular. That is what is
leading us to conclude that it is time to turn the page on the
old playbook. We do need to enforce our rights with respect to
China, and we do need to defend the interests of our entire
economy including our lobster people, lobster men, and lobster
women, our manufacturers, our workers, our ranchers, our
producers.
And I feel very strongly that we need to take a new and
more comprehensive look at enforcing those rights, and
defending those interests with respect to China. And that is
what we are doing right now at USTR.
Senator Collins. I look forward to getting more specificity
from you, in writing.
Madam Chair, I know my time has expired, so I would ask
unanimous consent that additional questions that I have, one
supporting the point that both you and the Ranking Member made
on 301 tariffs exclusions, and the other on Softwood Lumber
Agreement which is very important, be submitted for the record,
and I hope I will get answers.
Senator Shaheen. Without objection.
Senator Collins. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Senator Hagerty.
Senator Hagerty. Thank you, Chair Shaheen, and Ranking
Member Moran for holding this hearing. Ambassador Tai, it is
good to see you today. I would like to talk with you about the
China tariffs that were put in place by the previous
administration, and specifically, I would like to talk about
the negotiating leverage that those tariffs provide.
I can tell you from personal experience that when those
tariffs were imposed on China that it was felt around the
world. It demonstrated, particularly to Japan, the third
largest economy in the world, that we were serious about
leveling the playing field for American producers. It helped us
open significant new markets for American agriculture, and
importantly, it allowed us to establish a very high standard
digital trade agreement.
Ambassador Tai, I understand that China is not living up to
the commitments that it has made under Phase One, you have
talked about that at length. My question for you is: Wouldn't
removing these tariffs simply encourage more bad behavior? What
kind of message would it send to China?
Ambassador Tai. I appreciate that question very much,
Senator Hagerty, because at USTR we are responsible for the
formulation of American trade policy, and guiding the U.S.
economy through challenges, and opportunities that are
presented today, but really to set up the American economy for
success in the future. The China tariffs are, in my view, a
significant piece of leverage, and a trade negotiator never
walks away from leverage.
The question for us, and this is something that we have
done in the Biden administration, with respect to a number of
different Section 301 investigations, and tariff actions is:
How do you convert this leverage into a strategic program that
will strengthen American competitiveness and defend our
interests in a global economy in which China will continue to
play?
We need to use our tools more effectively. We need new
tools. We need to bring an entirely new approach. And I think
that all of those things are built on the back of the tools
that we have in our hands right now.
Senator Hagerty. I certainly think sustaining leverage from
the standpoint of a business person, which I have been on my
life, is a critical factor here. I hear the argument that it
will have an impact on inflation. Look, inflation didn't take
off when the tariffs were imposed it stayed, you know, at or
below 2 percent when the tariffs were originally imposed. So I
think that is a false argument. And I appreciate the fact that
you appreciate the leverage that you have, and encourage you to
use it.
I would like to turn now to the Indo-Pacific Economic
Framework, the so-called ``IPEF''. You have met with
representatives from the 13 countries that participate in the
Indo-Pacific Framework, and many experts have argued that the
IPEF is too vague, it lacks substance, and perhaps that was the
price of convincing more countries to join the framework.
But as you focus on making IPEF more substantive, I urge
you to build on the successes of our Nation's prior engagements
in Asia. And specifically, I would like to talk about my
experience when I was U.S. Ambassador to Japan, as we
negotiated the U.S. Japan Digital Trade Agreement. It is
comprehensive, it is a high standard agreement that addresses
digital barriers, and I think it holds great potential.
So Ambassador Tai, I would like to ask you your thoughts on
whether you have considered looking at the U.S.-Japan Digital
Trade Agreement, and perhaps using its provisions, parts
thereof, that have been fully negotiated, as a standalone
sector-specific trade agreement in the region?
Ambassador Tai. Well, Senator Hagerty, thank you so much
for sharing your experiences. I think that in this
administration we are picking up on those relationships, and I
do agree that there is a lot of energy in this region, and also
worldwide, for trade conversations and trade work to be done
with respect to the digital economy, how we can work together,
how we can formulate rules, how we can establish common
understanding to facilitate the growth in this part of our
economy.
So, that is absolutely a part of the Indo-Pacific Economic
Framework that we are working on. I think what I would like to
say with respect to the standalone sectoral approach, however,
is that we are actually much more ambitious about what we can
accomplish, and what we should accomplish, with respect to our
partners in this region.
And so, while digital will be an integral part of what we
are bringing to the negotiations and the conversation in the
Indo-Pacific, it will not be the only one because digital
itself implicates so many aspects of our economy, so many of
our stakeholders. It needs to be, itself, a comprehensive and
robust approach to digital economic and trade relations.
Senator Hagerty. I think it will present a good example.
Ambassador Tai. And also be part of a larger package.
Senator Hagerty. And I look forward to working with you on
that. But one last point, I would like to discuss a very
worrying development that is occurring in Mexico. And Mexico is
one of the United States most important international partners,
and it is our closest neighbor to the south. There are many
difficult issues that we are trying to deal with Mexico, but
our robust economic relationship should provide a firm
foundation to strengthen and stabilize our efforts with an eye
toward our future relationship there.
But actions over the past year by the government of the
current President, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, have weakened
that bond, and are threatening the economic ties of our two
nations.
Last month, nine of my colleagues joined me to send a
letter to President Biden to address the Mexican Government's
aggression toward U.S. companies, particularly the arbitrary
and punitive actions recently taken against Vulcan Materials.
Vulcan Materials is a strategic supplier, particularly to the
southeast part of the United States because of how we build our
infrastructure.
So Ambassador Tai, we have yet to hear back from President
Biden. I know you have weighed in on this topic with the
Minister of Economy in Mexico. We can't tolerate our nearest
neighbor to the south, basically, nationalizing American
companies' assets. It is extremely damaging to our Nation's
working relationship. And I hope that you will commit to taking
an immediate action to help address these illegal actions.
Ambassador Tai. Senator Hagerty, are you speaking with
respect to Mexico's energy policies specifically, or across the
board?
Senator Hagerty. No. I am speaking to the fact that Mexico
has nationalized a piece of a mining operation that is
responsible for sending aggregate into the Gulf of Mexico, and
basically we are dependent on it, not only in Florida, but all
the way through the southeast.
Ambassador Tai. Thank you for that clarification. Let me
assure you that one message that I hope is conveyed very, very
clearly through my participation in this hearing, is the
commitment of the USTR to the enforcement of all of our trading
rights. And I want to assure you that my team is working on all
aspects of these issues.
And I can assure you that we will not rest. Enforcement is
a critical piece, and we are working on the challenges that we
have in Mexico.
Senator Hagerty. Yes. I appreciate. Yes, I appreciate your
diligence there.
Ambassador Tai. Thank you.
Senator Hagerty. I have heard it also strongly from the
energy community as well, that this is also an issue for them.
Ambassador Tai. Thank you, Senator Hagerty.
Senator Hagerty. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Senator Feinstein would be next, but this
is her birthday, so we are going to give her plenty of time to
settle in, and get ready, and go to Senator Braun.
Senator Braun. Thank you, Madam Chair.
One of the great successes of the Trump administration I
think was reorienting Washington's focus on national security,
economic threats posed by the Communist--China Communist Party.
The way I look at, in the geopolitical landscape, they are
playing with a chessboard, and we seem to be very reactive.
Everything I see that they are doing is incrementally building
up their military capabilities, but I really think they intend
to win economically. Day-by-day, month-by-month, year-by-year,
to where when that day comes, when they probably will
inevitably be a larger economy than ours, they have certainly
become skilled state capitalists, will wonder: Did we make the
right moves along the way?
I am concerned that they have the ability, they are
patient, I view them as a saving, and investing country, their
Road and Belt Program tells you that. I think they are hedging
their bets there, as they increasingly do things that make them
less than a handshake business partner. I won't repeat all of
it, but the intellectual property issue that they seem to go
after with impunity, they way over produce, look at our steel
industry, they have got half the world's capacity, dump the
gluts on the market.
We have got to be careful. Ideally, in a world that works
right you have the ability to have free trade, in places where
it is not fair and free, we had better be careful.
President Trump's 301 tariffs were successful in bringing
the CCP to the table, put real pressure on the Chinese
Government. Moving forward, I think they help us reduce
reliance on the Chinese market, and by the way, they are a
trading economy. We are not, but we accommodate them mostly for
our propensity to import, consume, and spend.
All kind of abstract considerations that, to me, they are
getting the winning end of the bargain at this point. That is
why I am concerned about the one tool, to limit USTR's
flexibility with restrictions on 301, that tool there, we can't
do that.
Do you agree that the USTR must have the flexibility to
design an exclusion process that also maintains sufficient
economic pressure to go along with it?
Ambassador Tai. Senator Braun, I absolutely agree with
that.
Senator Braun. Well, that is great because I think the
proof will be in how we practice it. Would you care to
elaborate in some detail how you see our relationship with
China evolve over the next half-a-decade to a decade, and what
your main concerns are, about how they are playing the game,
versus how we are reacting to it?
Ambassador Tai. Thank you so much for this opportunity,
because I think that this is absolutely the question that we
need to focus on with respect to positioning the American
economy today for the future, and for future success.
Let me begin by saying this, unless we define the problem
there is not going to be a good way for us to assess whether or
not we are solving it, whether or not we are being effective. I
think that----
Senator Braun. Are you doing well at defining it now?
Ambassador Tai. Well, the Section 301 investigation that
was launched by the Trump administration that you referenced
addressed a very legitimate and deep problem that we have had
with Chinese economic practices, which is with respect to
intellectual property rights and forced tech transfer
practices.
But that is not the sum total of the challenge that we
have, and I think that in your comments you have started
getting at the contours of the challenge that we have, which is
a fundamental economic incompatibility between a very, very
market-based economy that we have here in the United States and
very strict division between the State and the private sector,
and a Chinese economy through which the Chinese State's
interests and control and direction extend.
To your point about, you know, it would be great if we
could have free trade?
Senator Braun. Mm-hmm.
Ambassador Tai. But you have to know who you are competing
against. I always come back to the David Ricardo, ``Econ 101'',
where you have comparative advantage. And if you have got, you
know, two islands, both of them producing bananas and making
boats, but one of them has the conditions for producing
bananas, and the other one, say, has more engineers. The logic
is that, you know, you should have one focus on making boats,
and the other one make bananas. They can trade and everybody is
better off.
The problem is that that is not the world that we live in,
and especially if you expand out that economic model and you
say it is not just two products that our economies make, but
let us say there are 25 products that our economies make, and
then you look at the theory of comparative advantage, and then
you realize the advantages are not always natural.
When you are--when you are working with another economy,
even in the simplistic model, where that economy is not--is a
state capitalist model, that economy is going to be able to
target and take over entire industries and create advantages
that the market-based economy doesn't have.
That is the fundamental challenge that we have, and unless
we start focusing on identifying that as the problem, and
thinking through how we address it, I think that we condemn
ourselves to repeating cycles of experiences that we have had
from steel and aluminum, to solar. Right now, the Chinese
Government, the PRC, is looking very closely at semiconductors,
and a number of other strategic industrial areas that are going
to be critical for our future, and our future competitiveness.
And so, from me to you, my answer is, we need to be keeping
our eye on the ball on this bigger picture, and with respect to
all of the economic challenges and the pinches that we and
Americans are experiencing right now, it is our responsibility
to do what we can to provide that relief.
But I will just be very, very clear, with respect to
tariffs and trade tools, we can impact the design of our
competition, and we can impact the competitiveness of our
economy in the medium and the long term. With respect to short-
term challenges, there is a limit to what we can do with
respect to, especially inflation.
Senator Braun. I agree. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Braun.
Senator Braun. The long run is always the bigger
consideration, and it is tough to navigate correctly through
the short run. But it sounds like you got a handle on it. Thank
you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Braun. Senator
Feinstein.
Senator Feinstein. Thank you very much. I am really
delighted to welcome you here. And I wanted to talk a little
bit about China and China trade. When I became Mayor of San
Francisco one of the first things I did was develop what was
called a ``sister city relationship'' with Shanghai.
And over the years we had some 50 different trade efforts,
ongoing, leading from San Francisco and other areas in
California, and I think, particularly when Jan Zeman (ph.)
became President that was sort of a heyday for us.
So the relationship has always been a very positive and
good one. You have said that the United States must enforce
terms of the Phase One Agreement, and you have outlined
principles for a multilateral trade approach to China, and the
discussions with China are taking place.
It would be really helpful for me to hear more of the
detail about what concrete steps are being taken to move this
relationship forward. I say this as a Californian. We believe
it is the Century of the Pacific, and that these relationships
are extraordinarily important.
Ambassador Tai. Thank you so much, Senator Feinstein. And
let me add my congratulations to Chair Shaheen, on the occasion
of your birthday.
Again, the U.S.-China relationship, as I have said before,
because it is true, is one of profound consequence. We are the
two largest economies in the world, and how we relate to each
other affects----
Senator Shaheen. Ambassador Tai.
Ambassador Tai. Yes.
Senator Shaheen. Can we ask you to put the mic a little
closer. Thank you.
Ambassador Tai. Absolutely. How we relate to each other
affects not just workers and businesses, communities,
businesses large and small in our own economies, but how we
relate to each other impacts the entire world. And that is
very, very clear for all of us to see.
And so, in terms of the realignment that we talk about in
the Biden administration that we know that the United States
needs to have with China in trade and economics, it means that
the status quo and the way things have been cannot--cannot
continue.
In order to be able to compete, in order for our workers
and our businesses to have an opportunity to thrive, we need to
fundamentally adjust how we relate to each other, and we need
to expand the set of tools that we use, we need to expand the
way that we use our tools----
Senator Feinstein. May I be so rude as to interrupt you.
How would you do this? That is the question. And what parts of
the government? Because it has seemed to me that over the years
that China works very differently than the United States does;
and you really start with personal relationships, and then you
build them into business relationships, which is sort of
contrary to how we trade. But that is what I have learned in my
interaction as Mayor of San Francisco and trying to build trade
for California.
Ambassador Tai. You are absolutely correct. Personal
relationships, whether they are in the U.S. Congress or they
are in international economic relations, do define possibility.
I will share with you that over the course of the past, almost
year-and-a-half of my time in my position, that I think that
the U.S.-China relationship has really suffered from the COVID
pandemic, and policies that the Chinese Government has taken
with respect to managing COVID.
There have been very, very few in-person interactions
between members of our administration, and the members of the
Chinese government. I think that those conversations are very,
very important, but what I also want to make clear is that in
those conversations we, as the United States, have to be
extremely clear and extremely clear-eyed, and unrelenting about
our interests.
We do not need to get emotional about the challenges that
we have, but it is absolutely incumbent upon us to be as tough
as we need to be in order to navigate a future where the United
States, and China are economies in this world that need to be
able to compete on fair terms.
Senator Feinstein. Thank you. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Feinstein. Senator
Murkowski?
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ambassador Tai, welcome, good to see you. I am looking
forward to your visit to Alaska next week. And in that vein, I
wanted to broaden the discussion here, obviously a great deal
of focus on China, where we are with the Section 301 tariffs.
Our reality, though, is that China is now importing 50 percent
more seafood than it did in 2017.
Unfortunately, China is sourcing this seafood from other
nations. Our producers are not fairly able to access the
growing market due to tariffs--you understand, above everyone,
the background on this.
In 2020 and 2021, China's seafood purchases of U.S. seafood
product were down--44 and 38 percent respectively, relative to
the 2017 baseline. So you are going to be North next week, you
are going to be talking with folks in the resource sector, but
particularly those in the seafood sector. You will have an
opportunity to go out and be on the ground, and see what it
really means to these local and regional economies.
So the question that I would ask you this morning is, what
are you going to share with them, in terms of what efforts this
administration is making to help address these tariffs that
have been so, so harmful to the U.S. seafood industry, and more
specifically, to the Alaska industry?
And as you respond to this question, recognize that beyond
China the reduction of trade barriers to seafood markets in
Japan, the European Union, and the U.K., these are all also
priorities for us. So can you speak to the Alaska seafood
issues, and the tariffs that that folks have been operating
under for far too long?
Ambassador Tai. Well, thank you Senator Murkowski. And I am
also looking forward to the trip to Alaska, which follows on
the invitation you extended me at this hearing last year. I
have never been to Alaska before. But even more, the reason why
I am looking forward to this is precisely to have the types of
conversations that you have just outlined are awaiting me in
your home State. Every time I travel out into the United
States, especially places I have never been before, and have
these conversations, I learned something new.
And I will just share with you. In mid-April, I made a trip
out to Oregon and the Oregon Coast and met with some fishermen
at Senator Wyden's invitation. Senator Merkley was there as
well. Those conversations really helped to inform me, with
respect to the real world, the real impact on real members of
our communities, in the WTO fisheries subsidies negotiations
that we just had last week, and how important it is to engage
in establishing rules for ensuring that in fisheries, that we
have a sustainable approach, and we have fair parameters for
the world's fishermen to engage in.
Senator Murkowski. Let me let me go ahead and interrupt,
because I have one more question that I want to ask. You will
get an earful. You will get an earful, and you will see it for
yourself, and our hope and the reason for the invitation, not
only for myself, but Senator Sullivan, is so that we can see
action in this area.
I wanted to shift just very briefly here with regards to
Arctic, and our friends in the Arctic, most notably Iceland.
Iceland is a great friend of ours. We have got good strong
relationships through Arctic strategy, and transatlantic
relations. U.S. is the fifth largest import and export market
for Iceland.
Iceland has made tremendous gains in its renewable energy
sector, we have got a--we have got a great relationship again.
China, a non-arctic Nation on the other side of the globe, has
recently signed a free trade agreement with Iceland. The people
in Iceland are saying: Why not us? Why not us? You run risks I
think when we discourage countries from doing business with
autocracies, whether it is China and Russia. But then we don't
offer them any viable alternatives.
We say we will be there for you, but we are not going to
enter into the free trade agreement. Your comments to why this
has not been addressed, at least in a significant way. I know
the ask has been out there for some time because I have been
part of those discussions, so any update that you might have on
an Iceland Free Trade Agreement?
Ambassador Tai. So unquestionably, Iceland is an important
trading partner. In fact, I met my Icelandic counterpart in
Geneva last week at the WTO. I think that all the reasons that
you have raised in terms of enhancing our collaboration with
Iceland economically are entirely valid. And Iceland, is an FTA
country, so with respect to our build and rebuild of our
relationship with the EU, that those do have positive
implications for our relationship with Iceland as well.
I am ready and willing to show up and to engage with all of
our partners. I take your point on the strategic aspects. I
guess what I would say with respect to what you have just
presented to me, is that the fact that Iceland has just signed
a free trade agreement with China will make us thoughtful about
how we--the parameters of the kinds of collaborations that we
build with Iceland, to ensure that.
And I think this is very true in terms of our approach the
Indo-Pacific as well, to ensure that what we are doing is
providing our partners with choice, with more choices. It is
providing us with more choices as well, but it is not
entangling us further into a version of globalized supply
chains that is going to undermine our ability to build for more
resilience.
And I think that with respect to China and the Chinese
market, and this goes back to your fishermen as well, we have
seen China use its leverage, with respect to its market, to
push countries on politically--political and sovereign
decisions that China has found that it doesn't like. We are a
very, very large economy, and we experience it differently, but
this is the version of that coercion that we experience. It is
not coercive, but it is very painful.
I think that this is absolutely something that we are
focused on addressing in the U.S.-China relationship, which is
the reliability and confidence that we have in each other, and
to the extent that we don't have it, all of the collaborations
that we need to have with our other partners and allies to
ensure that we provide each other with resilience.
Senator Feinstein. I appreciate that. I know that it would
mean a great deal to Iceland, and it doesn't take much from us.
So I look forward to exploring these conversations further.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Murkowski. Senator
Reed.
Senator Reed. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
I know you will enjoy Alaska because I have been to Alaska
with Senator Murkowski, and it was terrific. I just want to
warn you though, the way they measure things in Alaska, it is
how many times bigger it is than Rhode Island. So just be
prepared for that, okay.
[Laughter.]
Senator Reed. I just came from the Banking Committee
Hearing with Chairman Powell, the Federal Reserve. You know, we
are facing an issue of inflation which is significant with
multiple causes, but one that everyone admits to is the supply
chain, and normally with a task force in place. Can you tell us
what progress we are making on rearranging our supply chain?
And just one other comment is that we build and took for
granted a global supply chain built on efficiency and speed
without sustainability, or the ability to reconnect quickly.
With the pandemic, that has been broken, and I don't know if
that will be put together again. But what are you doing in the
task force on supply chain?
Ambassador Tai. Senator Reed, thank you for this question.
I wish that I also were able to visit Chairman Powell's
hearing, because I know how much inflation is impacting our
economy, and our people, and how concerning it really is. And I
agree with you.
I think that with respect to supply chains, the
bottlenecks, the disruptions that we have had these last couple
years that they have been a significant disrupter in our
economies. And significantly eroded our confidence, and
``our'', I mean collectively, our American and worldwide
confidence in the global economic system, which is why working
towards a version of globalization that is built for beyond
efficiency, resilience and sustainability is our guiding
principle in terms of our engagements with all of our partners
in our initiatives that are ongoing right now.
Let me say this on supply chains in particular. I had a
really eye-opening conversation with a CEO and Chairman earlier
at the early parts of this year, who is in the banking
industry, and we were talking supply chains, and he said to me,
``You know, as I have been looking at the supply chain
challenges, what strikes me is that I would never have designed
these supply chains to look like this.'' And at the time I
didn't quite understand what he meant by that, and I thought
about it through the lens of a banker, and what has struck me
is, what I think is an important perspective, which is our
supply chains have not taken into account risk.
They have been all about efficiency, and in terms of what
we can contribute from trade, to building supply chains that
are more resilient I think a key part of this is incorporating
into our work on trade beyond tariff liberalization, is how we
can incentivize countries and more specifically, our firms to
calculate in the risk of their supply chain design, as they
make their business decisions.
And this is one of the key issue areas that we are raising
with our trading partners and all the initiatives we have going
on right now.
Senator Reed. I think that is a sensible approach. Can you
give us any sense of tangible progress in this regard, of
rationalizing the supply chains, as you say, make it more
robust and resilient?
Ambassador Tai. USTR is tasked with heading the supply
chain task force on an inter-agency basis. We have a list of
all the work that we have done over the course of the last
year, which I won't go into, and I will refer you to our
website and let you know that it is there. But I think that the
most important work is yet to come and has really got to be on
an international basis.
How do we connect our economies together, and how do we, in
a very, very clear-eyed way, identify the things that we have
to do to correct for a set of supply chains and a version of
globalization that is built only for efficiency right now? And
so just let you know that whether it is in the Indo-Pacific,
whether it is our initiative with Taiwan, the initiative that--
on the future of Atlantic Trade that we have going on with the
United Kingdom, the EU Trade And Technology Council, and all of
these different arrangements, we are laser-focused on this
issue of our supply chain resilience.
Senator Reed. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you Senator Reed. Senator Van
Hollen.
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you. Thank you Madam Chair. And
it is great to see you Ambassador Tai.
I want to turn to the recently announced U.S.-Taiwan
Initiative on 21st Century Trade. If you could just quickly
identify the top priorities that you expect to come out of that
agreement, and tangible changes in terms of trade with Taiwan
that you hope to see?
Ambassador Tai. Certainly. Thank you, Senator Van Hollen.
And I appreciate your interest in this particular relationship
and this issue.
In our announcement kicking off this particular initiative
we identified 11 areas where our initiative will be focused,
seven of those areas are the same or similar to the ones that
we have announced in the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework. Those
go to the digital economy, and digital trade, labor,
environment, trade facilitation, science-based and evidence-
based regulatory practices, when it comes to trade for
agricultural products. In the category of the additional areas
where we will be focused with Taiwan in our initiative, I think
that they are a very interesting set of conversations around
non-market economy challenges that we share, State-owned
enterprises. And the other two, I am going to have to look at
my notes, but they are also on our website.
But I think that they are particularly relevant and
consistent with what I just said to Senator Reed. They are
looking at how we can work together with our partners on
building resilience, sustainability, and then the other piece
that is really critical to us is inclusiveness as we build out
into an economic recovery. How do we bring as many in the world
in our own communities as we can into prosperity?
Senator Van Hollen. Well, Thank you Madam Ambassador. As
you know, there was some concern including shared by many in
the Senate that Taiwan was not part of the Indo-Pacific
Economic Framework, but I am glad that you have developed this
initiative, and look forward to working with you on both those
fronts.
So on another committee, the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, I chair the Subcommittee on Africa, and interested
in what you, at USTR, are doing with respect to U.S. trade and
investment in Africa, which in my view is good for U.S.
businesses, good for U.S. workers, good for partners in the
region. And I think it is worth noting that in the next 30
years the population of the entire Continent is expected to
double, and one-quarter of the world will live in Africa by the
year 2050.
So it seems to me that we need to really keep our eye on
the ball here, and do better than we have. Obviously some of
our chief adversaries and competitors like China are very much
engaged in Africa. What are you doing at USTR? And are you
working with the Prosper Africa Initiative folks to make sure
that we combine our resources in a smart way?
Ambassador Tai. Absolutely, USTR is an active participant
in the Prosper Africa efforts within the administration. And I
agree with everything you have said, Senator Van Hollen, about
the opportunities, and frankly the necessity of the United
States to amp up our engagement with Africa, for all the
reasons you have listed. And also, I think one of the most
interesting, and awesome, frankly, data points is also the
number of young people that are in Africa.
And that goes to the growing population that the youth of
the world are largely in Africa, and this is really about our
collective future. Let me say this with respect to U.S. Africa
Trade. AGOA is a foundational trade program that we have had
with the African Continent. It expires in 2025, and there have
been a lot of conversations with my African counterparts around
what is going to happen to AGOA after 2025. I know that there
are a lot of leaders, thought leaders on this issue within the
U.S. Congress, and I will let you know that USTR is engaging
and stands ready to engage across the board, on what a vision
is for AGOA going forward.
But I will also let you know, it is my--it is my view that
AGOA is not enough. AGOA has been around for a long time, and I
think AGOA can do better. But also, I will just share with you
in the context of the World Trade Organization, 12th
Ministerial Conference that just concluded last week, that with
respect to the Intellectual Property Rule changes that were
made for COVID vaccines, for a limited period of time, to
address the covid pandemic that I found most powerful.
My African counterparts who asked the United States to lean
in and get that effort across the finish line because it is
going to, in their view, allow the African Continent a foothold
into a very important supply chain, that they do not have
access to. And I think that it is through new efforts, and new
initiatives also, that we have got to push ourselves to think
about how we can be a better partner to the entire African
Continent.
Senator Van Hollen. Well, thank you, madam Ambassador. I
look forward to continuing the conversation about AGOA and
updating it, upgrading it. As I am sure, you know, about 90
percent of our non-energy imports under AGOA, in 2020, came
from just five countries. And you know, clearly we have got to
expand the benefits of AGOA, along with engaging with Africa on
the African Continental Free Trade Area and see what kind of
mutual benefits we can draw. So I look forward to continuing
that conversation.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Van Hollen.
Ambassador Tai, I think I, and I think Senator Moran also,
we have a couple more questions. So we would like to do another
round with you.
And I would like to go back to Russia. And I think that the
actions that you and the President engaged in leading up to
Russia's War in Ukraine have been very important in helping to
unite the allies, and present a united front, and being able to
put in place a series of sanctions that, while they are taking
some time, they are having a real impact.
In April, Congress passed a bill revoking Russia's
permanent normal trade relations status. This law gives you
additional authority to sanction Russia in other ways. I wonder
if you can give us some insights into what you are thinking,
and how you might be using this authority.
Ambassador Tai. Chair Shaheen, I want to begin by thanking
you and the entire U.S. Congress for speaking with such
conviction, and resolution on the issue of Russia. Earlier this
year, the United States Government being able to respond with
one voice; was incredibly powerful, and enabled us to take a
real leadership role in responding to Russia's aggression in
Ukraine.
As a result of the bill that Congress passed, and that the
President signed into law earlier this spring, the United
States has, with respect to trade, suspended permanent normal
trade relations with Russia, and that means that we have
imposed non-MFN tariffs on imports from Russia, and that action
alone has increased tariff rates on over 75 percent of U.S.
imports from Russia.
We are continuing to engage in the administration through
our conversations with other partners and allies to look at how
we can use this new authority to impose additional consequences
on imports from Russia. I think what I would really also like
to note here that we have talked a lot about tariffs in the
course of this particular hearing, and I just want to note that
I think about tariffs a bit like--tariffs are like two-by-
fours, they can be used for lots of different purposes.
With respect to Russia, these tariffs are punishment. We
are using these two-by-fours as a kind of a weapon, but in
other areas, right, our tariffs are used to build platforms.
They are used as weapons to level the playing field. They are
used as encouragement to create enforcement and incentivize
compliance.
So, in this particular area, you know, I also feel that it
is important, from the USTR perspective, to note that these
tariffs we are using in a particular way which is appropriate,
and which is focused on changing Russia's behaviors.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. I certainly agree with
that, and agree with your sentiment that it has been very
important for Congress to be united in responding to Russia's
unprovoked war. And it has sent an important signal not just to
Russia but to our other adversaries who are really looking
closely at what we are doing here, and how we are responding.
I want to--so just to follow up, so then I would urge you
to think about every way possible, as you say; that we can
penalize Russia for what they are doing. And if you see ways in
which this subcommittee can be helpful with that, or that
Congress can do more, I hope you will share that with us.
You mentioned in your opening remarks the importance of the
legislation that is currently in the Committee of Conference,
whether it is America COMPETES, or the U.S. Innovation and
Competition Act. So much of the discussion at this hearing has
been about China, and the threat that China poses. Can you talk
about--I mean, one of the motivating--the main motivator behind
that legislation, I think, is to try and level the playing
field for the United States with China.
Can you talk about what it will mean if we are not able to
bring that legislation across the finish line; and what kind of
a disadvantage that will put the United States at against
China?
Ambassador Tai. I would be delighted to, Chair Shaheen.
With respect to realigning our relationship with China, there
is a set of--there is both defense and offense that we have to
play, and frankly, when I look at tariffs, I see the tariffs
mostly as defense. But if our goal, with respect to China--and
frankly every other non-market economy that our businesses, and
our workers have to compete with--defense isn't enough, we have
also got to play offense.
And I think that in terms of what is in the conversation
around the Bipartisan Innovation Act--it goes by many names--it
is a combination of defensive tools and offensive tools. And
what I mean by ``offensive tools'' are those are the tools to
really invest in ourselves to give our industry, and our
workers the boost to take their talents, and resources, and
assets, and allow them to shine in a competitive field, that we
have not considered fair in a very long time, and which is
really critical to our success in the future.
So, the way I look at what is before our Members of
Congress right now, in this conference, is really things that
we need to do that are necessary, but by themselves not
sufficient for putting the American economy on the strongest
footing possible. And I think that there is a lot more work for
us to be doing together, the administration and Congress. And I
am committed to doing that work with all of you.
General Scobee. Well, thank you. I appreciate that. And
hope that all of the conferees will hear that statement today.
Senator Manchin?
Senator Manchin. Thank you. Thank you Madam Chair.
And thank you for being here, and doing the job that you
do, and we are very hopeful in your accomplishments.
Let me just ask the question here. I have got two of them.
The State-backed companies that are circumventing U.S. trade
laws, by a variety of methods including transshipment and
dumping. Transshipment of goods through third countries to
evade anti-dumping duties undermines the integrity of our trade
laws, and puts domestic manufacturers at risk from unfairly
traded products; in a nutshell, what happens.
And I was just at a little company in West Virginia that
makes a lot of products for the solar industry, and they are
now competing with dumping parts, and they know it is coming
from China, but it is coming through different vessels, if you
will.
So I applaud yours, and Secretary Raimondo's inclusion of
annual audits of steel producers owned by and operated by
Chinese parent companies. And the recently struck trade
agreement with the U.K. And I encourage you to continue to
pursue the audits in any future trade agreements. So given its
inclusion in the recent U.K. Trade Agreement, how likely is it
that you all will pursue similar audit provisions, whether it
be for steel or other products, and future trade deals?
Ambassador Tai. Well Senator Manchin, I am always delighted
to talk about U.S. manufacturing, and how we can make the
American economy create more opportunities, and be a rosier
place for our manufacturing.
Senator Manchin. We are just asking for a level playing
field.
Ambassador Tai. A level playing field, absolutely. Your
specific question goes to our interest in incorporating audit
provisions in our arrangements with our trading partners, to
ensure that the playing field remains level.
Senator Manchin. I think basically----
Ambassador Tai. I am very interested in this issue of
audits. And I am interested in expanding it beyond anti-dumping
and countervailing----
Senator Manchin. When you have a U.S. company identifies
that they know they are getting dumped on, and all they are
asking for is an audit from the country--and look, just pick an
Indonesian country anywhere, pick one, and we know it is being
funneled through China, to have that audit show that they
didn't--they don't have the production facilities, they can't
do it there, so they have to be funneling from somewhere else.
I think we could determine that pretty easily. And then
classify them for anti-dumping.
Ambassador Tai. I think that audits and verification go to
the heart of the integrity of our trade tools. And I agree with
you entirely.
Senator Manchin. Okay. The other one is the relationship
between U.S. and China, I know we have been talking a lot about
that, has been tumultuous over the years. I think basically we
probably had progress by 2019 having a trade deal with them,
but then with COVID coming up and China failed on a number of
their purchase agreements, and while it is important to note
that the initial phase occurred during the pandemic, they have
made no efforts to reassure the United States they are
committed to making good on the terms that they agreed to.
So given the 2020 Phase One Trade Agreement between us and
China, ultimately did not produce its desired outcomes, what
avenues are being explored right now to ensure that fairness,
in any future trade agreements between China and ourselves?
Ambassador Tai. This is absolutely one of the most
important questions that we are grappling with right now, and
one of the most important issues to determine what our economic
future looks like in this globalized economy.
Senator Manchin, I have talked quite a bit about China.
Last October I gave a speech about the Biden administration's
approach to the U.S.-China trade relationship. We spent several
months focused on China's performance under the Phase One
Agreement, and as we turned the corner into 2022, and we were
able to look at full-year trade data for 2020 and 2021. We
absolutely saw gaps between the purchase commitment levels, in
particular, that China had committed to, and also where the
purchases actually were.
Let me just say this also. In the speech that I gave in
October, we also reviewed our approach to the China Trade and
Economic Relationship over the course of the past several
administrations. And it is very, very clear certainly to me at
this point that it is time for us to turn the page on the
playbook that we have had with China, which has been a
combination of negotiating agreements on one hand----
Senator Manchin. Do you have enforcement mechanisms; any
enforcement mechanisms available to you all to be used with
this agreement?
Ambassador Tai. Absolutely, we do.
Senator Manchin. Are you all going to use them?
Ambassador Tai. Yes.
Senator Manchin. Okay. And let me ask you on the first
question too, both of them. Is there something that we need to
do to help you basically, you know, tighten down on some of
this, because they are just running amok playing us, just
playing us really. And it is a shame.
We keep talking about, and I will tell you my biggest peeve
right now is the whole thing with the EVs, the batteries,
chips, and all the different things, rare earth minerals
processing, anodes, cathodes everything that we need. And if we
are ever going to get this industry up and running and be self-
sufficient in North America, then we have to make sure that
they can't dump on us.
And right now we are about ready to put our whole eggs in
one basket, thinking EV is the way to go, and we are going to
be absolutely so taken advantage of, to the point where we are
going to be held hostage by the foreign supply chain that China
has the grip on. I just, I just can't believe that we are even
thinking about going down that path. And I am gonna do
everything I can to stop it, because I think it is stupid,
because we are not able to protect our investments in the
country.
Because if Jerry Moran in Kansas wants to start a new
company, and he is up and running, and they start dumping, he
can't compete. He can't go out and get financing, he has no--
you know, the markets aren't going to basically respond to him.
And we just--we are just held at a disadvantage because of the
economy that we have, and the way we administer our economy.
But we depend on you all to crack hard and crack them down as
tight as you can.
We talk about border adjustment. I don't know if you have
talked about that, Madam Chair; if you all talked about border
adjustments. The reason that we have Democrats and Republicans
talking about border adjustment, we think that is the only
level playing field we might have. They are not paying
attention to any of the agreements they sign, and we have no
penalties to them.
But at border adjustment we would have that product coming
in and we proved it came from a country, but it really came
from China, via other countries. So that is my frustration.
I am sorry to vent. I thank you for giving me a chance to
do that.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Manchin.
Ambassador Tai, would you like to briefly respond to
Senator Manchin?
Ambassador Tai. Senator Manchin, you began that by asking
what you can do, and to help, and I think that what you have
just conveyed is absolutely, I want to let you know, loud and
clear, and well received by me sitting in this chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much. Senator Moran.
Senator Moran. Chair, thank you.
In this setting, and with the Secretary of Commerce, both
the Chair and I, and other Members of the Committee have had
ongoing conversations about lumber particularly as they relate
to home building, home prices, we are still absent this
agreement with Canada. Can you provide me an update on any
progress that has been made in a long-term resolution of this
issue with Canada on softwood lumber?
Ambassador Tai. Yes. Senator Moran, I would be happy to
provide you with an update. I talk lumber almost every single
time I have seen my Canadian counterpart, and I have seen her
quite a bit in these last several months. I have indicated that
we are open and interested in addressing lumber through another
agreement which we had in place several years ago, that
requires the Canadian Government to be willing to address the
fundamental challenges that we have with respect to an unlevel
playing field for our industry, with respect to how they govern
their harvesting and their industry, which has the impact of
subsidies, for our competitors.
When and if Canadian industry and the Canadian government
are ready to address those issues, we stand ready and willing
to enter into negotiations to see if we can, once again, come
to some kind of an agreement with Canada.
Senator Moran. Leverage has been a theme of the
conversations this morning. Is there leverage with Canada in
that regard to induce them to do so?
Ambassador Tai. Senator Moran, I like the way you think.
And I would be happy to have a follow-up conversation with you
around how we might examine that question.
Senator Moran. All right, thank you. One of the more recent
developments in home building, and in home ownership has
developed as a result of the lack of grain-oriented electric
steel needed to build transformers. And so there is a shortage
in Kansas, and I assume the country in getting the transformer
necessary to build a new home or to have a new home, have a
connection with utilities.
I know that we increased tariffs on imported steel, I know
there was a Department of Commerce investigation that
subsequently found no corresponding increase in domestic
manufacturing to meet U.S. demand; this type of steel remains
under Section 232 Tariffs. Any thoughts of what USTR can do to
solve this problem of lack of transformers?
Ambassador Tai. Senator Moran, let me go back to USTR and
check the facts, because I have had two sets of conversations
on grain-oriented electric steel of late. One is around the
need to access more of them, or more of this type of steel for
transformers. The other one goes to some of your colleagues
here in the Senate, and then also in the house who represents
States and districts where there is one lone producer in the
United States left.
Senator Moran. And producing the transformers----
Ambassador Tai. And in my mind the fact is that GOES is not
subject to 232. But let me come back to you with better facts.
Senator Moran. Okay.
Ambassador Tai. Let me just say this--these conversations
really break my heart because, they are similar to the
conversations we have on solar. We litigated several cases at
the WTO against China on their approach to cornering the market
on grain-oriented electric steel, and our loss of our own
industry. And what I find time and time again, is whether it is
with respect to GOES, or solar, that once we have lost the
better part of our industry, we find ourselves totally over a
barrel, domestically, and also with our other trading partners
around how we can--how we can have reliable access to these
types of industrial products, where we have confidence in their
integrity.
And so let me just say this bottom line is: let me go back
to USTR and do some homework and follow up with you.
Senator Moran. Finally, again, on this conversation of
tariffs being utilized as leverage, it seems to me that if we
are creating a circumstance in which we want and have leverage,
the result would be that we would be negotiating additional
trade agreements, bilateral, multilateral. But the
administration has not requested trade promotion authority.
That is one thing. What new agreements, trade agreements is the
administration pursuing that then justifies the use of tariffs
to be leveraged?
Ambassador Tai. I think that in terms of the China tariffs,
that is with respect to leverage vis-a-vis China.
Senator Moran. Mm-hmm.
Ambassador Tai. And it has been a very long time since we
have looked at negotiating what I would call a traditional
trade liberalizing agreement with China. I think the last
effort that we had was the Bilateral Investment Treaty. And
that was way back in 2015 and 2016, and I don't think this may
be when they come out of the woodwork. I don't think anyone has
asked me to re-engage with that particular issue.
At USTR I had an agency that is built for two things, and
it is on a spectrum. These two activities are not mutually
exclusive. One is trade negotiations, and the other one is
trade enforcement. And so, we have every interest, and we are
actively pursuing negotiations every single day, and enforcing
every single day.
Your question about TPA, I am happy to engage in the
conversation with Congress. And this is the larger issue around
how we orient U.S. trade policies in negotiations separate from
the enforcement side, to further our national interests. And I
think that our focus right now really is on sustainability and
resilience.
That means a modification; and a course correction for the
approach that we have taken in the past. In particular, around
trade liberalization; and I think it is an important
conversation to have, and I would like to let you know that I
am happy to engage in it with the Congress.
My main point being, however, that we have got to bring new
thinking to how we think about trade agreements, and trade
agreement negotiations. We have to take into effect the really
painful experiences that we have had these couple of years, and
figure out how we do things differently to remain connected
with the rest of the world, in a way that is good for the
American economy, and that is built for resilience in the long
term.
Senator Moran. I appreciate your answer. I am not going to
ask more questions, Chair.
[Laughter.]
Senator Moran. I appreciate your answer, and I would
highlight, at least from my take, I like that you put on par
with negotiations of agreements, enforcement of agreements, it
seems to me for a long time we celebrate. We do the high five
when the agreement is signed, but when the results don't occur
there seems to be less than adequate follow-through. So I
appreciate that.
I also think that you were segmenting China and leverage in
a different way than other trading, or potential trading
partners, around the globe. And I think that is a--an
appositive, and it is a necessary attitude to have with China.
And finally, I would say that the WTO is broken, its
appellate body, it seems to me, no longer really function--
membership so broad that agreements appear impossible. And I
would just encourage the--trying to fix those problems but as
equally important trying to find friendly countries around the
world to institute smaller successes than appears to me we
would get in work with WTO.
Does that make sense? Did I say anything that doesn't make
sense? That was a question.
Senator Shaheen. No. No further questions, Senator Moran.
Senator Moran. Well, I don't know that I want the answer,
but----
Ambassador Tai. All of it makes sense.
Senator Shaheen. Oh. Thank you, Senator Moran. And actually
you have made a very good argument for why we need to fund
USTR's budget, right, Ambassador Tai.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Shaheen. If there are no further questions this
morning, Senators have until June 29 to submit additional
questions for the official hearing record, and we would request
the agency's responses within 30 days.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the
hearing:]
Questions Submitted by Senator Dianne Feinstein
Questions Submitted to Ambassador Katherine Tai, U.S. Trade
Representative
Question 1. As you may know, I opposed the former president's
escalatory trade wars. The costs of the tariffs we put into place on
many countries have been paid almost exclusively by U.S. families and
businesses. I also believe they strained our international
relationships and were not part of a thoughtful strategy.
I realize that the Biden Administration inherited these tariffs,
and I thank you for having reduced them in some cases. I also recognize
that imposing tariffs can be useful in certain cases. China, for
instance, has engaged in numerous unfair trade practices and we should
be serious about trying to change its behavior.
--Ambassador Tai, when and how does the Administration believe
tariffs should be used, and when are other tools more
appropriate? What are we asking our trade partners to do in
exchange for reducing or eliminating current tariffs? How
specifically do you assess whether or not tariffs are achieving
our desired goals?
Answer. Tariffs are a legitimate tool in the trade toolbox. The
Biden-Harris Administration is continually reviewing the China Section
301 tariffs; this process is a key part of the Administration's
deliberative, long-term vision for realigning the U.S.-China trade
relationship around our priorities and making trade work for American
workers and businesses, which have been unfairly targeted by China's
non-market policies and practices. As part of our review, we have
initiated and completed two separate exclusion processes--one on COVID-
related products, and one addressed to over 500 previously-extended but
expired exclusions. In the latter process, we reinstated exclusions
where American workers, farmers, and domestic producers would benefit.
The statutory 4-year review also provides an opportunity to assess the
tariffs. Furthermore, we are continuing to consider additional
modifications and exclusions processes, as warranted.
Question 2. As you know, China is the world's second-largest
economy and is likely to someday surpass U.S. GDP. While it is a
lucrative market for many U.S. companies, China has also engaged in
many unfair trade practices, including intellectual property theft,
heavy subsidization of key industries, and preferential treatment for
state-run businesses.
The Biden Administration inherited numerous tariffs on imports from
China, along with the ``Phase One'' trade agreement. China has not
fulfilled its end of that agreement, including promised purchases of
U.S. agricultural products, which of course are important to
California. You have said that the U.S. must enforce the terms of the
Phase One agreement and outlined principles for a multilateral approach
to fair trade with China. You also have said that discussions with
China are taking place, but it would be helpful to me to hear more
details about what concrete steps are being taken to move this
relationship forward.
--Ambassador Tai, what specific steps has the Administration has
asked China to take to improve trade relations with the U.S.?
What specific negotiations with China have taken place or are
planned? What has been China's response, and what is China
asking of us?
Answer. In October 2021, we launched a direct dialogue with China
regarding China's failure to fulfill the purchase commitments made in
the U.S.-China Economic and Trade Agreement, commonly referred to as
the ``Phase One Agreement.'' We are also engaging in technical level
discussions with China regarding its incomplete implementation of its
agriculture and intellectual property- related commitments. We also
have been raising our concerns relating to China's harmful non- market
policies and practices that were left unaddressed by the Phase One
Agreement, particularly China's state-directed industrial targeting,
which has had devastating impact on American workers and businesses as
well as on our allies and partners.
While we continue to keep the door open to conversations with
China, including on its Phase One Agreement commitments, we also need
to acknowledge the Phase One Agreement's limitations, which did not
focus on some of China's most harmful practices, namely economic
coercion and non-market practices. Going forward, our strategies will
also include vigorously defending our values and economic interests
from the negative impacts of China's unfair, non- market policies and
practices. At the same time, we are not solely relying on bilateral
engagement. We are actively reaching out to and enhancing our
engagement with like-minded trading partners, both directly and through
multilateral institutions, as we seek to develop and execute joint or
coordinated strategies for addressing the unique challenges posed by
China.
As part of this effort, we are prepared to use whatever trade tools
we have that may be necessary to protect U.S. interests. That includes
working with Congress to develop new trade tools that take into account
the realities of what trade looks like today.
Question 3. Earlier this year, you said that while free trade
agreements are in the U.S. toolbox for negotiating trade relations,
they are ``a very 20th century tool.'' Since opening markets and the
principle of free trade have been a central feature of U.S. trade
policy for decades, I'd be interested in hearing a bit more from you on
that issue.
--Ambassador Tai, your earlier statement implies that free trade
agreements are in some way outdated. In what sense do you
believe they have become so? And given that you said that free
trade agreements should still be a tool in our toolbox, in
which circumstances do you think they would make sense?
Answer. The Biden Administration is using our trade tools to create
new opportunities for American agriculture, including using our
existing Trade and Investment Framework Agreements (TIFAs) and Free
Trade Agreements (FTAs) to eliminate tariff and non-tariff barriers to
U.S. agricultural products. Last year, we secured a number of wins that
will provide more certainty for U.S. farmers, ranchers, and food
producers around the country, including: removal of retaliatory tariffs
due to resolution of the EU aircraft dispute and a historic agreement
on steel aluminum; removal or aversion of tariffs due to agreements
with four European trading partners on Digital Services Taxes; new
access to the Indian market for U.S. pork following the U.S. India
Trade Policy Forum; favorable outcomes on products such as pork, beef,
rice, wheat, corn and grape juice in negotiations with the United
Kingdom and the EU on tariff rate quotas resulting from Brexit;
Vietnam's approval of pending biotech events following TIFA engagement;
MFN duty reductions in Vietnam for corn, wheat, and frozen pork; and
regaining access to the EU market for our shellfish producers. We are
also committed to strong enforcement of our agreements, as our recent
win on Canada dairy illustrates, to promote predictability and level
the playing field in agricultural trade.
Question 4. As you know, Trade Promotion Authority, legislation
that Congress has previously passed several times to make it easier for
the Administration to negotiate trade agreements, expired on July 1,
2021.
A number of members of Congress have said that they would like to
renew Trade Promotion Authority. You have said Congress should renew
Trade Promotion Authority, but with an updated set of priorities.
However, there has been little indication that the Administration
considers renewing it to be a priority.
--Ambassador Tai, do you believe that Congress should renew Trade
Promotion Authority? If so, how do you think it should look
different than previous Trade Promotion Authority that Congress
has passed? What actions has the Administration taken to move
forward on legislation to renew it? If you do not want to renew
Trade Promotion Authority, why not?
Answer. There are strong views on both sides of the Trade Promotion
Authority issue, and I look forward to working with Congress should you
decide to advance TPA legislation.
Question 5. In the past month, the Administration has introduced
its frameworks for trade in the Pacific Rim and South Asia and for
North and South America.
I thank the Administration for moving forward with trade relations
in these regions that are critical to California's economy. And, I
agree with the principles that the Administration has enumerated,
including clean energy and infrastructure, strengthening our supply
chains, and fighting corruption.
However, one principle notably missing from these frameworks is
increasing access to markets, which is a priority for many U.S.
producers to secure in other countries, and also what many countries
want most from the United States.
--Ambassador Tai, is the Administration willing to negotiate market
access with other countries despite it not being included in
its trade frameworks? If so, why was it not included as a
pillar in these frameworks?
Answer. This Administration takes a strategic approach when
engaging our partners worldwide. As each partner is different, we have
and will continue utilizing all our trade policy tools to come up with
innovative arrangements, whether in the context of a large trade
arrangement or through other formats that would secure market access
and provide the greatest economically meaningful outcomes for the
United States.
President Biden recently announced the launch of an Indo-Pacific
Economic Framework (IPEF) to promote inclusive growth for U.S. workers
and businesses and support our competitiveness going forward. USTR is
leading IPEF's trade pillar, where we are pursuing high-standard
commitments. While the Administration is not currently considering
tariff liberalization, IPEF will enhance market access for American
exporters by knocking down regulatory barriers and establishing rules
that facilitate market access.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Christopher Coons
Question 1. The WTO Ministerial decision on TRIPS states: ``No
later than 6 months from the date of this Decision, Members will decide
on its extension to cover the production and supply of COVID- 19
diagnostics and therapeutics.'' In light of the Administration's
position that any waiver should deal only with vaccines, will USTR
engage in these negotiations?
Answer. In the interest of achieving consensus across the 164
Members of the WTO, Members focused on securing an outcome with respect
to COVID-19 vaccines, with the potential to expand to COVID-19
diagnostics and therapeutics within 6 months. We are starting our
domestic consultations on whether to extend the Decision to cover the
production and supply of COVID-19 diagnostics and therapeutics and look
forward to continuing to engage with Congress and all relevant
stakeholders on this topic.
Question 2. In October, you announced a reengagement with the PRC
on trade; in your testimony, you noted ``several rounds of difficult
discussions'' with the PRC following that announcement and stated that
the United States must ``turn the page on the old playbook'' with
respect to its engagement with the PRC on trade issues. What will be
USTR's strategy for engagement with the PRC on trade, going forward?
Answer. In October 2021, we launched a direct dialogue with China
regarding China's failure to fulfill the purchase commitments made in
the U.S.-China Economic and Trade Agreement, commonly referred to as
the ``Phase One Agreement.'' We also have been raising our concerns
relating to China's harmful non-market policies and practices that were
left unaddressed by the Phase One Agreement, particularly China's
state-directed industrial targeting, which has had a devastating impact
on American workers and businesses as well as on our allies and
partners.
While we continue to keep the door open to conversations with
China, including on its Phase One Agreement commitments, we also need
to acknowledge the Phase One Agreement's limitations, which did not
focus on some of China's most harmful practices, namely economic
coercion and non-market practices. Going forward, our strategies will
also include vigorously defending our values and economic interests
from the negative impacts of China's unfair, non- market policies and
practices. At the same time, we are not solely relying on bilateral
engagement. We are actively reaching out to and enhancing our
engagement with like-minded trading partners, both directly and through
multilateral institutions, as we seek to develop and execute joint or
coordinated strategies for addressing the unique challenges posed by
China.
As part of this effort, we are prepared to use whatever trade tools
we have that may be necessary to protect U.S. interests. That includes
working with Congress to develop new trade tools that take into account
the realities of what trade looks like today.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Jerry Moran
Question 1. Given that current vaccine supply already exceeds
demand, how will agreeing to waive US intellectual property lead to
higher vaccination rates?
Answer. The WTO Ministerial Decision on the TRIPS Agreement is one
part of a holistic approach to getting as many safe and effective
COVID-19 vaccines to as many people around the world as possible. The
Biden-Harris Administration continues to work with the private sector
and all possible partners to expand sustainable vaccine and critical
medical supplies manufacturing and distribution around the world, an
important component of strengthening our global health security. The
uncertainty around the virus, including variants, means that the
pandemic is not over. The goal of this Decision is to facilitate
production among WTO Members who do not have that ability and to
diversify vaccine production. The Decision could help some developing
country Members, such as South Africa, on such efforts. Developing
distributed manufacturing capacities will foster regional self-
sufficiency on vaccine production.
Question 2. The United States has never in its history agreed to
such a broad waiver of intellectual property. What does USTR see as the
costs of this waiver and how did you weigh them in arriving at the
decision to consent to the IP waiver?
Answer. During a previous global health crisis--the HIV/AIDS crisis
in 2002--WTO Members agreed to a waiver in connection with the
implementation of paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration on TRIPS and
Public Health. The pandemic is another global health crisis that calls
for WTO Members to respond. The Administration believes strongly in
intellectual property protections, but in service of ending this
pandemic, supported a waiver of those protections for COVID-19
vaccines.
Question 3. In agreeing to the TRIPS IP waiver, WTO agreed to
consider in 6 months whether to extend the IP waiver to therapeutics
used to treat COVID.
--Will USTR support this broader waiver?
--What factors will USTR weigh in reaching a decision?
--Is USTR concerned that the prospect of a future waiver, even if
it's not enacted, could have a significant chilling effect on
investment into new COVID therapeutics that could potentially
save lives and improve health outcomes?
Answer. We are starting our domestic consultations on whether to
extend the Decision to cover the production and supply of COVID-19
diagnostics and therapeutics and look forward to continuing to engage
with Congress and all relevant stakeholders on this topic.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Susan Collins
Question 1. Since the Softwood Lumber Agreement expired in 2015,
the U.S. and Canada have been locked in a trade dispute that has
resulted in the U.S. imposing both countervailing and antidumping
duties on Canadian softwood lumber imports. These tariffs are very
harmful to Maine businesses, many of which work closely with Canadian
sawmills right across the border. High lumber prices also affect the
availability of affordable housing for millions of Americans. We need
long-term certainty and stability in the softwood lumber market, and
particularly amid rampant inflation.
In November 2017, Canada appealed the Commerce Department's
original determination to impose duties on Canadian lumber. NAFTA rules
that apply to this appeal require that a panel be established and reach
a final decision within 315 days of the appeal being made. It has now
been over four and a half years, or almost 1,700 days, since Canada
requested this review and yet a panel has not been established.
--Ambassador Tai, when will the panel be established so that it can
reach a decision, which is long overdue?
--Do you plan to meet with your Canadian counterparts to negotiate a
new Softwood Lumber Agreement?
Answer. USTR is engaged with our Canadian counterparts regarding
the important task of composing panels. The United States has proposed
candidates to complete NAFTA panel composition, but Canada has not
acted on our proposals.
I continue to discuss softwood lumber with my Canadian counterpart
in every meeting. The United States is open to resolving our
differences with Canada over softwood lumber, but it would require
Canada to address its policies that create an uneven playing field for
the U.S. industry. Unfortunately, to date, Canada has not been willing
to address these concerns adequately.
Question 2. As you know, Section 301 tariff exclusions for imports
from China expired in December 2020. In March of this year, USTR
announced that it would reinstate 352 exclusions that were previously
granted, and that these reinstated product exclusions would apply
retroactively to October 12, 2021 and extend through December 31, 2022.
One Maine company, Hussey Seating, located in North Berwick, is a
family-owned business that designs, manufactures, and sells spectator
seating systems around the world. I appreciate that USTR granted all
three of Hussey Seating's product exclusion requests, at my urging.
Making these product exclusions permanent, however, would provide much
more certainty to Hussey and other companies that rely on certain
imports.
--Has the USTR given any consideration to making these Section 301
product exclusions permanent, rather than going through the
lengthy and uncertain process of assessing and extending them
again?
--I understand that the USTR does not currently have a process in
place to accept new exclusion requests. Is the USTR considering
restarting a process to permit businesses to apply for
exclusions?
Answer. The Biden-Harris Administration is continually reviewing
the China Section 301 tariffs; this process is a key part of the
Administration's deliberative, long-term vision for realigning the
U.S.-China trade relationship around our priorities and making trade
work for American workers and businesses. The statutory 4-year review
also provides an opportunity to assess the tariffs.
In addition, we are continuing to consider additional modifications
and exclusions processes, as warranted.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator John Boozman
Question 1. What is USTR doing to ensure the second dispute
initiated under USMCA on Canada's dairy tariff rate quota
administration will result in a different outcome than the first
dispute, including measurable increases in US access?
Answer. We are carefully considering next steps to ensure that the
United States gets the full benefit of the market access for American
dairy workers, farmers, and exporters that Canada committed to under
the USMCA.
Question 2. Are you aware, higher energy costs, supply chain
disruptions, Russia's invasion of Ukraine along with other geopolitical
tensions, and additional duties on imported fertilizers have resulted
in significant price increases on fertilizer and other agricultural
inputs for U.S. producers. A recent report by economists at the
Agricultural and Food Policy Center (AFPC) at Texas A&M University
found nitrogen prices alone have increased 133 percent in the last
year. What actions have you taken to help alleviate the surging global
prices for fertilizer and other agricultural inputs? What actions are
you taking to engage China to restore its exports of phosphate and urea
in the global marketplace?
Answer. USTR has been working closely with USDA on various food
security issues. USDA is making $500 million available through a new
grant program this summer to support independent, innovative and
sustainable American fertilizer production to supply American farmers.
The new program will increase competition in a concentrated market;
create good-paying jobs at home while reducing the reliance on
potentially unstable or inconsistent foreign supplies; and improve upon
fertilizer production methods to jump start the next generation of
fertilizers produced here in the United States.
USTR is also working with the interagency to encourage multilateral
development banks, the Food and Agriculture Organization, and the
International Fund for Agricultural Development to finance projects to
expand fertilizer production, as well as increase the efficient use of
fertilizer and precision agriculture throughout the world to lessen the
global dependence on Russia. We will continue to work internally within
the administration and with our allies and partners to find additional
ways to resolve the global fertilizer shortage and prevent similar
shocks in the future.
Question 3. The Phase 1 Economic and Trade Agreement requires the
trajectory of Chinese imports of U.S. products to continue beyond 2021,
what actions are you taking to ensure China continues to meet the
purchasing goals set forth in the agreement?
Answer. It is apparent that China did not fully implement its Phase
One Agreement purchase commitments, and we have been discussing with
our Chinese counterparts how China plans to rectify the purchase
shortfalls. We continue to consult with China on this and other trade
matters, and all options remain on the table in dealing with China's
compliance failures. We also need to acknowledge the limitations of the
Phase One Agreement and past approaches to dealing with China. We are
prepared to use all available tools, and by exploring possible new
tools as necessary, to defend our economic interests in the face of
China's unfair policies and practices. We are also working more closely
with like-minded trading partners on issues of shared concern and new
potential strategies.
Question 4. Thank you for your work in protecting U.S. farmers at
the WTO-standing strong against India's ploys to expand their
agricultural subsidies and public stockholding programs. As you know,
rice is an important commodity in Arkansas and our farmers have been
operating at a competitive disadvantage to India for years because of
their trade distorting policies. Myself and 17 colleagues sent you a
letter to this effect in December 2021. Can you commit to taking action
to address India's behaviors and hold them accountable at the WTO?
Answer. I share your concerns regarding India's domestic support
policies and am committed to holding our trading partners accountable
to their international trade commitments. I also appreciate the
reference to your letter of December 2021, which highlights that U.S.
agricultural producers and exporters, particularly in the rice and
wheat industries, are disadvantaged as a result of Indian domestic
support policies.
India is a notable competitor for U.S. farmers, including Arkansas
rice farmers, in third-country markets, and its agricultural policies
impact our ability to export grains and other products both to India
and globally. USTR and USDA staff are closely reviewing India's
domestic support measures, and we are considering all options to ensure
that U.S. exports can compete on a level playing field. In addition,
the United States is working closely with a sizeable and growing
coalition of World Trade Organization (WTO) Members in Geneva who share
our concerns regarding India's domestic support policies. In May, the
United States and other concerned WTO Members initiated technical
consultations with India under the Bali Decision on Public Stockholding
for Food Security Purposes.
Additionally, at the 12th Ministerial Conference of the WTO in
June, I am pleased that we were able to uphold important WTO
commitments on agriculture by standing up to India's demands that its
public stockholding programs be exempted permanently from WTO limits on
trade- distorting agricultural subsidies.
Question 5. Can you elaborate on USTR's China strategy? Does USTR
plan any tariff relief, and will USTR initiate a new 301 investigation
into Chinese subsidiaries?
Answer. A major component of the Biden-Harris Administration's
trade agenda is the realignment of the U.S.-China trade relationship.
Since last year, we have launched a direct dialogue with China, and
have pressed China to live up to its commitments under the Phase One
Agreement. We have also raised concerns regarding China's state-
directed, non-market policies and practices that were not addressed in
the Phase One Agreement. Several rounds of difficult discussions made
clear the limits of China's interest in delivering on those
obligations. And that is why it is time for us to turn the page on the
old playbook. China's non-market policies and practices unfairly target
U.S. workers, businesses and key sectors. We have to use all available
tools and develop new tools to defend our economic interests and
values. President Biden recognizes that market economies must act in
concert to confront policies that are fundamentally at odds with the
modern trading system. And that is why we have also brought a renewed
focus to engagement with our partners and allies, who also are
negatively impacted by China's unfair trade and economic practices.
The Administration is continually reviewing the China Section 301
tariffs, as a key part of our deliberative, long-term vision for
realigning the U.S.-China trade relationship around our priorities. As
part of this process, in March, we reinstated exclusions where American
workers, farmers, and domestic producers would benefit. The statutory
4-year review also provides an opportunity to assess the tariffs. We
are continuing to consider additional exclusions processes and
modifications, as warranted.
Question 6. As you know, the Administration has launched a number
of non-trade, trade agreements, including IPEF, TCC, and Latam. How
does USTR intend to link these together? That is, if you are focusing
on trade facilitation in all three, are there best practices that
should be common to all three?
Answer. We are developing a worker-centered trade policy that
benefits U.S. workers and consumers, and ensures that U.S. companies
can continue to innovate and create new economic opportunities both in
the United States and abroad. Our initiatives are linked by a common
goal of trade arrangements that include high standard commitments in
the areas of labor, environmental sustainability, transparency and good
regulatory practices, and trade facilitation. This Administration takes
a strategic approach when engaging our partners worldwide. As each
partner is different, we have and will continue utilizing all our trade
policy tools to come up with innovative arrangements, whether in the
context of a large trade arrangement or through other formats that
would secure market access and provide the greatest economically
meaningful outcomes for the United States. We look forward to continued
close coordination with Congress on these initiatives.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Shelley Moore Capito
Question 1. I brought up this question last year during the fiscal
year 2022 hearing. However, I still have concerns surrounding Jingye
Group, a Chinese steel and iron manufacturer, had purchased British
Steel--a steel manufacturer with facilities across the UK and Europe.
As we continue to place focus on China's trade practices, I worry that
acquisitions such as these could lead to the circumvention of U.S.
trade law. My staff has reached out to USTR more than a few times to
get a better understanding how the quotas and auditing process will
work under the new agreement without receiving a sufficient response.
--Are the quotas in the Trade Rate Quotas (TRQs) with the EU and the
one being negotiated with the U.K. divided out by Harmonized
Tariff Schedule (HTS) code or is it just a lump sum of all
steel tonnage?
--Can you elaborate on how the ``melted & poured'' requirement in the
EU deal will be policed? What penalties will be levied for
breaking the rules of the agreement?
--Will the results of the annual audits under the U.S. and U.K. be
published for review?
Answer. The U.S. announcement of actions on EU imports under
Section 232 provides that the aggregate annual import volume under the
steel TRQ is set at 3.3MMT under 54 product categories (HTS codes for
these product categories are listed in Annex 1 of the U.S. announcement
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/Statements/
US%20232%20EU%20Statement.pdf). This annual volume is allocated by
product category on an EU member state basis in line with the 2015-2017
historical period.
The U.S. announcement of actions on UK imports under Section 232
provides that the aggregate annual import volume under the steel TRQ is
set at 0.5 MMT under 54 product categories (HTS codes for these product
categories are listed in Annex 1 of the U.S. announcement https://
www.commerce.gov/sites/default/files/2022-03/UK232-US-Statement.pdf).
This annual volume is allocated by product category in line with the
2018-2019 historical period. The U.S. Customs and Border Protection, in
consultation with the Department of Commerce, administers the TRQ.
With regard to the annual audit, the U.S.-UK joint statement
provides that, upon completion, the results of the annual audits will
be made available to the United States. The statement also provides
that the United States will protect any audit properly identified as
containing proprietary information from public disclosure to the extent
permitted by U.S. law.
Additional information on the administration of the TRQ or the
annual audit may best be obtained from the Department of Commerce.
Question 2. As part of the Phase One Agreement with China, Chinese
leaders committed to buying an additional $200 billion worth of
American goods and services over 2017 levels by the end of 2021.
However, analysis\1\ of the trade data published in March 2022 founds
that China only bought 57 percent of the U.S. exports they committed to
make by the end of 2021.
--Do you anticipate whether there will be a phase two of the
agreement?
--Will there be an effort taken by USTR to enforce China's compliance
with the energy provisions that are part of the Phase One
Agreement?
Answer. It is apparent that China did not fully implement its Phase
One Agreement purchase commitments, and we have been discussing with
our Chinese counterparts how China plans to rectify the purchase
shortfalls. We additionally continue to press China to implement other
commitments of Phase One, including those relating to agriculture and
intellectual property. We continue to consult with China on these and
other trade matters, and all options remain on the table in dealing
with China's compliance failures. We also need to acknowledge the
limitations of the Phase One Agreement and past approaches to dealing
with China. We are expanding our strategies beyond exclusively pressing
China for change or for compliance with past commitments. We are
prepared to use all available tools, and by exploring possible new
tools as necessary, to defend our economic interests in the face of
China's unfair policies and practices. We are also working more closely
with like-minded trading partners on issues of shared concern and new
potential strategies.
Question 3. As a result of the pandemic and indefinite work from
home policies, many Americans are considering the option to move to
rural areas, like my state of West Virginia. However, lumber prices
have more than tripled since last spring and are further increased by
tariffs on Canadian softwood lumber.
--Is your team working on a new softwood lumber agreement with
Canada?
--Will you make this a priority?
Answer. I understand your concerns about spikes in lumber prices
over the past year and a half, which have been followed by a downward
trend due to changes in supply and demand as our economy recovers from
the pandemic.
I continue to discuss softwood lumber with my Canadian counterpart
in every meeting. The United States is open to resolving our
differences with Canada over softwood lumber, but it would require
Canada to address its policies that create an uneven playing field for
the U.S. industry. Unfortunately, to date, Canada has not been willing
to address these concerns adequately.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.piie.com/blogs/realtime-economic-issues-watch/
china-bought-none-extra-200-
billion-us-exports-trumps-trade.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator John Kennedy
Question 1. Thank you for your work in protecting U.S. farmers last
week at the WTO--standing strong against India's ploys to expand their
agricultural subsidies and public stockholding programs. As you know,
rice is an important commodity in Louisiana and our farmers have been
operating at a competitive disadvantage to India for years because of
their trade distorting policies. Myself and 17 colleagues sent you a
letter to this effect in December. Can you commit to taking action to
address India's behaviors and hold them accountable at the WTO?
Answer. I share your concerns regarding India's domestic support
policies and am committed to holding our trading partners accountable
to their international trade commitments. I also appreciate the
reference to your letter of December 2021, which highlights that U.S.
agricultural producers and exporters, particularly in the rice and
wheat industries, are disadvantaged as a result of Indian domestic
support policies.
India is a notable competitor for U.S. farmers, including Louisiana
rice farmers, in third-country markets, and its agricultural policies
impact our ability to export grains and other products both to India
and globally. USTR and USDA staff are closely reviewing India's
domestic support measures, and we are considering all options to ensure
that U.S. exports can compete on a level playing field. In addition,
the United States is working closely with a sizeable and growing
coalition of World Trade Organization (WTO) Members in Geneva who share
our concerns regarding India's domestic support policies. In May, the
United States and other concerned WTO Members initiated technical
consultations with India under the Bali Decision on Public Stockholding
for Food Security Purposes.
Additionally, at the 12th Ministerial Conference of the WTO in
June, I am pleased that we were able to uphold important WTO
commitments on agriculture by standing up to India's demands that its
public stockholding programs be exempted permanently from WTO limits on
trade- distorting agricultural subsidies.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Shaheen. So thank you very much, Ambassador Tai.
This hearing stands in--subcommittee stands in recess until the
call of the Chair.
[Whereupon, at 11:12 a.m., Wednesday, June 22, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
the Chair.]
COMMERCE, JUSTICE, SCIENCE, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2023
----------
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
[Clerk's note.--The subcommittee was unable to hold
hearings on departmental and nondepartmental witnesses. The
statements and letters of those submitting written testimony
are as follows:]
DEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES
Prepared Statement of American Physiological Society
The American Physiological Society (APS) thanks you for your
sustained support of science at the NSF and NASA. In this statement we
offer our recommendations for FY 2023 funding levels for these two
agencies.
--The APS urges you to fund the FY 2023 NSF budget at a level of at
least $11 billion to prevent further erosion of program
capacity and allow researchers to take advantage of scientific
opportunities.
--The APS urges you to restore cuts to NASA's life sciences research
budgets and to increase funding for the Human Research Program.
NSF and NASA support scientific research and technology development
programs essential to the future technological excellence and economic
stability of the United States. Federal investment in this research is
critically important because breakthroughs in basic and translational
research provide the foundation for new technologies to fuel our
economy and make it possible for the United States to remain a global
leader in science, technology and engineering. According to the 2022
Science and Engineering Indicators, other countries including China
continue to increase basic research funding at a rate that outpaces the
growth of U.S. investments.\1\
nsf funds outstanding research and education programs
NSF provides support for 24% of all federally funded basic
scientific research, including 65% of the support for non-medical
research in biology. NSF invests in basic biological research across a
broad spectrum of sub-disciplines along with the equipment and other
infrastructure scientists need for their work. Time and time again we
have seen that knowledge gained through basic biological research
provides a foundation for more applied studies that sustain the health
of animals, humans and ecosystems. Moreover, NSF-funded research has
led to countless new and unexpected discoveries that could not have
been envisioned when the research began. These unforeseen applications
have had enormous impacts on science, health and the world's economy.
94% of the NSF budget directly funds research and education. Most
of this funding is awarded through highly competitive grants, which
support over 300,000 researchers across all 50 States.\2\ The NSF is
the only Federal agency that supports basic research across all
disciplines of science and engineering, and its continued funding is
critical for the development of the next generation of scientists. NSF
has an exemplary record of funding research with far-reaching
potential. Since its inception in 1950, NSF has supported the work of
248 Nobel Laureates, including the 2020 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for
the development of CRISPR gene editing technology. Although there are
many promising applications of CRISPR technology, such as rapid
diagnosis of diseases like COVID-19, its discovery started as
curiosity-driven basic science.
Biological research is just one part of the NSF portfolio. The APS
believes that each of the NSF directorates support research that is
critical to NSF's mission ``to promote the progress of science; to
advance the National health, prosperity, and welfare; and to secure the
National defense.'' Collaboration among scientific disciplines is
increasingly recognized as the best and most efficient way to advance
science. This will only be possible with strong support for all
disciplines of research.
In addition to funding innovative research in labs around the
country, NSF education programs foster the next generation of
scientists. The APS is proud to have partnered with NSF in programs to
provide training opportunities and career development activities to
enhance the participation of underrepresented minorities in science. We
believe that NSF is uniquely suited to foster science education
programs of the highest quality, and we recommend that Congress
continues to provide Federal funds for science education through the
NSF.
The APS joins the Federation of American Societies for Experimental
Biology (FASEB) in recommending that the NSF be funded at a level of at
least $11 billion in FY 2023. The NSF budget has been flat in real
terms for approximately the last 15 years. When former NSF Director Dr.
France Cordova testified before the House Appropriations subcommittee
on Commerce, Justice and Science on March 26, 2019, she stated that
each year the NSF receives approximately $4 billion worth of well-rated
proposals that the agency is unable to fund within its current budget.
Providing the agency with a significant budget increase would allow the
NSF to support approximately 2,000 additional research grants. The NSF
is poised to address major challenges facing our Nation and our world
in the 21st Century, but it needs adequate resources to continue to
carry out its mission.
support for life sciences research should be increased at nasa
NASA sponsors research across a broad range of the basic and
applied life sciences, including gravitational biology, biomedical
research and the Human Research Program (HRP). The gravitational
biology and biomedical research programs explore fundamental scientific
questions through research carried out both on Earth and aboard the
International Space Station, which provides an environment for the
conduct of experiments in space. NASA's HRP conducts focused research
and develops countermeasures with the goal of enabling safe and
productive human space exploration. The program funds more than 300
research grants that go to academic researchers in more than 30 States
around the country.
During prolonged space flight, the physiological changes that occur
due to weightlessness, increased exposure to radiation, confined living
quarters, and alterations in eating and sleeping patterns can lead to
debilitating conditions and reduced ability to perform tasks.
Scientists are actively engaged in research that explores the
physiological basis of these problems with the goal of contributing to
the identification of therapeutic targets and development of novel
countermeasures. One of the most well-known studies of these
physiological changes is the NASA Twin Study which compared identical
twins and fellow astronauts Mark and Scott Kelly to document changes
that occurred following Scott Kelly's 1 year mission aboard the
International Space Station.\3\ The knowledge gained from this research
is not only relevant to humans traveling in space, but is also directly
applicable to human health on Earth. For example, some of the muscle
and bone changes observed in astronauts after prolonged space flight
are similar to those seen in patients confined to bed rest during
periods of critical illness as well as during the process of aging.
NASA is the only agency whose mission addresses the biomedical
challenges of human space exploration. Over the past several years, the
amount of money available for conducting this kind of research at NASA
has dwindled. In the past, appropriations legislation specified funding
levels for biomedical research and gravitational biology, but ongoing
internal reorganizations at NASA have made it difficult to understand
how much money is being spent on these programs from year to year. The
APS recommends that funding streams for these important fundamental
research programs be clearly identified and tracked within the NASA
budget. The APS also recommends restoration of cuts to peer-reviewed
life sciences research to allow NASA-funded scientists to conduct
research that will be critical not only for supporting the success of
future long-range manned space exploration but also in leading to
innovative discoveries that can be applied to Earth-based medicine. As
highlighted above, investment in the basic sciences is vital to our
Nation's technological and economic future. This innovative engine of
research fuels our world leadership and our economy. The APS urges you
to make every effort to provide these agencies with increased funding
for FY 2023.
Physiology is a broad area of scientific inquiry that focuses on
how molecules, cells, tissues and organs function in health and
disease. The American Physiological Society connects a global,
multidisciplinary community of more than 10,000 biomedical scientists
and educators as part of its mission to advance scientific discovery,
understand life and improve health. The Society drives collaboration
and spotlights scientific discoveries through its 16 scholarly journals
and programming that support researchers and educators in their work.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20221/executive-summary.
\2\ https://www.nsf.gov/news/factsheets/
Factsheet_By%20the%20Numbers_05_21_V02.pdf.
\3\ https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-twins-study-confirms-
preliminary-findings.
______
Prepared Statement of Department of Justice
Members of the Senate Committee on Appropriations--Subcommittee on
Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, my name is Abigail
Echo-Hawk, and I am an enrolled citizen of the Pawnee Nation of
Oklahoma, currently living in an urban Indian community in Seattle,
Washington. I am Executive Vice President of the Seattle Indian Health
Board (SIHB) and the Director of Urban Indian Health Institute (UIHI)
where I oversee policy, research, data, and evaluation initiatives. To
uphold the legislative mandate of the Not Invisible Act and Savanna's
Act required by the Department of Justice and Department of Interior, I
would like to request an oversight hearing on this issue. The Not
Invisible Act and Savanna's Act are critical for addressing the Missing
and Murdered Indigenous Women and People (MMIWP) crisis. Each day these
go unfulfilled our Tribes, communities, and individuals affected by
MMIWP go unserved.
I am an American Indian health researcher with more than 20 years
of experience in both academic and non-profit settings. I participate
in numerous local, State, and Federal efforts to support AI/AN
communities in research, including serving on the Tribal Collaborations
Workgroup for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) All of Us
precision medicine initiative. I am also a recent member of the NIH
Office of AIDs Research Advisory Council as the only Native
representative. I am a co-author to four groundbreaking research
studies on sexual violence and Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women
and Girls (MMIWG) where I have called national attention to the
institutional barriers in data collection, reporting, and analysis of
demographic data that perpetuate violence against AI/AN people. I am a
member of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
(NASEM) Standing Committee for the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) Center for Preparedness and Response (SCPR).
Additionally, I serve on Washington State Office of the Attorney
General's task force for Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and
People.
bringing national attention to the mmiwp crisis
In 2018, UIHI released a groundbreaking report titled, Missing and
Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls Report.\1\ Through the first
publication and multiple reports released since then, UIHI continues to
identify gaps in local to Federal data collection methods on AI/AN
people, gaps in gender-based violence care continuation, and lack of
Federal funding available to meet the unique and prompting needs of
Indigenous communities.
Since the release of our initial report, UIHI continues to document
the existing resiliency and cultural strengths that combat the MMIWP
crisis. In 2022, UIHI released Supporting the Sacred: Womxn of
Resilience\2\ which gathered the voices of AI/AN survivors and
recommended increased and flexible funding for housing stability, legal
representation, behavioral health, and investing in community services
to reduce survivors' unmet needs. The report also found the
relationship between law enforcement, providers, and survivors could be
improved through culturally responsive training and authentic
relationship-building. Finally, the report concludes by stressing
gender-based violence services and programming be led by Native experts
and communities to ensure utmost care of our people.
In 2022, we also released Service as Ceremony: A Journey toward
Healing,\3\ which identified the intersectional impacts COVID-19 had on
AI/AN experiencing intimate partner violence from the perspective of
direct service providers. Recommendations to mitigate intimate partner
violence includes training medical providers to work with AI/AN
communities, support increased funding for community-based programming
and services, and promote cross-system coordination amongst responders,
Tribes, law enforcement, and community organizations.
Our reports continuously demand improved data collection on AI/AN
populations, cross-system coordination, and increased investments to
our community-based organizations serving AI/AN survivors, victims,
families, and community members affected by violence.
equity determination by the gao and department of justice (doj) equity
plan
In 2021, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released
Missing or Murdered Indigenous Women: New Efforts Are Underway but
Opportunities Exist to Improve the Federal Response\4\ documenting the
Department of Interior (DOI) and the Department of Justice's (DOJ)
Federal implementation failures to implement the Not Invisible Act and
Savanna's Act of 2019. The GAO report recommended DOJ and DOI fulfill
their legislative mandates by: developing a plan accomplish ongoing
analyses of data in existing Federal databases; developing a strategy
to educate the public on entering data into NamUs; developing a plan to
conduct outreach to Tribes, Tribal organizations, and urban Indian
organizations (UIO) to enter data into NamUs, and; and encouraging the
Secretary of the Interior to appoint members to the Not Invisible
Commission. The lack of Federal implementation of these legislative
mandates perpetuates the cycle of violence against Indigenous bodies
when Indian Country continues to demand action, accountability, and
justice for our loved ones.
In alignment with Executive Order 13985: Advancing Racial Equity
and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government
and the DOJ--Equity Action Plan, we request the DOJ engage with
underserved communities more effectively to increase reporting of
crimes; ensure appropriate consideration of the needs of victims, and;
improve the dissemination of resources, programs, and services. These
efforts will honor the government-to-government relationship with
Tribal communities and strengthen agency communication with front line
responders to the MMIWP crisis.
improving doj's approaches and response to violence
Due to unique legal jurisdictional precedent on Tribal lands,
Indian Country relies on the efforts of DOJ to assist violent crimes on
and off Tribal lands. We request Congress oversee the implementation of
Savanna's Act by the DOJ and ensure their equity plans do not go
dismissed.
A continuous issue that affects both Tribal regions and urban
areas, is the lack of multidisciplinary and multijurisdictional
coordination for MMIWP. Tribal, Federal, State, and local jurisdictions
often offer disjointed responses that leave crime victims and families
without appropriate intervention resources and no way to hold officials
accountable. Similar to DOJ creating an MMIP website available for
anyone, DOJ must support improved communication amongst Tribes, State
and local law enforcement, and community members through a nationwide
data system to document missing and endangered Indigenous people.
Additionally, DOJ can improve coordination between law enforcement and
providers to assure victims, survivors, and families have access to
programs, services, and activities that offer culturally responsive
wraparound services in the local area.
In Washington state, a historical missing and endangered Indigenous
persons advisory alert was created which will notify law enforcement,
Tribal areas, and the public. Similar to an Amber Alert, Washington
state patrol will respond to the call, and maintain the clearinghouse
associated with the call line for individuals impacted by MMIWP. These
State-based solutions can begin to bridge the jurisdictional gaps
associated with MMIWP, and create a unified approach for Tribal,
Federal, State, and local responses.
In 2021, UIHI released A Step Toward Justice,\5\ a case study
documenting our efforts within the 13th largest county in the Nation,
King County, to improve the accuracy of data collected on AI/AN
populations. To address the misrepresentation and undercount of missing
and murdered crimes against AI/AN people, UIHI led the creation of data
fields for law enforcement to utilize and provided data collection
techniques to improve accurate reporting on race/ethnicity, AI/AN
identity, and Tribal affiliation. These efforts support law
enforcement's improved data collection reporting from interactions with
AI/AN people to better document AI/AN people affected by violence. We
have created a national model that DOJ can use to support national
efforts to identify AI/AN crime victims more accurately and correctly
by engaging with Tribes, community leaders, and Tribal epidemiology
centers.
addressing the increase of intimate partner violence through flexible
funding
We are appreciative of the gender-based violence funding being made
available to UIOs through the reauthorization of Violence Against
Women's Act (VAWA). COVID supplements illuminated the various ways in
which wraparound service providers can mediate authentic responses for
Native survivors during times of a pandemic. During Tribal
consultations held with the DOJ, Indian Country continuously asks for
investments in our grassroot, community-based organizations, and Tribal
organizations providing low-barrier direct service to both urban and
rural AI/AN people. Our Native providers continue to offer unmatched
services that must receive renewable, and flexible funding to respond
to institutional inequities that perpetuate violence against Indigenous
bodies.
COVID-19 exacerbated social determinants of health in AI/AN
communities including income, housing, health, and safety. During the
stay-at-home orders, AI/AN women experienced an increase in intimate
partner violence,\6\ exposing them to additional traumas and placing
them at greater risk of becoming unhoused. Many survivors of violence
turned to cultural services to escape unsafe conditions. Through
flexible spending, our Native providers were able to offer centralized
services to address social determinants of health that can often lead
to increased risks of intimate partner violence. During the pandemic,
cultural healing spaces were created by providers and grew to support
survivors' access to behavioral health, medical services, continuing
education, and employment opportunities. However, additional, and long-
term funding is needed to support health access, legal services,
educational opportunities, and on the ground support to care for
survivors' and victims' holistic needs.
A multi-pronged systemic approach to MMIWP will require
implementation of Savanna's Act and Not Invisible Act, multi-
jurisdictional coordination, improved data collection on AI/AN
populations, and increased investment to community-based organizations
responding to the crisis. These efforts will center those most impacted
by MMIWP and address systemic issues plaguing Indian Country.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Urban India Health Institute. (November 2018) Missing and
Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls Report. Retrieved from: https://
www.uihi.org/projects/our-bodies-our-stories/.
\2\ Urban Indian Health Institute. (May 2021) Supporting the
Sacred: Womxn of Resilience. Retrieved from: https://www.uihi.org/
resources/supporting-the-sacred-womxn-of-resilience/.
\3\ Urban Indian Health Institute. (February 2022) Service as
Ceremony: A Journey toward Healing. Retrieved from: https://
www.uihi.org/resources/service-as-ceremony-a-journey-toward-healing/.
\4\ U.S. Government Accountability Office. (October 2021) Missing
or Murdered Indigenous Women: New Efforts Are Underway but
Opportunities Exist to Improve the Federal Response. Retrieved from:
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-22-104045.
\5\ Urban Indian Health Institute. (October 2021) A Step Toward
Justice Examining the collaboration between Urban Indian Health
Institute and the King County Prosecuting Attorney's Office and the
lessons learned from their partnerships. Retrieved from: https://
www.uihi.org/projects/protecting-the-sacred/.
\6\ Urban Indian Health Institute. (February 2022) Service as
Ceremony: A Journey toward Healing. Retrieved from: https://
www.uihi.org/resources/service-as-ceremony-a-journey-toward-healing/.
[This statement was submitted by Abigail Echo-Hawk]
______
Prepared Statement of U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) and the U.S.
Department of Justice (DOJ)
u.s. department of commerce
North Atlantic Right Whales $26 million
In 2020, North Atlantic right whales were designated as critically
endangered by the International Union for Conservation of Nature
(IUCN). Elevated mortalities of the species from entanglements in
fishing gear and vessel strikes have been declared an Unusual Mortality
Event (UME) by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) since 2017. The annual documented rate of anthropogenic
mortality and serious injury, due to both entanglement in gear and
vessel strikes, has exceeded the population's potential biological
removal level (PBR) since 1995.
In October 2021, scientists from the New England Aquarium released
a new population estimate for North Atlantic right whales, indicating
that the population numbered only 336 as of January 2020, the lowest
assessment in decades.\1\ Right whales are extremely vulnerable to
being caught in the vertical buoy lines used in lobster and crab
trapping gear. Entanglement can lead to drowning, reduced mobility,
and, in some cases, a long, painful death from starvation. Collisions
with vessels of all sizes can also cause serious injuries, such as
blunt force trauma, propeller cuts, and broken bones. Three North
Atlantic right whale calves were killed or seriously injured by vessel
strikes in U.S. waters in the last year. In February 2021, an adult
whale was confirmed dead due to injuries from entanglement. Two other
entangled whales were added to the serious injuries list in 2021.
Studies have shown that mortalities from known entanglements have
continued to increase from 21 percent (1970-2002) to 51 percent (2003-
2018).\2\ Entanglements caused as many as 85 percent of diagnosable
deaths from 2010 to 2015. In February 2021, a study co-authored by
leading North Atlantic right whale scientists found that from 1990-
2017, observed carcasses only accounted for 36 percent of North
Atlantic right whale mortalities.\3\ These ``cryptic mortalities,''
i.e., deaths caused by human activities without an observed carcass,
represent a larger proportion of the total mortality than previously
believed.
The FY22 appropriations omnibus included $21 million for North
Atlantic right whales within the Marine Mammals, Sea Turtles, and Other
Species line item. Within this funding, $2 million was directed to NOAA
for the continuation of a pilot program developing and field-testing
new fishing gear technologies designed to reduce entanglements, and $14
million was provided to States through the Atlantic States Marine
Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) to help defray the cost to the fishing
industry of compliance with the final 2021 rule to modify the Atlantic
Large Whale Take Reduction Plan (ALWTRP) (FR-210827-0171). We are
immensely grateful for the subcommittee's concern for this species and
the substantial increase in funding but remain deeply concerned with
the effectiveness of the 2021 rule, in that it falls significantly
short of the risk reduction needed to save this species from
extinction.
Within our proposal of $26 million, we believe funding should be
appropriated to NOAA to develop and implement new rules aimed at
reducing the mortality rate of North Atlantic right whales by vessel
strikes, fishing-gear entanglements, and other threats. There must also
be investment in reducing vessel-strike risk in high-traffic areas as
well as a transition to whale-safe fishing gear. We believe the pilot
program to refine and field test innovative fishing gear technologies,
such as ropeless gear, should be expanded, including the development of
geolocation technologies, and recommend $8 million be appropriated
towards this. Lastly, surveys and monitoring, enforcement,
disentanglement, stranding response, and plankton recorder surveys are
crucial to the conservation of this species.
We encourage Congress to direct investment to the development of
ropeless technologies instead of expensive, short-term investments in
``weak rope.'' The use of 1,700-lb breaking strength lines (known as
``weak rope'') may decrease the severity of entanglement injuries
suffered by right whales but does not reduce the likelihood of
entanglement in the first place nor the sub-lethal impacts of
entanglement on whales. This gear also does not reduce the risk of
serious injury or mortality for right whales who are less than 2 years
old.\4\
If we are to save this species, it will require the investment and
cooperation among Congress, agencies, scientists, and industry to find
long-term solutions. We appreciate the subcommittee's recognition of
the urgency of this situation and the funding it continues to provide
for the protection of North Atlantic right whales.
Unusual Mortality Event Contingency Fund $4.5 million
Marine mammals are important indicator species of ocean health.
Monitoring the health of marine mammals, especially during an Unusual
Mortality Event (UME), can reveal emerging threats, potential impacts
of human activities, and the effectiveness of management actions. A UME
is defined as ``a stranding that is unexpected; involves a significant
die-off of any marine mammal population; and demands immediate
response.'' There are currently six active UMEs-Alaska ice seals, West
Coast gray whales, Atlantic minke whales, North Atlantic right whales,
Atlantic humpback whales, and Atlantic Florida manatees. In the newest
UME to be declared, the 2021 Atlantic Florida manatee, over 1,000
manatees have died. Rescue organizations are hampered by the lack of
facilities and funds for responding to overwhelming numbers of live
manatees in need of rescue and rehabilitation.
Since 1991, 71 marine mammal UMEs have been declared. The UME
Contingency Fund was established through the Marine Mammal Protection
Act to enable the National Marine Fisheries Service to reimburse marine
mammal stranding network partners for costs related to: caring for and
treating live animals that strand as part of UMEs; collecting,
preparing, and sending biological samples to the National Marine Mammal
Tissue Bank and other diagnostic laboratories to investigate the causes
of UMEs; and collecting important marine mammal health data to inform
and improve future UME responses and marine conservation. Although
Congress created this fund in 1992, it appropriated funds only in 2005;
all other contributions to the Fund have been through voluntary
contributions. Given the growing number of UMEs, $4.5 million should be
allocated to the Unusual Mortality Event Contingency Fund to enable
robust marine mammal stranding response efforts.
John H. Prescott Marine Mammal Rescue Assistance Grant Program $8
million
The John H. Prescott Marine Mammal Rescue Assistance Grant Program
(Prescott Grant Program), a program under NMFS, provides competitive
grants to marine mammal stranding network organizations to do the
following: (1) rescue and rehabilitate sick, injured, or distressed
live marine mammals, and (2) investigate the events surrounding, and
determine the cause of, the death or injury of marine mammals. Over the
past 21 years, the Prescott Grant Program has been vital to protecting
and recovering marine mammals across the country while also generating
critical information regarding marine mammals and their environment. As
the sole source of Federal funding for the National Marine Mammal
Stranding Network, which is comprised of over 90 member organizations
in 26 States, the District of Columbia, two territories, and two
Tribes, robust funding is required for the Prescott Grant Program to
enable it to continue its vital work.
Enforcement and Seafood Import Monitoring Program (SIMP) $4 million
The Seafood Import Monitoring Program (SIMP) was established in
2016 to require U.S. importers of certain fish and fish products to
provide and report key data, with the aim of uncovering illegal,
unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing and/or seafood fraud and
preventing it from entering U.S. commerce. The program oversees imports
of 13 species groups (which are comprised of more than 1,100 unique
species) including sharks and sea cucumbers, two marine species that
are increasingly threatened by IUU fishing. The 2019 addition of shrimp
has had implications for the critically endangered vaquita, of which
only about 10 remain. The use of illegal gillnets for catching shrimp
in the Gulf of California, and the subsequent bycatch of vaquitas, has
been a major factor in the species' decline.
A 2021 report ``Seafood Obtained via Illegal, Unreported, and
Unregulated Fishing: U.S. Imports and Economic Impact on U.S.
Commercial Fisheries,'' compiled by the U.S. International Trade
Commission, found that $2.4 billion worth of seafood imports derived
from IUU fishing was imported in 2019 (11 percent of total seafood
imports). Over 13 percent of the U.S. imports caught at sea were
estimated to be caught using IUU fishing practices. Top species
included swimming crab, wild-caught warmwater shrimp, yellowfin tuna,
and squid. The report noted that IUU-sourced seafood is a threat to the
livelihood of U.S. fishermen. These practices also pose risks to marine
ecosystems, public health, and human rights.
In January 2020, the U.S. government allocated $8 million to fight
IUU fishing and bolster SIMP as part of the US-Mexico-Canada trade
agreement (USMCA) that was approved in January 2021. As part of the
agreement, funding will go to NOAA to help it cooperate with the
Mexican government in fighting illegal fishing through 2023. Additional
funding of $4 million is necessary to ensure full enforcement of SIMP
in FY23.
Marine Mammal Commission (MMC) $6 million
The Marine Mammal Commission (MMC) is an independent Federal agency
established by Congress in 1972 under the Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA). It is responsible for overseeing the proper implementation of
the MMPA and provides comprehensive, independent, science-based
oversight of all Federal and international policy and management
actions affecting marine mammals. The MMC's work is crucial to
maintaining healthy populations of marine mammals, including whales,
manatees, dolphins, seals, sea otters, walruses, and polar bears, and
ensuring their survival for generations to come. Additionally, the MMC
seeks to ensure that Alaska Natives can meet their subsistence needs
through hunting of marine mammals.
Each U.S. taxpayer contributes just over 1 cent per year to fund
the MMC and its work. Until FY21, the MMC had been flat funded at $3.43
million. In FY21, funding for the MMC was slightly increased to $3.769
million, and was then further increased to $4.2 million in FY22. Due to
rising fixed costs, the MMC has absorbed significant essential costs
(salaries, rent, etc.) and thereby reduced its discretionary funding.
In order for the MMC to fully fulfill its obligations, we ask that $6
million be appropriated for FY23.
u.s. department of justice
Environment and Natural Resources Division/Environmental Crimes Section
Additional $2 million
AWI asks the subcommittee to provide an additional $2 million, over
and above the amount that would otherwise be appropriated, to the
Environmental Crimes Section of the Department of Justice's Environment
and Natural Resources Division, to be designated for the Section's work
on animal cruelty crime.
Congress has taken significant steps in the last decade to
strengthen Federal laws to protect animals from cruel treatment. For
those efforts to be meaningful, it is imperative that the Federal
Government's enforcement efforts be robustly supported. The attorneys
in the Environmental Crimes Section are tasked with ensuring that
justice is served when the Federal statutes and enforcement regimes
that provide for the humane treatment of captive, farmed, and companion
animals across the country are violated. These laws include the Animal
Welfare Act, the Horse Protection Act, the Humane Methods of Slaughter
Act, the 28-Hour Law, the animal crush video statute, the Animal
Fighting Venture Prohibition Act, and, since 2019, the Preventing
Animal Cruelty and Torture Act.
This is a tremendous amount of responsibility, and it is a
responsibility that both Congress and the American public expect to be
executed vigorously. The resources available to bring criminal
prosecution under these laws has not kept pace with the improvements
made in the laws. Given the increased workload the Section has taken on
in just the last couple of years, a $2 million increase in its funding
its work on animal cruelty crimes is warranted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Heather Pettis, Richard Pace III, Philip Hamilton, North
Atlantic Right Whale Consortium 2021 Annual Report Card Report to the
North Atlantic Right Whale Consortium (2022) available at https://
www.narwc.org/uploads/1/1/6/6/116623219/2021report_cardfinal.pdf.
\2\ Sharp, S, et.al (2019). Gross and histopathologic diagnoses
from North Atlantic right whale Eubalaena glacialis mortalities between
2003 and 2018. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms, 135(1), 1-31.
doi:10.3354/dao03376).
\3\ Pace, R. et al. (2021). Cryptic mortality of North Atlantic
right whales. Conservation Science and Practice. 3. 10.1111/csp2.346.
\4\ Knowlton et al. (2016).
[This statement was submitted by Nancy Blaney, Director, Government
Affairs]
______
Prepared Statement of the Wildlife Conservation Society
The Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) would like to thank Chair
Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and the members of the subcommittee for
providing this opportunity to submit testimony in support of funding in
the FY22 Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies Appropriations
Act for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA)
National Marine Sanctuaries Program, the National Marine Fisheries
Service Office of Protected Resources funding for the critically
endangered North Atlantic right whale and for the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) Fisheries Data Collections, Surveys, and
Assessments funding line specifically to enhance data collection and
stock assessment of vulnerable shark, skate and ray species.
WCS was founded with the help of Theodore Roosevelt in 1895 with
the mission of saving wildlife and wild places worldwide. Today, WCS
manages the largest network of urban wildlife parks in the United
States. Visited by 4 million people annually, the network includes our
flagship, the Bronx Zoo, as well as the New York Aquarium in Brooklyn.
Globally, our goal is to conserve the world's most important wild
places, focusing on 14 priority regions that are home to more than 50%
of the world's biodiversity. We have offices and field programs in more
than 60 countries and with our partners manage more than 200 million
acres of protected areas around the world, employing more than 4,000
staff including about 200 Ph.D. scientists and 100 veterinarians.
Working in all the world's oceans, WCS combines its expertise in the
field, aquarium and zoos to achieve its conservation mission both in
New York and around the world. In our view, the largest threats facing
marine wildlife and habitats require innovative, science-based
solutions that balance conservation and sustainable use of the ocean.
The future of our ocean and coastal resources--and our National
well-being--depends on a strong NOAA. For these reasons, we support
robust investment in the Federal Government's premier ocean science,
conservation and management agency. We ask that the subcommittee
Members use this additional investment in NOAA in the FY23 Commerce,
Justice, Science and Related Agencies appropriations bill to increase
investments in the National Marine Sanctuaries Program, North Atlantic
right whale conservation and fisheries data collections, surveys and
assessments to improve fisheries management and conservation measures
for vulnerable shark, skate and ray species.
--NOAA--National Marine Sanctuaries Program--$87 Million: The
National Marine Sanctuary System is our essential network of
protected waters held in trust for all Americans. Marine
sanctuaries and monuments are home to millions of species,
preserve our Nation's maritime heritage, and promote access for
exploration and world-class outdoor recreation. The
conservation and sustainable use of marine ecosystems and
biodiversity are vital to maintaining a healthy ocean and Great
Lakes, addressing the climate crisis, and underpinning
productive coastal economies.
The United States is an ocean nation containing 3.4 million square
nautical miles of ocean-larger than the combined land area of all fifty
States. The National Marine Sanctuary Program serves as trustee for 15
ecologically and culturally significant ocean and Great Lakes sites.
The system works with diverse partners and stakeholders to promote
responsible, sustainable ocean uses that ensure the health of our most
valued ocean places. A healthy ocean is the basis for thriving
recreation, tourism and commercial activities that drive coastal
economies. The Office of National Marine Sanctuaries also leads the
National Marine Protected Areas Center, the Nation's hub for building
innovative partnerships and tools to protect our special ocean.
WCS strongly supports the Biden-Harris Administration's commitment
to 30x30 goals--conserving at least 30% of the world's lands and oceans
by 2030 (30x30). US implementation of 30x30 provides a critical
foundation for global success on biodiversity conservation, mitigating
and adapting to climate change through natural climate solutions, and
preventing zoonotic spillover that causes pandemics, such as COVID-19.
It provides an opportunity for improved inter-agency coordination, as
well as alignment, and synergy among existing and new laws,
regulations, and mechanisms to enhance habitat protection. 30x30 can
also provide a pathway to reconciliation of the issues of equity and
justice that underlie conservation in this country by increasing access
to nature, especially for under-resourced communities, and honoring and
elevating the role of Indigenous Nations in any 30x30 strategy.
Although there are places that merit all protections that U.S. law
can provide, working lands and busy waters also play a critical role in
meeting the Nation's 30x30 goals. As such, the National Marine
Sanctuaries Program which balances conservation and sustainable use
must be an integral part of the U.S. response. The program needs
additional resources to support existing Sanctuaries as well as to
initiate the public-facing, stakeholder-driven process to designate new
Sanctuaries in areas that NOAA has determined are worthy of protection.
Currently, there is no Sanctuary in the biodiverse and culturally
important waters of the New York Bight. Therefore, WCS nominated Hudson
Canyon as a National Marine Sanctuary in 2016. Located just 100 miles
from the Statue of Liberty, NOAA determined it is a site of ecological
and economic importance and placed the nomination in its inventory of
successful nominations. WCS's nomination recommended a Hudson Sanctuary
designation would supplement and complement existing regulations by
ensuring that oil, gas and mineral exploration and extraction be
permanently precluded from a Hudson Sanctuary and that the existing
authorities (e.g. Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, the Atlantic
States Marine Fisheries Commission and NOAA's Highly Migratory Species
Division) continue to regulate fisheries within the Sanctuary, should
it be designated. With increased resources from Congress, WCS looks
forward to NOAA initiating the public-facing, stakeholder-driven
designation process for Hudson Canyon.
For these reasons, WCS supports the Biden-Harris Administration's
recommended investment of $87m for the FY23 Sanctuaries and Marine
Protected Areas ORF as detailed in the President's Budget Request and
Congressional Justification.
--NOAA--Office of Protected Species, funding for North Atlantic Right
Whale conservation within Marine Mammals, Sea Turtles, and
Others Species, $26 Million: NOAA's Office of Protected Species
is responsible for the conservation, protection and recovery of
more than 150 Endangered and Threatened marine species under
the Endangered Species Act, including the North Atlantic right
whale. The Office is also responsible for the management and
protection of all whales, dolphins, porpoises, seals, and sea
lions under the Marine Mammal Protection Act.
Recently updated estimates for North Atlantic right whale indicate
that between January 2019 and January 2020 its population plummeted an
additional eight% to 336 individuals, entailing a rate of decline forty
times the legal limit. This is the lowest assessment in decades. We are
facing an emergency situation: This species cannot recover without a
significant reduction to the high level of mortality they are currently
experiencing, including from ship strikes in high-trafficked areas,
noise pollution, and other impacts from fisheries and offshore wind
energy development. including New York and New Jersey waters.
Scientists from the Wildlife Conservation Society, in collaboration
with the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution and other partners, are
monitoring right whales and other marine mammals as they migrate
through the busy waters of the New York Bight. Twelve million dollars
out of $26 million is needed to increase investments in research,
monitoring and management related to vessel strikes, ocean noise and
fishing gear entanglements by NOAA. With this funding, managers,
stakeholders and the public will be able to contribute to the
conservation of the critically endangered North Atlantic right whale.
--NOAA--National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Fisheries Data
Collections, Surveys, and Assessments funding line for
vulnerable shark, skate and ray species, $10 Million:
Insufficient fisheries data and stock assessment of shark,
skate and ray populations prevents scientists from determining
whether species are overfished and/or subject to overfishing.
Many sharks are important predators in ocean food chains, which
makes them critical in maintaining the balance of marine
ecosystems. Most shark and ray species are long-lived, mature
late, and produce few offspring. These life history
characteristics make sharks extremely vulnerable to
overfishing, whether from targeted fishing or bycatch. In a
recent paper, experts estimated that 37.5% of shark and ray
species are threatened with extinction, according to
International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List
criteria. Overfishing is the main threat for 100% of threatened
species and the sole threat affecting 67 % of these species.
Based on data from NMFS 2020 Report to Congress on the status
of U.S. shark fisheries, there are 34 shark stock or stock
complexes listed in U.S. waters of which 68% are either
overfished and experiencing overfishing , have a mixed status ,
or have an ``unknown'' overfished or overfishing stock status .
By directing $10 million specifically allocated towards stock
assessments for vulnerable shark, skate and ray species,
Congress can help ensure the improved management and
conservation of this important group of species.
WCS appreciates the opportunity to share its perspective and to
make a case for increases in Federal investments in ocean conservation
in the FY23 Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act. As an ocean nation, Americans depend on Federal
investment in NOAA programs that are rooted in marine science and
stakeholder engagement. These investments will help us balance marine
conservation and sustainable use of the ocean.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide details on these WCS
requests to the Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies
Appropriations subcommittee in preparation for the FY23 Appropriations
Act. WCS marine science and policy experts are available to the
subcommittee should there be any follow up questions.
[This statement was submitted by Noah Chesnin, Associate Director,
New York Seascape Program]
----------
NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES
Prepared Statement of The Alliance to End Slavery and Trafficking
Honorable Matt Cartwright, Chair, Honorable Robert Aderholt, Ranking
Member, House Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science
and Related Agencies, Honorable Jeanne Shaheen, Chair, Honorable Jerry
Moran, Ranking Member, Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce,
Justice, Science and Related Agencies:
The Alliance to End Slavery and Trafficking (ATEST) appreciates and
thanks you for your leadership in the fight to end child labor, forced
labor and human trafficking. We are grateful for the increased support
these programs have received over the past decade. We seek your
assistance again in funding essential programs in the FY23 Commerce,
Justice, Science and Related Agencies bill. The Justice Department
plays a vital role in bringing traffickers to justice. These cases are
often complicated and involve lengthy legal proceedings requiring
additional resources for prosecutors as well as for victims who often
experience severe trauma requiring intensive therapy and long-term
services and support to rebuild their lives. Most victims require
comprehensive case management, legal services and access to housing
supported by trauma-informed and culturally competent victim services
and community-based organizations to support their goals and help them
navigate the often re-traumatizing court process.
We are grateful for your support to increase investments in these
areas, and to continue to ensure that the Department of Justice works
to strengthen collaborative community responses to human trafficking.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
department of justice
Office of Justice Programs/State and Local Law Enforcement
Assistance Victim Services Grants and Human Trafficking Task Forces:
$150,000,000--According to the 2021 Trafficking in Persons (TIP)
Report, Department of Justice (DOJ) grantees served 9,854 clients
during the most recent 1-year period (7/1/19 to 6/30/20), approximately
17.6 percent more clients than DOJ grantees served the prior year
(8,375). The National Human Trafficking Hotline identified 18,600 sex
trafficking and forced labor victims in 2020, and reported a 60 percent
increase in signal volume since 2019. Given that survivors of
trafficking are coming forward in greater numbers than are being served
by DOJ grantees, robust resources are needed to ensure that they
receive appropriate responses and services. Data from the Trafficking
Hotline and anecdotal evidence from established service providers
demonstrate that insufficient resources and hindered access to
resources remain a significant barrier for survivors. For example,
service providers in New York City, including an ATEST member, reported
a significant increase in survivors' requests for rental assistance,
medical cost coverage and food vouchers. While some of these requests
were met, service providers engaged in ongoing advocacy with landlords
and medical providers to negotiate rent arrears arrangements or lower
medical bills when funding was insufficient to cover these costs. In
2020 and 2021, Trafficking Hotline data shows that more than 50 percent
of all crisis calls were requests for emergency shelter assistance.
The COVID-19 crisis has drastically changed the landscape for
serving human trafficking victims and survivors. Service providers
nationwide have reported a greater caseload and more difficulties
providing services due to complicated and evolving COVID-19 mitigation
measures. Data from one service provider showed a 556 percent increase
in emergency response cases of escaping survivors since the start of
the pandemic in 2019. Furthermore, this service provider has
experienced a 455 percent increase in costs for basic necessities. As
economic vulnerabilities continue to increase throughout the duration
of the pandemic and economic recovery remains inconsistent, we expect
an ongoing increase in required services for victims and survivors.
Despite the amplified need for comprehensive services, we anticipate a
possible 35 percent decrease in funding for service providers in the
anti-trafficking movement as part of the economic fallout from this
global health crisis. We are seeing significantly heightened client
financial needs in all areas, including social and legal needs, and
expect a significant increase in the need for sustained comprehensive
services.
To attempt to meet the growing needs of victims and survivors, we
request $150,000,000 for human trafficking survivors and law
enforcement. Given the increased vulnerability to trafficking due to
persistent unemployment and general financial, legal and social
instability, we request that no less than $126,000,000 of the
appropriation be for victim services, and that the majority of OVC
money continues to be spent supporting direct services for all forms of
trafficking in persons, including intensive case management and legal
and shelter services. We also request that OVC review monies granted to
law enforcement task forces to ensure task forces are adopting victim-
centered approaches. Two of ATEST's direct service provider members,
who also run federally funded task forces under the Enhanced
Collaborative Model grants, report that many of their clients have
experienced negative or harmful interactions with law enforcement.
Clients report being coerced to testify against their traffickers under
threat of prosecution themselves. Other clients who have reported
strong labor trafficking cases have not been granted Continued Presence
and law enforcement has declined to investigate these allegations.
Other survivors were required to interview with law enforcement up to
six separate times at the height of the pandemic, and were still not
issued Continued Presence until their victim service provider advocates
intervened on their behalf. One BIPOC client shared she was turned away
by the police when seeking help. ``I was searching for help and when I
went to the police department they looked at me like I was crazy. They
told me no one would want to house me or help me if I kept telling
people I was running away from a pimp. They gave me a cold shoulder, a
pamphlet to go across the street, and shooed me away.'' Essentially,
when survivors of human trafficking seek help from law enforcement, the
majority of survivors report being turned away, or arrested.
With respect to implementation of the Trafficking Victims
Protection Act (TVPA) related to protection of victim rights, section 5
of Public Law 115-392 (one of the four bills in the most recent TVPA
reauthorization), the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security
was to issue a directive regarding victim protection training and
victim screening protocols. These protocols have still not been
developed. ATEST is deeply invested in the development of victim-
centered protocols by DOJ and DHS, in strong collaboration with DOL and
HHS, for publication and dissemination to the extensive network of DOJ-
funded task forces around the country.
Finally, we want to acknowledge, gratefully, that colleagues within
the Department of Justice have steadfastly responded to our
appropriations requests over the past decade and we have seen large
increases in funding disbursed by Department of Justice for victims of
human trafficking. The COVID-19 global pandemic is unlike anything we
have seen before in recent times, and victims of human trafficking are
disproportionately impacted. Therefore, we continue to request
significantly elevated levels of funding and hope to continue the
ongoing trend of increased appropriations.
Proposed Report Language: The bill provides $150,000,000 for the
Victims of Trafficking Grant program, of which no less than
$126,000,000 is for victim services. The $10,000,000 request for minor
victim services grants is included within the $150,000,000
appropriations request for victim services overall.
Office of Justice Programs/State and Local Law Enforcement
Assistance Minor Victim Services Grants: $10,000,000--Specialized,
comprehensive, trauma-informed and gender- specific assistance to minor
victims of human trafficking is critical. Minors face significant
hurdles recovering from the abuse and trauma they have endured. Law
enforcement has identified the lack of specialized housing programs
throughout the U.S. as the greatest obstacle in effectively prosecuting
child traffickers. The Attorney General is authorized to provide grant
funding to serve sex-trafficked minors. We request additional funds to
support services, training and outreach for labor-trafficked youth.
Including labor trafficked children is imperative given that the
Federal definition of human trafficking includes both sex trafficking
and forced labor. Furthermore, labor trafficking victims experience the
same types of trauma, physical, sexual and psychological abuse seen in
sex trafficking cases. Unaccompanied minors working are at risk of and
have experienced sex and/or labor trafficking, but often only receive
support for their sex trafficking recovery. More than 50 percent of the
Safe Horizon Anti-Trafficking Program clients are identified as labor
trafficking victims. Another ATEST member noted that 28 percent of
their survivors served were trafficked as minors. Increased funding to
serve minor victims of all forms of human trafficking, including labor
trafficking, would critically shore up prevention and protection
efforts.
According to the National Advisory Committee on the Sex Trafficking
of Youth in the United States, ``a child or youth may more readily
disclose concerns related to labor trafficking than concerns related to
sex trafficking given the sexual violence, trauma, and stigma endemic
in sex trafficking. Additionally, some disclosures that initially seem
to involve only sex trafficking may also involve labor trafficking, as
children and youth may be forced to work while also being made to
engage in commercial sex acts.'' We further request that the bill
contain statutory language to make this funding available for 2 years
instead of just 1 year.
Proposed Report Language: The bill provides $10,000,000 for Minor
Victims of Trafficking Grant program, of which $5,000,000 is for victim
services grants for sex trafficked minors, and an additional $5,000,000
for victim services grants for labor trafficked minors. The Committee
encourages DOJ to work in close coordination with the Department of
Health and Human Services to encourage collaboration and reduce
duplication of effort.
Legal Activities/Civil Rights Division, Human Trafficking
Prosecution Unit (HTPU): $8,000,000--HTPU houses the government's top
legal experts on prosecuting human trafficking cases. These cases are
resource-intensive because they are procedurally complex and involve
multiple jurisdictions and defendants. Per the Human Trafficking
Institute's Federal Human Trafficking Report, HTPU cases had a 89
percent conviction rate in 2020. Defendants in HTPU cases are
consistently receiving longer sentences and more frequently ordered to
pay restitution than non-HTPU cases. With increased funding, HTPU will
be able to increase prosecutions of all forms of trafficking and forced
labor. This funding should be prioritized for the prosecution of forced
labor cases, which only constituted 6 percent of the active
prosecutions in 2020, compared to 94 percent of active prosecutions for
sex trafficking. From 2019 to 2020, new forced labor cases declined 11
percent, from 9 cases to 8 cases. The Human Trafficking Institute noted
that prosecutors filed more sex trafficking prosecutions in 2020 than
all forced labor prosecutions filed over more than 20 years after TVPA
passage.
Additionally, the Abolish Human Trafficking Act (Public Law 115-
392) designates an assistant U.S. Attorney in every U.S. Attorney's
Office across the United States to prosecute human trafficking cases.
HTPU is responsible for supporting the training of these prosecutors.
Proposed Report Language: The Committee provides $8,000,000 for the
Human Trafficking Prosecution Unit (HTPU) and encourages HTPU and the
Anti-Trafficking Coordination Teams to continue working with victim
service providers and non-governmental organizations to ensure victim
needs are prioritized as part of the overall strategy to combat human
trafficking and particularly forced labor in the United States.
Additional resources provided are to implement section 15 of Public Law
115-392. Furthermore, the Committee directs the Human Trafficking
Prosecution Unit (HTPU) to report to the Committees on Appropriations
no later than 120 days following enactment of this act on (1) the total
number of human trafficking cases it prosecuted or assisted in
prosecuting within the last 3 years disaggregated by type of
trafficking, (2) the number of Assistant U.S. Attorneys who received
training on human trafficking within the past 3 years, and, (3) the
number of Assistant U.S. Attorneys who received training on restitution
for human trafficking victims within the past 3 years.
National Institute of Justice/Prevalence Methodology & Study:
$10,000,0000.--DOJ missed the deadline of December 21, 2019 to update
Congress on its efforts to conduct the evaluation research and develop
a methodology to assess the prevalence of human trafficking in the
United States as mandated by Sec. 401(a) of the Trafficking Victims
Protection Act of 2017 (Public Law 115- 393). In the past, no funding
has been allocated to a prevalence study in the United States. Funding
provided will allow NIJ to finally develop a methodology and conduct a
prevalence study on the nature of trafficking in the United States, or
more accurately, a series of prevalence studies focused on specific
geographies, economic sectors, and forms of trafficking. This research
is essential to inform future appropriations decisions for counter-
trafficking in persons programs. The development and implementation of
the methodology is estimated to cost $10,000,000 total. Such sums
necessary to complete the evaluation research and development should be
appropriated for FY23.
The lack of coordinated efforts across the country to collect
reliable data about trafficking means funds are appropriated and
programs established without dependable information regarding the
prevalence of specific types of trafficking, the locations in which
trafficking occurs, and the effectiveness of specific anti-trafficking
measures. A concerted effort to collect reliable, accurate, relevant,
and impartial data is necessary to establish more effective counter-
trafficking in persons programs and to more appropriately target
Federal funding. The study will need to include information from
Federal and State law enforcement alongside direct service providers in
order to present a comprehensive landscape of human trafficking in the
United States. Conducting pilot studies that target specific high-
prevalence regions, economic sectors, and population groups is a
crucial step in developing a comprehensive and accurate prevalence
methodology study; moreover, limiting the covered populations (as
opposed to a national prevalence estimate) will allow the work to be
conducted on a shorter timeline. The United States already invests a
significant amount of resources in measuring human trafficking
prevalence aboard, and it is past time to make the same level of
investment in measuring prevalence domestically, if we are to continue
as a leader in the global anti-trafficking field.
Proposed Report Language: The Committee directs the Secretary to
report on efforts made by the National Institute of Justice to develop
a methodology to assess the prevalence of human trafficking in the
United States as mandated by Sec. 401(a) of the Trafficking Victims
Protection Act of 2017 (Public Law 115-393). The Secretary should
include in this report an estimate of the necessary funds to complete
the evaluation research and development of the methodology in fiscal
year 2023 and fiscal year 2024.
Federal Bureau of Investigation: Report Language.--The FBI is a
critical Federal law enforcement agency partner fighting human
trafficking. The presence of the FBI in any trafficking investigation
significantly increases the chances of success. Furthermore, with
trafficking investigations often crossing state lines, the presence of
the FBI becomes critical.
Proposed Report Language: The Committee recognizes the complex
nature of human trafficking investigations and encourages the Director
to allocate additional resources for human trafficking cases and
designate a lead agent in each field office as a point of contact for
human trafficking investigations.
Legal Activities/United States Attorneys: Report Language
1) Consistent with the reauthorization of the Trafficking Victim
Protection Act's requirement that each U.S. Attorney's Office (USAO)
designate an Assistant U.S. Attorney (AUSA) as a lead human trafficking
prosecutor, we request that the subcommittee include report language
encouraging the prompt implementation and that the Executive Office of
U.S. Attorneys provide sufficient support and training and technical
assistance to the designated AUSAs to enable each respective
jurisdiction to improve coordination and communication.
Proposed Report Language: The Committee directs the Executive
Office of U.S. Attorneys, in consultation with the United States
Attorneys, to provide sufficient support and training and technical
assistance to each Assistant U.S. Attorney designated as the lead human
trafficking prosecutor, consistent with the Trafficking Victims
Protection Act.
2) We request that the Executive Office of U.S. Attorneys, in
consultation with the Department of Homeland Security, develop a
process to enable survivors with T-visas to obtain an expedited letter
of support from the Department of Justice when their criminal case is
closed.
Proposed Report Language: Designating a point of contact will
improve communication and coordination within each jurisdiction,
including victim service organizations, in order to better serve the
victims of human trafficking and forced labor. The Committee directs
the Executive Office of U.S. Attorneys, in consultation with the
Department of Homeland Security, to develop a process to enable
survivors with T-visas to obtain an expedited letter of support from
the Department of Justice when their criminal case is closed, including
a report on sufficient staffing to ensure that requests for letters can
be processed in less than 3 months.
As a champion for the victims of child labor, forced labor and sex
trafficking, you understand the complexities of these issues and the
resources needed to respond. We have carefully vetted our requests to
focus on the most important and effective programs. We thank you for
your consideration of these requests and your continued leadership. If
you have any questions, please contact ATEST Director Terry FitzPatrick
([email protected]).
Sincerely,
Coalition to Abolish Slavery and Trafficking (CAST)
Coalition of Immokalee Workers (CIW)
Covenant House Free the Slaves HEAL Trafficking
Human Trafficking Institute Human Trafficking Legal Center Humanity
United Action
McCain Institute for International Leadership
National Network for Youth (NN4Y) Polaris
Safe Horizon Solidarity Center
T'ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights United Way Worldwide
Verite
Vital Voices Global Partnership
ATEST is a U.S.-based coalition that advocates for solutions to
prevent and end all forms of human trafficking and modern slavery
around the world.
______
Prepared Statement of American Educational Research Association
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and Members of the subcommittee:
Thank you for the opportunity to submit written testimony on behalf
of the American Educational Research Association (AERA). I want to
begin by recognizing your longstanding support for the National Science
Foundation (NSF) and thank you and your staff for your strong
commitment to maintaining agency flexibility in funding cutting edge
science. AERA recommends that the NSF receive at least $11 billion in
fiscal year 2023. This recommendation is consistent with that of the
Coalition for National Science Funding (CNSF), in which AERA is a long-
term active member. AERA also recommends $2 billion for the Census
Bureau, consistent with the recommendation of The Census Project.
AERA is the major national scientific association of 25,000
faculty, researchers, graduate students, and other distinguished
professionals dedicated to advancing knowledge about education,
encouraging scholarly inquiry related to education, and promoting the
use of research to serve public good. Many of our members are engaged
STEM education research. Our members work in a range of settings from
universities and other academic institutions to research institutes,
Federal and State agencies, school systems, testing companies, and
nonprofit organizations engaged in conducting research in all areas of
education and learning from early childhood through the workforce.
Given the scientific expertise of the AERA membership and in our
field, my testimony focuses on the importance of the current Education
and Human Resources Directorate (referenced hereafter under its
proposed new name in the fiscal Year 2023 budget request, STEM
Education [EDU]) and the Social, Behavioral and Economic (SBE) Sciences
Directorates at NSF. In addition, many of our members depend on an
accurate Census count and data from the American Community Survey to do
their work.
national science foundation
The Federal investment in research and scientific knowledge at NSF
has led to innovation and discoveries that are applied in our daily
lives. We appreciate the bipartisan interest in maintaining U.S.
leadership and global partnerships in basic research through the
Federal investments made in NSF.
The EDU and SBE Directorates are central to the mission of the NSF
to advance fundamental knowledge and scientific breakthroughs and to
ensure significant continuing advances across science, engineering, and
education. EDU support is vital to research discoveries, capacity
building, and methodological innovations directly related to STEM
education and learning from early education through workforce
development. Research and science supported by the EDU and SBE
Directorates are also inextricably linked to the science and research
of the other directorates (for example, Computer and Information
Science and Engineering). We also see promise in the new Technology,
Innovation, and Partnerships (TIP) Directorate, and encourage NSF to
pursue education research as a priority in this directorate.
Furthermore, the EDU and SBE directorates are vital not just to
producing essential knowledge but also to harnessing that knowledge to
enhance productivity, innovation, safety, security, and social and
economic well-being. I also wish to highlight the National Science
Board Vision 2030, which calls for expanding the STEM talent pool.
Ongoing NSF initiatives to broaden participation through programs such
as NSF INCLUDES in EDU and the Build and Broaden program within SBE are
examples to increase the diversity of the STEM educator and research
workforce.
As indicated in the agency's budget request for fiscal Year 2022,
96 percent of appropriated funds directly supported research and STEM
education through grants and cooperative agreements in fiscal Year
2021, with 78 percent of funding supporting research at colleges and
universities. In addition, NSF estimates that more than 132,000 K-12
students and 46,000 K-12 teachers will benefit from programs that
directly engage them in STEM experiences within and outside the
classroom in fiscal Year 2023.
STEM Education Directorate
The EDU Directorate at NSF is responsible for providing the
research foundation necessary to achieve excellence in U.S. STEM
education. EDU accomplishes this goal by supporting the development of
a scientifically-literate citizenry as well as a STEM-skilled
workforce. Advances in the industries of the future, including
artificial intelligence and quantum information science, require
building interest and engagement in STEM throughout the lifespan.
The EDU Directorate commitment to invest in fundamental research
related to STEM across all education levels and to promote evidence-
based innovations in teaching practices, instructional tools, and
programs is essential to advancing STEM education and preparing the
next generation of STEM professionals. EDU funded researchers are
asking key questions, for example, about how to spark students'
interest in math and science and keep them engaged, or about why so
many students lose interest and confidence and about what can be done
to keep them engaged. Understanding these and many other questions will
help the United States build a well-educated and technology-literate
workforce necessary for a prosperous economic future.
Key to advancing STEM education research is the Education Core
Research (ECR) program, an important resource to the field that builds
fundamental knowledge and capacity to understand STEM teaching and
learning and develop the STEM educator and workforce pipeline. ECR
grants have supported critical work in equity, inclusion, and ethics in
postsecondary academic workplaces and the academic profession, as well
as research to improve STEM teaching and learning for students with
disabilities. We also applaud NSF in investing in midscale research
infrastructure, serving as a potential resource for addressing key
needs that include building data infrastructure capacity and developing
innovative diagnostic assessment tools.
As the Nation continues to recover from the effects of the COVID-19
pandemic, research supported by EDU will be critical to fostering STEM
learning in formal and informal settings. Through the RAPID program,
EDU provided grants to education researchers to inform remote
instruction, develop STEM curriculum that incorporated the COVID-19
pandemic to understand scientific principles, and provide insight into
issues of equity in STEM education. Additional survey work and research
supported through RAPID funding highlighted how the pandemic affected
undergraduate and graduate students, including their engagement and
interest in STEM and their satisfaction with online STEM coursework.
Increased investment in EDU is critical to support research to
inform an educational system that will continue to incorporate
technology inside and outside the STEM classroom and in labs. In
addition, the EDU Directorate's focus on developing our Nation's
scientific workforce requires resources to ensure that early career
scholars and graduate students remain in the STEM talent pipeline. Some
examples include material support to emerging scholars (both salary and
``soft support''), mechanisms to connect and build communities among
scholars, and focus on mentoring.
Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences Directorate
In addition to the significant investments in education sciences
provided by EHR, AERA values the important role the SBE Directorate in
funding important education research and in social, family, and peer
contexts connected to learning. The SBE Directorate also houses the
National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (NCSES).
The SBE Directorate supports research to better understand people
and reveals basic aspects of human behavior in the context of education
and learning. SBE funded research adds fundamental knowledge essential
to promoting the Nation's economy, security, and global leadership.
Understanding social organizations and how social, economic, and
cultural forces influence the lives of students is important to
improving teaching and learning and advancing STEM education.
The budget for SBE is 4 percent of the budget for Research and
Related Activities, yet it provides approximately 65 percent of the
Federal funding for basic research in the social and psychological
sciences at academic institutions.
National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (NCSES)
In addition, AERA has a strong interest in the National Center for
Science and Engineering Statistics (NCSES) located in the SBE
Directorate. As one of the Federal principal statistical agencies,
NCSES provides invaluable statistical information about the science and
engineering infrastructure and workforce in the U.S. and around the
world. NCSES collects and analyzes data on the progress of STEM
education and the research and development, providing valuable
information on the trajectories of STEM graduates both in STEM and non-
STEM careers.
Additional resources in funding and staffing in FY 2023 for NCSES
would support critical activities to develop new data techniques
building on administrative data and to enhance data tools and
visualizations to facilitate access to statistical resources. These
methodological advances will be necessary for NCSES to implement the
Foundations for Evidence-based Policymaking Act and to build the NSF
data infrastructure to securely link its survey data with
administrative data in other Federal agencies.
NCSES will also play a pivotal role in supporting the overall NSF
priority to bring the ``Missing Millions'' from traditionally
underrepresented populations into the STEM pipeline. Expanding NCSES
surveys and incorporating information on inclusion-including data on
the participations of LGBTQ+ populations, persons with diverse
(dis)abilities, and other demographic attributes-can help NSF, other
science agencies and institutions, and fields of science understand
disparities in STEM and inform broadening participation initiatives.
census bureau
I also wish to emphasize the importance of adequate support for the
Census Bureau, especially critical in the tabulation of data from the
2020 Decennial Census, planning for the 2030 Decennial Census, and in
maintaining important survey collections. AERA recommends funding the
Census Bureau at $2 billion in FY 2023.
The requested amount of $2 billion for fiscal Year 2023 will
provide the agency with needed resources to conduct the Economic
Census, process and finalize the enumeration and related activities for
the 2020 Census, which experienced delays due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
In addition, this amount of funding will provide resources for planning
for the 2030 Decennial Census and continue the administration of the
Household Pulse Survey, which has provided valuable, real-time data to
inform the COVID-19 response. The recommended funding support will also
allow the Census Bureau to incorporate innovations in the American
Community Survey and the Current Population Survey.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit written testimony in
support of at least $11 billion for the National Science Foundation and
$2 billion for the Census Bureau in fiscal year 2023 appropriations.
AERA would welcome the opportunity to work with you and your
subcommittee to best further the crucial advances of the National
Science Foundation and the important data provided by the Census
Bureau. Please do not hesitate to contact me if AERA can provide
additional information regarding this recommendation or the significant
science made possible through the support of these agencies.
[This statement was submitted by Felice J. Levine, PhD, Executive
Director]
______
Prepared Statement of the American Geophysical Union
The American Geophysical Union (AGU), a non-profit, non-partisan
scientific society, appreciates the opportunity to submit testimony
regarding the fiscal year 2023 appropriations request for the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the National Science Foundation
(NSF). AGU, on behalf of its community of 130,000 in the Earth and
space sciences, respectfully requests that the 117th Congress
appropriate the following:
--$9 billion for NASA's Science Mission Directorate (SMD),
--$154 million for NASA's Office of STEM Engagement,
--$7.2 billion for NOAA, and
--$11 billion for NSF.
national aeronautics & space administration
AGU requests that Congress appropriate $9 billion in FY23 for
NASA's Science Mission Directorate (a 18.2% increase over FY22 levels)
and $154 million for NASA's Office of STEM Engagement (a 12.4% increase
over FY22 levels). This request will allow NASA to remain on track to
steadily advance existing and new decadal missions, provide unique
opportunities for the next generation of STEM professionals, and ensure
that the U.S. maintains its global leadership in the Earth and space
sciences.
Earth Science Division
A strong investment in this division will support a robust climate
and applications research program, including new and existing Earth
Systems Observatory missions, the launch of three Earth System
Explorers missions within a decade, and partnership opportunities to
ensure sustained climate observations. Additionally, increased funding
will enable NASA to begin planning for the Earth Information Center and
roll out the Wildfire Earth Information System and Fire Information for
Resource Management System, which will provide immediate benefits to
Western States. A robust investment will also allow the Earth Science
Data Systems and Applied Earth Sciences programs to provide tools and
resources for public and private decision-makers, including
implementing open science capabilities for all of NASA's Science
Mission Directorate
Planetary Science Division
Strong investment in this division will allow NASA to pursue the
Lunar Discovery and Exploration Program, which supports commercial
collaborations and innovative exploration approaches, without
sacrificing a balanced portfolio of other missions and exploration
targets in our solar system. Specifically, increased funding will allow
the U.S. to advance missions to explore new destinations in the solar
system, such as the Europa Clipper, Psyche and Dragonfly missions, and
a robust competitive Discovery Program. An increased investment in
planetary science will allow NASA to begin planning to implement the
latest decadal survey.
Heliophysics Division
A robust investment in Heliophysics will allow us to better
understand the space environment and therefore realize our space
exploration ambitions while protecting existing assets and people in
space. Investing in research and analysis will also maximize the return
of large missions, while ensuring a thriving heliophysics community
through the support of early career scientists and diversity, equity,
and inclusion efforts. Finally, increased funding will ensure a 2027
launch for the Geospace Dynamics Constellation, which was the highest
priority decadal large-scale mission, support technology investments in
future missions such as an Interstellar Probe and/or a Solar Orbiter
Prober; and provide a strong basis for an ambitious 2024 decadal
survey.
Office of STEM Engagement
According to the National Science Board, our country has a STEM
talent deficit that will reach the millions by FY2030. As such, it is
critical that we invest in NASA's efforts to re-engage and support
students interested in STEM. Increased funding for the office will
allow NASA to increase engagement of K-12 students, broaden
participation in NASA at all levels, and increase partnerships to
further expand NASA's STEM impact across the United States.
national oceanic & atmospheric administration
AGU requests that Congress appropriate $7.2 billion for NOAA in
FY23 (a 22.5% increase over FY22). From weather forecasts to fisheries
data, to groundbreaking research about the world around us, NOAA
provides critical products and services to citizens, planners,
emergency managers, and other decision makers, affecting more than one-
third of the Nation's gross domestic product. Yet NOAA has for years
remained severely underfunded.
Last year, there were 20 separate billion-dollar weather and
climate disaster events across the U.S., costing a total of $145
billion-the third most costly year on record, behind 2017 and 2005.\1\
Those same disasters also caused more than 680 fatalities, the most
disaster-related fatalities for the contiguous U.S. since 2011. With
extreme weather becoming more frequent, more dangerous, and costlier to
the Nation, especially in rural areas and marginalized communities.
NOAA needs strong financial support to be able to bolster climate
research, mitigate and prepare for worsening conditions, and build our
National and economic resilience.
Robust funding for NOAA will also provide critical funding for
satellites that provide weather forecasting, storm tracking, and long-
term Earth observations to protect lives and infrastructure. Sufficient
financial support will allow NOAA to maintain current launch and
development schedules and develop the next generation of geostationary
satellites, known as GEO-XO, well into the 2030s and beyond.
NOAA science also plays a vital role in informing the world about
changes in the climate system, as well as the effectiveness of certain
mitigation techniques and adaptation strategies. Robust funding will
allow the agency to continue this innovative work and lead cross-agency
efforts in extramural programs such as the Cooperative Institutes, and
the Sea Grant Program. These programs not only conduct research and
observations, but also promote outreach and education to serve the
public in every region and state.
national science foundation
AGU requests that Congress appropriate $11 billion for NSF in FY23
(an approximately 24.5% increase over FY22 levels). Ambitious and
robust funding for NSF is critical if the U.S. hopes to maintain its
leadership in science and technology and reap the economic and national
security benefits of that leadership.
Robust funding will allow NSF to realize congressional goals
through the new Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships Directorate
without sacrificing core NSF research and STEM education programs. NSF
currently supports almost a quarter of all basic research--and 56% of
basic geoscience research--done at U.S. colleges and universities.
Robust funding will allow NSF to continue this support, while expanding
efforts to aid graduate students, which is essential if we hope to
attract and retain those in STEM fields.
Increased funding will also allow NSF to build research capacity at
emerging and underserved institutions through the new Growing Research
Access for Nationally Transformative Equity and Diversity (GRANTED)
Initiative and to launch Global Centers to facilitate the education and
development of a global workforce to address climate and clean energy
challenges. By leveraging financial resources and capabilities from
multiple partners, this initiative has the potential to build capacity
and scale solutions here and around the world.
conclusion
With our Nation facing critical and interconnected challenges
affecting our economic strength, national security, and health and
well-being, strong investments in science and innovation--specifically
the work done by NASA, NOAA, and NSF--are vital for a stronger, more
secure, better future for America. AGU appreciates the subcommittee's
leadership in these areas, as well as the opportunity to submit this
testimony. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of our requests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information.
Calculating the cost of weather and climate disasters. https://
www.ncei.noaa.gov/news/calculating-cost-weather-and-climate-disasters.
[This statement was submitted by Brittany Webster, Manager, Science
Policy & Government Relations]
______
Prepared Statement of the American Indian Higher Education Consortium
On behalf of the Nation's Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs),
which are the American Indian Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC), we
are pleased to present our Fiscal Year 2023 (FY2023) recommendations
regarding the National Science Foundation's TCU Program (NSF-TCUP), and
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's Minority University
Research and Education Project (NASA-MUREP). We respectfully recommend
the following funding levels:
national science foundation (nsf)
Education and Human Resources Directorate (EHR):
--Tribal Colleges and Universities Program (TCUP).--TCUs urge the
subcommittee to fund competitively awarded NSF-TCUP grants at a
minimum of $25,000,000 for FY2023.
national aeronautics and space administration (nasa)
--NASA Headquarters, Office of Education--Minority University
Research and Education Project (MUREP).--TCUs urge the
subcommittee to expand the NASA MUREP program with robust
funding and establish a TCU-specific program within MUREP at
$5,000,000 for FY2023.
Tribal Colleges and Universities: Raising and Training the Nation's
Native STEM Workforce
TCUs are an essential component of American Indian and Alaska
Native STEM education, research, and workforce. Currently, 35
accredited TCUs operate more than 75 campuses and sites in 15 States.
TCU geographic boundaries encompass 80 percent of American Indian
reservations and Federal Indian trust lands. American Indian and Alaska
Native (AI/AN) TCU students represent more than 230 federally
recognized Tribes and hail from more than 30 States. Nearly 80 percent
receive Federal financial aid, and approximately half are first
generation students. In total, TCUs serve more than 160,000 AI/ANs and
other rural residents each year through a wide variety of academic and
community-based programs. TCUs are public institutions accredited by
independent, regional accreditation agencies and, like all U.S.
institutions of higher education, must regularly undergo stringent
performance reviews to retain their accreditation status.
The Federal Government, despite its direct trust responsibility and
binding treaty obligations, has never fully funded TCU institutional
operations as authorized under Federal law. Yet despite funding
challenges, TCUs are responding to the STEM workforce needs across the
country. In fall 2020, 1,733 TCU students were enrolled in one of 191
STEM programs at TCUs. TCUs have established programs in high-demand
fields: 11 TCUs offer pre-engineering programs, two TCUs offers
bachelor's degrees in industrial and electrical engineering, five TCUs
offer STEM teacher education programs, and 14 TCUs offer nursing
programs. These efforts are preparing AI/AN nurses, engineers, and
science and math teachers who contribute to a robust pipeline of STEM
professionals in Indian Country. TCUs also train professionals in other
high-demand STEM fields, including agriculture, information technology,
and natural resource management.
TCUs know that to break the cycle of generational poverty and end
the culture of dependency that grips much of Indian Country, TCUs must
bring industry partners and STEM jobs to Indian Country. TCUs and
Tribes must promote new Native-owned and operated STEM-based
businesses, create public-private partnerships, and build a culture of
self-sufficiency and innovation. NSF and NASA funding is essential in
supporting this effort to promote STEM-enabled economic development in
Indian Country and throughout rural America.
Each of the following Federal grant programs has invested in the
development of STEM-centered instruction, research, and job creation
across Indian country.
national science foundation (nsf)
Education and Human Resources Directorate (EHR)--Tribal Colleges
and Universities Program (TCUP).--TCUs urge the subcommittee to fund
competitively awarded NSF-TCUP grants at a minimum of $25,000,000. The
NSF-TCUP, administered by the NSF Education and Human Resources
Directorate, is a competitive grant program that enables TCUs and
Alaska Native Serving/Native Hawaiian Serving Institutions (AN/NHs) to
develop and expand critically needed STEM education and research
programs relevant to their Indigenous communities.
Since the program began in 2001, NSF-TCUP has become the primary
Federal program for building STEM programmatic and research capacity at
TCUs. For example, NSF-TCUP funding supported Navajo Technical
University (Crownpoint, NM) in the development of its electrical and
industrial engineering programs, which received accreditation from the
Accreditation Board of Engineering and Technology (ABET) in 2018. This
marks a significant milestone, with NTU leading the way as the first
TCU to receive ABET accreditation.
Community-Based Research
TCUs use NSF-TCUP funding to provide students with valuable
research experience in STEM fields. Through these opportunities,
students conduct place-based research that serves their communities and
can have national and international impacts. At Northwest Indian
College (NWIC) (Bellingham, WA), students are conducting complex
research related to food security focused on salmon, shellfish, and
indigenous sea cucumbers. Through a partnership with Western Washington
University, NWIC graduates continue to pursue their academic and career
goals through WWU's master's degree programs. Aaniiih Nakoda College
(Harlem, MT) faculty and students monitor streams for contaminants and
are investigating West Nile virus vectors; and Sitting Bull College
(SBC) (Fort Yates, ND) has established a water quality monitoring
laboratory serving the Standing Rock Sioux and surrounding communities.
SBC studies show that students participating in the college's research
have retention rates that are double the rate of students who are not
engaged in research.
Aaniiih Nakoda College (ANC)--Tribal Climate Resiliency
The environmental science program at Aaniiih Nakoda College
(Harlem, MT) is based on an effective model of place-based instruction
that combines rigorous coursework, internship placements, and
undergraduate research experiences focused on student learning. ANC
students are using their education and research skills to help combat
the looming climate change crisis and its effects on their Fort Belknap
Indian Community.
For over a decade, ANC environmental studies students have been
studying the 23 miles of river that pass through Tribal lands to
monitor changes in water temperatures, impact on life in the river, and
quality of local drinking water. Student researchers collect samples of
small bottom-dwelling aquatic insects and freshwater algae. The
specimens are brought back to ANC's laboratory to be sorted,
identified, and analyzed. Next, the specimens are transported six hours
away across the State to a private laboratory in Missoula, Montana for
advanced testing and further analysis. Until additional resources are
available to build out the required research infrastructure, ANC and
other TCUs will continue to work with similar limitations in conducting
vital research necessary to support Tribal communities in preserving
health, environment, and traditional ways of life.
These success stories notwithstanding, AI/AN students are
disadvantaged from pursuing STEM-centered career from an early age. AI/
AN youth have the highest high school drop-out rate of any ethnic or
racial group in the country. Those who do pursue postsecondary
education often require developmental classes before taking on a full
load of college-level courses. Placement tests administered at TCUs to
first-time entering students in academic year 2019-20 showed that 23
percent required remedial math. Our data indicates that while 53
percent will successfully complete the course, many will take more than
1 year to do so.
Through NSF-TCUP grants, TCUs and AN/NHs are actively working to
address this problem by developing strong partnerships with their K-12
feeder schools to engage students in culturally appropriate STEM
education and outreach programs. Salish Kootenai College, located on
the Flathead Indian Reservation, created a 2-year STEM Academy to
prepare junior and senior high school students for college.
Participating high school students engage in collaborative work with
STEM researchers, conduct culturally relevant research, and take
courses to earn college credit.
While a number of TCUs have achieved significant advances and
success, , only a portion of the TCUs have been able to benefit from
this transformative program due in part to limited funding. We urge the
subcommittee to expand the competitively awarded NSF-TCUP grants at a
minimum of $25,000,000.
national aeronautics and space administration (nasa)
Minority University Research and Education Project (MUREP).--TCUs
urge the subcommittee to expand the NASA MUREP program with robust
funding and support a TCU-specific program within MUREP at $5,000,000
for fiscal year 2023. Under its current design, MUREP provides a range
of competitive awards to Historically Black Colleges and Universities,
Tribal Colleges and Universities, and other Minority Serving
Institutions to recruit and retain underrepresented students in STEM
fields.
Due to the competitive aspect of current MUREP programs and limited
funding, TCUs only receive funding from two MUREP grants: MUREP
Institutional Research Opportunity (MIRO) and MUREP for American Indian
and Alaska Native STEM Engagement (MAIANSE).
MUREP Institutional Research Opportunity (MIRO)
In October 2019, under the MUREP MIRO program, Sitting Bull College
received $1 million to further develop curriculum for an environmental
science master's degree and includes support for air quality research
on the Standing Rock Reservation. SBC students and faculty work with
NASA's Langley Research Center, NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, and
the University of North Dakota to develop a regional research facility
to monitor air quality, generating important data for the Tribe while
providing invaluable research experience for SBC students. In the same
MUREP MIRO award cycle, Navajo Technical University was selected to
perform critical research and produce parts through its advanced
manufacturing program for the Space Launch System at NASA's Marshall
Space Flight Center. NTU's contributions through advanced manufacturing
research and innovative parts production are advancing space
exploration for the entire nation.
MUREP for American Indian and Alaska Native STEM Engagement (MAIANSE)
The MAIANSE program provides a unique opportunity for direct
collaboration between TCUs and NASA to engage students in NASA STEM-
related activities. Despite its popularity and value, participation in
the MAIANSE program has been limited to three TCU projects each grant
cycles due to limited funding.
To support the past TCU investment, AIHEC requests that the
subcommittee expand the NASA MUREP program through robust funding and
support a Tribal College and University-specific program within MUREP
at $5,000,000 for FY2023.
conclusion
Tribal Colleges and Universities provide access to high-quality,
culturally appropriate postsecondary education opportunities, including
STEM-focused programs, for thousands of AI/AN students. The modest
Federal investment in TCUs has paid great dividends in terms of
employment, education, and economic development. We ask you to renew
your commitment to help move our students and communities toward self-
sufficiency by full considering our fiscal year 2023 appropriations
requests. Thank you.
______
Prepared Statement of American Institute of Biological Sciences
The American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS) appreciates
the opportunity to provide testimony in support of fiscal year 2023
appropriations for the National Science Foundation (NSF). We encourage
Congress to provide NSF with at least $11 billion in fiscal Year 2023.
AIBS is a scientific association dedicated to promoting informed
decision-making that advances biological research and education for the
benefit of science and society. AIBS works to ensure that the public,
legislators, funders, and the community of biologists have access to
information that can guide informed decision-making.
importance of biological research
Biological research is in our National interest. It advances our
understanding of the living world and provides solutions to important
problems. Increasing our knowledge of how genes, cells, tissues,
organisms, and ecosystems function is vitally important to efforts to
improve the human condition. Food security, medicine and public health,
national security, economic growth, and sound environmental management
are all informed by the biological sciences. Notably, biological
research helps to sustain biodiversity and healthy ecosystems that
underpin the livelihoods of communities. The knowledge gained from NSF-
funded research also contributes to the development of new research
tools and industries.
Biological research strengthens our economy. Research funding from
NSF powers the expansion of the bioeconomy and has given rise to
successful companies, such as Genentech, Ekso Bionics, and Ginkgo
BioWorks, as well as new industries that provide more robust food crops
or disease detection tools and techniques. The translation of
biological knowledge into formal and informal education programs
fosters the development of the scientifically and technically skilled
workforce needed by employers. Data show that employers continue to
seek workers with scientific and technical skills. Science and
engineering employment in the United States has grown more rapidly-at
an annual growth rate of 4 percent-compared to the 2 percent annual
growth rate for the U.S. workforce overall. In fact, the U.S. STEM
workforce constitutes 23 percent of the total U.S. workforce and is
comprised of more than 36 million people in diverse occupations that
require STEM knowledge and expertise.
importance of nsf-funded biological research
The cornerstone of NSF excellence is a competitive, merit-based
review system that underpins the highest standards of excellence.
Through its research programs, NSF invests in the development of new
knowledge and tools that solve the most challenging problems facing
society.
--Combating emerging diseases: NSF-funded research is playing crucial
role in our response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Fundamental
research supported by NSF led to the development of critical
diagnostic tools and medical devices to combat the outbreak.
NSF supported the discovery of bacteria from thermal pools at
Yellowstone National Park that contain thermostable enzymes
that allow for the rapid copying of genetic material through a
process called Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR). This process
was integral to manufacturing a widely used clinical test for
determining whether a patient has been infected with the virus
that causes COVID-19.
--Mobilizing big data: Access to and analysis of vast amounts of data
are driving innovation. NSF enables integration of big data
across scientific disciplines, including applications in the
biological sciences. Digitization of biodiversity and natural
science collections involves multi-disciplinary teams, which
have put more than 130 million specimens and their associated
data online for use by researchers, educators, and the public.
--Enabling synthetic biology: DNA editing has become more advanced
and targeted with techniques such as CRISPR-CAS9 allowing
scientists to rewrite genetic code and redesign biological
systems. NSF funds research on how these techniques can be used
to bio-manufacture new materials, treat diseases, and
accelerate growth of the bioeconomy.
Other examples of federally-funded research that have benefited the
public are chronicled in the AIBS report, ``Biological Innovation:
Benefits of Federal Investments in Biology,'' which is available at
https://www.aibs.org/assets/pages/policy/AIBS-Biological-Innovation-
Report.pdf.
The NSF is the primary Federal funding source for biological
research at our Nation's universities and colleges, providing 65
percent of extramural Federal support for non-medical, fundamental
biological and environmental research at academic institutions.
The NSF is also an important supporter of biological research
infrastructure, such as field stations, natural history museums, and
living stock collections. These place-based research centers enable
studies that take place over long periods of time and variable spatial
scales to provide insights into our Nation's most pressing issues.
Scientific collections are an important component of our Nation's
research infrastructure. Recent reports have highlighted the value of
mobilizing biodiversity specimens and data in spurring new scientific
discoveries that grow our economy, improve our public health and well-
being, and increase our National security. In 2019, the Biodiversity
Collections Network released their report, ``Extending U.S.
Biodiversity Collections to Promote Research and Education,'' outlining
a national agenda that leverages digital data in biodiversity
collections for new uses and calling for building an Extended Specimen
Network. A 2020 report by the National Academies of Science,
Engineering and Medicine, ``Biological Collections: Ensuring Critical
Research and Education for the 21st Century,'' argued that collections
are a critical part of our Nation's science and innovation
infrastructure and a fundamental resource for understanding the natural
world.
Both reports articulate a common vision of the future of biological
collections and define the need to broaden and deepen collections and
associated data to realize the full potential for biodiversity
collections to inform 21st century science. This endeavor requires
robust investments in our Nation's scientific collections, whether they
are owned by a Federal or state agency or are part of an educational
institution, free-standing natural history museum, or another research
center.
While many Federal agencies have a role in supporting the
development of the Extended Specimen Network, NSF has a central role to
play. The agency has been a leader in this space through the Advancing
Digitization of Biodiversity Collections program, and is now supporting
critical advancements through the Infrastructure Capacity for
Biological Research: Biological Collections program.
building the stem workforce
The NSF supports recruitment and training of our next generation of
scientists. Support for undergraduate and graduate students is
critically important to our research enterprise. Students learn science
by doing science, and NSF programs engage students in the research
process.
NSF awards reached 1,900 colleges, universities, and other public
and private institutions across the country in FY 2021. Initiatives
such as the Graduate Research Fellowship and the Faculty Early Career
Development program are important parts of our National effort to
attract and retain the next generation of researchers. Since 1952, the
number of students supported by NSF Graduate Research Fellowships has
grown to more than 60,000. In FY 2021, nearly 318,000 people, including
researchers, postdoctoral fellows, trainees, teachers and students,
were supported directly by NSF.
investing in nsf
Unfortunately, Federal research and development investments are
shrinking as a share of the U.S. economy. The U.S. is still the largest
performer of research and development globally, but our share of
worldwide scientific activity has declined considerably over the past
two decades, while countries in East and Southeast Asia, especially
China, have been rapidly increasing their investments in science.
According to the National Science Board, the annual increase of China's
R&D, averaging 10.6 percent annually between 2010 and 2019, continues
to outpace that of the United States, with an annual average of 5.4
percent from 2010 to 2019.
To remain at the global forefront of innovation and to fully
realize the benefits of NSF-supported research, the government must
make bold and sustained investments in NSF. Unpredictability in funding
disrupts research programs, create uncertainty in the research
community, and stall the development of the next great idea.
Enacting robust funding increases for NSF will allow for critical
Federal investments in scientific and educational research, as well as
support for the development of the scientific workforce. These
investments will allow NSF to increase the number of new graduate
research fellowships it awards to nurture the human capital needed to
ensure U.S. leadership in scientific innovation. Such increases will
also enable NSF to expand support for important new initiatives, such
as the Integrative Biology program, which promotes ambitious, high-
risk-high-reward collaborative research, and the Biology Integration
Institutes program, which supports collaborative research on frontier
questions about life that span multiple disciplines within and beyond
biology.
conclusion
Providing the NSF with at least $11 billion in FY 2023 is necessary
to undo the harmful effects of recent stagnant funding that slowed
American scientific discovery. The requested funding will grow and
sustain the U.S. bioeconomy and enable NSF to accelerate work on
important initiatives at the frontiers of science and engineering. This
investment will enable NSF to support research in a number of important
priority areas such as biotechnology, climate change, and advanced
biomanufacturing. Importantly, these increases will advance research on
infectious disease emergence and transmission, prevent future
pandemics, and fill gaps in our knowledge about the spread and
evolution of biological threats.
In addition to the appropriations process, Congress is currently
considering legislation relevant to the scientific community,
specifically reauthorization proposals to significantly expand NSF's
mission and budget. Increasing investments in translational research
through the new technology-focused directorate will bolster U.S. global
leadership and competitiveness in innovation. However, we urge Congress
to also make robust investments in basic and foundational research.
Please continue supporting increased investments in our Nation's
scientific capacity. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of
this request and for your prior efforts on behalf of science and the
National Science Foundation.
[This statement was submitted by Jyotsna Pandey, PhD, Public Policy
Director]
______
Prepared Statement of American Psychological Association Services, Inc.
The American Psychological Association (APA) is the largest
scientific and professional organization representing psychology in the
United States, with more than 133,000 researchers, educators,
clinicians, consultants and students as its members. Our mission is to
promote the advancement, communication, and application of
psychological science and knowledge to benefit society and improve
lives.
APA urges Congress to provide the following funding levels for
programs within the National Science Foundation (NSF) and Department of
Justice (DOJ) in FY23.
national science foundation (nsf)
APA joins the scientific community urging Congress to provide at
least an $11 billion appropriation for the National Science Foundation
(NSF) in FY 2023. As a member of the Coalition for National Science
Funding, APA thanks Congress for its support for fundamental scientific
research supported by NSF, including the approximately 4% increase in
fiscal year 2022. As other nations continue to make dramatic increases
in their investments in science, robust funding for NSF in FY 2023 can
help the United States maintain its global leadership and
competitiveness in science and engineering. Increased support for NSF
will also provide funding for the more than $3 billion in high-quality
proposals (as estimated by the National Science Board) submitted to NSF
each year that cannot be funded.
APA urges continued investments in core psychological science
research at NSF. NSF is the only Federal agency whose primary mission
is to support basic nonbiomedical research and education across all
fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Although
psychological science receives funding from various directorates within
NSF, most core psychological research is supported by the Social,
Behavioral, and Economic Sciences (SBE) Directorate. SBE supports
research that focuses on variables that influence human behavior across
all ages, interactions among individuals and groups, and the
development of social and economic systems. While SBE funding accounts
for more than 60% of the Federal funding for basic social and
behavioral science research at academic institutions, SBE has received
historically lower levels of funding--the lowest funding level of the
seven NSF Directorates. In addition to the core behavioral research in
cognitive neuroscience, human cognition and perception, learning and
development, and social psychology, SBE continues to invest substantial
funds to participate in special initiatives and cross-directorate
programs that address vital national priorities, including emerging
technologies in society.
In addition to the SBE Directorate, APA encourages continued
support for the Biological Science Directorate (BIO) and Computer
Science and Information Systems Engineering Directorate (CISE), both of
which provide important support for psychological research at NSF. BIO
provides support for psychologists who study the principles and
mechanisms that govern life from the level of the genome and cell, to
the whole family, individual, or species. The work of CISE is of
particular importance given the emphasis from Congress and the
Administration on emerging technologies and artificial intelligence
(AI). Knowledge derived from psychological science is essential to the
work in many of the CISE divisions, as human behavior plays a key role
in the design and implementation of new technologies. Human factors
psychology is relevant for the development and advancement of automated
systems in autonomous vehicles, essential for the creation of
trustworthy and explainable AI, and necessary for research on the
future of work.
APA also urges the Committee to provide robust support for research
proposed by NSF's Convergence Accelerator and Technology, Innovation,
and Partnerships (TIP) Directorate. The Convergence Accelerators offer
new funding opportunities for research, including enhancing
opportunities for persons with disabilities, developing sustainable
materials for global challenges, and addressing food and nutrition
security. TIP is the first new directorate at NSF in over 30 years. Its
mission is to harness the Nation's vast and diverse talent pool, to
advance critical and emerging technologies, to address pressing
societal and economic challenges, and to accelerate the translation of
research results from lab to market and society. The social,
behavioral, and economic sciences are integral to these efforts which
can improve U.S. competitiveness, grow the U.S. economy and train a
diverse workforce for future, high-wage jobs.
APA strongly encourages NSF to support research to prevent, prepare
for, and respond to future pandemics. The COVID-19 worldwide public
health crisis persists, contributing to nearly 1 million deaths and
around 82 million confirmed cases in the United States (U.S.) alone.
Clear evidence illustrates wide health disparities in COVID-19 cases
and vaccine distribution. COVID-19 has disproportionately impacted
racial and ethnic minority communities across the U.S., particularly
the African American community. In addition to the human toll, the
impacts of COVID-19 have reached every sector of society, including
health care, transportation, and economics and business. Psychological
research supported by NSF has provided important insights to help
recover from COVID-19 as well as prepare for future pandemics and their
impacts on people, communities, and society. Stress and worry about
contracting the virus, coupled with job losses, loss of childcare, as
well as the devastating loss of loved ones due to COVID-19 are just a
few examples of the specific ways the pandemic has affected mental
health. To help accelerate healing and recovery, NSF partnered with the
National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) early
in the pandemic to leverage knowledge from the social, behavioral and
economic (SBE) sciences and create the Societal Experts Action Network
(SEAN). SEAN helps NASEM and NSF's SBE Directorate to provide key
decision makers rapid expert consultation and develop evidence-based
recommendations to support local, State, and national responses to
COVID-19, having published 16 reports to date. The latest guidance from
the Societal Experts Action Network (SEAN) highlights new and updated
COVID-19 data measures and surveillance strategies that decision makers
can use to inform policy.
APA urges the Committee to help curb the potential loss of research
talent likely to occur if early-career researchers are forced from
scientific pathways due to economic or social circumstances which
attenuate career progression and threaten their professional futures.
While scientists across career stages have been upended by this
monumental shift, early-career scientists, such as graduate students,
postdoctoral fellows, and junior faculty, are particularly vulnerable.
The interruptions to science during the COVID-19 pandemic still
threaten the research careers of an estimated 668,000 graduate students
and 64,000 postdoctoral fellows according to the National Center for
Science and Engineering Statistics, a component of NSF's SBE
Directorate. Early-career scientists are often just beginning to
establish research independence and the negative impacts of the
pandemic may be significant and long-lasting. Destabilizing
fluctuations in research productivity, faculty positions in academia,
and funding opportunities will impact early-career scientists in the
immediate and late phases of their careers.
APA applauds NSF's investments in climate science and
sustainability research. NSF has developed crucial funding mechanisms
for climate and clean energy-related research over the past year that
must continue. They fund a broad portfolio of research related to
climate science and clean energy, including research the social,
behavioral, and economic research on human responses to climate change.
Nearly all subject areas and approaches within psychology (including
environmental, cognitive, social, community, developmental,
educational, school, counseling, clinical, neuroscientific, health,
psychodynamic, humanistic, industrial and organizational, human
factors, and other subfields) offer concepts, methods, and tools that
can be applied or elaborated to address climate change.
APA supports NSF's continued mission to broaden participation in
science, research, and education. We encourage greater investments in
programming to diversify the scientific workforce through targeted
support of scholars from diverse backgrounds and resources specifically
for development and training. Additionally, we urge greater engagement
with minority serving institutions (MSIs) and improved investment with
their communities to further represent minority and historically
underrepresented populations in scientific research. APA believes that
these activities are necessary for the success of the scientific
enterprise in the U.S. and it is imperative that NSF, through its
actions, demonstrate compelling leadership to diversify the scientific
landscape of the future.
department of justice (doj)
APA is committed to reforming policing and the criminal justice
system, supporting those with mental illness within the system, meeting
the needs of victims of violence, and ensuring that high-value research
is funded, and the best scientific evidence is used to improve programs
and policies.
APA urges the Committee to adopt a reform-minded approach by
increasing appropriations for the following Office of Justice (OJP) and
Bureau of Prisons (BOP) Programs. Within OJP, APA urges the Committee
to provide $45 million for the Bureau of Justice Statistics; $43
million for the National Institute of Justice; $125 million for the
Second Chance Act including $5 million to support Children of
Incarcerated Parents demonstration grants; $35 million for Justice
Reinvestment; $117 million for Delinquency Prevention Program. To
address the impact the COVID-19 pandemic has had on increases in drug
misuse, APA recommends: $418 million for the Comprehensive Addiction
and Recovery Act related activities including $95 million for Drug
Courts; $25 million for Veterans Treatment Courts; $35 million for
Residential Substance Abuse Treatment; $190 million for the
Comprehensive Opioid Abuse Program; and $40 million for the Justice and
Mental Health Collaboration Program. APA supports $10 million for
Crisis Stabilization and Community Re-entry Grant Program; $140 million
for STOP School Violence Act; $50 million for Mentally Ill Offender
Treatment and Crime Reduction Act; and $21 Million for Improving
Suicide Prevention Resources for States' Extreme Risk Protection
Orders; $3 million for the Missing Americans Alert Program (Kevin and
Avonte's Law). Within BOP, APA recommends $409.5 million for the First
Step Act. Though rates of domestic abuse have declined significantly
since the enactment of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), exposure
to violence remains common, with one in three women in the U.S.
experiencing rape, physical violence, or stalking at some point in
their lifetime. Flat funding for the Office on Violence Against Women
(OVW) would imperil progress made over the last three decades,
especially now that the risks are even more severe. The stay-at home
orders necessary for public safety during the COVID-19 pandemic
seriously increased the risk of intimate partner violence, domestic
violence, and child maltreatment.
APA urges the Committee to increase FY23 appropriations for OVW and
prioritize the prevention of violence across the lifespan--including
domestic and sexual violence, dating violence, and stalking, as well as
children's exposure to family violence.
Of the FY 2023 funds made available to the OVW, APA specifically
requests: $400 million for Services, Training, Officers Prosecutors
(STOP) Grants; $17.5 million for Education and Training to End Violence
Against Women with Disabilities; $10 million for the Enhanced Training
and Services to End Violence Against and Abuse of Women in Later Life
Program (Abuse in Later Life Program); $5.5 million for grants to
assist Tribal governments in exercising special domestic violence
criminal jurisdiction; $47.5 million for Rural Domestic Violence and
Child Abuse Enforcement; $18 million for the Consolidated Youth
Oriented Program; and $40 million for grants to reduce violent crimes
against women on campus. These programs are crucial in preventing
further violence, helping victims find safety and support, and starting
them on the path towards recovery.
Psychological research has revealed effective strategies to enhance
law enforcement and community relations, improve public safety, and
reduce the risks of violence and aggression. These include the
development of community-informed responses to violence, implementation
of community-based policing implemented in a way that builds trust
between police and the communities they serve, training on stereotypes
and the effects of implicit bias. APA urges the Committee to increase
FY23 funding for the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services
(COPS) to support federal, State, and local activities. In particular,
APA requests $23 million for the Just Police Program (JPP); $12 million
for the Community Policing Development Program to help bolster training
for responding to people with mental illness/disability, and $16
million for the Law Enforcement Mental Health and Wellness Program to
address the alarming rates of suicide among police officers.
[This statement was submitted by Katherine B. McGuire, Chief
Advocacy Officer]
______
Prepared Statement of American Society for Engineering Education
Summary: This written testimony is submitted on behalf of the
American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) to the Senate
subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies for
the official record. ASEE appreciates the Committee's support for the
National Science Foundation (NSF) and asks you to robustly fund the
agency in (FY) 2023, including the Research and Related Activities and
the Education and Human Resources accounts. ASEE joins the academic and
scientific community in requesting support of at least $11 billion for
NSF in FY 2023 to help alleviate impacts of historical underinvestment
at NSF, advance core research and education activities, and address
critical technologies where the U.S. is facing major competition from
China. At NASA, ASEE supports the Administration's proposed growth for
the Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) to increase its
investment in crosscutting NASA technology gaps which support engineers
and scientists in developing technology to advance science and space
missions in the National interest. ASEE also supports proposed growth
to NASA's Office of Education to advance NASA's initiatives to broaden
participation of underrepresented groups in science and engineering.
Written Testimony: The American Society for Engineering Education
(ASEE) is dedicated to advancing engineering and engineering technology
education and research and is the only society representing the
country's schools and colleges of engineering and engineering
technology. Membership includes over 12,000 individuals hailing from
all disciplines of engineering and engineering technology and includes
educators, researchers, and students as well as industry and government
representatives. As the pre-eminent authority on the education of
engineering professionals, ASEE works to develop the future engineering
and technology workforce, expand technological literacy, and convene
academic and corporate stakeholders to advance innovation and sound
policy.
national science foundation
Engineering shapes our Nation and powers our innovation ecosystem.
NSF basic research, conducted in engineering schools and colleges
around the country, catalyzes new industries and revolutionary
advances. There is high demand for a workforce of well-trained
engineers in industry and government to leverage these discoveries and
develop innovative new technologies to improve our future. The
partnership between the Federal Government and universities is
essential to growth and innovation across our economy, and is helping
to solve challenges in health, energy, and national security. NSF is a
tremendously important piece of this innovation ecosystem, funding
basic engineering and engineering education research at universities
and supporting students to enable access to engineering education.
ASEE is grateful for recent increases, yet concerned that these
investments have not kept pace with international competitors or
growing research needs. Due to budget limitations, NSF is currently
unable to fund $3.9 billion worth of very good and excellently rated
proposals each year.\1\ With more funding, tremendous amounts of
additional research and development could be undertaken, leading to
novel and transformative discoveries. As the National Science Board
predicted, in 2018 China surpassed U.S. investments in research and
development. As some countries have been steeply accelerating research
funding, increasing NSF's appropriation would help secure continued
U.S. global innovation leadership.
NSF funding has additionally fallen far behind other research
agencies, risking distortions in the overall STEM ecosystem. For
example, over the last decade the Department of Energy (DOE) Office of
Science has grown faster than NSF and is approaching having the same
funding level as NSF, despite studying a much narrower range of topics.
Other agencies depend on NSF-funded discoveries and workforce
development for their missions. NSF-funded research catalyzes
fundamental advances that are utilized for national security
applications while engineers trained with NSF funding become key
components of the National security workforce and industrial base.
Additionally, NSF has a critical role to play in promoting economic
recovery and research on many aspects of the pandemic. Continued
support of NSF will be critical as the engineering community and the
country move into the next phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Engineers
across the country adapted quickly to the realities of the pandemic,
but challenges and disparities remain. NSF will be crucial to
rebuilding the STEM pipeline, and building a better, more diverse and
resilient STEM workforce.
ASEE joins the research and higher education community in
requesting that the Committee fund NSF at $11 billion in FY 2023 to
drive advances in research and education and ensure the U.S. retains
global competitiveness and scientific leadership.
Investments in engineering education and research from NSF are
essential for having a workforce trained and ready to contribute to
industry, government, and academia. NSF is a major supporter of
engineering research and workforce initiatives funding 45 percent of
engineering and 79 percent of computer science academic fundamental
research. NSF-funded advancements touch every corner of our lives and
economy, from wireless systems to advanced manufacturing, and from new
tools to combat brain diseases to technologies to ensure our
cybersecurity. NSF supports engineering education at all levels,
ensuring the next generation of the U.S. engineering workforce is
appropriately prepared to contribute and innovate and that domestic
students are attracted to careers in engineering and engineering
technology.
The NSF Directorate for Engineering (ENG) provides critical support
for engineering education and research across the breadth of the
discipline. These investments have dual outcomes of training future
engineers that will discover tomorrow's innovations, all while
furthering today's cutting-edge research. Engineering investments at
NSF provide critical advancements in areas such as resilient
infrastructure, advanced materials and manufacturing, and
bioengineering, in addition to equipping students with the skills they
need to be the next generation of technological leaders. Divisions such
as Engineering Education and Centers (EEC) support university research,
Engineering Research Centers, and engineering curriculum
revitalization, including a new expansion to support 2-to-4-year
transfer students. ENG grantees have robust partnerships with industry,
expand the boundaries of our understanding of how students most
effectively learn engineering, provide experiential opportunities
fundamental to engineering education.
The NSF Directorate for Computer and Information Science and
Engineering also plays a key role supporting engineering education and
research, particularly within the Division of Information & Intelligent
Systems, which supports efforts at the frontiers of information
technology, data science, and artificial intelligence, among other
areas. These investments are critical as we move into a world even more
reliant on human-technology interactions. The Division of Computer and
Network Systems has been building capacity within Minority Service
Institutions to contribute to both the knowledge base and human
resource base in computing and engineering.
ASEE is excited by the establishment of the Directorate for
Technology, Innovation and Partnerships and believes the new
directorate will help maintain the United States' leadership role in
technological innovation and development of critical technologies.
However, ASEE urges the subcommittee to provide NSF with enough funding
to meet this expanded mission in emerging technologies, research
translation, and expanding the geography of innovation while protecting
core activities that sustains our science and technology ecosystem.
ASEE strongly supports NSF Education and Human Resources (EHR)
funding to foster inclusive and effective learning and learning
environments. The STEM workforce, particularly engineers, and computer
scientists, drives our innovation and economic development. We need to
fully develop all of our Nation's human talent in order to tackle
pressing problems, including the STEM technical workforce, professional
engineers, and advanced degree holders. Access to STEM experiences and
skills are a critical aspect of developing well-rounded citizens,
technological literacy, and the future STEM workforce. ASEE supports
EHR programs including Improving Undergraduate STEM Education (IUSE)
and Innovations in Graduate Education (IGE). The first is critical for
preparing professional engineers and enhancing engineering educational
experiences to broaden participation and retention, and the latter
works to revolutionize graduate studies to best prepare students for
STEM careers.
NSF plays a key role ensuring the development of new tools for
teaching engineering design and analysis skills, which are under-taught
in today's K-12 classrooms. As noted in the 2009 National Academies
report Engineering in K-12 Education, engineering education has
received little attention yet has the potential to improve student
learning and achievement in other areas of STEM, increase awareness of
engineering careers, and increase technological literacy. Engineering's
focus on design and analysis enhances problem solving, teaches students
new ways to approach challenges, and encourages students to connect
science and math topics to real-world applications- all skills critical
to the future technical workforce. ASEE supports programs to fill
workforce needs including Advanced Technical Education (ATE) that
prepares advanced technicians for America's high-skills workforce and
graduate research fellowships and traineeships to create a pipeline of
students knowledgeable and excited about engineering.
national aeronautics and space administration
ASEE is supportive of the Administration's proposed increases to
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in its Space
Technology Mission Directorate (STMD). Of importance to ASEE, STMD
activities support the workforce development pipeline of future space
engineers and technicians by engaging directly with the academic
community through early career faculty programs, early-stage research
grants, and university-led multidisciplinary research institutes. The
disruptions to the STEM pipeline caused by the COVID-19 pandemic makes
this work even more crucial. STMD's broad portfolio of activities helps
to meet NASA's science objectives, establishes new commercial and
academic partnerships, and stimulates the growth of the Nation's
technology sector. STMD programs fill significant capability gaps for
NASA and better position the agency to meet its long-term strategic
goals in areas across all its directorates ranging from propulsion and
power generation to materials science and high-performance computing.
ASEE applauds the Administration's support of STMD's vital role and
urges the subcommittee to support STMD's ability to focus on a broad
array of NASA technology challenges, continue its engagement with the
academic and private sectors, and keep long-term focus beyond specific
near-term mission goals.
ASEE is also supportive of the Administration's proposed increase
for NASA's Office of STEM Engagement and asks that the Committee
support the proposed funding for this office in fiscal Year 2023 and
beyond. NASA STEM Engagement programs inspire students to pursue
engineering, science, and technology careers, and this office plays a
vital role coordinating STEM education programs throughout the agency,
including those at NASA centers. ASEE supports the continuation of the
National Space Grant College and Fellowship Program (Space Grant),
which supports university consortia in all 50 States, funding
fellowships for engineering and other STEM students, while also
offering important resources for faculty professional development and
strengthening curricula. ASEE is also supportive of initiatives at the
NASA Office of STEM Engagement to broaden participation of
underrepresented groups in STEM and to bring engineering design and
analysis experiences to K-12 students.
conclusion
NSF education and research investments have truly transformed our
world through engineering breakthroughs such as the internet, fiber-
optics, and medical imaging technology. These investments keep our
communities safe, lower healthcare costs, and spur our economy. Today,
engineering research is opening possibilities through advances in areas
such as artificial intelligence, biosensors, and advanced materials. We
ask that you robustly fund NSF at $11 billion to support critical
education and research programs that support our National security,
address critical national challenges, and advance our economic
competitiveness. In addition, at NASA, we urge you to fund proposed
increases for NASA's Space Technology Mission Directorate and Office of
STEM Engagement. Thank you for the opportunity to submit this
testimony.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.nsf.gov/nsb/publications/2021/merit_review/FY-2020/
nsb202145.pdf.
[This statement was submitted by Adrienne R. Minerick PhD,
President, and Norman Fortenberry, ScD, Executive Director]
______
Prepared Statement of the American Society for Microbiology
The American Society for Microbiology (ASM) appreciates the
opportunity to submit outside witness testimony for the Fiscal Year
2023 Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies appropriations
bill in support of increased funding for the National Science
Foundation (NSF) and increased coordination of microbiome research by
the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). ASM is
one of the oldest and largest life science societies with 30,000
members in the U.S. and around the world. Our mission is to promote and
advance the microbial sciences, including programs and initiatives
funded by Federal Government departments and agencies, by virtue of the
integral role microorganisms play in human health and society.
Microbial science is a cross-cutting endeavor, and our members'
federally funded research is fundamental to advances in human health,
agriculture, energy, and the environment. For FY2023, ASM recommends
the following:
Provide at least $11 billion for the National Science Foundation in
Fiscal Year 2023.
The NSF is a key supporter of microbiology research, including
foundational research supporting ecosystems and biodiversity, mapping
the microbiome, and discovering emerging pathogens. NSF-funded
researchers across the country are working to improve lives through
research on human and animal health, agriculture, energy, the
environment, and biothreats. NSF funding is key to cultivating a
diverse and inclusive scientific workforce that is prepared for future
challenges and discoveries. However, due to lack of Federal funding,
NSF was unable to fund nearly $4 billion in highly rated research
proposals in FY2020.
Fundamental research supported by NSF will enable new discoveries
and solutions using biotechnology to promote the bioeconomy,
forecasting and mitigating the impacts of global warming on essential
ecosystem services, and predicting and preventing the emergence and
spread of infectious diseases. NSF-funded research advances our
understanding of the 70 percent of emerging human pathogens that have
non-human origins, which pose serious threats to human health and
global health security. To continue to achieve its goals, it is
critical that the FY2023 appropriations bill robustly fund NSF.
Urge the Office of Science and Technology Policy to implement
FY2022 CJS Appropriations report language on the microbiome and revisit
the Interagency Strategic Plan for Microbiome Research.
Interagency coordination is more crucial than ever and responding
to 21st challenges will require interdisciplinary and interagency
coordination. Microbiome science aims to advance understanding of
microbial communities (microbiomes) for applications in areas such as
health care, food production, and environmental restoration to benefit
individuals, communities, and the environment. Understanding of the
microbiome has evolved significantly since the concept of the human
microbiome emerged roughly two decades ago. Today it is understood that
microbial communities exist on, in, and around people, animals, and the
environment, and directly impact health and disease States. It is also
clear that microbiome research and coordination are essential to
unlocking the full potential of the bioeconomy. However, the rapid pace
of discovery and the interdisciplinary nature of microbiome research
necessitates cross-agency coordination and a robust data sharing
infrastructure.
Launched in 2016, the National Microbiome Initiative pledged $121
million in funding from Federal agencies and $400 million in total cash
and in-kind contributions from 100 companies, foundations and academic
institutions. As part of this initiative, the Federal Microbiome
Interagency Working Group developed the Interagency Strategic Plan for
Microbiome Research, providing recommendations for improving
coordination of microbiome research among Federal agencies and between
agencies and non-Federal domestic and international microbiome research
efforts. The 5-year Strategic Plan envisioned coordinated microbiome
research activities across 21 government agencies, set out interagency
objectives, structure and operating principles, and noted several
research focus areas.
ASM is grateful to the House and Senate Appropriations Committees
for including requested language in FY2022 report language that asks
OSTP to review the Interagency Strategic Plan for Microbiome Research,
to evaluate the progress made, consider whether the Federal investment
has been adequate to fully realize the promise of this initiative, and
begin the process to develop a strategic plan for interagency
collaboration in this essential research for the next 5 years. We
encourage the Committee to follow up with OSTP on implementation of
this language.
conclusion
ASM is particularly grateful to Congress for increasing investment
in the NSF in recent years. In FY2023, we urge Congress to revisit
OSTP's past commitment to microbiome research and to increase funding
for NSF to $11 billion. We thank you for your continued support for
microbe-powered innovation.
[This statement was submitted by Allen Segal, Director of Public
Policy and Advocacy]
______
Prepared Statement of The American Society for the Prevention of
Cruelty to Animals
On behalf of our over 2 million supporters, The American Society
for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) appreciates this
opportunity to submit testimony to the Senate Appropriations
subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies.
Founded in 1866, the ASPCA is the first humane organization established
in the U.S. and serves as the Nation's leading voice for animal
welfare. We respectfully request that the subcommittee consider the
following concerns when making fiscal year 2023 appropriations.
police encounters with pets
Media reports about violent encounters between law enforcement
officers and pets--most often family dogs--are far too commonplace
across the country. The ASPCA believes that the vast majority of these
incidents are avoidable. The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) can
assist in reducing these incidents by collecting national data around
them and by providing resources for techniques to handle police and dog
encounters in law enforcement de-escalation trainings. Tragedies like
this take a serious toll on communities, further eroding trust with law
enforcement, escalating tense situations, and endangering bystanders.
There are many troubling examples of these incidents, some of which
have garnered media attention in the last 18 months.\1\
Shootings involving pets often account for a significant percentage
of the total firearms discharges in a particular agency. Data from some
municipalities suggest that 25-75 percent of all police firearm
discharges are directed at dogs.\2\ One DOJ official estimated that
several thousand dogs annually are killed by law enforcement officers
and described the phenomenon as ``an epidemic''.\3\ Additionally,
research reveals that these incidents take a disproportionate toll on
communities of color. An analysis of officer-involved shootings in Los
Angeles County revealed that between 28-46 percent of all firearms
discharges were directed at dogs, and these shootings were
geographically clustered in low-income communities of color.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ On May 3, Sacramento police officers shot and killed a family
dog while serving a search warrant on the property. On April 17,
Chicago police officers shot and injured a family dog while responding
to a domestic dispute. Body cam footage from April 11 shows a
Jacksonville, Florida police officer shooting and killing a family's 1-
year-old puppy in her yard while responding to a neighbor's 911 call.
Body cam footage from January 12 shows a Miami Dade officer shooting
and killing a family dog seven times while responding to a barking
complaint. On April 11 of last year, New Orleans police officers shot
and killed an 18-week-old rescue puppy in his yard while responding to
a 911 call. On March 23 of last year, the Tampa PD shot the dog of the
woman who had called them for help.
\2\ Bathurst, Cynthia, Donald Cleary, Karen Delise, Ledy VanKavage,
and Patricia Rushing. 2015. The Problem of Dog-Related Incidents and
Encounters. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing
Services; https://cops.usdoj.gov/RIC/Publications/cops-p206-pub.pdf.
\3\ Griffin, David; ``Can Police Stop Killing Dogs?.'' Police
Magazine; Oct. 29, 2014; https://www.policemag.com/341722/can-police-
stop-killing-dogs.
\4\ Stefano Bloch, Daniel E. Martinez. 2020. Canicide by Cop: A
geographical analysis of canine killings by police in Los Angeles.
Geoforum: 111. 142-154; https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/
abs/pii/S0016718520300440.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The House Fiscal Year 2022 Commerce, Justice, and Science
Appropriations report included language directing the DOJ to include
use of force incidents in any Federal database created to track law
enforcement's use of force more broadly, or to submit a report on how
this can be accomplished within 180 days. This language was included by
reference in the final report. We greatly appreciate the subcommittee's
support to include this new language. The DOJ recently announced a new
police reform initiative, providing resources for de-escalation
trainings, among other community-oriented policing priorities.\5\ This
request is in line with this administrative priority.
Encourage documentation and tracking for incidents of police use of
force against pets:
Use of force reporting requirements among State and local law
enforcement agencies are inconsistent, and many agencies do not require
documentation for use of force incidents involving pets. Federally, no
nationwide data exists regarding the prevalence of these tragedies, or
for officer-involved shootings more broadly. DOJ's Federal Bureau of
Investigations operates a National Use of Force Data Collection, which
allows law enforcement to voluntarily provide data on use-of-force
incidents. The voluntary data, which currently reflects only 40 percent
of the total law enforcement officer population, does not, apparently,
include incidents involving pets.\6\ A publication by the DOJ's Office
of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) recognized the lack of
data on this issue and urged law enforcement agencies to examine
questions like how often police officers discharge firearms in dog-
related incidents and how many dogs have been killed to better
understand and address this problem.\7\ Understanding the scope and
frequency of these incidents is fundamental to avoiding them.
Provide resources and training to de-escalate police encounters with
pets and reduce violent incidents:
De-escalation trainings have proven to be quite beneficial in
resolving situations with dogs without resorting to lethal force.\8\
Several States including Colorado, Illinois, Ohio, California, Texas,
Nevada, and Georgia mandate training and have created programs on
proper responses to encounters with dogs. These policies appear to be
having a positive impact--between 2015 when the law was enacted and
2019, the number of dogs shot by police in Texas dropped from 281 to
31.\9\ Other States including Connecticut, Louisiana, New Jersey, and
Oregon address law enforcement encounters with dogs either in basic
training or through electives. The COPS office, which provides training
for police departments on a variety of topics, published The Problem of
Dog-Related Incidents and Encounters in 2011, which served as the
foundation for a jointly created video series and toolkit in 2020 that
provides training on methods for responding to dog encounters,
including assessing dog behavior and risk levels, strategies for
diffusing threatening encounters, as well as defense and escape
tactics.\10\ The evidence is compelling that funding for the use of
such trainings or creating incentives to do so could minimize risk to
officers, families, and animals.
The ASPCA requests that the subcommittee recognize the impact of
law enforcement's use of force in communities and the need to avoid
such incidents by including the following report language in its FY23
Appropriations bill:
Police Use of Force Against Pets.--Police shootings directed at
pets can account for a significant percentage of overall firearms
discharges in communities--data from some localities suggests that
anywhere from 25-75 percent of all law enforcement firearms discharges
are directed at dogs, and that these incidents are geographically
clustered in low-income communities of color where police shootings
involving people are also concentrated. These occurrences escalate
encounters with communities and erode trust in law enforcement.
The committee continues to be concerned about the lack of data and
reporting requirements for police use of force incidents against pets
and directs the Department to incorporate data on these incidents into
broader efforts to collect, track, and report on police use-of-force
and to provide guidance to law enforcement agencies regarding best
practices in tracking and reporting data on these incidences.
The Department shall develop a grant program to support Law
Enforcement Dog Encounters Training (LEDET) or other evidenced-based
training programs for law enforcement to handle encounters with pets.
The grants shall be made available to law enforcement agencies and
other qualified entities, including nonprofit organizations and
institutions of higher education.
Thank you for your consideration of this request, we look forward
to working with you on this important issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-40-
million-funding-advance-community-policing-and-5-million.
\6\ See ``What is Collected?'' https://crime-data-
explorer.app.cloud.gov/officers/national/united-States/uof.
\7\ Bathurst, Cynthia, Donald Cleary, Karen Delise, Ledy VanKavage,
and Patricia Rushing. 2015. The Problem of Dog-Related Incidents and
Encounters. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing
Services; https://cops.usdoj.gov/RIC/Publications/cops-p206-pub.pdf.
\8\ Amendola, Karen, Valdovinos, Maria, Perea, Cesar. 2019. An
Evidence-Based Approach to Dog Shootings in Routine Police Encounters:
Regulations, Policies, Practices, and Training Implications. https://
www.policefoundation.org/publication/reducing-dog-shootings-in-routine-
police-encounters-regulations-policies-practices-and-training-
implications/.
\9\ Texas Humane Legislative Network.
\10\ https://www.sheriffs.org/ledet.
[This statement was submitted by Nancy Perry, Senior Vice
President, Government Relations]
______
Prepared Statement of The American Society of Agronomy (ASA)
Dear Chairwoman Shaheen and Ranking Member Moran:
The American Society of Agronomy (ASA), Crop Science Society of
America (CSSA), and Soil Science Society of America (SSSA) represent
more than 8,000 scientists and students, 13,500 Certified Crop Advisers
(CCA), and more than 700 Certified Professional Soil Scientist (CPSS).
We are the largest coalition of scientists and professionals dedicated
to the agronomic, crop, and soil science disciplines in the United
States.
In the coming decades, our agricultural system must sustainably
produce food and fuel for a rapidly growing global population. The
Nation's economic prosperity and security depend on our dedication to
developing innovative, science-based solutions to address the
challenges facing our food system. We appreciate the appropriations the
National Science Foundation (NSF) received in (FY) 2022. Yet, as our
Nation's producers face increasing extreme weather, limited resources,
and market uncertainty, NSF's programs become even more important
providers of the science they need to stay in business. NSF's Big Ideas
initiatives, its core programs, and its unparalleled support for STEM
students and the future STEM workforce require increased investment.
We support $11 billion for the National Science Foundation for the
fiscal year 2023. This funding level will put the premier government-
funding agency for scientific research on track to address farmers'
challenges by increasing the broad knowledge base supported by a wide
range of scientific disciplines, such as biology, plant science,
chemistry and soil science.
Within NSF we are very supportive of Signals in the Soil program.
As Franklin D. Roosevelt stated in 1935, ``A nation that destroys its
soils destroys itself,'' and yet our soils are eroding at an alarming
rate. This interdisciplinary program is a collaboration among four NSF
Directorates, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's National Institute
of Food and Agriculture, and five international science organizations
to encourage convergent research and high-impact projects that advance
a more comprehensive understanding of soil and the systems soils
support.
In 2017, NSF launched its 10 ``Big Ideas,'' a set of cutting-edge
research agendas and processes poised to drive NSF's long-term research
agenda. We are particularly supportive of NSF's Convergence Accelerator
and Understanding the Rules of Life Initiatives. The Convergence
Accelerator puts systems thinking into research practice. Agriculture
researchers are uniquely aware of the multiple disciplines,
technologies, and expertise necessary to produce realistic and useful
information for producers working in large, multi-faceted outdoor
systems. From water management to precision agriculture, this program
provides support for exactly the kind of systems-level research
successful agriculture requires. The Understanding the Rules of Life
Initiative aims to address one of the biggest gaps in biological
knowledge: our inability to predict an organism's observable
characteristics--its phenotype--from what we know about its genetics
and environment. This cross-disciplinary research could help create
food crops with higher yields or nutritional content and new models for
environmental remediation.
ASA, CSSA, SSSA have made the commitment to enhancing the
experiences, opportunities, and safety of all Society members by
creating a diverse, inclusive, and equitable environment in our
scientific fields of study. NSF can play an invaluable role in
addressing the equity challenges facing minority and underrepresented
groups within the research workforce. We know that students and
researchers from disadvantaged backgrounds are less likely to choose a
field with unreliable funding. Robust Federal funding for NSF can
advance a more representative and equitable research enterprise by
bolstering the student pipeline, expanding educational programs and
grants--especially for MSIs, expanding resources for early career
researchers, and facilitating collaborations with diverse stakeholders
to address existential threats, such as climate change.
Science is essential. A strong commitment to federally funded
scientific research will boost the Nation's capacity for innovation,
productivity, and economic prosperity.
Thank you for your consideration. For additional information or to
learn more about ASA, CSSA, and SSSA, please contact Rachel Owen at
[email protected] or 608-268-4965.
Sincerely,
Luther Smith, Interim CEO
______
Prepared Statement of American Society of Plant Biologists
On behalf of the American Society of Plant Biologists (ASPB), I
submit this testimony for the official record to support $11 billion
for the National Science Foundation (NSF) for (FY) 2023. ASPB
recognizes the difficult fiscal environment our Nation faces, but we
believe that sustained investments in scientific research are a
critical step toward economic recovery and continued global competitive
innovation for our Nation. ASPB would also like to thank the
subcommittee for its consideration of this testimony and for its strong
support for the research missions of NSF.
ASPB, founded in 1924 as the American Society of Plant
Physiologists, was established to promote the growth and development of
plant biology, to encourage and publish research in plant biology, and
to promote the interests and professional advancement of plant
scientists in general. ASPB members educate, mentor, advise, and
nurture future generations of plant biologists; they work to increase
understanding of plant biology, as well as science in general, in K-16
schools and among the general public; they advocate in support of plant
biology research; they work to convey the relevance and importance of
plant biology; and they provide expertise in policy decisions world-
wide. Overall, ASPB members, as representatives of the society, work to
disseminate information and excitement about plant sciences, especially
through ASPB's advocacy, outreach activities, conferences, and
publications.
food, fuel, environment, and health: plant biology
research and america's future
Plants are vital to our very existence. They harvest sunlight,
converting it to chemical energy for food and feed; they absorb carbon
dioxide and produce oxygen; and they are the primary producers on which
most life depends. Indeed, plant biology research is making many
fundamental contributions in the areas of energy security and
environmental stewardship; the continued and sustainable development of
better foods, fabrics, and building materials; and in the understanding
of biological principles that underpin the health and nutrition of all
Americans. In short, plant biology research is at the foundation of a
robust American bioeconomy.
Plant science has become the backbone of agricultural innovation,
and a thriving agricultural sector is a cornerstone for America's
economic success. Agriculture and related industries comprise 6 percent
of the U.S. GDP, contributing nearly $1.055 trillion and 19.7 million
jobs to the economy.\1\ In fact, despite persistent U.S. trade
deficits, there has been a surplus in agricultural trade since 1960.
Steady increases in yield have made these surpluses possible, even in
the face of sustained population growth. Such increases are due to
improvements in crop seeds and agricultural innovations that, in turn,
rely on sustained fundamental and applied research in crop science and
plant biology. American farmers have experienced and come to expect
continuously increasing yields, which are necessary for economic and
national security. But for this to continue, growing investments in
basic biological sciences are needed.
Plant biology is at the interface of numerous scientific
breakthroughs. For example, NSF has supported high throughput
experimental approaches that facilitate extraordinary syntheses of
information, and plant biologists are using computer science and
bioinformatics to make tremendous strides in our understanding of
complex biological systems, ranging from single cells to entire
ecosystems. Ultimately, understanding how plants function will enable
biotechnological approaches toward more nutritious and productive
crops, new sources of fuel, and the development of novel medicines to
treat diseases like cancer.
Despite the significant positive impact plants have on our Nation's
economy and in addressing some of our most urgent challenges, including
food and energy security, Federal investments in fundamental plant
biology research are modest. Still, scientists have maximized and
leveraged this funding to understand the basic functions and mechanisms
of plants, providing a foundation for vital advances in practical
applications in agriculture, health, energy, and the environment.
robust funding for the national science foundation
ASPB supports the new Directorate for Technology, Innovation, and
Partnerships (TIP) and its goal to advance science and engineering
research and innovation. This new directorate will accelerate basic
research to solve national and societal problems. TIP will support use-
inspired research in biotechnology, among other areas, and propel NSF-
funded discoveries to new levels of innovation. TIP will also fund
activities in priority areas such as climate resilience and energy
sufficiency, advanced wireless research, biotechnology,
microelectronics and semiconductors, advanced manufacturing, AI, and
quantum sciences. Programs that broaden participation would also see
major growth, and NSF would launch a new initiative aimed at building
research capacity at emerging research institutions.
ASPB encourages strong support for the Directorate of Biological
Sciences (BIO) and proportional funding increases across all of the
scientific disciplines NSF supports. As scientific research becomes
increasingly interdisciplinary, a diverse research portfolio at NSF is
needed to maintain transformational research and innovation. NSF
funding for plant biology specifically enables the scientific community
to address cross-cutting research questions that could ultimately solve
grand challenges related to a sustainable food supply, energy security,
and improved health and nutrition.
NSF BIO is a critical source of funding for scientific research,
providing the majority of the Federal support for non-medical, basic
life sciences research at U.S. academic institutions and beyond. BIO
supports research ranging from the molecular to the biosphere levels.
These investments have significant payoffs, both in terms of the
knowledge directly generated and in deepening collaborations and
fostering innovation among communities of scientists.
BIO's Plant Genome Research Program (PGRP) is an excellent example
of a high impact program that has laid a strong scientific research
foundation for understanding plant genomics as it relates to energy
(biofuels), health (nutrition and functional foods), agriculture
(impact of changing climates on agronomic ecosystems), and the
environment (plants' roles as primary producers in ecosystems). ASPB
asks that the PGRP be funded at the highest possible level and have
sustained funding growth to address 21st century challenges.
Additionally, ASPB is encouraged by the ongoing efforts of the
Reintegrating Biology initiative. The Society hopes that these efforts
will result in innovative, cross-disciplinary efforts that advance both
plant science and biological research.
Without significant and increased support for BIO and NSF,
promising fundamental research discoveries will be delayed and vital
collaborations at the leading edges of scientific disciplines will be
postponed, thus limiting the ability to respond to the pressing
scientific problems that exist today and the new challenges on the
horizon. Addressing these scientific priorities also helps improve the
competitive position of the U.S. in a global marketplace.
continued support for nsf education and workforce development programs
As discussed above, among the challenges brought by a changing
world, many will be addressed specifically by plant scientists.
Sustained increases in crop productivity will be needed to match the
demand for food expected from population growth. At the same time,
climate change will present new challenges for crops and other plant
ecosystems. These challenges will require efforts to increase
productivity beyond current practices, including, for example,
improvement in crop water use efficiency and enhanced crop
photosynthesis efficiency and performance. More knowledge and
innovation will be needed to replace chemicals from non-renewable
sources (from fuels to biomedical applications) with plant-derived
metabolites. These innovations will require contributions from basic
and applied plant science fields, as well as collaboration with other
sciences and engineering.
To tackle these challenges, a strong and diverse community of plant
scientists, with increased involvement from women and minority
scientists who often bring underrepresented perspectives, will be
needed. However, the current training pipeline does not appear prepared
to ensure the availability of this workforce. The number of PhD degrees
awarded in the U.S. in biomedical sciences in the last two decades has
increased at an unsustainable rate, even triggering warnings from
members of the National Academy of Sciences;\2\ however, this trend has
not been paralleled by increases in plant-related PhD degrees. In fact,
plant science doctoral degrees, both basic and agronomy-related, have
remained stagnant during this period.\3\ Students gravitate towards
fields with reliable and robust career and earning opportunities. What
is necessary to change these trends is a strong investment in plant
science research, basic and applied, renewed efforts to transform
public perception of plant biology and plant biologists, and a push to
increase the number of students in the plant science pipeline.
Developing the workforce that will solve current and future challenges
is urgent.
The NSF is a major source of funding for the education and training
of the American scientific workforce and for understanding how
educational innovations can be most effectively implemented. NSF's
education portfolio impacts students at all levels, including K-12,
undergraduate, graduate, and postgraduate, as well as the public.
ASPB urges the subcommittee to support expanding NSF's fellowship
and career development programs-such as the Postdoctoral Research
Fellowships in Biology, the Graduate Research Fellowship (GRF), the
Research and Mentoring for Postbaccalaureates in Biological Sciences
(RaMP), and the Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) programs--
thereby providing continuity in funding opportunities for the country's
most promising early career scientists.
ASPB urges support for NSF to further develop programs aimed at
increasing the diversity of the scientific workforce by leveraging
professional scientific societies' commitment to provide a professional
home for scientists throughout their education and careers and to help
promote and sustain broad participation in the sciences. Focused
training and infrastructure support programs for Hispanic Serving
Institutions, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and Tribal
Colleges and Universities remain vitally important, because they foster
a scientific workforce that reflects the U.S. population.
ASPB also urges support for research that enhances our
understanding of how educational innovations can be sustainably and
effectively implemented. NSF Education and Human Resources (EHR)
programs provide opportunities to expand NSF's research and evaluation
efforts to address scale-up and sustainability. ASPB encourages
continued support for education research programs within NSF's EHR
portfolio with a focus on understanding how previous investments in
educational strategies can be made most effective.
Grand research challenges will not be solved in a year, an
administration, or a generation. It takes attention and investment at
Federal research agencies, such as the NSF, over decades.
Thank you for your consideration of ASPB's testimony. For more
information about ASPB, please visit at www.aspb.org.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ag-and-food-statistics-
charting-the-essentials/ag-and-food-sectors-and-the-economy/.
\2\ National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
2018. The Next Generation of Biomedical and Behavioral Sciences
Researchers: Breaking Through. Washington, DC: The National Academies
Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25008.
\3\ National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, Survey
of Earned Doctorates. https://ncsesdata.nsf.gov/builder/
sed?type=chart&convert=1.
[This statement was submitted by Crispin Taylor, PhD, Chief
Executive Officer]
______
Prepared Statement of Association for Psychological Science
aps recommendations for fiscal year 2023 appropriations
--The Association for Psychological Science (APS) supports (FY) 2023
funding of at least $11 billion for the National Science
Foundation (NSF). The NSF is critical to ensuring the success
of the Nation's science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics (STEM) enterprise and to promoting national
security and prosperity.
--APS recommends increased funding for NSF's Social, Behavioral, and
Economic (SBE) Sciences Directorate. This NSF directorate is
the primary funder of behavioral research conducted at U.S.
colleges and universities. SBE-funded research provides the
foundation upon which our knowledge of people, including our
understanding of the human mind, brain, and behavior, is built.
--APS requests Congress encourage NSF to increase the number of
Graduate Research Fellowships to 3,000 in FY 2023. This program
provides essential support that empowers students to pursue
graduate education and training in STEM fields.
statement of aps chief executive officer
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and Members of the
subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony about
psychological science priorities and interests at NSF in FY 2023. I am
Robert Gropp, PhD, Chief Executive Officer of APS, which is a nonprofit
scientific organization of approximately 25,000 scientists and students
dedicated to advancing research psychology for the benefit of science
and society. Many of these members are scientists and educators at the
Nation's universities and colleges who conduct research and train
undergraduate and graduate students with support from NSF.
funding for the national science foundation and policy issues
APS joins with the Coalition for National Science Funding to
request that Congress provide at least $11 billion in FY 2023 funding
for NSF. NSF-funded research and training programs are engines that
power the discovery and innovation that grow our economy, promote
national security, and enhance human well-being.
NSF-funded research and education benefit every State and local
community across the United States. In 2021, for example, New Hampshire
research institutions secured more than $33 million in research and
education support from NSF, and institutions across Kansas received $40
million. NSF is helping institutions in both States address the COVID-
19 pandemic and other issues through funding, for example, the
development of behavioral theories about resilience and sustainability
for use by engineers (University of New Hampshire) and the study of how
debt and economic insecurity developed during the pandemic and how
these factors affect low-income communities (Dartmouth College). Other
NSF-supported research examined challenges faced by individuals using
public libraries for computing and Internet access amid the COVID-19
pandemic (University of Kansas) and how scientific goals and values can
support responsible research conduct (Kansas State University).
Specifically, APS urges increased funding for NSF behavioral and
social sciences and economics programs. The SBE directorate funds
research on critical areas such as understanding human interactions
with artificial intelligence and developing a secure and trustworthy
cyberspace. The SBE directorate also works with other NSF directorates
on major NSF projects such as the Future of Work and Human-Technology
Frontier, Growing Convergence Research, and Harnessing the Data
Revolution, ensuring that social and behavioral science research is
contributing to our understanding and advancing these research areas
critical to the future of science and engineering.
APS encourages Congress to provide sufficient funding to NSF to
empower the agency to allocate increased funding for SBE. For this
purpose, APS requests that Congress adopt the following report
language:
Directorate for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences (SBE).--
The Committee supports the SBE directorate and recognizes the
fundamental importance of the research it supports in advancing
scientific understanding of critical challenges facing our
Nation. These sciences also afford insights into advancing
public health, defense and security, education and learning,
and the interface between humans and technology. The SBE
directorate funds more than half of our Nation's university-
based behavioral science research, yet it is the smallest NSF
directorate. The Committee believes that behavioral science
provides evidence-based understanding of human behavior and
recognizes the SBE directorate's unique role in funding this
research. The Committee therefore recommends an increase over
the Fiscal Year 2022 levels for SBE activities comparable to
the increases provided for the other directorates.
NSF facilitates a wide variety of research conducted at colleges
and universities across the United States. The agency also empowers the
next generation of scientists to begin and continue their training and
education in science. The Graduate Research Fellowship Program, or
GRFP, is one such example of this work. Historically, NSF has awarded
around 2,100 of these fellowships per year, but it receives
applications from many more qualified students than it can support. For
this reason, APS encourages Congress to provide NSF with funding to
support at least 3,000 GRFP awards annually.
APS requests that the following language be included in the fiscal
Year 2023 CJS Report:
Graduate Research Fellowship Program.--The Committee notes that the
Graduate Research Fellowship Program (GRFP) has a long history
of supporting outstanding graduate students studying NSF-
supported sciences, engineering, and mathematics fields,
including behavioral science, and selects recipients who go on
to achieve high levels of success in their future academic and
professional careers. In recognition of this program's
contributions to launching the careers of talented future
scientists, the Committee has provided the resources necessary
to fund more than 3,000 grants in Fiscal Year 2023 and urges
the program to continue to grow in future years.
summary and conclusion
Knowledge gained from NSF-funded psychological science research is
essential to advancing innovation and discovery, improving the Nation's
health and prosperity, and strengthening economic and national
security. The importance of this research has been on display during
the COVID pandemic. As an illustration of what investment in SBE
sciences can do, I direct you to the APS Global Collaboration on COVID-
19. This initiative has brought together psychological scientists and
other experts to make recommendations on how we can draw on our field
for the good of the country. This collaboration has identified that
psychological and other behavioral sciences could have been better
applied throughout the COVID-19 crisis, that these fields can
contribute to COVID-19 and future threats, and that new research and
research funding are urgently needed to best prepare society for future
crises. I would be pleased to share further information on this effort
with any interested Members of the subcommittee at your convenience.
APS shares your commitment to fostering innovation through
investment in research. We appreciate the opportunity to provide this
testimony, and we thank you for your leadership.
[This statement was submitted by Robert Gropp, PhD, Chief Executive
Officer]
______
Prepared Statement of Association of Science and Technology Centers,
American Alliance of Museums, Association of Children's Museums, and
Association of Science Museum Directors
Dear Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and Members of the
subcommittee:
Thank you for accepting this statement submitted by the Association
of Science and Technology Centers (ASTC), the American Alliance of
Museums (AAM), the Association of Children's Museums (ACM), and the
Association of Science Museum Directors (ASMD).
We appreciate the opportunity to present the views of our
associations to the subcommittee for its consideration as it prepares
to write the Fiscal Year 2023 Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related
Agencies Appropriations bill, particularly regarding the National
Science Foundation (NSF), the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA), and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA).
Our associations represent more than 5,000 member organizations in
every State and district in America, including science centers, museums
of all types, nature centers, aquariums, zoos, planetariums, botanical
gardens, and natural history and children's museums, as well as
companies, consultants, and other organizations that share an interest
in science education and public engagement in science.
Taken together, our National reach is a vital resource for
fostering rich public engagement in the importance of science and many
other subjects and disciplines towards building a bright future and
opportunity for all. Our place-based organizations are leading
institutions in the efforts to promote education in science,
technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics (STEAM), developing
rich, innovative, and effective science-learning experiences. We are
helping to create the future STEAM workforce and inspiring people of
all ages about the wonders and the meaning of science in their lives.
Our members are trusted and valued by their communities-a recent
national public opinion poll, showed that 95% of voters would approve
of lawmakers who acted to support museums and 96% of voters want
Federal funding for museums to be maintained or increased (Museums and
Public Opinion, S. Wilkening and AAM, 2018).
These past 2 years have been especially challenging for our
community as nearly all of our members, many of whom receive the
majority of their operating income from revenue from people coming
through their doors, experienced prolonged closure of their facilities.
Even as they have reopened to the public, attendance and revenue may
take several years to recover. While Federal relief programs have
provided an essential lifeline, the impact on our members will long
outlast COVID relief (National Snapshot of COVID-19 Impact on United
States Museums, AAM and Wilkening Consulting, 2021). At the same time,
our member institutions continued to serve their communities and their
missions, engaging their regions with STEM and youth engagement,
supporting science learning and serving their communities in myriad
other ways. Indeed, one of the most inspiring aspects of the past 2
years is how our member organizations have shown up for their
communities and worked closely with local residents and organizations
to advance conversation and action on the most urgent local priorities.
For example, a year ago ASTC, AAM, and ACM joined with a coalition
of other national organizations to launch Communities for Immunity
(www.
communitiesforimmunity.org), an initiative supported by the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention and the Institute of Museum and Library
Services to activate museums, libraries, and Tribal organizations to
boost vaccine confidence in their communities. Building upon the high
degree of trust that the public has in these cultural institutions,
Communities for Immunity has been able to effectively engage vaccine
hesitant members of their local communities.
As the Nation hopefully emerges from the immediacy of the pandemic,
this example of action by the museum and library community demonstrates
how these trusted institutions embedded in their communities offer an
opportunity to advance community conversation and action on national
and international challenges in locally relevant ways.
requests for fiscal year 2023 appropriations
We appreciate the support that the subcommittee has provided for
the Nation's science and education agencies, including support for
programs of particular interest to ASTC, AAM, ACM, and ASMD.
In general, we stress the need for inclusive programs that include
support for informal education as much STEAM learning-including but not
limited to school-aged youth-happens outside of formal schooling.
Research has consistently shown that learning experiences outside of
the formal classroom are vitally important to youth's future interest
and capacity in STEAM (National Academies, 2006, 2009, 2010, 2015,
2016).
National Science Foundation (NSF)
The National Science Foundation (NSF) is one of our Nation's most
important sources of support for STEM education, including many of the
programs centered in the Directorate for Education and Human Resources
(EHR). EHR supports STEAM education at all levels and for all audiences
to help develop a diverse and well-prepared workforce and a
scientifically well-informed citizenry.
Of particular interest to the museum community is the Advancing
Informal STEM Learning (AISL) program in the Division of Research on
Learning in Formal and Informal Settings, which advances new approaches
to and evidence-based understanding of learning in informal
environments. However, current funding levels have limited the ability
of the program to support the range of informal STEM education programs
that have been ranked highly competitive. We ask you to provide at
least $74.5 million for the Advancing Informal STEM Learning (AISL)
program.
NSF also supports STEAM education and informal learning through its
research directorates, and we urge the subcommittee to provide
increased funding for the NSF Directorates for Biological Sciences;
Education and Human Resources; Geosciences; and Social, Behavioral and
Economic Sciences to continue to support museum research, collections,
and programs that are key to lifelong STEAM education. We also support
the focus on the intersection of science and society in NSF's new
Directorate for Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships.
Finally, we support continued analysis and refinement of the
broader impacts criterion on which all NSF proposals are evaluated,
including efforts to enhance training for merit review panelists and
NSF program officers-and the development of tools for evaluating and
documenting the societal impacts of research.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) supports
informal STEM education in a variety of ways. The Teams Engaging
Affiliate Museums and Informal Institutions (TEAM II) program, within
the Office of STEM Engagement, provides support for museums and
planetariums to enhance programs related to space exploration,
aeronautics, space and earth science, or microgravity.
We request at least $130 million for NASA's Office of STEM
Engagement, including at least $15 million for the Teams Engaging
Affiliate Museums and Informal Institutions (TEAM II) program.
In addition, NASA's Science Mission Directorate supports museums
and museum networks through its Science Activation program, which
connects competitively-selected teams across the country with NASA
infrastructure teams. Last year, more than 50 teams supported by the
program engaged more than 21 million learner interactions in all 50
States. To continue the program's evolution and strong reach
nationwide, we request at least $47 million for the SciAct Program.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
NOAA's Office of Education offers two grant programs to advance
education in areas relevant to NOAA's mission, including support for
museums, zoos, aquariums, and science centers. These programs help
enhance the understanding and use of environmental information to
promote informed decision-making by educators, students, and the
public.
--The Bay Watershed Education and Training (B-WET) program promotes
place-based experiential learning for K-12 students and related
professional development for educators.
--Environmental Literacy grants support activities that inspire
people to use Earth system science to improve ecosystem
stewardship and increase resilience to environmental hazards.
For more than 15 years, these grants have supported museum
exhibitions, K-12 curricula, online education resources,
citizen science activities, out-of-school programs, and
professional development for educators.
As the need for enhanced education about our changing climate and
community resilience increases, there is a need for a concurrent
increase in the budget for the Office of Education. We request at least
$35 million for NOAAs Office of Education.
We continue to thank the subcommittee for all its support of a
robust science and education budget. You have demonstrated your support
for crucial programs that promote STEAM education for our Nation's
students. Like our organizations, you recognize these are vital
investments in our future, and we thank you in advance for taking
action accordingly.
Our organizations stand ready to be of service to your work. We are
always happy to provide examples of the ways that museums are
contributing to their communities and helping to advance local,
regional, and national priorities. With our networks of hundreds of
community-based institutions, these examples can be in or near each
Congressional district.
Founded in 1973, the Association of Science and Technology Centers
(ASTC) is a network of nearly 700 science and technology centers and
museums, and allied organizations, engaging more than 110 million
people annually across North America and in almost 50 countries. With
its members and partners, ASTC works towards a vision of increased
understanding of-and engagement with-science and technology among all
people. www.astc.org.
The American Alliance of Museums (AAM) has been bringing museums
together since 1906, helping to develop standards and best practices,
gathering and sharing knowledge, and providing advocacy on issues of
concern to the entire museum community. Representing more than 35,000
individual museum professionals and volunteers, institutions, and
corporate partners serving the museum field, the Alliance stands for
the broad scope of the museum community. www.aam-us.org.
The Association of Children's Museums (ACM) champions children's
museums worldwide. With more than 460 members in 50 States and 19
countries, ACM leverages the collective knowledge of children's museums
through convening, sharing, and dissemination.
www.childrensmuseums.org.
The Association of Science Museum Directors (ASMD) is a non-profit,
professional association of natural history and other science museum
directors. Our community of museum leaders gathers to share experiences
and discuss issues related to the advancement of our respective
organizations to benefit society and the planet. www.asmd-us.org.
[This statement was submitted by Christofer Nelson, President and
CEOAssociation of Science and Technology Centers; Laura Lott, President
and CEO, American Alliance of Museums; Arthur G. Affleck, III,
Executive Director, Association of Children's Museums; and Bonnie
Styles, Executive Director, Association of Science Museum Directors]
______
Prepared Statement of Board Member of Youth Advocate Programs, Inc.
Chairman Cartwright, Ranking Member Aderholt, and members of the
subcommittee, my name is Judge Thomas Foster, and I am a retired Kansas
District judge, a current member of the National Council of Juvenile
and Family Court Judges, and a board member of Youth Advocates Program.
I am pleased to submit testimony on behalf of a coalition of
organizations, co-led by the Youth First Initiative and Columbia
Justice Lab's Youth Corrections Leaders for Justice. These
organizations work to assist States in building on the past two decades
of successful youth justice system accountability, reform, and
improvement through expanding access to more effective and cost-
efficient community-based alternatives for youth. Federal investments
play a key role in juvenile justice efforts to protect youth, prevent
delinquency, and promote safe communities. To accomplish these goals,
we seek $100 million for a new initiative in the Department of
Justice's (DOJ) Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
(OJJDP) that would support grants to States to implement a robust
planning process to (1) close failed and ineffective youth prisons, (2)
expand access to more effective and cost-efficient community-based
alternatives, and (3) address economic concerns, such as the re-
employment of facility workers and the economic impact of facility
closures on communities. I want to thank the subcommittee for its past
funding of Federal juvenile justice programs and urge it to support
this new initiative at OJJDP to support States in moving from costly
and ineffective incarceration to more effective community-based
alternatives that produce dramatically better outcomes for youth, their
families, and communities.
For more than four decades, YAP has supported youth and families
involved in the youth justice and child welfare systems as well as
adults in the criminal legal system. YAP has provided individuals and
their communities with proven, effective, and economical community-
based alternatives to institutional placement. YAP promotes expanding
access to these resources for families and communities as an effective
way to improve youth and family outcomes and community safety. YAP now
serves youth and families in Kansas and 32 other States and Washington
DC.
In 2014, the Kansas legislature funded a bipartisan comprehensive
review of the Kansas juvenile justice system. I was honored to have
been appointed by our Supreme Court Chief Justice to serve on this
committee. The committee collected information and invited national
experts to present data and information related to juvenile justice and
best practices. Dr. Edward Mulvey, University of Pittsburgh, and Dr.
Mark Lipsey, Vanderbilt University, travelled to Kansas to meet with us
and make presentations which are available for review at the KDOC
website.\1\
As a result of this process many modifications were implemented.
The most significant modification was the limitation on the use of
juvenile prison and elimination of the group home system in Kansas. The
Committee was convinced that these out of home placements just did not
work as Kansas was spending over $45,000 per year per child on an
ineffective placement. The committee came to the conclusion that the
out of home placement system could not be improved or salvaged and that
it would be better to close them down and redirect the money to
community-based programs that have been shown to work, such as
intensive mentoring, family therapy, mental health services, parenting
education, and substance use treatment. While Kansas closed its
facilities, we still needed to identify and redirect funding to more
effective community-based programs. YAP was one of the first programs
brought to Kansas to address the need for community-based and in home
services. Federal resources are needed now to galvanize and support
Kansas' statewide effort to plan and implement its juvenile justice
system transformation that will result in a better outcome for young
people, increased system accountability, and safer communities.
Research shows that community-based alternatives perform far better
than the youth prison model; racial and ethnic disparities and abuse of
children, including at facilities nationwide, continue to plague the
youth carceral system; and youth prisons are extremely expensive. Given
these limitations, experts and youth justice leaders--including youth
correctional administrators, judges, prosecutors, and youth advocates--
recommend the closure of failed youth prisons in favor of more
effective community-based alternatives. However, there are many youth
prisons still operating and taking up significant and precious state
resources that could be used to expand access to more effective
alternatives.
There are a range of proven and effective alternatives to youth
incarceration to support. Community mentoring programs that link young
people to trusted adults show strong results. In Harrisburg,
Pennsylvania, Youth Advocates Program found that 97% of program
participants were not convicted or adjudicated of a new offense while
in the program, 85% were living safely in the community at discharge,
and 76% were regularly attending school, had graduated, or attained
their GED at discharge. The NYC Mayor's Office and Urban Institute
found that Credible Messengers' mentoring programs for youth on
probation significantly reduced recidivism for young adults on
probation by 69% after 12 months. At the 24-month mark, it was still
57% lower. These results show that evidence-based alternatives
delivered in the community significantly reduce recidivism. YAP just
completed a 2-year project in 15 jurisdictions across the Nation where
it invested private foundation funds in the local juvenile justice
systems to support expanded access to effective alternatives to youth
incarceration. 80% of the highest risk youth served were diverted from
youth prisons, and at the end of the project jurisdictions decided to
sustain these programs with their own funds because they found the
alternatives to incarceration to be more effective.
Incarceration contributes to racial disparities and poor long-term
outcomes for youth. Racial inequities in incarceration are pervasive--
Black youth are 5 times more likely and Latinx youth 3 times more
likely than their white peers to be incarcerated for similar offenses.
Excluding Indian Country, American Indians make up 3% of girls and 1.5%
of boys in juvenile facilities but less than 1% of youth nationally.
Long term outcomes for incarcerated youth include lower educational
attainment and employment; high rates of homelessness; behavioral and
emotional problems; poor physical health; and problems in forming
stable family relationships. Physical and sexual assault and extended
solitary confinement also are common. Incarceration also increases
recidivism by disconnecting youth from their families, religious and
spiritual connections, schools, and other pro-social experiences. As a
result, incarcerated youth are more likely to have entered adult prison
by age 25.
Closing youth prisons both saves money and increases public safety.
The cost of youth incarceration is astronomically high, especially
considering these poor outcomes. According to one recent study, the
average cost of the most expensive confinement option for a young
person in 48 States was $588 per day, or $214,620 per year--almost 15
times more than the U.S. spends per pupil for 1 year of K-12 public
education. A Washington State Study showed that youth detention
produced fewer benefits in reduced crime and other outcomes than many
less costly programs. Spending $1 for diversion and mentoring programs
resulted in $3.36 in benefits of reduced crime, while multisystemic
therapy, a more service intensive alternative, produced $13.36 in
benefits.
Such community-based alternatives, including mentoring programs,
evidence-based therapies, and small, rehabilitative and home-like
facilities for the very few young people who commit serious crimes cost
much less than prison and are safer for youth and staff. New York
City's investment in small, homelike facilities resulted in a 53% drop
in youth arrests and a 68% reduction in youth placement. Texas
decreased youth incarceration by 38% and further decreased youth
arrests by 49%. After California's closure of youth prisons in 2016,
youth arrests for violent crimes in the state fell to less than half
what they were in 1990. These States have demonstrated that closing
failed youth prisons and diverting kids to community-based alternatives
both save money and increase public safety.
Americans nationwide support Federal funding to incentivize States
to close failed youth prisons to capture resources to reinvest in more
effective and cost-efficient community-based alternatives. In a 2021
Youth First Initiative poll, 78 percent of adults endorsed the proposal
to provide Federal funds to support State planning and consultation
with stakeholders to close youth prisons and invest savings to expand
access to community-based alternatives and provide workforce
development services to workers from closed facilities. Additionally,
residents polled in Pennsylvania and Virginia showed that 81 percent of
Pennsylvanians and 85 percent of Virginians support a youth justice
system that focuses on prevention and rehabilitation. In both States,
more than 80 percent of respondents support providing financial
incentives for States to invest in alternatives to youth incarceration.
At a time when our Nation is debating how to reduce the negative
impacts of the justice system while increasing public safety, I urge
you to fully fund in FY23 the new $100 million initiative at OJJDP
because it would accomplish the key goals of improving outcomes,
addressing racial disparities, reducing long-term costs, and ensuring
public safety.
Thank you so much for your time and consideration of these
important issues. Please do not hesitate to contact me at
[email protected] or Jenny Collier at
[email protected] if you have any questions or need
additional information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.doc.ks.gov/juvenile-services/Workgroup/
Presentations/Lipsey.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Prepared Statement of Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission
The Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission (CRITFC) is pleased
to share our views on the Department of Commerce's FY 2023 budget and
has identified the following funding needs:
1. $70.5 million for Salmon Management Activities of which:
--$26.5 million supports Mitchell Act Programs to implement reforms
called for in the ``Conservation of Columbia Basin Fish'' and
the Federal Columbia River Power System (FCRPS) Biological
Opinion, of which $6.7 million (or 25 percent of the enacted
amount) is directed to the Tribes to enhance natural stock
recovery programs.
--$43.5 million for the Pacific Salmon Treaty, of which $43.5 million
is annual operations for the implementation of the 2019-2028
Agreement.
2. $100 million for the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund to
support on-the-ground salmon restoration activities.
3. $4 million for Columbia River Pinniped Management to support
implementation of the MMPA Section 120(f) permit issued by NOAA-F in
2019.
4. $80.8 million for the Integrated Ocean Observing Systems (IOOS)
program to continue the study of estuary and near-shore environment for
multiple purposes including the restoration of treaty trust aquatic
resources.
background
The Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission (CRITFC) was
founded in 1977 by the four Columbia River treaty Tribes: Confederated
Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, Confederated Tribes of the
Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon, Confederated Tribes and Bands of
the Yakama Nation, and the Nez Perce Tribe. CRITFC provides
coordination and technical assistance to the Tribes in regional,
national, and international efforts to protect and restore the
fisheries and fish habitat.
In 1855, the United States entered treaties with the four
Tribes\1\. The Tribes' ceded millions of acres of our homelands to the
U.S. and the U.S. pledged to honor our ancestral rights, including the
right to fish at all usual and accustomed places. Unfortunately, a long
history of hydroelectric development, habitat destruction, and over-
fishing by non-Indians brought the salmon resource to the edge of
extinction with many stocks extirpated and 12 salmon and steelhead
trout populations in the Columbia River basin listed under the
Endangered Species Act (ESA).
Today, the treaties form the bedrock of the region's fisheries
management. The CRITFC Tribes are among the most successful fishery
managers in the country leading restoration efforts and working with
State, Federal, and private entities. CRITFC's comprehensive plan, Wy-
Kan-Ush-Mi Wa-Kish-Wit, outlines principles and objectives designed to
halt the decline of salmon, lamprey, and sturgeon populations and
rebuild the fisheries to levels that support Tribal ceremonial,
subsistence, and economic purposes. To achieve these objectives, the
plan emphasizes strategies that rely on natural production, healthy
rivers, and collaborative efforts.
Several key regional agreements were completed in 2008. The
Columbia Basin Fish Accords set out parameters for management of the
Federal Columbia River Power System (FCRPS) for fish passage. New
agreements in U.S. v. Oregon and the Pacific Salmon Commission
established fishery management criteria for fisheries ranging from the
Columbia River to Southeast Alaska. The U.S. v. Oregon agreement also
contains provisions for hatchery management in the Columbia River
Basin. We have successfully secured other funds to support our efforts
to implement these agreements, including funds from the Bonneville
Power Administration (BPA), the Department of Interior, and the
Southern Fund of the Pacific Salmon Treaty. Continued Federal support
is needed to accomplish the management objectives embodied in the
agreements.
1. salmon management activities: $70.5 million
Columbia River (Mitchell Act) Hatchery Program.--The Mitchell Act
program was created in 1938 to mitigate for the impacts caused by the
construction and operation of the Bonneville Dam. These production fish
fuel West Coast salmon fisheries from the Oregon to Southeast Alaska,
and to the interior Columbia River basin worth millions of dollars.
Mitchell Act facilities operation and maintenance (O&M) funding has
been static for years and eroded buying power of this account results
in reduced numbers of fish produced and reduced fish health which
results in fewer fish for harvest. A modest increase of O&M budgets to
$26.7 million would help these facilities produce targeted numbers of
fish to benefit Columbia River and West Coast fisheries and assist
these Mitchell Act programs to begin integrating modern fisheries
management and incorporate the dual needs of fish production and ESA
salmon recovery opportunities.
Pacific Salmon Treaty Program.--CRITFC supports the U.S. Section
recommendation of $43.5 million for implementation of the revised
Pacific Salmon Treaty (Treaty). The Department of Commerce principally
funds programs conducted by the States of Washington, Oregon, Idaho and
Alaska and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS.) Unfortunately,
the cost of programs conducted by the States to fulfill national
commitments created by the Treaty continue to be substantially greater
than the funding provided in the NMFS budget. Consequently, the States
have supplemented the Federal Treaty appropriations from other sources,
including State general funds. Many of those funding sources are
limited or no longer available and this has been exacerbated by the
ongoing global pandemic.
2. pacific coastal salmon recovery fund: $100 million
The Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund (PCSRF) was developed in
2000 by Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Alaska, and the treaty Tribes to
fulfill the unmet needs for the conservation and restoration of salmon
stocks shared in the Tribal, State, and international fisheries. Since
that time, the number of entities eligible for receiving funding has
grown.
PCSRF has funded 417 Yakama, Umatilla, Warm Springs, Nez Perce, and
CRITFC Tribal salmon recovery projects. These projects have contributed
greatly to the Pacific Northwest effort to avoid extinction of Columbia
Basin salmon species and their habitat. Accomplishments from CRITFC and
our member Tribes include 4,838 stream miles monitored; 417 miles of
stream made accessible to salmon; 5,060 acres of riparian area treated;
11,341 acres conserved by acquisition or lease; and 2 million salmon
fry/smolts released annually. PCSRF is vital to fulfill the region's
goal of full salmon recovery, to provide sustainability of the fishery,
and meaningful exercise of the treaty-reserved rights by the Columbia
River treaty Tribes.
The co-managers have developed an extensive matrix of performance
standards to address accountability and performance standards, which
includes the use of monitoring protocols to systematically track
current and future projects basin-wide. The PCSRF projects are based on
the best science, provide adequate monitoring, and address limiting
factors affecting salmon restoration. Projects undertaken by the Tribes
are consistent with CRITFC's salmon restoration plan and the
programmatic areas identified by Congress.
We recommend a funding level of $100 million for the PCSRF FY 2023
allocation. Long-term economic benefits can be achieved by making PCSRF
investments on-the-ground to rebuild sustainable, harvestable salmon
populations into the future.
3. columbia river pinniped management: $4 million
Columbia River Section 120 Pinniped Removal Program.--Since 2002,
sea lions in the Columbia River have significantly impacted endangered
and threatened stocks of salmon and steelhead. Sea lions also prey on
Pacific lamprey and mature sturgeon below Bonneville Dam, and on listed
salmon and steelhead runs in the Willamette River and other tributaries
to the Columbia River. Thirty-two wild salmon populations bound for the
upper Columbia and Snake rivers are vulnerable to predation by sea
lions immediately below Bonneville Dam. Other impacted ESA-listed
salmon and steelhead populations include lower Columbia River chinook,
lower Columbia River steelhead, middle Columbia River steelhead, Snake
River Basin steelhead, upper Willamette River chinook, and Upper
Willamette River steelhead. All six of these are listed as
``threatened'' under the ESA.
Despite non-lethal and limited lethal-take measures, the number of
salmon and steelhead consumed by sea lions below Bonneville Dam more
than doubled between 2006 and 2015, as larger Steller sea lions
increased in numbers and began to take a higher toll; management and
Federal authorization was initially focused exclusively on California
sea lions. To respond to this change, Congress amended the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) in December 2018 to provide State and
Tribal resource managers greater flexibility to manage sea lions. In
August 2020, the CRITFC member Tribes, along with Oregon, Idaho, and
Washington received a MMPA Section 120(f) permit from the National
Marine Fisheries Service to actively manage pinniped populations on the
lower Columbia River and its tributaries. The authority under this
permit increases the scope and scale of current management and expands
lethal removal to include Steller sea lions. It also expands the area
of potential removals and it will increase removal activity to 10 per
year. Previously, removing sea lions required a multistep process,
including branding animals and identifying repeat offenders. This new
authority has streamlined this process and, as a result, will increase
the number of trappings and lethal removals in the future. To fully
implement the program under the new permit, the States and Tribes are
requesting $4 million in Federal funds. This will supplement funds that
the States and Tribes are currently contributing.
4. integrated ocean observing systems (ioos) program: $80.8 million
Increase IOOS Funding Levels.--Study of the estuary and near-shore
environment is critical to understanding not only the impacts to treaty
trust resources, but also actions needed to restore these resources.
CRITFC has expanded its work to include the Coastal Margin Observation
and Prediction Program (CMOP) whose main funding is through the NOAA-
administered Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) Program. Since
2020, we have partnered with the Northwest Association of Networked
Ocean Observing Systems (NANOOS) through our acquisition of the CMOP
program which has been a NANOOS-supported effort since 2004. The CMOP
infrastructure, now operated by CRITFC, has been integral to NANOOS for
decades and will remain so. The multi-institutional collaborative
structure of the IOOS regional associations ensures that the Tribes are
integrated into the governance and decision-making processes.
We strongly encourage a funding level of $69.5 million be invested
in the regional IOOS network and its partners using the funding for
Coastal, Ocean, and Great Lakes Observing Systems to refurbish aging
infrastructure, modernize equipment, and address critical issues facing
our collective communities. Expansion of IOOS capabilities in
biological monitoring is important to CRITFC's interest in improving
ocean conditions for salmon and allow regional partnerships to continue
to address Biden Administration priorities for climate change, racial
equity, and the economy.
Improve Collaboration between NOAA Programs.--OAA should aim to
create a comprehensive understanding of the Columbia River estuary and
the near shore environment and work to improve the collaboration
between these programs. CRITFC has collaborated with NOAA's Office of
Coast Survey (OSC) in numeric and hydrodynamic modelling and plan to
expand this effort to include hydrographic surveys in the confluence
areas of Zone 6 of the Columbia River mainstem, where our Tribes
primarily exercise their treaty-reserved fishing rights. This
collaboration should be expanded with funding at $11.3 million in the
Navigation, Observations and Positioning line to address issues of
floodplain restoration and flooding to improve salmon survival.
In summary, CRITFC and our four member Tribes have developed the
capacity and infrastructure to become the regional leaders in restoring
and rebuilding Columbia Basin salmon populations. Our collective
efforts protect our treaty-reserved fishing rights and provides
healthy, harvestable salmon populations for all citizens to enjoy. We
will be pleased to provide any additional information that this
subcommittee may require.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Treaty with the Yakama Tribe, June 6, 1855, 12 Stat. 951;
Treaty with the Tribes of Middle Oregon, June 25, 1855, 12 Stat. 963;
Treaty with the Umatilla Tribe, June 9, 1855, 12 Stat. 945; Treaty with
the Nez Perce Tribe, June 11, 1855, 12 Stat. 9.
[This statement was submitted by Casey Mitchell, Chair]
______
Prepared Statement of Consortium of Social Science Associations
On behalf of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA),
I offer this written testimony for inclusion in the official committee
record. For fiscal year (FY) 2023, COSSA urges the Committee to
appropriate:
--$11 billion for the National Science Foundation
--$2 billion for the Census Bureau
--$50 million for the National Institute of Justice
--$60 million for the Bureau of Justice Statistics
First, allow me to thank the Committee for its long-standing,
bipartisan support for scientific research. Strong, sustained funding
for all U.S. science agencies is essential if we are to make progress
toward improving the health and economic competitiveness of the Nation.
The need for increased investment in science has become even more
pronounced in light of the disruptions caused over the past 2 years by
the COVID-19 pandemic.
COSSA serves as a united voice for a broad, diverse network of
organizations, institutions, communities, and stakeholders who care
about a successful and vibrant social and behavioral science research
enterprise. We represent the collective interests of all STEM
disciplines engaged in the rigorous study of why and how humans behave
as they do as individuals, groups and within institutions,
organizations, and society.
Social and behavioral science research is supported across the
Federal Government, including at the National Science Foundation and
the Department of Justice. Further, Federal statistics produced by the
Census Bureau and other Federal statistical agencies provide data
needed to conduct social science research to inform policy decisions.
Taken together, Federal social and behavioral science and statistical
data help provide answers to complex, human-centered questions.
In short, knowledge derived from social and behavioral science
research has made our population healthier, our democracy fairer, our
Nation safer, and our economy stronger, and not just in times of
crisis. Without these sciences, policymaking on major national and
global issues would not be based on evidence, and billions of dollars
would be wasted.
national science foundation
COSSA joins the broader scientific community in support of $11
billion for the National Science Foundation (NSF) in FY 2023. The U.S.
scientific enterprise, including NSF, requires stability,
predictability, and sustainable funding growth, as well as Federal
policies that are patient and can tolerate a reasonable amount of risk
in order to achieve the greatest payoff.
Supporting All of STEM
NSF is the only U.S. Federal agency tasked with supporting basic
research across all fields of science. NSF supports about a quarter of
all federally funded basic scientific research conducted at colleges
and universities nationwide and serves as the largest single funder of
university-based basic social and behavioral science research. Though
NSF's Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences Directorate (SBE)-one
of eight research directorates at NSF-represents less than five percent
of the entire NSF research budget, it supports around two-thirds of
total Federal funding for academic basic research in the social and
behavioral sciences (excluding psychology). As the primary funding
source for the majority of our disciplines, stagnant or reduced funding
for SBE has an outsized impact on the social and behavioral science
community. As increased investment is made in NSF, we are hopeful the
social, behavioral and economic sciences will see commensurate
investments.
Further, while by far the smallest of the research directorates,
SBE's impact is huge. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering
and Medicine stated in its 2017 consensus report, The Value of Social,
Behavioral, and Economic Sciences to National Priorities \1\, that
``nearly every major challenge the United States faces-from alleviating
unemployment to protecting itself from terrorism-requires understanding
the causes and consequences of people's behavior. Even societal
challenges that at first glance appear to be issues only of medicine or
engineering or computer science have social and behavioral
components.'' We all observed first-hand the importance of
understanding behavioral and social systems over the last 2 years as
the world collectively worked to gain control of the COVID-19 pandemic.
From mask mandates to vaccine hesitancy, the social and behavioral
sciences have been shining light on this uniquely human challenge and
informing policy solutions at all levels.
Keeping NSF Competitive
As we speak, a conference committee is considering sweeping
innovation legislation (the America COMPETES Act) that contains
reauthorization provisions for NSF and seeks to push the agency into
new frontiers in technology transfer and convergence research. As the
committee knows, NSF has already started moving in this direction with
the establishment of the Technology, Innovation and Partnerships
Directorate (TIP) in FY 2022. COSSA hopes that future support for and
investment in TIP and related activities is also met with a commitment
to maintaining the NSF's defining characteristic, which is to be the
incubator for basic scientific discovery across all areas of science.
NSF's investigator-initiated, discovery-driven identity is what makes
it special and has kept the American science enterprise at the leading
edge of innovation. We look forward to seeing how social and behavioral
science will be incorporated into the work of the new TIP directorate
in addition to ongoing support for social science across the
foundation.
census bureau, u.s. department of commerce
COSSA requests that the Committee appropriate $2 billion for the
Census Bureau in FY 2023. Social scientists across the country rely on
the Census Bureau for accurate, timely, objective, and relevant data to
better understand the U.S. population and to produce findings that help
us shape policies that better serve the American people.
After a decade in which the Census Bureau received inconsistent and
delayed funding, had to curtail essential research and testing of
operations, and experienced significant pandemic-related disruptions,
investments are needed to not only help the agency recover, but to also
help it improve the collection and delivery of official statistics for
the Nation. A modest increase in funding in FY 2023 could help the
Census Bureau recover from years of postponed enhancements, sustain and
strengthen its mission, and pursue numerous necessary operational
innovations.
In addition, COSSA calls on Congress to fully fund the American
Community Survey (ACS) and maintain its status as a mandatory Federal
survey. The ACS is the only source of comparable, consistent, timely,
and high-quality demographic and socio-economic data for all
communities in the U.S. As a component of the Decennial Census, the ACS
is a ``mandatory'' national survey. The Census Bureau needs additional
funds to expand the ACS sample size (which has not been expanded since
2011) to produce more timely, granular data for a significant number of
geographies and sub-populations than currently achievable. This would
provide communities more timely data to fill in any gaps in the 2020
Decennial Census results caused by the pandemic.
national institute of justice, u.s. department of justice
COSSA requests that the Committee appropriate at least $50 million
for the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) within the U.S. Department
of Justice's (DOJ) Office of Justice Programs (OJP). NIJ provides
funding for research, development, and evaluation projects at
institutions across the country to shed light on the most pressing
issues facing our Nation's criminal justice system today, including the
drivers of domestic radicalization, responses to the opioid epidemic,
improving school safety, advancing forensic science, and fostering
positive relationships between law enforcement and the communities they
serve-not to mention our urgent need to better understand and respond
to the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the incarcerated population
and on our court systems.
We recognize that tough funding tradeoffs must be made each year;
however, we were disappointed to see the 19 percent cut to NIJ in the
final FY 2022 appropriations bill. Despite our growing need for
objective, science-backed solutions, over the past decade, NIJ's
purchasing power has dropped by 40 percent due to the combined effect
of declining appropriations and inflation. Compounding this pressure
are Congressionally mandated directives for specific activities, nearly
always without the inclusion of additional funding to the agency's
bottom line. As a result, 60 percent of NIJ's FY 2022 appropriation
will be directed to Congressionally requested research, not including a
number of additional projects requested without a specifically
allocated funding level. An increase to the NIJ base budget would give
the agency the flexibility to direct funding to the most pressing and
promising areas of science across all domains of justice research,
while still being responsive to topics of Congressional concern.
bureau of justice statistics, u.s. department of justice
Similarly, we were disappointed by the 11 percent cut to the Burau
of Justice Statistics in the FY 2022 appropriations bill. As the
Department's principal statistical agency, the Bureau of Justice
Statistics produces high-quality data on all aspects of the United
States criminal justice system, including corrections, courts, crime
type, law enforcement personnel and expenditures, Federal processing of
criminal cases, Indian country justice statistics, and victims of
crime. COSSA urges the Committee to appropriate at least $60 million
for the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).
Steady declines in funding have resulted in antiquated systems and,
especially, staffing shortfalls, which can only be resolved by
sustained investment. Despite a growing demand from policymakers,
researchers, and other stakeholders for high-quality criminal justice
data across an expanding array of variables, BJS' purchasing power has
dropped by nearly one-third (32.7 percent) since FY 2012 due to the
combined effect of declining appropriations and inflation. Additional
funding would allow the agency to modernize its data collection and
dissemination systems, hire the necessary experts, and to begin to
develop the next generation of statistical products to keep pace with
the ever-changing criminal justice environment.
Thank you for the opportunity to offer this statement. Please do
not hesitate to contact me should you require additional information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.nap.edu/catalog/24790/the-value-of-social-
behavioral-and-economic-sciences-to-national-priorities.
[This statement was submitted by Wendy A. Naus, Executive Director]
______
Prepared Statement of Daughters of Penelope
Chair Jeanne Shaheen, Ranking Member Jerry Moran, and distinguished
members of the Commerce, Justice, and Science Appropriations
subcommittee, the Daughters of Penelope (DOP), an international service
organization for women of Greek heritage and Philhellenes, which is
dedicated, in part, to supporting victims of domestic violence, is
requesting meaningful support for Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) (Office
of Justice Programs--OVC) and Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) (Office
of Violence Against Women--OVW) programs at the Department of Justice.
We thank Congress for passing the VOCA Fix to Sustain the Crime
Victims Fund Act of 2021, which will stabilize the Crime Victims Fund.
To continue funding the essential and lifesaving services to crime
victims, Congress must provide a Crime Victims Fund cap for FY2023 that
is set at $2.65 billion; and as the President's FY2023 budget
rightfully proposes, without any transfers to programs not authorized
under the VOCA statute. Moreover, we also are grateful to Congress for
passing a strong bipartisan-backed reauthorization of VAWA through
2027. Now, it must be properly funded. Therefore, we support-at a
minimum-the President's strong proposed investment FY23 request of $1
billion for VAWA programs.
voca programs & crime victims fund
The Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) created the Crime Victims Fund
(CVF), which serves as a mechanism to fund compensation and services
for the Nation's victims of Federal crime. The Fund is comprised of
money from criminals, and by law, the Fund is dedicated solely to
victim services. For example, the Fund is used to help pay for state
victim compensation and assistance programs and grants to victim
service providers. A considerable amount supports victims' out-of-
pocket expenses such as medical and counseling fees, lost wages, and
funeral and burial costs. In FY2019, 6.5 million victims of violent
crime, including domestic violence, received services through Victim
Assistance programs, according to the Department of Justice.\1\ The
Fund provides formula grants to over 11,000 local victim assistance
programs.\2\ These agencies provided services to nearly millions of
victims of crime, including victims of murder, assault and sexual
assault, domestic violence, child abuse, stalking and elder abuse, and
others.
The Crime Victims Fund is financed by fines, forfeitures, or other
penalties paid by Federal crime offenders. Therefore, the Crime Victims
Fund is not funded by taxpayer dollars. However, it is unfortunate
Congress often carves out funds from the CVF to use as offsets for
other government programs. Because CVF is comprised of non-taxpayer
dollars, it should not be considered available for use for non-VOCA
programs in the Federal budget. Moreover, as the former Congressional
Victims' Rights Caucus would advocate, ``not only does raiding the
Crime Victims Fund violate the intent of the law, but it violates the
[VOCA] statute itself . . . '' Therefore, we recommend to the
subcommittee that the Fund be used only for programs authorized under
the VOCA statute. However, recent appropriations bills passed by
Congress, and previous administrations' budget requests, have carved
out funds from the Crime Victims Fund for non-VOCA authorized programs.
As example, in FY2022, Congress transferred $575 million from the CVF
to VAWA programs, the highest level. We applaud the President's budget
for rightfully eliminating transfer, and we request the elimination of
transfers that harm the Fund's long-term viability and ability to
commit fully to crime victims.
Finally, we recommend setting the Crime Victims' Fund cap to at
least $2.65 billion. Congress established an appropriation cap on funds
available for distribution intended to maintain the CVF as a stable
source of support for future victim services. At the cap level,
Congress will not only ensure the continuation of enhanced services to
victims to meet their needs, but it also does not contribute or add to
the National debt or deficit because these are non-taxpayer funds.
vawa programs
Domestic violence is a pervasive, life-threatening crime affecting
millions of individuals across our Nation regardless of age, gender,
socio-economic status, race or religion. The statistics are alarming.
According to the National Network to End Domestic Violence (NNEDV)\3\:
--More than 1 in 3 women have experienced rape, physical violence,
and/or stalking by an intimate partner in their lifetime.
--Approximately 8 million women are raped, physically assaulted, and/
or stalked by a current or former intimate partner each year.
--1 in 5 women and 1 in 71 men have experienced rape in her or his
lifetime.
--Nationwide, an average of 3 women are killed by a current or former
intimate partner every day.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
and The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS)
2015 Data Brief:
--In the United States, intimate partner contact sexual violence,
physical violence, and/or stalking was experienced by 36.4% (or
43.6 million) of U.S. women during their lifetime.\4\
--One in 4 women and 1 in 7 men have experienced physical violence by
an intimate partner during their lifetime.\5\
Also, of concern, are the following stats:
--On average, nearly 20 people per minute are physically abused by an
intimate partner in the United States. During 1 year, this
equates to more than 10 million women and men.\6\
--Nationwide, an average of 3 women are killed by a current or former
intimate partner every day.\7\
--Approximately 15.5 million children are exposed to domestic
violence annually.\8\
Our nation's response to intimate partner and domestic violence is
driven by VAWA programs. Each of these programs is critical to ensuring
that victims are safe, that offenders are held accountable, and that
our communities are more secure. Thanks to VAWA, steady progress has
been made there are many victims who still suffer in silence. A 2021
24-hour survey of domestic violence programs across the U.S. found that
although 20,701 Hotline calls were received (averaging more than 14
calls every minute). However, 9,444 requests for services (such as
emergency shelter, transportation, or legal representation) went unmet
because programs lacked the resources to provide them.\9\ Sixty-four
percent of the unmet services were for Housing and Emergency Shelter.
In total, 70,032 victims were served in one day. The unconscionable gap
between need and resources only widens.
daughters of penelope's work to support domestic violence shelters
Why are VAWA and VOCA programs important to the Daughters of
Penelope? In addition to our chapters supporting domestic violence
shelters in their respective local communities, the Daughters of
Penelope is a national sponsor and stakeholder of two domestic violence
shelters-Penelope House in Mobile, Alabama, and Penelope's Place in
Brockton, Massachusetts. In the past, the Daughters of Penelope has
supported WIN Hellas, which is an NGO based in Athens, Greece, that is
active in the prevention of violence against women.
Penelope House was the first shelter established in Alabama when it
opened its doors in 1979. Since then, Penelope House is recognized as a
model shelter for others to emulate. VAWA and VOCA grant funding has
been critical in helping Penelope House to meet its mission of
providing safety, protection, and support to victims of domestic
violence and their children through shelter, advocacy, and individual
and community education. Penelope House has been awarded VAWA and VOCA
grants from the following programs: Shelter Services, Court Advocate
Program, and Transitional Living Program. Portions of these grants help
to fund the case managers, case and court advocates, and children's
counselors and program coordinators, among other employees who help to
provide the life-saving support to domestic violence victims and their
children.
statistics--effectiveness and importance of vawa & voca grant funding
--Historically, VOCA/VAWA grant funding more than 25% of Penelope
House's budget.
Penelope House's Court Advocacy Program is funded by VOCA & VAWA.
Its 2021 stats, which were all increases, yet still impacted by the
coronavirus pandemic, for clients served were:
--Adult Clients: 8,251
--Children: 7,080
--Court Appointments with Clients: 6.761
--Clients Assisted to obtain protection from abuse or no contact
orders: 1,358
VOCA supports the salaries and benefits for seven Court/Victim
Advocates who provide services to victims of domestic violence
throughout Mobile, Washington, Clarke, and Choctaw Counties of Alabama
as they navigate within the court system. (VOCA grant funding has
become increasingly important to Penelope House because its services
were expanded to include more counties in Alabama.)
VAWA supports a full-time Court Advocate Administrative Assistant
and a portion of the salary for a Court/Victim Advocate for the Court
Advocacy Program. The Court Advocate Administrative Assistant provides
administrative support to Court/Victim Advocates and assistance to the
Court Advocacy Supervisor. The assistant also collects and complies
program data needed for the evaluation of the Court Advocacy Program.
The Court Advocate Administrative Assistant is dually trained to serve
as a Court/Victim Advocate when necessary, in case of illness or any
other absence of court advocates. Thus, a victim will not have to be
alone as he/she attempts to navigate within the court system.
Penelope House's Emergency Shelter Program is funded by VOCA. It's
2021 service stats-again impacted due to the pandemic-were:
--Adults sheltered: 233
--Children sheltered: 252
--Total Client Service Hours: 4,226.24
--Total Nights of shelter provided: 5,989
--Crisis calls: 1,573
--Meals Served: 15,824
recommendation
The Daughters of Penelope (DOP) is requesting support for Victims
of Crime Act (VOCA) and Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) programs,
which are vital to DOP programs that serve its mission. Specifically,
we request a Crime Victims Fund cap for fiscal year 2023 to be set at
least at $2.65 billion and without any transfers to programs not
authorized under the VOCA statute, as rightfully proposed by the
President's FY23 budget. The Fund is not funded by taxpayer dollars.
Therefore, the cap can be sustained or raised without adding to the
National debt or deficit. We also support the Biden administration's
strong investment request of $1 billion for VAWA programs, at a
minimum.
Clearly, as the missions of domestic violence centers across the
country, such as Penelope House, have expanded into jurisdictions due
to the unfortunate increased need to provide victims' services, the
viability of VOCA and VAWA grants have become increasingly important to
meet the victims' needs.
Thank you for the opportunity to present and submit our written
testimony before the subcommittee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.justice.gov/doj/page/file/1249306/download, Page
17.
\2\ https://www.justice.gov/jmd/page/file/1489521/download, Page
144.
\3\ NNEDV Domestic Violence Fact Sheet, accessed https://nnedv.org/
wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Library_General_DV_SA_Factsheet.pdf.
\4\ https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/2015data-
brief508.pdf.
\5\ https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/intimatepartnerviolence/
fastfact.html f.
\6\ https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_report2010-
a.pdf.
\7\ NNEDV Domestic Violence Fact Sheet, https://nnedv.org/wp-
content/uploads/2020/07/DVSA-Fact-Sheet-July-2020.pdf.
\8\ Ibid.
\9\ 16th Annual Domestic Violence Counts Report, accessed https://
nnedv.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/16th-Annual-Domestic-Violence-
Counts-National-Summary-FINAL.pdf.
[This statement was submitted by Kathy Bizoukas, National
President]
______
Prepared Statement of Demand Progress
Dear Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and members of the committee:
Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony on improving
transparency and accountability at the Department of Justice (DOJ). My
name is Daniel Schuman and I serve as Policy Director at Demand
Progress. We urge you to ensure congressional and public access to
legal opinions rendered by the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) at the
Justice Department that are afforded the force of law.
Before I begin, please allow me to thank you for including language
in the FY 2022 and FY 2021 Commerce, Justice, Science Appropriations
Committee Joint Explanatory Statement concerning OLC opinions. We urge
you to further strengthen that language.
background
OLC's core function, according to an OLC memoranda, is to provide
``controlling advice to Executive Branch officials on questions of law
that are centrally important to the functioning of the Federal
Government.'' \1\ This legal advice ``may effectively be the final word
on the controlling law,'' yet it is routinely withheld from both
Congress and the public.\2\ This withholding in effect creates secret
law that controls agency actions but is shielded from both public
debate and Congressional oversight.
Secrecy undermines accountability. Congress must understand how the
Executive branch interprets the Constitution and implements laws
enacted by Congress. Allowing legal opinions that are accorded
precedential value and the force of law to remain the sole province of
the Executive branch thwarts Congress's lawmaking and oversight
prerogatives. It removes consequences for agency decisions and short-
circuits the public feedback process integral to a functioning
democracy.
Secrecy also poisons the operations of the Office of Legal Counsel.
Public scrutiny would create persistent pressure for the promulgation
of responsible, high quality, objective legal opinions. By contrast,
OLC legal opinion secrecy ensures the most salient incentive for OLC
attorneys is to lean towards a legal opinion that a given
administration desires--not the legal opinion that best reflects the
law. There are high profile examples of this happening.\3\ In some
instances, the OLC ultimately withdrew its own legal opinions when they
came to light; in at least one instance, the OLC secretly concluded
explicit statutory language was unconstitutional and, therefore,
inapplicable to the Executive branch.\4\ Building transparency into the
process helps ensure that OLC legal analyses face scrutiny by Congress,
scholars, and members of the public.
In December 2004, 19 former senior DOJ officials--including the
now-Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel,
Christopher Schroeder--endorsed a document calling for increased
transparency, entitled Principles to Guide the Office of Legal
Counsel.\5\ One principle was that ``OLC should publicly disclose its
written legal opinions in a timely manner, absent strong reasons for
delay or nondisclosure.'' \6\ According to the Principles document,
public disclosure of written legal opinions is important because:
Such disclosure helps to ensure executive branch adherence to the
rule of law and guard against excessive claims of executive
authority. Transparency also promotes confidence in the
lawfulness of governmental action. Making executive branch law
available to the public also adds an important voice to the
development of constitutional meaning--in the courts as well as
among academics, other commentators, and the public more
generally--and a particularly valuable perspective on legal
issues regarding which the executive branch possesses relevant
expertise.\7\
A similar statement on the Office of Legal Counsel and the rule of
law was released in October 2020, with significant contributions from a
comparable array of legal experts.\8\ It endorsed publication of and
transparency for OLC opinions. Specifically, the statement endorsed: a
strong presumption in favor of publishing final OLC opinions;
disclosing OLC advice deemed classified, privileged, or sensitive to
congressional committees when an agency relies upon that advice to
justify a major policy decision or executive action; and releasing a
public index of its memoranda. ``OLC exercises a form of public trust,
and because its views of the law's meaning shape executive action and
policy, Congress and the public both have compelling interests in
understanding the legal basis of executive action.''
Transparency strengthens our constitutional order. It helps ensure
that the checks and balances between the Legislative and Executive
branches function as the framers intended. Congress must have
visibility into how the Executive branch interprets the Constitution
and implements laws enacted by Congress.\9\ The OLC must be
incentivized to render legal opinions that apply the law without fear
or favor.
We note that OLC legal opinions are rendered both as ``formal
opinions'' and ``informal advice.'' Both constitute legal advice that
is binding within the Executive branch, follow a formal approval
process, have precedential value within OLC, and are tracked in an OLC
database. The major distinction is only the format in which the advice
is rendered: a ``formal opinion'' is turned into a carefully formatted,
written document and some are published online, whereas ``informal
advice'' may be rendered as an email or in verbal form, which is then
reduced to a memo for the record. Accordingly, we would apply the
principle of transparency articulated in the Principles document to
disclosure of OLC legal opinions regardless of format.
We are aware of some limited disclosure provisions within the 2010
Office of Legal Counsel Memorandum for Attorneys of the Office: Best
Practices for OLC Legal Advice and Written Opinions.\10\ However, the
last dozen years have demonstrated that this memorandum does not go far
enough to protect the integrity of OLC legal opinions or confidence in
the work of OLC attorneys. Indeed, the 2020 statement by legal experts
declares ``OLC itself has been in crisis for some time.'' The process
outlined in section III of the 2010 Memorandum, under a heading
entitled Opinion Publication and Other Public Disclosure, is exactly
the wrong approach. It describes a system that creates a presumption
that OLC opinions will be withheld unless an arduous process is
followed, with multiple consultations and veto points, and no end date.
It requires that the publication committee affirmatively decide to
publish an opinion.
recommendations
Our request is twofold. First, we ask you to direct the Office of
Legal Counsel to make its opinions publicly available upon issuance,
except in narrow circumstances. The default for the government should
be openness.\11\ Second, we request you direct the Office of Legal
Counsel to release an index of all current OLC opinions and to update
that index on a regular basis.
The default rule must be that OLC legal opinions will be made
publicly available contemporarily with their issuance. While there
necessarily will be exceptions to disclosure, those exceptions should
be narrow, constrained, and used only when necessary. Only Congress can
guarantee this will happen. The FOIA is a powerful remedy, but it is
slow, limited, and evaded by the Executive branch. The language
included in the Joint Explanatory Statements accompanying the FY 2021
and FY 2022 Appropriations bills has thus far been unavailing on OLC
opinion transparency.\12\
To address disclosure exceptions, Congress should direct the OLC to
publicly release and maintain an index of all its opinions. OLC should
publish the name of the opinion; the date it was finalized or revised;
the author's name (i.e., the person who signed it); each recipient's
name; identify whether the opinion has been withdrawn; and other
salient information. Congress and the public should know how many OLC
legal opinions exist. It is astonishing that there has yet to be a full
accounting of the opinions.\13\
There is precedent for an index. The FOIA Improvement Act, enacted
in 2016, established a 25-year limit for the Executive branch to assert
deliberative process privilege as an exemption to a FOIA request.\14\ A
recent lawsuit brought by the Knight First Amendment Center, Francis v.
DOJ, resulted in an agreement whereby the DOJ is producing indexes of
OLC opinions more than 25 years old.\15\ Similarly, the 2020 statement
by legal experts endorsed indices.
We urge that you adopt more vigorous language concerning the Office
of Legal Counsel contained in the report (H. Rept. 117-97) that
accompanied the House Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act for FY 2022. It would fully address the issues
raised above and limit the Justice Department's ability to evade
Congress's directive to make OLC opinions publicly available.
Thank you again for the opportunity to submit this testimony.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Department of Justice, Memorandum for Attorneys of the Office
re: Best Practices for OLC Advice and Written Opinions, July 16, 2010,
available at: https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/olc/legacy/
2010/08/26/olc-legal-advice-opinions.pdf.
\2\ Id.
\3\ See, for example, a Statement by Sen. Patrick Leahy at a
February 26, 2010 hearing before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary
entitled The Office of Professional Responsibility Investigation into
the Office of Legal Counsel Memoranda, in which he said, ``The
fundamental question here is not whether these were shoddy legal memos.
They were shoddy legal memos. Everybody knows that.... It failed to
cite significant case law; it twisted the plain meaning of statutes.
The legal memoranda were designed to achieve an end.'' (emphasis
added). See also a letter from select members of the Senate Committee
on the Judiciary to Attorney General Garland urging the Department of
Justice to not appeal D.C. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson's May 3,
2021 decision ordering the release of an OLC memorandum (May 14, 2021),
available at https://www.durbin.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2021-05-
14%20Letter%20to%20AG%20Garland.pdf. ``Given the gravity of the
misconduct underlying OLC's March 2019 memo and DOJ's apparent
misrepresentations when attempting to conceal the memo from the public
. . . .''
\4\ ``Report on the President's Surveillance Program,'' by the
Offices of the Inspectors General of the Department of Defense, the
Department of Justice, the Central Intelligence Agency, the National
Security Agency, and the Office of the Director of National
Intelligence (July 10, 2009), at 14, available at https://
oig.justice.gov/reports/2015/PSP-09-18-15-full.pdf.
\5\ ``Principles to Guide the Office of Legal Counsel'' (Dec. 21,
2004), available at: https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/
viewcontent.cgi?article=2927&context=faculty_scholarship.
\6\ Id.
\7\ Id. (emphasis added).
\8\ ``The Office of Legal Counsel and the Rule of Law,'' American
Constitution Society (October 2020), available at: https://
www.acslaw.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/OLC-ROL-Doc-103020.
pdf.
\9\ For example: the Department of Justice issued a secret Office
of Legal Counsel opinion at the request of the Executive branch that
authorized Executive branch employees to engage in torture. The opinion
was unfounded and withdrawn when it came to light. Nevertheless, the
DOJ would not prosecute the officials who obtained the advice because
they were acting in conformity with an OLC opinion and the DOJ as a
policy declines to prosecute those who follow its advice. This kind of
circular reasoning undermines the rule of law. See ``Statement of the
Attorney General Regarding Investigation into the Interrogation of
Certain Detainees,'' Office of Public Affairs (June 30, 2011) ``I made
clear at that time that the Department would not prosecute anyone who
acted in good faith and within the scope of the legal guidance given by
the Office of Legal Counsel regarding the interrogation of detainees.''
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/statement-attorney-general-regarding-
investigation-interrogation-certain-detainees.
\10\ See ``Best Practices for OLC Legal Advice and Written
Opinions,'' Office of Legal Counsel (July 2010), available at https://
www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/olc/legacy/2010/08/26/olc-legal-
advice-opinions.pdf
\11\ See ``Freedom of Information Act, Memorandum for the Heads of
Executive Departments and Agencies,'' The White House (January 21,
2009), available at https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-
office/freedom-information-act; ``Freedom of Information Act
Guidelines,'' Office of the Attorney General (March 15, 2022),
available at https://www.justice.gov/ag/page/file/1483516/download.
\12\ While the report language included by the CJS Appropriations
subcommittee in the House of Representatives addressed these issues
squarely, the superseding Joint Explanatory Statement language on OLC
opinions provides wiggle room and defers to the DOJ. See Report,
Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill,
2021, H. Rpt. 116-455, p. 59, https://www.congress.gov/116/crpt/
hrpt455/CRPT-116hrpt455.pdf, superseded by Joint Explanatory Statement,
p. 61, https://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20201221/BILLS-116RCP68-
JES-DIVISION-B.pdf; see Report, Commerce, Justice, Science and Related
Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2020, H. Rpt. 116-101, pp. 45-46, https:/
/www.congress.gov/116/crpt/hrpt101/CRPT-116hrpt101.pdf, superseded by
Joint Explanatory Statement, p. 30, https://appropriations.house.gov/
sites/democrats.appropriations.house.gov/files/HR%201158%20-
%20Division%20B%20-%20CJS%20SOM%20FY20.pdf.
\13\ Congress has previously considered legislation on OLC
opinions. For example, the Senate Judiciary Committee favorably
reported the OLC Reporting Act of 2008 (S. 3501, 110th Congress). We
note the introduction in the 117th Congress of the DOJ OLC Transparency
Act (S. 3858) and the SUNLIGHT Act of 2022 (H.R. 7619).
\14\ Public Law 114-185 (114th Congress). https://www.congress.gov/
bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/337.
\15\ The Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University is
publishing the index on its website. https://knightcolumbia.org/
reading-room/olc-opinions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Prepared Statement of Entomological Society of America
The Entomological Society of America (ESA) respectfully submits
this statement for the official record in support of funding for the
National Science Foundation (NSF). ESA joins the research community by
requesting a robust fiscal year (FY) 2023 appropriation of $11 billion
for NSF, including strong support for the Directorate for Biological
Sciences (BIO). Through activities within BIO, NSF advances the
frontiers of knowledge about complex biological systems at multiple
scales, from molecules and cells to organisms and ecosystems. In
addition, the Directorate contributes to the support of essential
research resources, including biological collections and field
stations. NSF BIO is also the Nation's primary funder of fundamental
research on biodiversity, ecology, and environmental biology.
NSF is the only Federal agency that supports basic research across
all scientific and engineering disciplines, outside of the medical
sciences. Each year, the Foundation supports an estimated 300,000
researchers, scientific trainees, teachers, and students, primarily
through competitive grants to approximately 2,000 colleges,
universities, and other institutions in all 50 States. NSF also plays a
critical role in training the next generation of scientists and
engineers through programs like the Graduate Research Fellowship
Program (GRFP), ensuring that the United States will remain globally
competitive in the future.
NSF-sponsored research in entomology and other basic biological
sciences, primarily supported through NSF BIO, provides the fundamental
discoveries that advance knowledge and facilitate the development of
new technologies and strategies for addressing societal challenges
related to economic growth, national security, and human health.
Because insects constitute two out of every three species, fundamental
research on their biology has provided foundational insights across all
areas of biology, including cell and molecular biology, genomics,
physiology, ecology, behavior, and evolution. In turn, these insights
have been applied toward challenges in a wide range of fields,
including conservation biology, habitat management, livestock
production, and pest management.
Insects have long played an essential role as model organisms for
understanding basic biological processes across all organisms and as
sentinel species to give indications of potential environmental risks
to human populations. For example, insect behavior patterns can be an
indicator of climatic and environmental conditions, as many species and
populations are forced to migrate or adapt due to the impacts of
climate change. One area of NSF-supported research worthy of continued
support is advancing our knowledge of the impact of environmental
changes on important pollinators, including bumblebees. Better
understanding how various factors, including those induced by climate
change, impact bumblebee feeding behavior can help advance innovative
methods to protect these insects and the agricultural economies that
rely heavily on them for pollination.\1\ One recent study funded by the
Systematics and Biodiversity Science cluster within BIO observed
changes in the feeding behavior of bumblebees in response to changes in
both the microbial and sugar content of nectar due to increases in
temperature. This study, in conjunction with other ongoing research in
this complex area, could have significant implications for the
agricultural industry as it seeks to adapt to the impacts of climate
change.\2\
NSF also supports the development of technologies and methods that
directly impact economic sectors that are highly dependent on
entomology. For example, recent GRFP recipients have explored
innovative approaches to managing pest-induced agricultural damage to
commodity crops and insects' behavioral responses to external stimuli,
with significant economic and human health implications. A recent study
led by an NSF GRFP recipient investigated the effectiveness of post-
harvest cold storage in spotted-wing drosophila control. Spotted-wing
drosophila is a uniquely devastating pest of small fruits like
blueberries, raspberries, and strawberries owing to its ability to lay
eggs in ripening fruit. The estimated revenue losses of wild
blueberries due to spotted wing drosophila to amount to nearly $7
million in the State of Maine alone.\3\ The study found that storing
fruit at or near freezing temperatures for 3-5 days resulted in
decreased pest survival. After accounting for slight daily cost
depreciation from holding the crop and the initial investment of
purchasing a cold storage system, farmers could realize individual net
profits of $88,000 to $483,000 over 20 years by utilizing these post-
harvest cold storage protocols.\4\ This practice also has the potential
to reduce the need for pesticides and could prevent unintentional
spread of the pest through shipment and trade.
Another study led by a GRFP recipient sought to determine whether
certain compounds on the outer surface of German cockroaches play a
role in shelter choice and aggregation. These insects are an abundant
household and commercial pest globally, accounting for 15 percent of
pest control industry sales across the U.S. and 40 percent of insect-
related household and structural damage in some States.\5\ Beyond these
economic impacts, German cockroaches also pose health risks as both an
asthma-causing allergen and a potential route of transmission for
bacteria and other pathogens. Determining how cockroaches choose where
to shelter could inform innovative control strategies. The study
demonstrated that one candidate category of compounds, cuticular
hydrocarbons, were not effective in causing the cockroaches to
aggregate.\6\ The chemical cues important for inducing aggregation in
German cockroaches remain unresolved, presenting an important challenge
in urban pest biology and control that requires continued support from
Federal research programs to promote health, well-being, and scientific
understanding.
In addition to funding research, NSF BIO plays a critical role in
the curation, maintenance, and enhancement of physical-biological
collections. These collections and their associated data sets serve a
variety of purposes, and while they are particularly important to the
field of entomology, their value to the broader scientific enterprise
cannot be overstated. Physical collections enable the rapid
identification and mitigation of costly invasive pests that affect
agriculture, forestry, and human and animal health. This is only
achievable because such collections are continuously being updated to
reflect environmental changes, evolutionary developments, and shifting
migratory patterns of invasive species around the world. Furthermore,
new and emerging technologies enable scientists to gain novel insights
from physical historic samples in an ongoing manner.
While collections-focused awards are encouraging, ESA is concerned
by the inconsistent Federal support for biological collections. Recent
advancements in imaging, digitization, and data collection and storage
technologies have caused some to question the necessity of continued
support for existing biological collections. ESA recognizes that
technological development is spurring substantive discussion about the
future of biological collections. However, while these new developments
and advancements will hopefully yield new benefits for biological
research, they are not a replacement for physical biological
collections. Furthermore, new and emerging technologies enable
scientists to gain novel insights from physical historic samples in
previously unanticipated way. Given their continuing relevance and
broad application to domestic homeland security, public health,
agriculture, food security, and environmental sustainability, ESA
firmly supports continued Federal investment in programs supporting
collections such as NSF's Infrastructure Capacity for Biological
Research.
Given NSF's critical role in supporting fundamental research and
education across science and engineering disciplines, ESA supports an
overall FY 2023 NSF budget of $11 billion. ESA requests robust support
for the NSF BIO Directorate, which funds important research studies and
biological collections, enabling discoveries in the entomological
sciences to contribute to understanding environmental and evolutionary
biology, physiological and developmental systems, and molecular and
cellular mechanisms.
ESA, headquartered in Annapolis, Maryland, is the largest
organization in the world serving the professional and scientific needs
of entomologists and individuals in related disciplines. As the largest
and one of the oldest insect science organizations in the world, ESA
has over 7,000 members affiliated with educational institutions, health
agencies, private industry, and government. Members are researchers,
teachers, extension service personnel, administrators, marketing
representatives, research technicians, consultants, students, pest
management professionals, and hobbyists.
Thank you for the opportunity to offer the Entomological Society of
America's support for NSF research programs. For more information about
the Entomological Society of America, please see http://
www.entsoc.org/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Main, Douglas. Bumblebees Are Going Extinct in a Time of
`Climate Chaos'. Animals, National Geographic, 4 May 2021, https://
www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/article/bumblebees-going-extinct-
climate-change-pesticides.
\2\ Russell, Kaleigh A., and Quinn S. McFrederick. Elevated
Temperature May Affect Nectar Microbes, Nectar Sugars, and Bumble Bee
Foraging Preference--Microbial Ecology. SpringerLink, Springer US, 1
Oct. 2021, https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00248-021-01881-
x.
\3\ Yeh, D. Adeline, Drummond, Francis A., Gomez, Miguel I., and
Fan, Xiaoli. The Economic Impacts and Management of Spotted Wing
Drosophila (Drosophila Suzukii): The Case of Wild Blueberries in Maine.
Journal of Economic Entomology, 6 Jun. 2020, https://
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31943106/.
\4\ Kraft, L.J. et al. Determining the effect of postharvest cold
storage treatment on the survival of immature Drosophila suzukii
(Diptera: Drosophilidae) in small fruits. Journal of Economic
Entomology, 11 Sept. 2020, https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/toaa185.
\5\ Lee, C.Y. and Wang, C. German cockroach infestations in the
world and their social and economic impacts. In: Biology and Management
of the German Cockroach, 2021, eds: Wang C, Lee CY, and Rust MK.
\6\ Hamilton, J.A., Wada-Katsumata, A., and Schal, C. Role of
cuticular hydrocarbons in German cockroach (Blattodea: Ectobiidae)
aggregation behavior. Environmental Entomology, 28 Apr. 2019, https://
doi.org/10.1093/ee/nvz044.
[This statement was submitted by Jessica Ware, PhD, President]
______
Prepared Statement of Environmental and Energy Study Institute
Thank you for the opportunity to submit written testimony for the
record in support of programs under the subcommittee's jurisdiction at
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that support
climate change mitigation and adaptation. The Environmental and Energy
Study Institute (EESI) is a non-profit organization founded in 1984 on
a bipartisan basis by members of Congress to help educate and inform
policymakers, their staff, stakeholders, and the American public about
the benefits of a low-emissions economy that prioritizes energy
efficiency, renewable energy, and new clean energy technologies. In
1988, EESI declared that addressing climate change is a moral
imperative, and that has since guided our work.
Climate adaptation and resilience work should complement and, when
possible, contribute to a decarbonized, clean energy economy. From
droughts to wildfires and hurricanes to extreme heat, different
regions, States, and communities will experience different climate
change-related threats. Communities need locally-tailored, accessible,
and actionable data and support to make informed decisions to reduce
their climate risks and safeguard the ecosystems on which they depend.
This testimony is informed by EESI's report, A Resilient Future for
Coastal Communities: Federal Policy Recommendations from Solutions to
Practice.\1\ This report is based on EESI's 16-part Congressional
briefing series that featured 42 coastal resilience experts discussing
federal, State, and local programs and policies conducting effective
climate adaptation to coastal hazards. The testimony is also informed
by EESI's 2021 article series on Federal resilience programs.\2\ This
nine-part series reviews program background information, the program
connection to adaptation and resilience, an example of the program in
action, and results of the program for six NOAA programs.\3\
national oceanic and atmospheric administration (noaa)
climate-related programs
EESI supports the Biden-Harris Administration's budget, which would
provide $6.9 billion for NOAA in fiscal year 2023. This would represent
a $800 million increase from the 2022 enacted level of $6.1 billion.
The budget also calls for $376 million specifically for climate
resilience. NOAA plays a critical role in climate resilience work, in
conjunction with other Federal agencies, and this amount of funding
should be seen as a floor, not a ceiling, for what is needed to support
U.S. communities as they adapt to the impacts of climate change.
EESI's Congressional briefing on March 18, 2022, Climate Adaptation
Programs Across Agencies,\4\ outlined NOAA's role in advancing
adaptation and resilience work. Key NOAA tools highlighted in the
briefing include Climate.gov, Drought.gov, Atlas 14, and the Digital
Coast Sea Level Rise Viewer. These critical tools require funding to
ensure they are up-to-date and accessible to people who want to apply
the information to their work.
The 2020s must be the decade where significant strides are made on
climate adaptation and resilience planning, data, project
implementation, and evaluation. All these efforts must be scaled up to
meet the magnitude of the challenge we face. This is only possible with
adequate, sustainable funding from Congress in support of this work.
Thank you for your consideration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ A Resilient Future for Coastal Communities: Federal Policy
Recommendations from Solutions to Practice: https://www.eesi.org/
papers/view/a-resilient-future-for-coastal-communities.
\2\ EESI Federal Resilience Programs article series: https://
www.eesi.org/federal
resilienceprograms.
\3\ NOAA National Sea Grant College Program: https://www.eesi.org/
articles/view/federal-
resilience-series-noaa-national-sea-grant-college-program. NOAA Coral
Reef Conservation Program: https://www.eesi.org/articles/view/federal-
resilience-programs-noaa-coral-reef-conservation-program.
NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program: https://www.eesi.org/articles/
view/federal-resilience-programs-noaa-coral-reef-conservation-program.
NOAA National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science: https://www.eesi.org/
articles/view/federal-resilience-programs-noaa-national-centers-for-
coastal-ocean-science.
NOAA Cooperative Institutes: https://www.eesi.org/articles/view/
federal-resilience-programs-noaa-cooperative-institutes. National
Centers for Environmental Information: https://www.eesi.org/articles/
view/federal-resilience-programs-national-centers-for-environmental-
inform
ation. Mission ``Iconic Reefs:'' https://www.eesi.org/articles/view/
federal-resilience-programs-mis
sion-iconic-reefs.
\4\ Climate Adaptation Programs across Agencies: https://
www.eesi.org/briefings/view/031822fed.
[This statement was submitted by Daniel Bresette, Executive
Director]
______
Prepared Statement of Family Based Alternative Sentencing (FBAS)
Chairwoman Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and members of the
subcommittee, I offer my written testimony in support of the request
for $10 million for Family Based Alternative Sentencing (FBAS)
currently funded through the Byrne Grant Program and administered by
the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) in
the Department of Justice, to be used to fund State, local, and
community agencies to replicate successful parenting sentencing
alternative programs. FBAS corrects the systemic failure of American
criminal justice to take the needs, emotions and well-being of families
into account after arrest, pretrial and at sentencing following
conviction, a failure which contributes to family disruption,
alienation among children and community harm.
I submit my testimony as a lawyer who has been active in, and a
close observer of, criminal and juvenile justice in the United States
for more than 45 years. I began my career as a criminal defense
attorney with community based and law school legal clinics in Chicago,
Illinois, and as staff attorney with the National Legal Aid and
Defender Association in Washington, DC where I specialized in
sentencing in criminal case. For 19 years I was the founding Executive
Director of The Sentencing Project, also in Washington, DC. I also
served as Executive Director of the John Howard Association of
Illinois, an adult and juvenile corrections oversight organization.
More recently I was Project Director for the New York based Center on
Community Alternative's Project New Opportunity in Washington, DC, a
reentry program staffed principally by previously-incarcerated
individuals which achieved highly successful outcomes for persons
released from the Federal Bureau of Prisons in 2017-2018.
Over my career I have been the attorney for parents facing
separation from their children at sentencing, spoken with scores of
incarcerated parents and with their children, and represented and
interviewed youth struggling with the emotional consequences of the
incarceration of at least one parent. At Project New Opportunity, I saw
up close how difficult family reunification could be after years of a
parent's incarceration.
My experience confirms the pain and adverse impacts that a parent's
incarceration brings down upon their children which is described in
research provided by others to the subcommittee.\1\ As a third-party
witness, however, I cannot match the power of the voices of the
formerly incarcerated parents and the children of incarcerated parents
when they testify to their experience and to the damage to a child's
social and emotional development, health, education, finances and
housing stability that flows from incarceration of a parent.
But as a former practitioner who has had much opportunity to
observe criminal court processes and corrections operations, I would
like to offer that Family Based Alternative Sentencing programs will
help correct for a systemic failure, a deficiency in justice if you
will, long present in criminal justice as it operates in this country.
Historically and to my observation, criminal courts have not taken
factors such as parental status and family relationships into account
during the pendency of a case, in deciding pretrial release, or at
sentencing after conviction.
Surprisingly, being a parent with custody of a child is not one of
the codified mitigating factors a court need consider in order to
mitigate or help define an appropriate sentence.
Similarly, criminal courts and the probation agencies under their
supervision typically have not attempted to fashion sentences or
administer supervision in ways that ameliorate the adverse impact of
incarcerating a parent upon their children. As the research details,
criminal courts have been quite content to leave the fate of children
of parents they incarcerate to family courts, guardians at litem, child
welfare case workers and foster parents, sometimes but not nearly often
enough, with good effect.
It may well be that these deficiencies came about because, in large
part, current sentencing practices and sentences were shaped in the
years before the dramatic increase in the number of women in State and
Federal prisons--800% from 1978 to 2016.\2\ The fact is that as late as
the early 1970's criminal courts and sentencing were dominated by
males. Fewer women were being sentenced to prison, and men were less
likely to be, or at least to be considered to be, the primary
caregivers of their children.
The responsibility for a failure of the system to take into account
the needs of the children of parents facing incarceration is shared.
Defense attorneys such as myself focused on our clients' legal
defenses. With a few remarkable exceptions, most of us did not attend
to family dynamics or to the trauma, disruption, or the psychological
impact our client's case had on her or his child. Moreover, most
defense attorneys--particularly over-extended and understaffed public
defenders--were not equipped by training or with resources to take on
the challenge of minimizing damage to a child when a parent is
incarcerated, pretrial or after conviction.
As for corrections, few state prison systems provide accommodations
or material support for parents, even for incarcerated mothers, to help
sustain family relationships.\3\
My experience with reentry, in which family reunification is
important, drove home the deficiencies of our courts and correctional
agencies to address the issue while a parent is incarcerated.
Personally, I observed parents released from Federal prison struggling
to reconnect with children who had rejected them, were angry, had
themselves become substance abusers, or who had bonded with another
family. For all the years of their incarceration, often hundreds of
miles from their children, these parents had not been counseled or
assisted by programs designed to mitigate the pain and harm of
separation. The closest to any kind of program of assistance were
volunteer and non-profit-sponsored family bus trips to prison; multiple
hours both ways that were themselves sometimes so trauma-inducing that
incarcerated parents urged their children not to visit.
The appropriations legislation you are considering is encouraging,
a bright promise of improvement in justice. As the subcommittee will
hear, there are now programs which provide alternatives to
incarcerating parents. Programs in California, Illinois, Massachusetts,
Tennessee, Oregon, and Washington are giving children greater stability
and sense of belonging, contributing to family success, and, I have no
doubt by doing so, helping to reduce crime, support families and
improve communities. These programs have been shown to have high
success rates compared to outcomes where there is no assistance or
alternative to incarceration.
The legislation before this subcommittee will provide support for
programs that build upon these recent successes. That is why I
respectfully urge the subcommittee to support $10 million in funding
for programs that will help keep families together, will assist the
children of incarcerated parents, and will encourage alternatives to
incarceration for parents of children whenever possible.
Respectfully submitted,
Malcolm C. Young, Attorney at Law
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For an earlier research-based study which sounded the alarm
about the negative impact of incarcerating a parent, see: Allard,
Patricia and Greene, Judith Children on the Outside: Voicing the Pain
and Human Costs of Parental Incarceration, Justice Strategies (January
2011).
\2\ Carson, E., Prisoners under the jurisdiction of State or
Federal correctional authorities, December 31, 1978-2016, Washington,
DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics (2017).
\3\ The exceptions demonstrate the rule. For example, the ``Moms
and Babies'' program which the Illinois Department of Corrections
launched in 2007, which I visited it while in Illinois, claimed a
``Zero Percent Recidivism Rate'' after 4 years. It is regarded in many
respects a model for programs that keep infants united with their
mothers, of which there are only about seven others nationally. Yet,
housed in Illinois' Logan Correctional Center which holds more than
1,000 women, of whom about 70% have been mothers, after 11 years Moms
and Babies reported having served just 90 mothers, on average less than
9 per year. Illinois did not invest heavily in the program, claiming
that it was ``budget-neutral'' and sustained by community donations and
volunteers. Meanwhile, support for the hundreds of mothers not in the
program and their families lagged. In 2015, a Gender Informed Practices
Assessment (GIPA) conducted at Logan with technical assistance from
National Institute of Corrections and the National Resource Center on
Justice-Involved Women (NRCJIW) found major deficiencies in support for
families, including termination of state-funded transportation for
families seeking to visit incarcerated mothers. Prompted in part by the
GIPA, Illinois enacted the Women's Correctional Services Act in 2017
which directed the Illinois Department of Corrections to implement
``gender responsive policies, practices, programs, and services [that
are] considered relational, culturally competent, family-centered,
holistic, strength-based, and trauma-informed.'' Yet as basic as its
efforts were, Illinois is one of just a handful of States with any
correctional programs or legislated mandates addressing the challenges
confronting incarcerated parents and their children. A description of
the advantages and limitations of the Logan program and the National
context is provided in: Dworsky, A., Fedock, G., Schlecht, C., Malcome,
M., Murray, C., & Hazel, C., Addressing the needs of incarcerated
mothers and their children in Illinois, (Chapin Hall at the University
of Chicago and the University of Chicago's School of Social Service
Administration) 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Prepared Statement of Federation of American Societies
for Experimental Biology
Dear Chair Shaheen and Ranking Member Moran:
As the largest coalition of biomedical researchers in the United
States, representing 28 member societies and 115,000 individual
scientists, the Federation of American Societies for Experimental
Biology (FASEB) recommends at least $11 billion for the National
Science Foundation for FY 2023.
Federal investments in fundamental research have led to remarkable
progress in the biological and biomedical sciences. Basic research was
the groundwork for the speed--months instead of years--that led to the
development of COVID-19 vaccines and also supports pre-clinical
research involving the use of animal studies to achieve medical
progress.
Despite Congress' bipartisan support for investing in science,
Federal funding for research has not kept pace, posing a threat to our
Nation's competitiveness. We face a real threat of losing our edge in
industries such as biotechnology if we do not prioritize increasing
investments in science, research infrastructure such as core
facilities, and building a diverse workforce\1\ The U.S. spends less on
research and development (R&D) than many countries. If the U.S. is to
be prepared to respond to future threats, our scientific leadership
must progress. According to Science Is Us, there is the added benefit
of jobs. STEM supports 69 percent of U.S. gross domestic product,
touches two out of three workers, and generates $2.3 trillion in tax
revenue.\2\
With a mandate to support fundamental research across all fields of
science, engineering, and mathematics, the NSF is the cornerstone of
our Nation's scientific and innovation enterprise while also advancing
our security and economic interests. Through a new technology,
innovation and partnerships directorate it will be better able to
collaborate with other stakeholders to translate fundamental research
into commercially viable products and services enhancing our
competitiveness on the global stage. At current funding levels, NSF is
not meeting the needs of researchers with innovative ideas bridging
multiple disciplines that could bring forth new technologies and
industries. Doubling NSF's grant award amounts and increasing their
duration to 4 years from 3 years is needed.\3\ Many potentially
fundable proposals are declined each year.
Among Federal science agencies, NSF has the unique capacity to:
Support Multi-Disciplinary Research.--By leveraging its portfolio
across the sciences, NSF funds cutting-edge research at the interface
of the physical, biological, and social sciences to tackle challenges
in creative ways, including climate change, biodiversity loss, and one
health.\4\
Organize and Lead Research Partnerships at Speed and Scale.--The
NSF coordinates and leads interagency research endeavors, including
partnerships with NIH and DOE SC. These collaborations advance public
health and clean energy, the development of artificial intelligence,
and other national priorities.\5\
Train the Next Generation of Scientists From Diverse Backgrounds.--
NSF plays a key role in creating educational pathways and supporting
the accessibility of scientific education, training scientists from
diverse backgrounds to increase inclusivity in science. These
scientists--some of whom will become entrepreneurs--will work across
different scientific disciplines, broaden participation in science and
engineering among underrepresented and diverse groups.\6\
Despite its critical role in accelerating science and innovation,
NSF's budget has been flat in constant dollars since the 2010 COMPETES
Act.\7\ There is also a pressing need to expand our scientific
enterprise across all disciplines as well as diversify the STEM
workforce. Recent data demonstrates that NSF was able to fund only 28
percent of the high-quality research proposals that were submitted,
rather than the National Science Board recommendation of 30 percent.\8\
According to the FY 2020 Merit Review Digest from NSF, approximately
$3.9 billion was requested for declined proposals that were rated Very
Good or higher in the merit review process (about 4,233 declined
proposals received ratings of 4.0 or greater). These declined proposals
represent a rich portfolio of unfunded opportunities--proposals that,
if funded, may have produced substantial research and education
benefits.\9\
Meanwhile, according to the National Science Board's Science &
Engineering (S&E) Indicators 2022 report, the US is falling behind at
10 percent compared to China's 49 percent of international patents
received from 2010 to 2020.\25\ The publication of research in peer-
reviewed literature--the primary mechanism for disseminating new S&E
knowledge--grew at an annual average rate of three percent for high-
income countries such as the US compared 11 percent for upper middle-
income countries such as China, Russia and Brazil over a 10 year
period.\10\
Our recommendation of at least $11 billion, will allow NSF to
establish a new grant program for early-career fellowships as
envisioned in congressional legislation, fund more high-quality
research proposals, and increase NSF's average award size.\11,12\ In
addition, this funding level will support NSF's new technology,
innovation and partnerships directorate (TIP) which will work with all
of NSF's directorates and offices to advance the impacts of NSF-funded
research by accelerating the translation of fundamental science and
engineering discoveries into innovative new technologies and solutions.
TIP will provide an optimized lab-to-market platform, fund the
successful Partnerships for Innovation, Small Business Innovation
Research, and Small Business Technology Transfer programs. NSF could
also accelerate key priorities, including Big Ideas that include
understanding the rules of life, future of work at the human-technology
frontier, mid-scale research infrastructure, inclusion across the
Nation, Innovation Corps, biotechnology and harnessing the data
revolution for 21st Century Science and Engineering and major
investments in graduate education.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20201/executive-summary.
\2\ STEM and the American Workforce. You've heard it before: STEM
jobs - . . . | by Science is US | Medium.
\3\ Senate Appropriations Committee's Commerce ,Justice, Science
and Related Agencies explanatory language for FY 2022, page 2 released
Oct. 15, 2021.
\4\ NSF's 10 Big Ideas, National Science Foundation, Alexandria,
VA.
\5\ NSF Collaborations with Federal Agencies and Others, National
Science Foundation, Alexandria, VA.
\6\ Education and Human Resources Directorate, National Science
Foundation, Alexandria, VA.
\7\ Subcommittee Report H.R. 2225--National Science Foundation for
the Future Act July 2021.
\8\ https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2021/nsf21002/tables.jsp Figure 1.5
NSF Competitive Proposals, New Awards, and Funding Rate.
\9\ National Science Foundation, National Science Board, ``Merit
Review Process Fiscal Year 2020 Digest'', page. 42.
\25\ SCIENCE & ENGINEERING INDICATORS 2022. Figure 25--Shares of
international patents granted to inventors, by selected country or
economy: 2010 and 2020.
\10\ SCIENCE & ENGINEERING INDICATORS 2022.
\11\ American Innovation Act, S. 1249.
\12\ Supporting Early Career Researchers Act, H.R. 144, Section 3--
Supporting early-career research fellowship program.
\13\ NSF Budget FY 2022.
[This statement was submitted by Ellen Kuo, Associate Director,
Legislative Affairs]
______
Prepared Statement of Federation of Associations in
Behavioral and Brain Sciences
The Federation of Associations in Behavioral and Brain Sciences
(FABBS) is grateful for the opportunity to submit testimony for the
record in support of the National Science Foundation (NSF) budget for
fiscal year 2023. FABBS represents twenty-seven scientific societies
and over fifty university departments whose members and faculty share a
commitment to advancing knowledge of the mind, brain, and behavior. As
a leading member of the Coalition for National Science Funding, FABBS
joins the broader scientific community in urging Congress to fund NSF
with at least $11 billion in FY 2023.
NSF-funded research pays long-term dividends in innovation and
technologies driving our economy, national security, well-being, and
other areas of significant importance to our Nation. In addition, NSF
research and programs provide the tools to develop a workforce equipped
for the challenges and technologies of the future and foster the next
generation of scientists--with a commitment to broad participation--
whose work will keep this country at the forefront of discovery.
We are grateful for the four percent increase provided to NSF in
the FY 2022 omnibus spending legislation. Nonetheless, NSF needs more
consistent and ambitious funding increases to meet our country's needs
and to re-invigorate Federal research and development at a time when
our global competitors are looking to surpass American investments.
Funding for the NSF has remained stagnant over the past decade despite
established bipartisan and bicameral support for the NSF, including
essential contributions to prevent and address COVID-19, spark economic
growth, and strengthen national security; and despite evidence that the
U.S. has lost standing in international competitiveness.
As the House and Senate move to conference on the America COMPETES
Act and the United States Innovation and Competition Act, it is clear
that now is the time to increase Federal support for the NSF to ensure
the future health, security, and economic well-being of our Nation.
While Congress provides an expanded vision for NSF, the agency requires
additional resources to realize the potential of its existing programs.
One out of every four basic research projects at higher learning
institutions across the United States is supported by the NSF and the
Foundation's merit review process is the international gold-standard.
However, in FY 2020, almost $4 billion worth of proposals were rated
very good but were declined due to inadequate resources.
NSF Director Panchanathan has stated that proposals that do receive
funding could produce better research outcomes and provide better value
by increasing the size and duration of grants. In fact, he has said
that NSF could double their budget on the current research and
researchers that go unfunded, and ``a quadrupling of the funding is
just barely enough to be able to take us to all the ideas being
unleashed so that we might be far ahead of the competition.''
social, behavioral, and economic sciences
FABBS scientists have a particular interest in the Social,
Behavioral and Economic (SBE) Sciences directorate, which provides an
estimated 64 percent of the Federal funding for fundamental research in
SBE sciences at academic institutions across the country.\1\ Thus, our
fields are heavily dependent on the NSF to inform discoveries from
expanding our understanding of the mechanisms of memory underlying
brain activity, to contributing to the design and assessing the social
and ethical consequences of new technologies.
Findings from the brain and behavioral sciences have extensive
reach and applicability. For example, SBE funded researchers studying
violent extremism delivered new insights that the National security
community is now using to develop more effective strategies to disrupt
recruitment and counter extremism.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, SBE scientists contributed in many
ways, including through the Societal Experts Action Network (SEAN).
This partnership between NSF's SBE directorate and the National
Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine provided actionable
responses to urgent policy questions. Consulting leading researchers in
the social, behavioral, and economic sciences, SEAN has published
guidance to inform more effective public policy.\2\ The National
Science Foundation's ability to conduct rapid-response programs such as
SEAN is just one example of the many ways in which NSF is uniquely
suited to capitalize on scientific discovery for the betterment of
society.
SBE is also home to the National Center for Science and Engineering
Statistics (NCSES), a Federal statistical agency that provides
statistical information about the United States' science and
engineering (S&E) enterprise. NCSES collects, analyzes, and
disseminates data on research and development (R&D), the S&E workforce,
the condition and progress of science, STEM education, and U.S.
competitiveness in science, engineering, and technology R&D.
technology, innovation, and partnerships
On March 16, NSF officially launched a new Directorate for
Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships (TIP). This exciting new
venture will take a cross-cutting approach to speed the translation of
basic research to make a difference in American's lives. By building on
existing multidisciplinary programs, such as the Convergence
Accelerator, TIP will integrate the expertise of all NSF directorates
to spearhead new use-inspired research.
To maximize the benefits of the TIP directorate, NSF must make sure
to take full advantage of the behavioral and brain sciences. All of the
directorate's target focuses, such as clean energy, quantum science,
artificial intelligence, supercomputing, etc., have human components.
Whether it is optimizing the user interface for a new technology or
finding the most effective way to communicate with lay audiences, brain
and behavioral scientists should be included to help maximize the
return on investment for these new programs.
Substantial, sustained funding increases will allow NSF to realize
the full potential of the TIP directorate by investing in critical new
programs while bolstering the existing investments in basic research--
including in the social, behavioral, and economic sciences--which
underly future societal, economic, and technological advances.
In addition to receiving support from SBE, FABBS members appreciate
critical funding from the Computer and Information Science and
Engineering Directorate (CISE), which funds research on topics such as
human-technology interaction and cyber-assisted learning, the
Biological Sciences (BIO) Directorate, which funds research on topics
such as sleep and circadian rhythms and sex differences in responses to
stress, and the Education and Human Resources (EHR) Directorate, which
funds research on increasing America's human capital through effective
education in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. EHR is
especially vital to expanding participation in science through programs
such as S-STEM, which provides scholarships to enable low-income
students with academic ability, talent, or potential to pursue
successful careers in promising STEM fields.
Increasing Federal investment in fundamental scientific research
across all sciences is critical to ensuring the future prosperity,
security, and health of our Nation and its people. We urge you to
provide NSF with at least $11 billion for FY 2023. Along with the
broader scientific community, we believe that increased funding for
fundamental scientific research would set the NSF on a path to yield
transformative benefits to the country. We thank you in advance for
your commitment to robust funding in fiscal Year 2023 and efforts to
complete the budget in a timely manner.
Thank you for considering this testimony.
FABBS Member Societies:
Academy of Behavioral Medicine Research, American Educational
Research Association, American Psychological Association,
American Psychosomatic Society, Association for Applied
Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, Association for Behavior
Analysis International, Behavior Genetics Association,
Cognitive Neuroscience Society, Cognitive Science Society,
Flux: The Society for Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience,
International Congress of Infant Studies, International Society
for Developmental Psychobiology, National Academy of
Neuropsychology, The Psychonomic Society, Society for
Behavioral Neuroendocrinology, Society for Computation in
Psychology, Society for Judgement and Decision Making, Society
for Mathematical Psychology, Society for Psychophysiological
Research, Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues,
Society for Research in Child Development, Society for Research
in Psychopathology, Society for the Scientific Study of
Reading, Society for Text & Discourse, Society of Experimental
Social Psychology, Society of Multivariate Experimental
Psychology, Vision Sciences Society
FABBS Affiliates:
APA Division 1: The Society for General Psychology; APA Division 3:
Experimental Psychology; APA Division 7: Developmental
Psychology; APA Division 28: Psychopharmacology and Substance
Abuse; Arizona State University; Binghamton University; Boston
College; Boston University; California State University,
Fullerton; Carnegie Mellon University; Duke University; East
Tennessee State University; Florida International University;
George Mason University; George Washington University;
Georgetown University; Harvard University; Indiana University
Bloomington; Johns Hopkins University; Lehigh University;
Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Michigan State
University; New York University; North Carolina State
University; The Ohio State University, Center for Cognitive and
Brain Sciences; Pennsylvania State University; Princeton
University; Purdue University; Rice University; Southern
Methodist University; Syracuse University; Temple University;
Texas A&M University; Tulane University; University of Arizona;
University of California, Berkeley; University of California,
Irvine; University of California, Los Angeles; University of
California, Riverside; University of California, San Diego;
University of Chicago; University of Delaware; University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; University of Iowa; University of
Maryland, College Park; University of Michigan; University of
Minnesota; University of Minnesota, Institute of Child
Development; University of North Carolina at Greensboro;
University of Oregon; University of Pennsylvania; University of
Texas at Austin; University of Texas at Dallas; University of
Virginia; University of Washington; Virginia Tech; Wake Forest
University; Washington University in St. Louis; Western
Kentucky University; Yale University
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.nsf.gov/about/budget/fy2023/pdf/74_fy2023.pdf.
\2\ https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/societal-experts-
action-network.
[This statement was submitted by Juliane Baron, Executive Director]
______
Prepared Statement of Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University
Chairman Leahy, Chairman Shaheen, Vice Chairman Shelby, Ranking
Member Moran, and Members of the Commerce, Justice, Science, and
Related Agencies subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to submit
public testimony on the Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 Commerce, Justice,
Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill. Florida A&M
University (FAMU) is grateful for the historic support of Congress
during the pandemic. Increased funding for the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Education Partnership Program with
Minority Serving Institutions (EPP/MSI) and the National Sea Grant
College Program, as well as the National Science Foundation's (NSF)
Education and Human Resources will have a direct impact on our
University, our students, our region, and our Nation.
Florida A&M University, based in the State capital of Tallahassee,
Florida, was founded in 1887 with only 15 students and two instructors.
Today, FAMU offers 95 degree programs to nearly 10,000 students. We are
proud to be the highest ranked among public Historically Black Colleges
and Universities (HBCU) for three consecutive years, according to the
2022 U.S. News and World Report National Public Universities. The
University is a leading land-grant research institution with an
increased focus on science, technology, research, engineering,
agriculture, and mathematics. As noted by Diverse Issues, FAMU is a top
producer of African American undergraduate degrees and doctoral degrees
in pharmacy and pharmaceutical sciences.
The Federal Government is a key partner and resource for FAMU. The
Federal science agencies, in particular, support a wide range of the
University's education, research, and training programs. In turn, we
produce highly-skilled graduates in critical disciplines and conduct
cutting edge research benefitting the Federal Government as well as the
Nation. FAMU strongly supports funding for two important education
programs under the Department of Commerce National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), as well as education programs under
the National Science Foundation Directorate for Education & Human
Resources (EHR).
noaa education partnership program with minority serving institutions
FAMU is one of the four lead universities for the NOAA Education
Partnership Program with Minority Serving Institutions (EPP/MSI)
Cooperative Science Centers (CSCs), and as such we support the FY 2022
Senate recommended allocation of $22 million for the program. The goal
of the EPP/MSI is to increase the number of students, particularly from
underrepresented communities, who attend MSIs and graduate with degrees
in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) relevant to
NOAA's mission.
In August 2016 under the EPP/MSI program, NOAA awarded Cooperative
Science Centers (CSCs) to four universities under 5-year cooperative
agreements. This was the latest round of CSC awards since the program
was first established in 2001. FAMU is the lead university for the
Center for Coastal and Marine Ecosystems, one of the four CSCs. Our
partners include Bethune Cookman University, California State
University Monterey Bay, Jackson State University, Texas A&M University
(Corpus Christi), and the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley. The
annual appropriation supports FAMU, along with other lead MSIs, which
partner with 24 additional U.S. colleges and universities as part of
the CSC program with faculty and students conducting research that
further supports NOAA's mission.
In April 2022, FAMU hosted Phase II of the Tenth Biennial NOAA EPP/
MSI Education and Science Forum with over 460 registrants after holding
the first phase virtually in 2021 due to COVID-19 concerns. The focus
of the Forum is expanding academic training in NOAA-mission STEM
disciplines, through partnership activities as well as promoting career
opportunities for STEM graduates in the public, private, and academic
sectors.
Since 2001, NOAA EPP/MSI Cooperative Science Centers institutions
have awarded post-secondary degrees to over 2,500 students in fields
that support NOAA's mission. Over the same time period, these
institutions awarded over half of the doctoral degrees that were earned
by African Americans in both atmospheric science and marine science in
the United States. We support an increase in funding for this critical
program, which supports NOAA-related research, increases diversity of
the STEM workforce and fosters American competitiveness in STEM fields.
We urge the subcommittee to again recommend an allocation of $22
million for the NOAA EPP/MSI program.
noaa national sea grant college program
FAMU also strongly supports the subcommittee providing the FY 2022
Senate recommended allocation of $90 million for NOAA's National Sea
Grant College Program, which works to create and maintain a healthy
coastal environment and economy. The Sea Grant network consists of a
federal/university partnership between NOAA and 34 university-based
programs in every coastal and Great Lakes state, Puerto Rico, and Guam.
The network draws on the expertise of more than 3,000 scientists,
engineers, public outreach experts, educators, and students to help
citizens better understand, conserve, and utilize America's coastal and
Great Lakes resources.
The Florida Sea Grant program is a Statewide program headquartered
at the University of Florida. The program supports research, education
and extension to conserve coastal resources and enhance economic
opportunities for the citizens of Florida. Since 1997, faculty and
students at 13 participating institutions, including FAMU, have
received Federal funding from the Florida Sea Grant. In 2020, the
economic impact of the Florida Sea Grant program was $16.6 million and
resulted in 465 jobs created or sustained. The program also supported a
variety of research and training relevant to Florida's coastal
communities and related industries, including developing a model to
project future flood risks to support Florida's coastal resiliency
plans. The program augments the State's artificial reef efforts and
helps to protect, enhance and restore coastal habitat. Nationally, the
Sea Grant program had an economic impact of $519.5 million in 2021, far
exceeding the Federal investment in the program. The national program
helped to create or sustain 11,044 jobs and 1,332 businesses. It also
supported over 2,000 graduate and undergraduate students and fellows.
Last year, the Senate proposed to substantially increase funding
for the National Sea Grant College Program under NOAA's Office of
Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR). Continued funding for this
program, which has been in existence for more than 50 years, is
critical to supporting Great Lakes and coastal communities, including
those in Florida, through research, extension and education. FAMU, as a
member of the Florida Sea Grant program, urges the subcommittee to
again recommend an allocation of $90 million for the Sea Grant program.
national science foundation education programs
The NSF Directorate for Education and Human Resources (EHR)
supports a wide variety of programs across all levels of education in
science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). In particular,
FAMU supports funding for the broadening participation programs aimed
at increasing the participation of underrepresented populations in STEM
education and, ultimately, the STEM workforce. These programs include
the Historically Black Colleges and Universities Undergraduate Program
(HBCU-UP). FAMU urges the subcommittee to support the President's
budget request of $48.5 million for HBCU-UP.
FAMU has received significant research funding through NSF, which
has supported various research projects as well as programs to promote
underrepresented minorities in STEM careers. FAMU continues to pursue
NSF resources for innovative projects and encourages the subcommittee
to provide robust funding for NSF's education programs.
The President's FY 2023 budget requests $1.38 billion for NSF's EHR
programs. The budget also proposes an increase in the HBCU-UP program.
Funding at the President's budget request for EHR and the HBCU-UP would
allow NSF to expand its important work of supporting STEM education
programs, particularly its broadening participation programs directed
at underrepresented populations.
We urge the subcommittee to support funding increases for these
critical NOAA and NSF education programs. We thank you for your
continued support of Federal postsecondary initiatives that not only
directly benefit our University but our region and our Nation as well.
Thank you for your consideration.
[This statement was submitted by Larry Robinson, PhD, President]
______
Prepared Statement of the Geological Society of America
The Geological Society of America (GSA) supports increased
investments in geoscience research and education at the National
Science Foundation (NSF) and National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA). GSA encourages Congress to appropriate at least
$11 billion for NSF in Fiscal Year 2023 and provide increases to NASA's
Science Mission Directorate and its Earth Science and Planetary Science
Divisions. Investment in NSF and NASA is necessary to secure America's
future economic leadership, both through the discoveries made and the
talent developed through their programs. For the United States to
remain a global leader, the Nation must provide greater investment in
its people, particularly women and individuals from other groups
traditionally underrepresented in STEM fields. Earth and space science
at these two agencies play a vital role in American prosperity and
security through understanding and documenting mineral and energy
resources that underpin economic growth; researching and monitoring
potential natural hazards that threaten U.S. and international
security; informing communities about the impacts of a changing
climate; and determining and assessing water quality and availability.
GSA is a scientific society with members from academia, government,
and industry in more than 100 countries. Through its meetings,
publications, and programs, GSA enhances the professional growth of its
members and promotes the geosciences in the service of humankind. GSA
encourages cooperative research among earth, life, planetary, and
social scientists, fosters public dialogue on geoscience issues, and
supports all levels of earth science education.
national science foundation
The Geological Society of America (GSA) appreciates the increase to
the National Science Foundation (NSF) budget in FY 2022 and thanks the
Committee for recognizing the important role that the agency plays in
our country's global competitiveness. We urge Congress to provide NSF
at least $11 billion in FY 2023. Increases in funding will allow NSF to
continue to support its core basic research in addition to growing
investments in its Ten Big Ideas and other transformational research,
such as that funded by the new Directorate for Technology, Innovation
and Partnerships (TIP).
Sustained increases beyond inflation are necessary to regain
America's science and technology leadership and to enable the
discoveries that lead to future innovations and industries. Data from
the Merit Review Process Fiscal Year 2020 Digest show that NSF receives
many more high-quality proposals than it can fund. In FY 2020, NSF was
only able to fund 28% of the proposals received. The report noted,
``Approximately $3.9 billion was requested for declined proposals that
were rated Very Good or higher in the merit review process--proposals
that, if funded, may have produced substantial research and education
benefits.''
Geoscience research is a critical component of the overall science
and technology enterprise and a key contributor to groundbreaking
research across disciplines at NSF. Increased investments in NSF's
geoscience portfolio are necessary to address pressing issues including
natural hazards, energy and minerals, water resources, and education.
--There is a vital need to understand the abundance and distribution
of critical mineral resources, as well as the geologic
processes that form them, as articulated in the Energy Policy
Act of 2020. NSF's Division of Earth Sciences supports research
on the structure, composition, and evolution of the Earth and
the processes that govern the formation and behavior of the
Earth's materials. This research contributes to a better
understanding of the natural distribution of mineral and energy
resources.
--The quality and quantity of surface water and groundwater have a
direct impact on the wellbeing of societies and ecosystems, as
evidenced by flooding and drought impacts experienced across
the U.S. during the past year. NSF's research addresses major
gaps in our understanding of water availability, quality, and
dynamics, including the impact of both a changing climate and
human activity on the water system.
--The Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences provides critical
infrastructure and research funding for understanding our
planet, including weather and precipitation variability,
atmospheric conditions, and space weather hazards. NSF is a key
partner in obtaining data necessary to predict severe space
weather events, which affect the electric power grid, satellite
communications, and navigation systems, as noted in The
Promoting Research and Observations of Space Weather to Improve
the Forecasting of Tomorrow Act (PROSWIFT Act), which was
signed into law in October of 2020.
--Understanding the oceans is key to a sustainable future. The
National Research Council report Sea Change,2015-2025 Decadal
Survey of Ocean Sciences highlights areas of research that are
need to make informed decisions. These include better
characterizing risk and the ability forecast geohazards such as
earthquakes, tsunamis, undersea landslides, and volcanic
eruptions; rates, mechanisms, impacts, and geographic
variability of sea level change; and changes in the marine
food.
--Natural hazards are a major cause of fatalities and economic
losses. NOAA found in 2021 alone, 20 weather/climate disaster
events with losses greater than $1 billion. An improved
scientific understanding of hazards will reduce future losses
by informing effective planning and mitigation. We urge
Congress to support NSF investments in fundamental Earth
science research and facilities that underpin innovations in
natural hazards monitoring and warning systems. For example,
the Coastlines and People Hubs for Research and Broadening
Participation initiative aims to understand the impacts of
coastal environmental variability and natural hazards on
populated coastal regions.
national aeronautics and space administration
GSA appreciates past committee support of NASA Science and requests
increases to NASA's Science Mission Directorate and its Earth Science
and Planetary Science Divisions in FY 2023 as proposed in the
President's budget request. Increased funding will be critical to
implement the recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences
report, Thriving on Our Changing Planet: A Decadal Strategy for Earth
Observation from Space. The report notes:
``Earth science and derived Earth information have become an
integral component of our daily lives, our business successes,
and society's capacity to thrive. Extending this societal
progress requires that we focus on understanding and reliably
predicting the many ways our planet is changing.''
The data and observations from Earth observing missions and
research are a tremendously important resource for natural resource
exploration and land use planning, as well as assessing water
resources, natural disaster impacts, global agriculture production. The
Landsat satellites have amassed the largest archive of remotely sensed
land data in the world. On September 27, 2021, the NASA/USGS Landsat
program launched its ninth satellite in its 50 year program that will
operate in tandem with Landsat 8 and replace Landsat 7. GSA supports
interagency efforts to ensure the future viability of Landsat
satellites as well as funding to increase the capabilities and uses of
multi-spacecraft constellations of small scientific satellites.
By looking at our planet as an integrated system, NASA's Earth and
climate science efforts are among the Nation's most effective tools to
understand and tackle climate change. For example, NASA's new Earth
System Observatory consists of a series of Earth-focused missions that
will create a holistic view of the Earth to provide key information
related to climate change, natural hazards and agricultural processes.
In addition, NASA's proposal to create an Earth Information Center will
make data more accessible to communities most affected by climate
change.
Planetary research is directly linked to Earth science research and
cuts in either program will hinder the other. In order to support
missions to better understand the workings of the entire solar system,
planetary scientists engage in both terrestrial field studies and Earth
observation to examine geologic features and processes that are common
on other planets, such as impact structures, volcanic constructs,
tectonic structures, and glacial and fluvial deposits and landforms. In
addition, geochemical planetary research studies include investigations
of extraterrestrial materials now on Earth, including lunar samples,
meteorites, cosmic dust particles, and, most recently, particles
returned from comets and asteroids. We appreciate past congressional
support for Planetary Science and urge you to continue to investment to
allow NASA to move forward with priority missions as identified in the
recent decadal survey, Origins, Worlds, and Life: A Decadal Strategy
for Planetary Science and Astrobiology 2023-2032.
support needed to educate future innovators
For the United States to remain a global leader, the Nation must
provide greater investment in its people, including women and
individuals from other groups traditionally underrepresented in STEM
fields. NSF's Education and Human Resources Directorate researches and
improves the way we teach science and provides research and fellowship
opportunities for students that encourage them to continue in the
sciences. Similarly, NASA's educational programs, led by NASA's Office
of STEM Engagement and directorates, have inspired and led many into
science careers. GSA fully supports these efforts, as well as
additional programs to make the geoscience workforce more diverse, such
as NSF INCLUDES. Inclusion across the Nation of Communities of Learners
of Underrepresented Discoverers in Engineering and Science.
Please contact GSA Director for Geoscience Policy Kasey White to
learn more about the Geological Society of America--including GSA
Position Statements on water resources, planetary research, energy and
mineral resources, natural hazards, climate change, and public
investment in Earth science research.
______
Prepared Statement of Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission
(GLIFWC)
Summary of GLIFWC'S FY 2023 Testimony.--GLIFWC supports sustained
funding for the TRGP at no less than the FY 2022 enacted funding level.
GLIFWC is closely monitoring misinformation and harassment related to
the exercise of treaty rights and is working proactively with other
jurisdictions to address social conflict and prevent its potential
progression into extremism. This program has enabled GLIFWC to solidify
its communications, training, and equipment requirements, essential to
ensuring the safety of GLIFWC officers and the role of GLIFWC
Conservation officers within the proper functioning of
interjurisdictional emergency mutual assistance networks in the treaty
ceded territories.
Ceded Territory Treaty Rights and GLIFWC'S Role.--GLIFWC was
established in 1984 as a ``Tribal organization'' within the meaning of
the Indian Self-Determination Act (Public Law 93-638). It exercises
authority delegated by its member Tribes to implement Federal court
orders and various interjurisdictional agreements related to their
treaty rights. GLIFWC assists its member Tribes in:
X securing and implementing treaty guaranteed rights to hunt, fish,
and gather in Chippewa treaty ceded territories; and
X cooperatively managing, restoring and protecting ceded territory
natural resources and their habitats.
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
For over nearly 40 years, Congress and various Administrations have
funded GLIFWC through the BIA, the Department of Justice, and other
agencies to meet specific Federal obligations under: (1) a number of
US/Chippewa treaties;\1\ (2) the Federal trust responsibility; (3) the
Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act, the Clean Water
Act, and other Federal legislation; and (4) various court decisions,
including a 1999 US Supreme Court case, that affirmed the treaty rights
of GLIFWC's member Tribes. Under the direction of its member Tribes,
GLIFWC operates a ceded territory hunting, fishing, and gathering
rights protection/implementation program through its staff of
biologists, scientists, technicians, conservation enforcement officers,
and public information specialists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Specifically, the Treaty of 1836, 7 Stat. 491; Treaty of 1837,
7 Stat. 536; Treaty of 1842, 7 Stat. 591; and Treaty of 1854, 10 Stat.
1109. The rights guaranteed by these treaties have been affirmed by
various court decisions, including a 1999 U.S. Supreme Court case.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Community-Based Policing.--GLIFWC's officers carry out their duties
through a community-based policing program. The underlying premise of
that program is that effective detection and deterrence of illegal
activities, as well as education of the regulated constituents, are
best accomplished if the officers work within the Tribal communities
they primarily serve. The officers work with reservation communities of
the following member Tribes: in Wisconsin--Bad River, Lac Courte
Oreilles, Lac du Flambeau, Red Cliff, Sokaogon Chippewa (Mole Lake),
and St. Croix; in Minnesota--Fond du Lac and Mille Lacs; and in
Michigan--Bay Mills, Keweenaw Bay, and Lac Vieux Desert. To help
develop mutual trust between GLIFWC officers and Tribal communities,
officers provide outdoor skills workshops and safety classes (hunter,
boater, snowmobile, ATV) to Tribal youth in grades 4-8. GLIFWC's
officers also actively participate in summer and winter youth outdoor
activity camps, kids fishing events, workshops on canoe safety and rice
stick carving, and seminars on trapping and archery/bow safety.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, GLIFWC's member Tribes saw a rise in
harassment incidents across the ceded territory. GLIFWC's Conservation
Officers have responded by increasing their coordination and
cooperation with local law enforcement and by documenting and mapping
the locations of these incidents. In May 2021, a roundtable discussion
was held that included Senator Tammy Baldwin, Wisconsin Governor Tony
Evers, DNR Secretary Preston Cole, Tribal leaders, and State and Tribal
law enforcement to discuss how best to prevent and respond to these
incidents. GLIFWC Conservation Officers have also increased their
outreach to county sheriff's departments.
GLIFWC's member Tribes realize it is critical to build
relationships between Tribal youth and law enforcement officers as a
means of combatting gang recruitment and drug/alcohol abuse in
reservation communities. GLIFWC is continuing to implement community
policing strategies to build community relationships targeting Tribal
youth. GLIFWC Conservation Officers continue to work to improve and
expand youth outdoor recreation activities to help prevent violations
of Tribal off-reservation codes, improve public safety and promote an
outdoor lifestyle as an alternative to potentially turning to
violence\2\ and substance abuse\3\. GLIFWC, in partnership with the
U.S. Forest Service, plans to resume its Camp Onji-Akiing (From the
Earth) in 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) youth population
is more affected by gang involvement than any other racial population.
15% of AI/AN youth are involved with gangs compared to 8% of Latino
youth and 6% of African American youth nationally. (National Council on
Crime and Delinquency: Glesmann, C., Krisberg, B.A., & Marchionna, S.,
2009).
\3\ 22.9% of American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) youth aged
12 and older report alcohol use, 18.4% report binge drinking and 16.0%
report substance dependence or abuse. In the same group, 35.8% report
tobacco use and 12.5% report illicit drug use. (2010 National Survey on
Drug Use and Health: Summary of National Findings).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interaction With Law Enforcement Agencies.--GLIFWC's Conservation
Officers are integral members of regional emergency services networks
in Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin. They not only enforce the
Tribes' conservation codes but are fully certified officers who work
cooperatively with authorities from other jurisdictions when they
detect violations of State or Federal criminal and conservation laws.
These partnerships evolved from the inter-governmental cooperation
required to combat the violence experienced during the early
implementation of treaty rights in Wisconsin. As time passed, GLIFWC's
professional officers continued to provide a bridge between local law
enforcement and many rural Indian communities.
GLIFWC remains at this forefront, using DOJ funding to develop
interjurisdictional legal training that is attended by GLIFWC officers,
Tribal police and conservation officers, Tribal judges, Tribal and
county prosecutors, and State and Federal agency law enforcement staff.
DOJ funding has also enabled GLIFWC to certify its officers as medical
emergency first responders, and to train them in search and rescue,
particularly in cold water rescue techniques. When a crime is in
progress or emergencies occur, local, State, and Federal law
enforcement agencies look to GLIFWC's officers as part of the mutual
assistance networks. In fact, the role of GLIFWC's officers in these
networks was further legitimized in 2007 by the passage of Wisconsin
Act 27, which affords GLIFWC wardens the same statutory safeguards and
protections that are afforded to their DNR counterparts. GLIFWC wardens
now have access to the criminal history database and other information
to identify whom they are encountering in the field so that they can
determine whether they are about to face a fugitive or some other
dangerous individual.
GLIFWC's participation in mutual assistance networks located
throughout a 60,000 square mile region increases public safety in an
effective and cost-efficient manner. In 2020, GLIFWC officers utilized
prior DOJ funded training and equipment to assist in the patrol of
276,345 vehicle miles. GLIFWC officers continued to assist federal,
State and local officers in: (1) responding to emergency backup
requests from other law enforcement agencies; (2) accidents; (3) search
and rescue operations; (4) medical calls including requiring CPR and an
AED to resuscitate citizens; and (5) removing commercial fishing nets
that have been damaged due to Lake Superior's strong storms or
vandalism which pose navigation hazards.
Looking to the Future.--Tribal members are relying more heavily on
off-reservation treaty harvesting activities, especially given the
ongoing pandemic and rapidly increasing food costs. This necessitates
more outreach to Tribal members to ensure they are exercising their
rights safely and within Tribal regulations. It also requires education
of the non-Tribal public about treaty rights. This work will
proactively prevent and deter social conflict. GLIFWC's Conservation
Officers are an integral part of this work and work closely with
GLIFWC's public information staff to ensure that timely and accurate
information about treaty rights is provided through GLIFWC media as
well as the media outlets of other jurisdictions.
[This statement was submitted by Michael J. Isham, Executive
Administrator]
______
Prepared Statement of Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
On behalf of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (HFES), we
are pleased to provide this written testimony to House Appropriations
subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, and Science, and Related Agencies
for the official record. HFES urges the subcommittee to provide at
least $11 billion for the National Science Foundation (NSF) in the
fiscal year (FY) 2023 appropriations process. In addition, HFES
supports efforts by NSF to broaden participation in science for
underrepresented groups to ensure a diverse, equitable, and inclusive
workforce and research enterprise, such as the INCLUDES and ADVANCE
initiatives. These efforts are critical to not only fixing inequities
in the U.S. research enterprise but also to ensuring that the U.S. has
the robust, 21st Century workforce needed to maintain its competitive
edge in technological innovation.
HFES is a multidisciplinary professional association with over
3,000 individual members worldwide, comprised of scientists and
practitioners, all with a common interest in enhancing the performance,
effectiveness, and safety of systems with which humans interact through
the design of those systems' user interfaces to optimally fit humans'
physical and cognitive capabilities. The Society and its members
strongly believe that investment in scientific research serves as an
important driver for innovation and the economy, national security, and
maintaining American global competitiveness. Funding for fundamental
research at NSF to address national and societal needs will be critical
as Congress looks at legislation to ensure the U.S. remains the global
leader in advancing science and technology. We thank the subcommittee
for its longtime recognition of the value of scientific and engineering
research and its contribution to innovation in the U.S.
human factors and ergonomics at the national science foundation
HFES and its members strongly believe that Federal investment in
NSF will have a direct and positive impact on the U.S. economy,
national security, and the health and well-being of Americans. It is
for these reasons that HFES supports robust funding for the Foundation
to encourage further advancements in the fields of technology,
education, defense, and healthcare, among others. In the past, NSF
funding for HF/E basic research has strengthened interdisciplinary
partnerships allowing for a multilateral approach to technology
research and development, including the human and user perspectives.
The benefits of this research are not confined to one field but rather
span across a range of disciplines to increase understanding of the way
humans interact with technology, as well as with each other.
In particular, NSF funds HF/E research to:
--Better understand and improve the effectiveness of how individuals,
groups, organizations, and society make decisions.\1\
--Improve understanding of the relationship between science and
engineering, technology, and society, in order to advance the
adoption and use of technology.\2\
--Gain a better understanding of how humans and computers interact to
ensure the development of new devices or environments that
empower the user.\3\
--Inform decision making in engineering design, control, and
optimization to improve individual engineering components and
entire systems.\4\
\1\ Decision, Risk & Management Sciences (DRMS) Program (http://
www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=5423).
\2\ Science and Technology Studies (STS) Program (https://
www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=505697).
\3\ Human Centered Computing (HCC) Program (https://www.nsf.gov/
funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=504958).
\4\ Operation and Design Cluster (http://www.nsf.gov/funding/
pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=13473).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
HF/E research will be especially critical as Congress and the
Federal Government work to develop, adopt, and broadly integrate
emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI). HFES
recognizes that most systems that rely on AI will not operate
independently but will be initially programmed and trained by humans to
augment, collaborate, or perform specific tasks.
The HF/E profession has conducted detailed research on impacts of
AI on human performance, and HFES believes AI must be designed to
successfully support human capabilities and overcome known human
cognitive limitations, so that humans can understand the actions and
intentions of AI. More research is needed to understand how systems can
be designed to overcome AI biases, provide transparency and
explainability for human use, and provide clear interfaces for human-AI
interactions. Interdisciplinary research programs at NSF to address
these challenges, such as its Fairness in Artificial Intelligence
program\5\ and the AI Research Institutes\6\, will be critical to
ensuring the U.S. achieves the promised benefits AI can bring to
society.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ NSF Program on Fairness in Artificial Intelligence in
Collaboration with Amazon (FAI) (https://www.nsf.gov/funding/
pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=505651).
\6\ Artificial Intelligence Research Institutes (https://
www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=505686).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
the value of human factors and ergonomics science
For over 50 years, the U.S. Federal Government has funded
scientists and engineers to explore and better understand the
relationship between humans, technology, and the environment.
Originally stemming from urgent needs to improve the performance of
humans using complex systems such as aircraft during World War II, the
field of human factors and ergonomics (HF/E) works to develop safe,
effective, and practical human use of technology. HF/E does this by
developing scientific approaches for understanding this complex
interface, also known as ``human-systems integration.'' Today, HF/E is
applied to fields as diverse as transportation, architecture,
environmental design, consumer products, electronics and computers,
energy systems, medical devices, manufacturing, office automation,
organizational design and management, aging, farming, health, sports
and recreation, oil field operations, mining, forensics, and education.
With increasing reliance by Federal agencies and the private sector
on technology-aided decision-making, HF/E is vital to effectively
achieving our National objectives. While a large proportion of HF/E
research exists at the intersection of science and practice-that is,
HF/E is often viewed more at the ``applied'' end of the science
continuum-the field also contributes to advancing ``fundamental''
scientific understanding of the interface between human decision-
making, engineering, design, technology, and the world around us
through research funded by NSF. The reach of HF/E is profound, touching
nearly all aspects of human life from the health care sector to the
ways we travel, to the hand-held devices we use every day.
conclusion
Given NSF's critical role in supporting fundamental research and
education across science and engineering disciplines, HFES supports an
overall FY 2023 NSF budget of at least $11 billion. This investment
funds important research studies, enabling an evidence-base,
methodology, and measurements for improving organizational function,
performance, and design across sectors and disciplines.
On behalf of HFES, we would like to thank you for the opportunity
to provide this testimony. Please do not hesitate to contact us should
you have any questions about HFES or HF/E research. HFES truly
appreciates the subcommittee's long history of support for scientific
research and innovation.
[This statement was submitted by Steven C. Kemp, CAE, Executive
Director]
______
Prepared Statement of Humane Society Legislative Fund and The Humane
Society of the United States
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and Members of the
subcommittee, thank you for this opportunity to offer testimony on
matters of importance to our organizations and to our millions of
supporters. We thank you for the support and investment in animal
protection in the subcommittee's Fiscal Year 2022 appropriations bill.
We appreciate your continued consideration for the following requests
in the Fiscal Year 2023 Department of Commerce, Justice, Science, and
Related Agencies budget:
--NOAA North Atlantic Right Whales: at least $26 million
--NOAA Protected Resources: increase of at least $30 million
--NOAA John H. Prescott Marine Mammal Rescue Assistance Grant
Program: $8 million
--Marine Mammal Commission: $6 million
--DOJ Animal Welfare Act enforcement: report language for DOJ-USDA
MOU
national oceanic and atmospheric administration--north atlantic right
whale conservation
We, along with coalition partners, request at least $26 million in
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) budget to
support the recovery of the critically endangered North Atlantic right
whale, which is plunging ever closer to extinction due to fishing gear
entanglements and vessel strikes. Recently updated estimates for the
species indicate that from January 2019 to January 2020, the population
plummeted by eight percent to 336 individuals-a rate of decline forty
times the legal limit. This is the lowest assessment in decades.
Within the $26 million for North Atlantic right whale conservation,
we request the following allocations:
Within Marine Mammals, Sea Turtles, and Other Species
--$12,000,000 for the continued development and implementation of new
rules from NOAA aimed at reducing the mortality rate of North
Atlantic right whales by vessel strikes, fishing gear
entanglements, and other threats to their survival. This
funding should also be used for regulatory and management
support to both reduce vessel-strike risk in high-traffic areas
and to facilitate a transition to commercial fishing gear known
to reduce gear entanglement risk with a strong focus on
fishermen education and outreach.
--$8,000,000 to expand the pilot program to refine and field test
innovative fishing gear technologies designed to reduce North
Atlantic right whale entanglements. As determined by the
agency's needs, some funding within this amount should be
directed towards the development of geolocation technologies
and mapping. Lastly, research on how to lower the cost of new
gear technologies should also be included.
--$3,000,000 for: (1) Enforcement activities of offshore lobster
fisheries in Massachusetts and Maine, related to personnel and
vessel needs, monitoring, gear removal, and surveys (2)
Enforcement activities of current and future vessel speed
restrictions.
--$2,000,000 for surveys and monitoring, including underwater
acoustic gliders, of North Atlantic right whales in Atlantic
coastal waters.
--$1,000,000 for disentanglement, stranding response, and necropsy
activities.
--3 percent cap on the amount of funds NOAA can use internally.
Within Fisheries Data Collections, Surveys, and Assessments
$300,000 to continue conducting the continuous plankton recorder
survey that will enhance our understanding of the distribution and
movement of Calanus spp., the primary prey of the North Atlantic right
whale.
We thank the subcommittee for its continued commitment to ensuring
the survival of the critically endangered North Atlantic right whale.
national oceanic and atmospheric administration--office of protected
resources
In the last few years, we have seen other imperiled marine species
reach crisis status. The Southern Resident killer whale population is
at its lowest levels in 20 years. The number of vaquitas-the smallest
and most endangered marine mammal on Earth-has plummeted by 90 percent
in recent years; scientists estimate that a mere 10 vaquitas might
remain in the world. Without bold, immediate action, their extinction
is virtually assured. Each of these tragic declines underscores the
danger of being complacent and failing to provide robust funding to the
National Marine Fisheries Service. Thus, we recommend a $30 million
increase in funding to the agency's protected resources budget to
prevent any more of our amazing marine species slipping irrevocably to
extinction.
national oceanic and atmospheric administration--john h. prescott
marine mammal rescue assistance grant program
We request $8 million in FY23 for the John H. Prescott Marine
Mammal Rescue Assistance Grant Program, an increase from $4 million in
FY22. The Prescott program provides competitive grants to marine mammal
stranding organizations to rescue, rehabilitate, or investigate sick,
injured, or distressed live marine mammals, and to investigate and
determine the cause of death or injury to these animals. The program is
the sole source of Federal funding for the National Marine Mammal
Stranding Network, comprising more than 90 member organizations in 26
States, the District of Columbia, two territories, and two Tribes.
Funds are awarded only if at least 25 percent of non-federal matching
funds are also committed, and no single award may exceed $100,000. To
date, NOAA has issued 794 Prescott program awards to the National
stranding network, totaling over $67 million in Federal funding and
over $28 million in non-federal funding.
marine mammal commission
For FY23, we urge that the Marine Mammal Commission (MMC) budget be
increased to $6 million to help restore the Commission's key oversight
role in conserving marine mammals. The U.S. taxpayer contributes just
over 1 cent per year to fund this agency and its work. Starting in
FY15, the MMC had been flat-funded at $3.43 million. MMC funding
increased slightly to $3.769 million in FY21, and to $4.2 million in
FY22. Despite that, the agency's actual discretionary funding has
declined due to rising fixed costs such as salaries and rent. Providing
$6 million in funding for FY23 would enable the MMC to fulfill its
obligations under the Marine Mammal Protection Act.
department of justice--animal welfare act enforcement
The Animal Welfare Act (AWA) sets basic standards of care for
animals used in research, exhibition, transport, and sales. This law is
crucial to protecting over a million animals from inhumane care and
treatment. Yet many dealers, exhibitors, and research facilities are
getting away with egregious abuses. Enforcement of the AWA must be
strengthened because the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA)
enforcement actions have not been frequent or strong enough to stop
those engaging in abuse or to deter potential violators of the law.
Without vigorous enforcement of this important law, there is no
deterrent for violators and animals will continue to suffer. To keep up
with the sheer number of animals in need of AWA protection, the USDA
needs help.
The Department of Justice's Environment and Natural Resources
Division (DOJ) already works tirelessly to ensure that full effect is
given to the Federal statutes and enforcement regimes that provide for
the humane treatment of captive, farmed, and companion animals across
the United States--including sections of the AWA. However, to provide
the Department with additional tools to take action against dealers,
exhibitors, and research facilities that violate the AWA, we encourage
the inclusion of report language calling on USDA and DOJ to develop a
Memorandum of Understanding to facilitate a partnership in enforcing
the AWA, and to create a formalized structure for USDA to partner and
share information on AWA violators with DOJ.
As such, we urge the inclusion of this report language: The
Committee urges the Department to enter into a memorandum of
understanding with the Secretary of Agriculture to encourage greater
collaboration on Animal Welfare Act enforcement and ensure that the
Department of Justice has access to evidence needed to initiate cases.
[This statement was submitted by Jocelyn Ziemian, Senior
Legislative Specialist, Humane Society Legislative Fund]
______
Prepared Statement of Indigenous Cannabis Coalition
Dear Chairman Shaheen and Ranking Committee Members,
As Tribal leaders, Tribal citizens, organizations and cannabis
advocates, we publicly endorse the Fiscal Year 2023 appropriations
legislation for the Commerce Justice and Science subcommittee and the
support for Tribal sovereignty and the implementation of Indian treaty
rights and self-determination in cannabis commerce. We believe that
responsible regulation and control of marijuana by Tribes in their
respective homelands is beneficial to society and the public's health,
and provides safer alternatives to the illicit cartel economies that
occur in States that continue the practice of criminalizing black and
brown communities with failed marijuana policies.
We support the 2023 appropriations bill's new policy language that
says no Federal funds appropriated to agencies within Interior, Justice
Department, Bureau of Indian Affairs or Office of Justice Services
could be used to ``enforce Federal laws criminalizing the use,
distribution, possession, or cultivation of marijuana against any
person engaged in the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of
marijuana in Indian country'' where such activity is authorized, we are
highly concerned that the new contingencies create further
discriminatory practices and fails to protect Tribal sovereignty.
We ask that the members of this committee pass this House measure
specifically regarding provisions on the Federal enforcement of
cannabis on Indian lands. The language reflects Tribal sovereignty for
all 574 federally recognized Tribes and does not allow for State law to
supersede Tribal law regarding trade and commerce in cannabis, an
imperative aspect of upholding the trust responsibility and uplifting
self-determination.
[This statement was submitted by Mary Jane Oatman, Executive
Director (Nez Perce/Delaware) Kamiah, ID]
______
Prepared Statement of Insights Association
On behalf of the Insights Association (IA), the leading nonprofit
trade association for the market research and data analytics industry,
I am respectfully submitting testimony on the U.S. Census Bureau's
``Ask U.S. Panel'' project and the bill language and committee report
language we are seeking. The project is presumably funded through the
Current Surveys and Programs account, though the President's FY23
budget request makes no mention of it.
IA defends and promotes the indisputable role of insights in
driving positive impacts on society and consumers. Our more than 7,000
company and individual members are the world's leading producers of
intelligence, analytics and insights defining the needs, attitudes and
behaviors of consumers, organizations and their employees, students and
citizens. With that essential understanding, leaders can make
intelligent decisions and deploy strategies and tactics to build trust,
inspire innovation, realize the full potential of individuals and
teams, and successfully create and promote products, services and
ideas.
The Ask U.S. Panel is being developed by the Bureau through a
cooperative agreement to create a new ``nationally representative
survey panel for tracking public opinion on a variety of topics of
interest to numerous Federal agencies and their partners, and for
conducting experimentation on alternative question wording and
methodological approaches.'' The Bureau intends to spend at least the
first 2 years of the project on a pilot before trying to make their
panel probability-based in the third year (or later).
This lead time is particularly galling since numerous private
sector insights companies and organizations currently provide well-
established high-quality probability-based panels to the Federal
Government and other customers without needing Federal subsidy and
multiple years of development time. At best, the plan for the Census
Bureau to develop a probability-based research panel is duplicative. It
is also anti-competitive, given these existing panels and the Bureau's
intent to fund an additional insights organization (Research Triangle
Institute) to spend years building one, whose intellectual property and
technology that organization would get to keep for its own purposes.
Our industry is not the only interest raising concerns about the
project. The Department of Commerce's Office of the Inspector General
(OIG) has initiated ``an evaluation'' of the ``award and use of a
cooperative agreement to participate in a joint statistical project
with Research Triangle Institute, an independent nonprofit
institution.'' The OIG's ``objective is to determine whether the
cooperative agreement was properly authorized, executed, and
administered in accordance with relevant laws and regulations.'' \1\
Recent Congressional inquiries to the Bureau have been met with
reference to this OIG evaluation as the reason for the Bureau's
inability to answer questions. However, if the OIG evaluation somehow
prevents the Census Bureau from discussing the Ask U.S. Panel, should
it not also prevent the continued pursuit of the project?
IA has requested bill language in CJS: ``No funds in this bill may
be spent in support or development of the Ask U.S. Panel or any similar
effort to develop a survey, opinion or market research service
duplicative of private sector offerings.''
Along with the prohibition on funds, IA also requested committee
report language: ``Ask U.S. Panel Survey. The Committee is concerned
about the lack of transparency related to the Census Bureau's plans for
implementation of the Ask U.S. Panel Survey, particularly given the
lack of congressional authorization and the expanding scope of the
project since it was initially announced. The Committee also is
concerned about the use of taxpayer dollars for the development of a
panel survey given the wide range of options that currently exist in
the private sector for these types of activities. The Committee directs
the Census Bureau to provide a report to the Committee within 60 days
about the panel's methodology, data collection processes,
implementation, and procurement strategy to allow the Committee to
evaluate the project's use of Federal resources.''
IA's concerns include:
1. Federal agencies can (and already do) purchase such services
from the private sector.--The ultimate goal of the Ask U.S. Panel
project--to create a probability-based nationwide representative survey
panel for tracking public opinion--is already being fulfilled utilizing
numerous non-governmental sources. Insights providers such as Dynata,
Gallup, Ipsos, NORC at the University of Chicago, SSRS, the University
of Southern California, and others maintain probability-based research
panels that could meet any needs of the Bureau or other Federal
agencies. Most of them already successfully provide such services to
Federal agency clients, including the Bureau itself. Plenty of other
insights companies and organizations with panels could also adapt to
provide probability-based panels if requested.
Since these insights providers offer their services commercially on
the open market, the Census Bureau could acquire such panel research
services with full and open competitions. So why does the Bureau feel
the need to disregard the availability of ready commercial alternatives
and develop its own panel?
2. The Ask U.S. Panel is an unnecessary financial burden on Federal
taxpayers.--Besides just the cost and expertise involved in
establishing this duplicative service, the Census Bureau has not
considered the immense expertise in data quality, incentive management
and delivery, fraud detection, and privacy and permissions management
required to successfully maintain this kind of panel. The Bureau has
mentioned no planned procedures to monitor and mitigate attrition of
panelists and how it would refresh the pool of available respondents.
The multi-year pilot plan suggests they just hope to learn on the fly
(an expensive gamble). Why should taxpayers fund the lengthy creation
and complicated maintenance of such a duplicative service when it could
be simply purchased in the open market for a tiny fraction of the cost?
The Bureau's supporting Statement to OMB estimates that the pilot
will cost a mere $3.5 million,\2\ but this hides the true cost of the
overall project, since actually building the panel, which the Bureau
doesn't propose to even do until at least year three, would cost a
massively greater amount. NORC estimates it would cost at least $25
million to build this kind of online panel, with annual maintenance
costing as much as $2 million per year.\3\ Meanwhile, NORC estimates
that studies from pre-existing probability-based panel providers could
``be purchased for as little as $100,000.'' \4\
3. The Federal Government should not compete against the private
sector.--According to the original Notice of Federal Funding,\5\ the
Ask U.S. Panel would be ``open to government and other non-profit
researchers and policy makers,'' meaning that the Bureau's proposed
panel itself could compete directly with private sector insights
providers.
Since 1955, Federal agencies have been charged with avoiding
``activities conducted by the Government that provide services or
products for its own use which could be procured from private
enterprise through ordinary business channels''.\6\ The policy required
the head of an agency to make any exception to such restrictions ``only
where it is clearly demonstrated . . . that it is not in the public
interest to procure such product or service from private enterprise.''
This policy was reiterated by every Administration following, including
in OMB Circular A-76\7\ and other policies specifically requiring
competitive sourcing.
The Census Bureau implies in a supporting Statement to OMB that it
has conducted a competitive sourcing analysis, but in fact has only
checked to see if the data to be collected in the pilot project stage
is duplicative of other Federal Government agencies.\8\ That is no
substitute for an actual competitive sourcing analysis.
4. Government should not subsidize a private entity to develop (and
keep for its own use) duplicative intellectual property.--By using a
cooperative agreement, under which the intellectual property (IP)
developed is owned not by the Federal Government but by the awardee,
the Census Bureau is using taxpayer funds to establish a panel that is
free to be used by a private entity for its own work long after the
contracted work is complete. Per the Department of Commerce Financial
Assistance Standard Terms and Conditions (December 26, 2014,
Sec. D.03.a), the awardee ``owns any work produced or purchased under a
Federal award.''
How could the best or most cost-effective way of pursuing the
Census Bureau's research goals involve directly subsidizing a private
entity to spend years developing a service already offered by other
private entities?
conclusion
We applaud the Census Bureau for their ongoing innovation and
dedication to serve as the leading source of the highest quality and
most representative data for America's people and economy. The Insights
Association dedicates much of our daily advocacy to supporting the
decennial census and the American Community Survey (ACS), the two
essential Federal data sources underpinning statistical sampling/
representativeness in almost all U.S. research studies.
The insights industry is no stranger to the importance of the
Bureau and its core work; we want the Bureau to focus on that work and
do it well.
IA remains gravely concerned about the shaky rationale and lack of
need for the Ask U.S. Panel given numerous commercially-viable
alternatives. The Census Bureau should be using the competitive
marketplace of available insights services to acquire pre-existing
research services on an as-needed basis, which would reduce public
burden, save years of development time, and ultimately cost taxpayers a
lot less money.
Thank you for allowing IA to testify on the Ask U.S. Panel project,
an important under-the-radar issue in the FY23 CJS Appropriations
legislation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Evaluation of the U.S. Census Bureau's Award and Use of a
Cooperative Agreement
(#2022-420). January 14, 2022. https://www.oig.doc.gov/OIGPublications/
Evaluation-of-Census-Cooperative-Agreement.pdf.
\2\ Page 17. Supporting Statement Part A Ask US Pilot_4_4--22.docx
https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewDocument?ref_nbr=202202-0607-
008.
\3\ NORC comments. February 22, 2022. Page 3. https://
www.regulations.gov/comment/USBC-2021-0024-0004.
\4\ NORC comments. February 22, 2022. Page 2. https://
www.regulations.gov/comment/USBC-2021-0024-0004.
\5\ CENSUS-ADR-ADRM-2020-2006579. U.S. Census Bureau Research and
Methodology Directorate Cooperative Agreements. Department of Commerce.
Page 10. https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/search-
grants.html?keywords=CENSUS-ADR-ADRM-2020-2006579.
\6\ Bureau of the Budget Bulletin 55-4. January 15, 1955. https://
www.governmentcompetition.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/
Bureauof_the_Budget_Bulletin_55-4_January_15_1955.pdf.
\7\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/
circulars/A76/a076.pdf.
\8\ Page 5. Supporting Statement Part A Ask US Pilot_4_4--22.docx
https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewDocument?ref_nbr=202202-0607-
008.
[This statement was submitted by Howard Fienberg, Senior VP
Advocacy]
______
Prepared Statement of International Fund for Animal Welfare
Chairwoman Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and Members of the
subcommittee:
Thank you for the opportunity to offer testimony on the FY23
Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act.
The International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) has 15 offices
globally and works in more than 40 countries around the world. IFAW
takes a holistic approach to innovating solutions for tough
conservation challenges like conflicts between humans and wildlife, and
illegal wildlife trafficking. IFAW's Marine Mammal Rescue Team, based
on Cape Cod, Massachusetts, has also served as a first line of defense
for stranded marine mammals in distress for more than 20 years. Our
team investigates incidents involving human interactions with marine
mammals, and, rescues dolphins, whales, seals, and other marine
mammals, releasing them, whenever possible, back into the wild.
IFAW is grateful for this subcommittee's championship of strong
marine conservation and research funding for the current fiscal year
(FY22), and requests additional support for these programs in FY23 to
meet urgent and growing needs.
Our oceans are in trouble. From the depletion of fish stocks to
climate change, increasing ocean temperatures, noise pollution, and
acidification, human activity threatens marine ecosystems that are
vital to the health of our oceans and to all life on earth. Marine
mammals are further impacted by changes that are occurring rapidly,
such as increases in offshore wind energy and aquaculture, potentially
exacerbating existing threats.
Fortunately, just as human activities are responsible for many of
the current ocean threats, it is within our power to change our shared
trajectory, and this subcommittee has jurisdiction over critical
programs that can help to do just that. Given the severity of the
challenges we face, IFAW respectfully asks the subcommittee to exert
its leadership in order to reverse the alarming and interrelated
climate and biodiversity emergencies by making substantial increases in
funding for the important marine conservation programs within your
purview. Doing so will help to protect ocean biodiversity, and will in
turn have significant positive effects, including promoting healthy
fish stocks, fighting climate change, and safeguarding human health and
wellbeing.
For FY23, IFAW requests the following direction from the
subcommittee within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration's (NOAA) National Marine Fisheries Service Marine
Mammals, Sea Turtles, and Other Species conservation programs:
north atlantic right whales: $26.3 million
Recent population surveys have found a decline in North Atlantic
right whale (NARW) populations, and suggest that there are currently
fewer than 340 individuals remaining. Urgent action must be taken NOW
in order to save these iconic animals from extinction.
The NARW faces ongoing threats from fishing gear entanglement and
vessel strikes, amongst other stressors. It is imperative that we
continue to provide significant funding to conserve this imperiled
species, better understand how it interacts with commercial fisheries
and vessel traffic, and if needed, support the fishing industry in
complying with last year's Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction Plan
(ALWTRP) rule.
Critical habitat for right whales frequently overlaps with
commercial fishing grounds and areas of high vessel traffic, leaving
the whales vulnerable to vessel collisions and fishing gear
entanglements, the two leading causes of injury and death to the
species. Whales that survive these dangers are often subject to chronic
stress and reproductive failure, further inhibiting the species'
ability to recover. Due to human-caused threats, the population's
mortality rate still exceeds the birth rate by a ratio of three to two.
By providing funding for NARW research and prioritizing cooperative
research with fishermen, Congress can help generate innovative and
long-term solutions for saving this endangered species--while
preserving the essential economic activity of commercial fishing and
shipping.
--$12,000,000 for the continued development and implementation of new
rules from NOAA to reduce mortality of NARWs from vessel
strikes, fishing gear entanglements, and other threats to their
survival. This funding should also be used to provide
regulatory and management support to both reduce vessel-strike
risk in high-traffic areas and to facilitate a transition to
commercial fishing gear known to reduce gear entanglement risk,
with a strong focus on fishermen education and outreach;
--$8,000,000 to expand the existing pilot program to field test and
refine innovative fishing gear technologies intended to reduce
NARW entanglements. As determined by the agency's needs, some
funding within this amount should be directed towards the
development of gear geolocation technologies and toward
strategies for lowering the cost of adoption of new gear
technologies;
--$3,000,000 for enforcement of current and future vessel speed
restrictions and offshore lobster fisheries in Massachusetts
and Maine, related to personnel and vessel needs, monitoring,
gear removal, and surveys;
--$2,000,000 for surveys and monitoring, including but not limited to
underwater acoustic detection technologies, of NARW in Atlantic
coastal waters;
--$1,000,000 for disentanglement, stranding response, and necropsy
activities;
--3% cap on the amount of funds NOAA can use internally.
We also request an additional $300,000 within Fisheries Data
Collections, Surveys, and Assessment in order to continue conducting
the continuous plankton recorder survey that will enhance our
understanding of the distribution and movement of Calanus finmarchicus,
the primary prey of the NARW.
john h. prescott marine mammal rescue assistance grant program:
$15 million
The Prescott Grant Program provides grants or cooperative
agreements to eligible stranding network participants for the recovery
and treatment of stranded marine mammals; the collection of data from
living or dead stranded marine mammals; and for facility upgrades,
operation costs, and staffing needs directly related to the recovery
and treatment of stranded marine mammals and the collection of data
from living or dead stranded marine mammals. In FY22, the Committee
provided $5 million for this important program. This year IFAW is
requesting a significant increase to $15 million.
The National Marine Mammal Health and Stranding Network provides
critical services that allow NOAA to fulfil its duties under the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). Under the MMPA, the Secretary is
responsible for the establishment of the Marine Mammal Health and
Stranding Response Program (MMHSRP), composed of marine mammal experts
including stranding response programs, scientists, and veterinarians
who are charged with data collection on the health of marine mammals,
observed trends of wild populations, and effective responses to unusual
mortality events (UMEs) to better inform the collective management and
conservation of marine mammal species. Without the support and efforts
of stranding organizations who are fundamental to the collection and
reporting of this data, NOAA's understanding of marine mammal health
trends would be fatality flawed, putting NOAA at risk of violation of
the MMPA. In addition, responders provide a crucial service that
supports public safety, a timely and humane response, and life-saving
care for marine mammals--including a variety of cetaceans and pinnipeds
and endangered and threatened species--along the whole of the United
States coast.
As threats to marine mammals are increasing, the financial
constraints on the stranding network are also going up. It is estimated
that for every entangled whale that is reported, another 10 are unseen.
As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, supply chain shortages and
increased shipping costs are driving up prices in a realm that is
already expensive. The provision of high-quality food and medication is
key to the successful care and rehabilitation of all marine mammals in
rehabilitation. Depending on the case, the testing necessary to reach a
diagnosis for a patient can include radiology or advanced imaging (such
as MRI or CT scans) in addition to the baseline diagnostics of complete
blood counts, serum chemistry profiles, parasite screens, and
microbiology. Members maintain fleets of rescue vehicles to safely
transport patients, and a hospital in which to care for them. The
hospitals include pens with enclosed pools through which water is
circulated. That water is filtered through a sophisticated system of
filters before being sanitized and returned to the patient pools. This
is key to maintaining good health for the patients, and the approach is
one that importantly considers the environment in that water is
conserved by this recirculation process.
Given the condition of our ocean and the threats to marine mammals
currently, and in the future, reinforcing and appropriately building
out the MMHSRP for timely, effective response in the interest of public
service, animal welfare, disease surveillance, science and conservation
will likely require a Federal investment of at least $30 million. For
FY23, IFAW respectfully asks for a significant investment of $15
million in the Prescott Grant Program toward that total figure.
unusual/large whale response funds: $1 million
A recent increase in large whale strandings along the Northeastern
coast of the US has led the Federal Government to declare three
separate, concurrent UMEs for minke whales, humpback whales, and the
endangered NARW, respectively to further assess these mortalities. The
primary cause of the NARW UME is human interaction, including vessel
strikes and entanglements, and a number of live entangled NARW have
also been included in the event. As fishing ropes have gotten stronger,
entanglements have become more severe and it is increasingly more
difficult for whales to break or shed the gear themselves. The
likelihood of entanglement has also increased as right whale habitat
and fisheries increasingly overlap due to changing ecosystems and
climate change. Entanglement can lead to reductions in feeding
capability, swimming efficiency, nutritional status, and fecundity and,
in many cases, results in death. In fact, between 2010 and 2018,
entanglements caused 72% of known-cause right whale deaths.
Furthermore, observed deaths due to entanglement alone have exceeded
the potential biological removal (PBR) levels, for both right and
humpback whales in the Northwest Atlantic for nearly two decades,
meaning that these human impacts are simply unsustainable for this
population and have been ongoing for far too long. With the NARW on the
brink of extinction, it is critical that action be taken now to address
entanglements or this species will be lost forever.
Unfortunately, despite the importance of conducting thorough exams
and necropsies on these critical cases and the technical expertise of
stranding networks, effective large whale stranding response has become
increasingly difficult. An increase in dead whale events, a lack of
resources, including adequate staffing, necessary heavy equipment,
appropriate carcass landing sites, and disposal options, as well as the
expense associated with aerial surveys to locate carcasses, on-water
towing, over-land hauling, heavy equipment hire, disposal and sample
processing are critical limiting factors. While limited Federal funding
is available for response to specific UME events, resources often are
not sufficient to respond to every event sufficiently or for non-UME
whale species.
The cost of a single stranding event involving a large whale can be
as much as $50,000 or more, making it difficult for responders to meet
not only our country's legal conservation obligation to these large
whales, but also a moral animal welfare obligation by expanding
detection and mitigation of anthropogenic threats to these federally
protected animals. IFAW therefore requests $1 million for FY23 to be
directed specifically to unusual or large whale stranding responses.
conclusion
In closing, thank you for the opportunity to share IFAW's funding
priorities to promote conservation in the FY2023 Commerce, Science,
Justice and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. Our oceans and native
marine species are more than our National heritage; they are essential
aspects of the healthy ecosystems on which we all rely. We appreciate
the continued leadership of this subcommittee on conservation efforts.
With your support, we can reverse the tide of extinction, protect human
health, and promote a better future for generations of wildlife lovers
and Americans yet to come. Thank you.
[This statement was submitted by Kate Wall, Senior Legislative
Manager]
______
Prepared Statement of Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe
On behalf of the Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe, I am pleased to submit
this written testimony on our funding priorities and requests for the
Fiscal Year 2023 for the Department of Justice and the Department of
Commerce Budgets. Our Budget Request endorses the requests and
recommendations of our international, regional, and national partners,
the Pacific Salmon Commission, the Northwest Indian Fisheries
Commission, the Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians and the National
Congress of American Indians.
The moral compass of our Nation is expressed annually when Congress
exercises its authority to appropriate funding to support certain
programs and services. The Constitution, Treaties, Executive Orders,
and numerous court decisions established the legal and moral foundation
for prioritizing funding for American Indian/Alaska Natives (AI/AN).
Yet, as documented by two Reports that were issued by the U.S. Civil
Rights Commission, a quiet crisis of unfulfilled Federal obligations
has persisted for decades across Indian Country and has left our Tribal
citizens and communities vulnerable to the current public health crisis
and economic devastation. The COVID-19 pandemic's disproportionate
impact on AI/AN resulted in the highest rates of infection,
hospitalizations, and deaths compared to any other racial and ethnic
group in the U.S. And these harrowing statistics are likely much worse
given the lack of accurate, reliable, quality data on AI/AN.
The Biden Administration has committed to respect Tribal
sovereignty, as well as, uphold the trust responsibility, strengthen
the Nation-to-Nation relationship, and empower Tribal communities
through Self-Governance and Self-Determination to make their own
decisions and govern their own communities. We urge Congress to follow
suit and pass a Federal budget for AI/AN that is reflective of the
solemn promises made by the U.S. We have proven time and again that
when you invest in Jamestown and empower our Tribe to exercise our
inherent right of Self-Governance we become strong economic development
drivers for our community and the surrounding region by growing our
resource base and creating jobs. Tribes are a critical governmental
partner in our Nation's quest to ``Build Back Better''.
uphold trust and treaty obligations
1. Provide Recurring Base Funding for Tribal Programs
2. equire All Agencies to Provide an Annual Estimate of the Costs
to Fully Fund Tribal Programs & Improve Data Collection to Support
Tribal Funding Requests
3. Provide Mandatory Funding for Tribal Programs and Services
tribal requests and recommendations--department of commerce
(Support the FY 2022 request of the Pacific Salmon Commission)
1. Provide $110 million for the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery
Fund (NOAA/NMFS)
2. Provide $43.5 million for the Pacific Salmon Treaty
3. Provide $26.5 million for the Mitchell Act Hatchery Program
(NOAA/NMFS)
national requests and recommendations--department of justice
1. Fully Fund the Tribal Law and Order Act (TLOA)
2. Fully Fund Violence Against Women Act (VAWA)
3. Office of Justice Programs (OJP)--Create a Ten Percent (10%)
Tribal Set-Aside for Tribes
4. Victims of Crime Act Funding--Provide a five percent (5%) set
aside
5. Fund COPS Program--$52 million
uphold trust & treaty obligations
1. Provide Recurring Base Funding for Tribal Programs
Stable base funding at sufficient levels is essential for viable
and effective Tribal programs and services. Grant funding is highly
competitive, short-term, the application process is complex, the
administrative burden on Tribes is excessive and there are numerous
restrictions imposed on how Tribes may use the funds. Simply put,
competitive grants create barriers to effectively and efficiently
providing programs and services in Tribal communities. Reducing
Administrative inefficiencies would improve program effectiveness and
increase the ability of Tribes to leverage the Federal dollar. Base
funding coupled with more flexibility allows for more effective and
efficient use of the Federal dollar and stronger Tribal governmental
systems resulting in strong and self-reliant Tribal citizens and
communities.
2. Require All Agencies to Provide an Annual Estimate of the Costs to
Fully Fund
Tribal Programs & Improve Data Collection to Support Tribal
Funding Requests
It is incumbent upon the agencies, as trustees, to work
collectively with the Tribes to quantify the true unmet need/
unfulfilled Federal obligation with credible metrics that will
demonstrate an accurate community profile for each Tribe. We need
economic statistics and data that establish and drive policy goals,
ensure effective implementation of programs and services, measure
funding impacts, prove effective and efficient use of funding, and to
demonstrate program success. These data metrics, however, are not a
``justification'' of whether Tribes deserve funding. The Federal
obligation does not dissipate if a Tribe performs poorly in any area.
Rather, a heightened response by the government is required to identify
the challenges that impede a Tribe's success and to build greater
capacity at the local level, if necessary. At this point in time, there
is not a system in place that captures the data needed. There is an
absence of good data agency-wide with some agencies under the prior
Administration having imposed a moratorium on the collection of needs-
based data for Tribes. The Federal Government needs to be held
accountable and directed to work in partnership with Tribes to collect
data that quantifies the true unmet needs/unfulfilled Federal
obligations in Indian country.
3. Provide Mandatory Funding for Tribal Programs and Services
Trust and Treaty obligations are not discretionary; these are
mandatory obligations. On an annual basis Tribes are required to
``justify'' their budgetary needs and prove to the Federal Government
that the Federal investment in Tribal communities is a good investment.
We have shown time and again that the Federal investment in Jamestown
is a good investment but the narrative about funding needs to be re-
written because it is mischaracterizing the Federal trust obligation.
Tribes relinquished their lands and resources in exchange for funding
and services from the Federal Government in perpetuity and that
obligation has not changed with time. It is solidified in our
Constitution, Treaties, Executive Orders, and countless legal opinions.
department of commerce tribal requests and recommendations
1. $110 million for the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund (NOAA/
NMFS)
The Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery fund was established to reverse
the decline of salmon and steelhead in the Pacific Northwest. Jamestown
uses the funds to restore wild salmon populations and to protect and
restore important habitat in the Puget Sound coastal plains. These
funds also support our policy development and help to build the
technical capacity of our Natural Resource staff charged with planning,
implementation, and monitoring recovery activities.
2. $43.5 million for the Pacific Salmon Treaty--The U.S. Section
estimates that this funding is needed to implement national
commitments created by the Treaty (NOAA/NMFS)
The Pacific Salmon Treaty provides the framework for international
collaboration and cooperation to conserve and manage Pacific Salmon.
The Pacific Salmon Commission (PSC) works together to establish fishery
regimes, develop management recommendations, assess each country's
performance and compliance with the Treaty, and is the forum for all
entities to work towards reaching an agreement on mutual fisheries
issues.
3. $26.5 million for the Mitchell Act Hatchery Program (NOAA/NMFS)
Jamestown hatchery operations have elevated our success and
generated a substantial return on our investment in our aquaculture
business. The Tribe operates three hatcheries, two in Washington state
and one in Hawaii that produce shellfish and sablefish seeds. The
seedlings help to replenish fish and shellfish stocks that have been
depleted due to loss of ecosystems and natural habitats. Tribes depend
on hatcheries to support Treaty fishing rights, protect our culture and
traditional ways of life, and to bolster our commercial fishery
operations at home and trade abroad.
national requests and recommendations department of justice
1. Fully Fund the Tribal Law and Order Act (TLOA)
The Tribal Law and Order Act (TLOA) was an important step in
empowering Tribes to better address the unique public safety challenges
and reduce the prevalence of violent crime in Indian country. However,
effective implementation of TLOA is contingent upon adequate Federal
funding for law enforcement, courts, detention facilities and the
provision of rehabilitative and preventative services. Full Funding is
needed to effectively and efficiently implement the comprehensive and
improved measures that were enacted to address the public safety crisis
in Tribal communities.
2. Fully Fund Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) Including $5 million
for VAWA Special Domestic Violence Criminal Jurisdiction
The Office on Violence Against Women provides funding for Tribes to
address violence against women in their communities. The incidence of
domestic violence in Tribal communities is staggering and it is
estimated that over 85% of American Indians/Alaska Natives (AI/AN) will
be victims of intimate partner violence, stalking and/or sexual
violence in their lifetime. Over 90% of these crimes are committed by
non-Natives who were outside of the jurisdictional authority of the
Tribes. In 2013, Congress afforded AI/AN judicial recourse by
reaffirming the inherent sovereign authority of Tribes to exercise
Special Domestic Violence Criminal Jurisdiction over Indians and Non-
Indians who commit certain crimes in Indian country. Although Congress
authorized $5 million for Tribes to exercise this new jurisdictional
authority, in FY2021 only $4.3 million was appropriated. Tribal justice
systems need additional resources to fully implement this authority and
we therefore urge Congress to appropriate $5 million.
3. Office of Justice Programs (OJP)--Create a 10% Tribal Set-Aside for
all (OJP) Programs and Allow for Greater Flexibility
Jamestown is advocating for a 10% Tribal set-aside from all OJP
discretionary programs to provide Tribes base funding and maximum
flexibility including the ability to combine DOJ funding with other
sources of funding and allow Tribes to develop comprehensive holistic
strategies to address public safety and justice in their communities.
Stable funding for Tribal public safety and justice is a prerequisite
to ensure a safe, healthy, and thriving Tribal community.
4. Provide a Five Percent (5%) Tribal Set-Aside for Victims of Crime
Act Funding
The Victims of Crime Act funding is financed by fines and penalties
imposed on convicted Federal offenders and is the largest source of
Federal funding for crime victims. As of 2020, the fund balance was
over $6 billion. Although the fund was established in 1984 and despite
the staggering rates of violent crimes in Indian country, Tribes were
not authorized as direct recipients of funding until recently. For the
past 5 years, Congress has authorized and appropriated a portion of the
fund directly to Tribal Nations. We urge Congress to continue to
provide a 5% Tribal Set Aside on a recurring annual basis.
5. Fund the COPS Program--$52 million
The COPS Office provides funding to Tribes for law enforcement
officers. Since the creation of the COPS program Tribes have hired more
than 1700 law enforcement officers. COPS funding is also used for
police training, equipment, vehicles, and technology. Although there is
a great need for additional law enforcement officers throughout Indian
Country, limited resources has hindered Tribe's ability to hire,
retain, and train law enforcement officers. It is imperative for the
safety of Tribal citizens, Indian communities, and surrounding
neighboring communities that a significant increase in funding is
allocated for Tribal law enforcement officers and programs.
We thank you for the opportunity to provide this written testimony.
[This statement was submitted by Hon. W. Ron Allen, Tribal
Chairman/CEO]
______
Prepared Statement of the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative
Chairman Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and other members of the
subcommittee, we commend your long-standing support for key ocean
accounts, and thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony
regarding the Fiscal Year 2023 CJS appropriations bill.
Our oceans hold some of our most viable solutions to address
climate impacts. These impacts are already exacting an enormous and
unacceptable toll on our economy and our communities. The agencies
under your charge are required by law to respond to the domestic and
global crisis in our oceans, which is inextricably linked to climate.
We urge you to ensure that all have sufficient resources to take the
necessary actions. You have an opportunity to reassert global
leadership that will steer the planet, including the stewardship of our
oceans, back to a just, sustainable, and more secure future.
We are encouraged by the Administration proposal for nearly $7
billion for NOAA, as well as significantly increased support for the
National Science Foundation and NASA's Earth Science Division. However,
we ask your committee to critically examine funding for these front-
line agencies in FY 2023 to determine if additional resources are
required to empower them to confront the unprecedented challenges posed
by a rapidly changing climate, including more than a foot of sea level
rise by 2050, as recently documented by NOAA.
The Joint Ocean Commission Initiative (Joint Initiative) is a
collaborative, bipartisan effort to catalyze action on meaningful ocean
policy reform. We believe that providing the necessary funding for core
programs at NOAA, NSF, and NASA is an essential investment that will
save lives, protect national security, grow our economy, increase
justice and equity, mitigate climate change, and preserve the health of
our oceans, coasts, and communities.
Ocean and coastal environments are often the first line of defense
in promoting resilience and protecting American communities from severe
weather events. The oceans are disproportionately impacted by
increasing emissions from human activities, but also have immense
potential to reduce carbon emissions by as much as 21 percent, and play
an instrumental role in mitigating the climate crisis. For example,
with adequate funding US agencies can exert global leadership to
significantly reduce emissions from marine transportation and ports,
which now account for nearly 3 percent of global GHG emissions.
Likewise, your budget should provide funding to encourage action to
advance offshore renewable energy to create new clean energy sources
and invest in coastal communities. With a clear nexus of climate and
oceans, a failure to take decisive action would severely impact the
health and livelihoods of millions of Americans, with the largest
impact on historically underserved communities, especially Black,
Indigenous people of color, and low-income environmental justice
communities. Programs should be designed to create just and equitable
policy solutions and empower these communities to take decisive action
to restore and protect the places they live, work, and recreate.
The Biden Administration's proposed topline budget makes
significant strides toward re-establishing NOAA, NSF, and NASA Earth
Sciences as premier science agencies that provide the underpinning to
address the global climate crisis, while restoring and protecting the
Nation's oceans. However, we strongly urge the Committee to consider
strategic investments above this level in critical accounts such as
ocean acidification, managing fish stocks, addressing the ocean/climate
interface for wind power and shipping decarbonization, and empowering
oceans and coasts to mitigate climate impacts.
research, exploration, and observation
A critical component of America's economic, military, and
diplomatic power lies in its ocean research, education, exploration,
and observation enterprises. Especially given the pace of observed
changes in climate and ocean chemistry, we strongly urge the
subcommittee to protect vital ocean science and research capabilities.
To make the best, proactive management decisions possible, it is
necessary that we first explore, map, observe, and understand our
ocean.
Observation and monitoring programs are integral to NOAA's ability
to accurately forecast weather, for NOAA's protection and management of
America's ocean resources, and for the U.S. military's navigation and
extreme weather preparedness. We ask that your committee continue to
fully support enhanced capabilities for observation and monitoring by
NOAA's Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR) and NOAA's
Sustained Ocean Observations and Monitoring Program. We also suggest
the committee continue its support for the Ocean Exploration program to
maintain the pace, scope, and efficiency of exploration. It is also
critical to fund climate research at OAR. This is essential to promote
high-priority climate science that advances our understanding of
Earth's climate system.
Likewise, we support the FY 2023 proposed increase in NSF's overall
budget to $10.5 billion, recognizing that developing sufficient
capabilities to sustain ocean-based economies and protect our coasts
and coastal communities from natural and man-made hazards will require
a sustained investment in the geosciences, essential to economic
development and the safety and security of our citizens. NSF's
investment in the geosciences--which includes ocean sciences--has
spurred innovations, addressed salient national and global challenges,
galvanized new economic sectors, generated countless jobs, and led to
the development and implementation of advanced technologies.
We are highly supportive of the proposed increase in NASA's Earth
science funding for climate and weather monitoring and measurement. The
recommended $2.4 billion for Earth-observing satellites and related
research will enhance NASA's ability to improve national capabilities
to predict climate, weather, and natural hazards, and better manage
resources.
education and extension
The National Sea Grant College Program works to better research,
understand, conserve, and utilize America's coastal resources, making
it critical to coastal States, communities, and economies. Given Sea
Grant's critical importance, we urge this committee to strongly support
Sea Grant in FY 2023, including funding for marine aquaculture
education and extension programming.
NOAA's environmental education and ocean stewardship programs
increase essential access to STEM education and cultivate environmental
stewardship. We request that the committee continue its support for
Bay-Watershed Education and Training (B-WET) programs and Environmental
Literacy Programs (ELP). These vital programs in increase equity
through inspiring and educating future ocean leaders who represent all
Americans.
resilience and security
Sufficient funding must be dedicated to strengthening the
resiliency of coastal communities and ocean ecosystems to combat
dramatic, climate driven changes in our oceans. We ask this
subcommittee to continue leading on ocean and coastal security by
funding over historical levels the National Ocean and Coastal Security
Fund (NOCSF) in FY 2023. We further recommend continued support for
regional data portals used to support critical ocean partnerships that
encourage collaboration and data sharing on the regional scale. In
addition, we recommend continued support of Coastal Management Grants
and the National Estuarine Research Reserve System, which preserve
millions of acres of coastal habitat, buffering against rising seas and
storm events.
NOAA's National Ocean Service (NOS) is a front-line agency for
sustained resilience and security. We strongly recommend that NOS be
adequately funded commensurate with its sobering responsibilities. NOS
also supports the Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS), which
collects and distributes data that is used at the National, regional,
State, and local levels. We recommend you strongly support IOOS to meet
the safety, economic and stewardship needs of the Nation.
The NOS also administers the Office of National Marine Sanctuaries
and key restoration projects that dramatically enhance the resilience
of coastal communities and ocean environments. National Marine
Sanctuaries require continued congressional support to protect and
steward special marine spaces, especially in the face of climate
change, and develop the next generation of ocean stewards.
ocean acidification
Ocean acidification is evident along every shoreline and is
impacting economies worldwide. By changing the chemistry of seawater,
ocean acidification endangers shellfish, corals, and other marine life
and disrupts marine food webs. Ocean acidification poses a fundamental
risk to fisheries and aquaculture industries and to human health, as
well as a potentially catastrophic risk to our economy. We strongly
urge you to increase funding for NOAA's Integrated Ocean Acidification
program to support critical research, monitoring, education, and
outreach. The potential devastating impact from ocean acidification
requires an unequivocal response to prevent catastrophe.
sustainable fisheries & aquaculture
Fishing is a cornerstone of the ocean economy and an important
aspect of American history and culture. Since 1976, we have seen
tremendous progress toward creating and maintaining sustainable
fisheries domestically and internationally, in part due to your
subcommittee's commitment to scientifically-sound fishery management.
Aquaculture is also a growing aspect of America's seafood economy. We
are encouraged by NOAAs strong support for sustainable, environmentally
sound aquaculture.
However, America's seafood industry is currently being challenged
by changing ocean conditions, shifts in historic stock distributions,
and increasingly complex data requirements. NOAA Fisheries requires
elevated funding to address these challenges. We thank you for
responding to our testimony from year's past and many other
organizations, increasing funding for the NOAA Fisheries to over $1
billion. We ask you to continue this trend in fiscal Year 2023, to
fully implement the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act. We also urge you to support full implementation of the
U.S. Seafood Import Monitoring Program to address IUU fishing and other
initiatives to spread sustainable fisheries management globally.
Further, we recommend funding the research and expansion of aquaculture
to increase sustainable American seafood, and provide a low-carbon
source of protein for the planet's projected 10 billion people. These
initiatives will not only increase sustainability but also create
quality jobs for coastal Americans.
concluding remarks
The Joint Initiative greatly appreciates your commitment to
addressing the challenges of our maritime nation, and to the ocean-
climate nexus, so critical to the future of our blue planet. We
appreciate your consideration of our fiscal Year 2023 budget request.
We will continue to track progress on key ocean and coastal programs
and accounts in fiscal Year 2023 and beyond, and we stand ready to
assist you in advancing positive and lasting changes in the way we
manage our Nation's oceans and coasts.
Joint Initiative Leadership Council Members
The Honorable Christine Todd Whitman, Co-Chair
Maite Arce | Frances Beinecke | Don Boesch The Honorable Norm Dicks |
Quenton Dokken | Robert Gagosian | Sherri Goodman | Scott Gudes | The
Honorable Conrad Lautenbacher | Margaret Leinen | Julie Packard | The
Honorable Leon Panetta | John Pappalardo | The Honorable Pietro
Parravano | Queen Quet |Randy Repass | Larry Robinson | Andrew
Rosenberg Paul Sandifer
[This statement was submitted by Christine Todd Whitman and Leon
Panetta]
______
Prepared Statement of the Learning and Education Academic Research
Network (LEARN)
We are writing on behalf of the Learning and Education Academic
Research Network (LEARN) Coalition to express our support for increased
funding for several key STEM related research programs that your
subcommittee will debate as part of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2023
appropriations process. LEARN, a coalition of 41 leading research
colleges of education across the country, supports critical investments
in research aimed at advancing the scientific understanding of learning
and development. We advocate for greater funding for these priorities
across all Federal agencies, including the National Science Foundation
(NSF). Specifically, LEARN is requesting $11 billion be allocated to
NSF overall, and for Congress to match the President's FY2023 budget
proposal by providing $1.37 billion towards the Directorate for
Education and Human Resources (EHR), which the Administration's FY2023
budget request be renamed the Directorate for STEM Education (EDU), and
robust funding for the new Directorate for Technology, Innovation and
Partnerships (TIP). While advocating for these increased resources for
FY2023, we want to express our appreciation for the increases for NSF
provided in FY2022.
While we are grateful for the funding NSF was appropriated in
FY2022, we respectfully recognize that increased funding is required to
address the effects of historical underinvestment in fundamental
research in the United States as well as to support COVID-19 recovery.
According to the National Science Board, more than $3 billion in high-
quality proposals are submitted each year that cannot be funded with
current appropriations. The potential impact of these missed
opportunities is even starker when considering the return on investment
of fundamental scientific research and the significant investments that
other nations -both allies and adversaries-are making in comparable
research areas.
In addition to our call for a $11 billion funding level for NSF,
LEARN supports funding for NSF's EDU directorate at $1.37 billion in
FY2023. EDU works to prepare the next generation of STEM professionals
by conducting rigorous research and evaluation of STEM education. Over
the past 20 years, the share of U.S. research and development funded by
the Federal Government has declined; this decline has
disproportionately impacted the higher education sector reducing
resources to the sector that drives the most innovation in this area.
Stagnation in these key U.S. talent development programs come as our
National security leaders are sounding alarm bells over foreign talent
recruitment programs which are effectively siphoning STEM capacity from
the United States and elsewhere to countries that are strongly
investing while we remain complacent. As Congress considers making a
large investment in STEM education through the America Creating
Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology,
Education, and Science (COMPETES)/United States Innovation and
Competition (USICA) Act, we urge you to first invest in EDU which has
been successfully supporting STEM education research and dissemination
to ensure the creation of an adept and diverse STEM workforce.
Finally, LEARN members are invigorated by the Administrations new
call for funding for the TIP directorate. As noted in the President's
FY2023 budget, a portion of TIP's mission is to ``cultivate new
education pathways leading to a diverse and skilled future technical
workforce comprising researchers, practitioners, technicians and
entrepreneurs.'' The newly proposed funding for TIP would allow for
work across the public and private sector to provide practical
experiences to learners and encourage strategic cross-sector
partnerships. By targeting a range of educational institutions from
community colleges and vocational schools to graduate schools, adequate
funding for TIP would ensure that the Nation's STEM workforce is as
diverse as it is strong. As a nascent directorate, we urge Congress to
provide TIP with robust funding so it can accomplish its innovative
goals.
The LEARN Coalition believes strongly that collectively these key
investments will advance scientific learning and development to ensure
a globally competitive, STEM-educated workforce in the long run. Thank
you for considering these requests and please contact us if we can be
of any assistance.
Sincerely,
Camilla P. Benbow, EdD
Co-Chair, Learning and Education Academic Research Network (LEARN)
Patricia and Rodes Hart
Dean of Education and Human Development of the Peabody College of
Education and Human Development, Vanderbilt University
Rick Ginsberg, PhD
Co-Chair, Learning and Education Academic Research Network (LEARN)
Dean of the School of Education, University of Kansas
Glenn E. Good, PhD
Co-Chair, Learning and Education Academic Research Network (LEARN)
Dean of the College of Education, University of Florida
______
Prepared Statement of Monterey Bay Aquarium
The Monterey Bay Aquarium is pleased to submit this statement in
support of President Biden's $6.9 billion budget for the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) within the FY 2023
Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations Act. The following testimony
outlines several specific requests within NOAA that support vital
research, education and grant programs that are needed in California,
the West Coast and nationwide.
The mission of the Aquarium is to inspire conservation of the
ocean. In a typical year, we welcome 2 million visitors annually,
provide more than 91,000 students and 5,000 teachers with award-winning
education programs at no cost, and continue to produce valuable data,
tools and approaches at local to global scales through our conservation
and science programs.
NOAA is a crucial leader and frequent partner in our mission-driven
work. As the Nation's lead science agency for oceanic and atmospheric
matters, NOAA provides important tools and services that are necessary
to supporting safe communities across the United States and creating a
sustainable future for all. NOAA's research, environmental observations
and predictions, marine resource conservation and management and
education programs and services shape the way we live today and guide
decision-making about how to maintain the health and function of
coupled ocean and climate system.
The Aquarium strongly supports the President's budget request of
$6.9 billion dollars for FY23 and encourages the subcommittee to
continue its balanced and strategic investment strategy for NOAA.
Significant congressional investment in NOAA is needed to ensure that
the Nation's ocean agency can continue to provide vital science and
management services into the future and act for the health and safety
of our citizens and rich natural resources. The Aquarium urges the
subcommittee to support priority requests for research, education,
management, and grants in FY23 that are particularly important for
California and West Coast communities.
Pacific Highly Migratory Species.--Pelagic and highly migratory
fisheries in the Pacific Ocean support thousands of jobs and generate
hundreds of millions in revenue related to commercial and recreational
fishing, as well as related seafood industries along the West Coast.
These highly migratory species (HMS) include valuable tunas (albacore,
bluefin), swordfish, marlin, and pelagic sharks that are managed
through international agreements and rely on scientific contributions
from all nations.
Federal funding opportunities for non-federal scientists in pelagic
and HMS research programs in the Pacific have declined considerably
since the Pacific Fisheries Research Program (PFRP) ended in 2013. This
has resulted in significantly fewer public-private research
collaborations with NOAA and a lack of independent science to address
critical and timely management questions that directly impact U.S.
stakeholders and the health of the Pacific Ocean ecosystem. In the
Atlantic, NOAA Fisheries (NMFS) currently has dedicated Federal
research programs for HMS fisheries, notably the Atlantic Bluefin Tuna
Research Program, as well as a recent HMS Research Program through Sea
Grant. Priority HMS fisheries research questions remain unanswered in
the Pacific region, but there are no dedicated Federal programs to
address life history and other questions central to ensuring
international management is sustainable.
We are very grateful that Congress included Pacific HMS research
grants alongside the existing Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico HMS research
programs within the FY22 Senate Commerce Justice Science report.
Additional funding should be provided to ensure that Pacific HMS
research needs are addressed alongside the existing HMS priorities in
the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico.
Request.--We urge the subcommittee to provide an additional $2
million and report language to NOAA to support independent HMS research
grants for the Pacific region to address key science in support of
sustainable international management.
Corresponding Report Language Request:
Highly Migratory Species: Migratory Species (HMS)
Research Initiative for Atlantic, Pacific, and Gulf of
Mexico HMS. The Committee notes lack of funding for
Pacific HMS independent research that supports
ecologically and economically important species such as
tuna, swordfish, marlin, and pelagic sharks. Within
funding for the Sea Grant program, the Committee
provides $2,000,000 over FY22 for research grants to
non-federal entities to improve science-based
management of domestic and international HMS in the
Pacific region.
Bycatch Reduction.--We recommend that the subcommittee include an
increase of $2 million over FY22 funding for bycatch reduction
competitive grants to non-federal researchers for the development and
implementation of practical bycatch solutions that support sustainable
U.S. fisheries. The program was again funded at the same level in FY22.
We request that the subcommittee increase funding for NOAA's bycatch
reporting and reduction programs to accelerate technology improvements
and help U.S. fishermen achieve greater environmental sustainability
while protecting living marine resources, particularly endangered,
protected and threatened species.
Seafood Import Monitoring Program.--We support an additional $5
million for NMFS to implement the Seafood Import Monitoring Program
(SIMP). Increasing funding for NMFS and specifically for SIMP
implementation is essential for safeguarding the integrity of seafood
imports in the U.S. and leveling the playing field for U.S. fishermen
undercut by illegal, unreported, and unregulated seafood products in
the market.
Climate-Ready Fisheries.--The Aquarium supports advancing climate-
ready fisheries management in the Fiscal Year 2023 Commerce, Justice,
Science, and Related Agencies appropriations bill. This should include
full funding for NOAA's Climate, Ecosystems, and Fisheries Initiative
and enhanced support for fisheries surveys. We specifically request the
following investments to support climate-ready fisheries:
1. National Marine Fisheries Service, Fisheries and Ecosystem
Science Programs and Services: $180 million, of which $10
million is dedicated to Climate-Informed Fisheries Assessment
and Management Strategies for Changing Oceans;
2. National Marine Fisheries Service, Fisheries Data Collections,
Surveys, and Assessments: $212 million; and
3. Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, Climate Competitive Research:
$91.5 million, of which $10 million is dedicated to Marine
Ecosystem Responses to Climate Change.
Ocean Science and Technology.--The Aquarium collaborates with the
Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI) on science and
conservation issues of mutual interest. The success of our efforts to
harness cutting edge research to address challenging ocean-related
issues is dependent on a vibrant ocean science and technology
enterprise. To continue to generate science-based solutions to restore
our ocean, and support a robust U.S. role in global efforts, we urge
the subcommittee to bolster funding for essential new science and
technology. Through NOAA and the other relevant agencies, including NSF
and NASA, we recommend the subcommittee provide support for research
and technology development and ocean science.
NOAA Education.--The Aquarium is a long-time partner of NOAA's
Education programs. We also share NOAA Education's commitment to
ensuring diversity among our staff and within the professional spheres
of our field. NOAA's Jose E. Serrano Educational Partnership Program
(EPP) with Minority Serving Institutions (MSI) provides STEM education
and future workforce training, benefiting both the agency and other
organizations by creating a pool of diverse, qualified candidates for
the future workforce. We are proud to work with the EPP centers and
urge the subcommittee to provide additional funding for the EPP-MSI
program to support expansion of the EPP network, particularly to build
professional opportunities on the west coast, and build technical
capacity within the next generation to address emerging challenges.
National Marine Sanctuaries.--The Aquarium collaborates with the
Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS) program to provide
public education and research connected to the MBNMS and in support of
its living marine resources. We also support the designation of the
Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary, also in California's
waters. We recognize the constraints on this important program and
support an increase in appropriations for the NOAA Sanctuaries program,
including $87 million for Sanctuaries and Marine Protected Areas within
NOAA's Operations, Research, and Facilities (ORF) account.
Marine Debris Program.--According to the 2021 National Academies of
Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) report undertaken as
directed by the Save Our Seas 2.0 Act enacted in 2020, ocean plastic
pollution continues to increase, as does the United States' role as a
major contributor in this global plastic crisis. The Aquarium urges the
subcommittee to provide $15 million for the Marine Debris Program (MDP)
to provide frontline services, funding, and science to meet the demands
of plastic pollution challenges along our coastline. Additional funding
above $15 million is necessary in order to meet two recommendations
generated by the NASEM report: (1) for the MDP Marine Debris Monitoring
and Assessment Project to conduct scientifically designed national
marine debris shoreline surveys every 5 years using standardized
protocols; and (2) for MDP to contribute to a Federal research and
policy strategy focused on identifying, implementing, and assessing
equitable and effective interventions across the entire plastic life
cycle to reduce the U.S. contribution of plastic waste to the
environment.
Thank you for your consideration of these requests.
[This statement was submitted by Ms. Margaret Spring, Chief
Conservation & Science Officer]
______
Prepared Statement of the National Association of Latino Elected and
Appointed Officials (NALEO) Educational Fund
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and Members of the subcommittee:
On behalf of the National Association of Latino Elected and
Appointed Officials (NALEO) Educational Fund, thank you for the
opportunity to submit testimony on the U.S. Census Bureau's budget for
fiscal year 2023. As you consider appropriations for fiscal Year 2023,
NALEO Educational Fund urges this subcommittee to provide $2 billion in
funding for the U.S. Census Bureau, which represents a $495 million
increase over the President's budget request and $646 million over the
agency's fiscal Year 2022 enacted level. We believe that the $2 billion
funding level is necessary to support the Bureau's efforts to address
and ameliorate the significant undercount of our Nation's Latino
population and other population groups in the 2020 Census. In addition,
we believe there needs to be more robust investment to enhance the
accuracy of other Bureau data products. Finally, a higher level of
funding would help the Bureau continue to assess and start to make the
fundamental changes needed to modernize the census and count all of our
Nation's residents fairly and accurately.
NALEO Educational Fund is the Nation's leading nonprofit
organization that facilitates the full participation of Latinos in the
American political process, from citizenship to public service. Our
Board members and constituency encompass the Nation's more than 7,000
Latino elected and appointed officials, and include Republicans,
Democrats, and Independents. Since the 1990 Census, our organization
has conducted outreach campaigns to promote the full and accurate count
of the Latino community. In addition, NALEO Educational Fund is a
leading expert on Census policy development, with a long record of
service on the Bureau's National Advisory Committees. The organization
serves as co-chair of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human
Rights' Census Task Force, a Steering Committee member of the Census
Counts Campaign, and the co-chair of the National Hispanic Leadership
Agenda's Census Task Force.
addressing and ameliorating the severe undercount of
latinos in census 2020
In March, the Census Bureau released its initial findings from its
Post-Enumeration Survey (PES), which revealed a massive 4.99 percent
national undercount of Latinos in Census 2020, which is more than
triple the percentage of Latinos undercounted in Census 2010. The PES
also revealed a 2.79 percent undercount of very young children (ages 0-
4); a 3.30 percent undercount for Blacks; and a 5.64 percent for
American Indians or Alaska Natives living on reservations. The
undercount of very young children, which increased more than threefold
from 2010, is very salient for the Latino population and the Nation as
a whole. First, the 2020 Census shows that slightly more than one in
four children under 18-years-old is Latino (25.7 percent). In addition,
2016 research spearheaded by demographer Dr. William O'Hare found that
the net undercount rate in 2010 for very young Latino children (ages 0-
4) was 7.1 percent, compared to 4.3 percent for non-Latinos--with
Census 2010 missing nearly 400,000 very young Latino children. While
more research is needed to determine the undercount of very young
Latino children in Census 2020, the initial PES findings raise serious
concerns about the size and scope of this undercount.
The historic undercount of Latinos and other population groups has
serious implications for the full range of programs, activities, and
decisions for which census data are used. These data guide the
distribution of more than $1.5 trillion in annual Federal funding to
States and localities, and flawed data will lead to a potential
misallocation of resources that could have a detrimental effect on our
schools, healthcare systems, infrastructure, and programs essential for
the future prosperity and well-being of Latino families and all of our
Nation's residents. The undercount of Latinos and other people of color
could also dramatically erode the ability of government agencies to
monitor and enforce civil rights protections. As a result, our Nation
could see existing ethnic and socio-economic inequities in areas such
as employment, education, housing, and health care grow far worse.
The undercount of Latinos and other people of color could also lead
to a vast number of unsound decisions being made in the public and
private sector. Furthermore, data from Census 2020 have already been
used to apportion the U.S. House of Representatives and for
redistricting, despite the fact that such data do not reflect the
actual growth of the Latino population. Without a thorough
understanding of the factors which contributed to the Census 2020
undercount, we cannot take the action needed to improve the accuracy of
the Census 2030 data which will be used for apportionment and
redistricting at the start of the next decade.
Our funding request for fiscal year 2023 would help support the
Bureau's efforts to continue to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the
effect of the undercount on the Latino community and the implications
of the undercount for all of the activities for which census data are
used. This would include the Bureau's continued work to examine options
to ameliorate the undercount.
Additionally, in May, the Bureau released PES estimates for the
undercount of the total population in each State and the District of
Columbia. These estimates indicated statistically significant
undercounts in six States (Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, Mississippi,
Tennessee and Texas), but did not include demographic characteristics
such as age, race and Hispanic origin. In addition, the estimates were
not available for geographies below the state level. Moreover, the PES
state estimates are net figures derived in part from both the 2020
Census omissions and persons overcounted in the enumeration. Thus, the
persons overcounted in the state may mask the impact of the persons
missed in the enumeration and other significant problems with the
overall accuracy of state census data.
Based on our work with and research on historically undercounted
communities, we believe it is likely that Census 2020's accuracy varied
in different regions of the States. For example, areas with large
concentrations of Latinos, Black residents, and young children are
likely to have had the highest undercounts, while places with large
concentrations of non-Hispanic whites and wealthy residents likely had
overcounts. However, without specific Latino undercount data and data
on other population groups throughout each State, we cannot determine
precisely where and to what extent these population groups were missed.
We understand the Census Bureau's position that the PES sample size
is not adequate enough to produce data that meet the Bureau's standards
for every demographic group in each State or many localities in the
Nation. Thus, our funding request would support much-needed Bureau
efforts to research and make available data from other sources that
could help illuminate the accuracy of Census 2020 data for various
demographic groups and localities. Finally, our funding request would
also enhance the Bureau's ability to engage stakeholders in its efforts
to evaluate the implications of the National undercounts and the state
PES estimates for different population groups, examine options to
mitigate the effect of the undercounts on funding formulas and the fair
allocation of resources, and plan for Census 2030.
strengthening population estimates and the american community survey
The Bureau's Population Estimates play a critical role in
determining the allocation of Federal funding, and the next annual
series of Population Estimates is the basis for all subsequent annual
estimates for the next decade. The Bureau will use Census 2020 data in
its determination of the next annual series of Population Estimates and
given the severe undercount of Latinos and other population groups, the
agency needs resources to strengthen the accuracy of the next annual
series. This funding would also support expanded and enhanced
opportunities for cities, counties, towns, Tribal governments, and
other localities to help ensure the accuracy of their annual estimates,
through the Population Estimates Challenge Program and other
activities. This will help ensure that trillions of Federal funds over
the decade can reach the communities needing them the most.
In addition, we believe that the American Community Survey (ACS) is
in dire need of additional resources to implement several critical
enhancements to the survey. The ACS provides updated data on a wide
range of demographic and housing characteristics that are crucial for
sound public and private decision-making which affects all aspects of
the lives of Latinos, including income, employment status, educational
attainment, language proficiency, and nativity. Additional funding
would help with such enhancements as increasing the ACS' sample size,
improving its non-response follow up operations, addressing steadily
declining response rates, revising content, and making other
methodological and operational improvements.
modernizing the census
The massive net national undercount of our Nation's Latino
population and other people of color in the 2020 Census demonstrates
the need for the Census Bureau to make fundamental changes to how it
counts the U.S. population. It can no longer simply rely on the
traditional methods of mailing forms out to households and encouraging
the public to respond. Thus, our funding request also aims at providing
the Census Bureau resources for the purpose of informing its planning
for future census data collection programs and surveys. Modernizing the
census will involve research, evaluation and testing of a broad range
of initiatives and approaches, including modernizing the Bureau's
information technology infrastructure, and assessing the use of machine
learning and Big Data methodology.
In addition, as part of its modernization activities, the Bureau
intends to examine the expanded use of administrative records for
various purposes. However, these records have serious limitations with
respect to the accuracy and completeness of information on Latinos and
other people of color, young children, low-income residents, and other
underrepresented populations. Thus, the Bureau needs resources to
continue to assess the appropriate use of administrative records for
its data compilation and analysis activities.
Finally, the Bureau's efforts to modernize the census could result
in approaches that would enable the agency to achieve cost-savings for
its Census 2030 operations. However, the agency must start several
years before Census 2030 to thoroughly test and evaluate these
approaches if they are to be used in a sound and effective manner.
Thus, more robust funding for the Bureau in FY 2023 is an investment
which would lead to more efficient and cost-effective operations in the
next enumeration.
conclusion
Census data are the basis of our representative democracy, and our
Nation's well-being and prosperity depend in part on the accuracy of
the data collected by the Census Bureau. These data guide a wide range
of decisions made in the public and private sectors that affect the
lives of all Americans. Latinos are the Nation's second-largest
population group, and the Bureau cannot produce accurate data on all of
our country's residents without accurate data on Latinos. However, as
the PES undercount estimates indicate, the Bureau faced significant
challenges in accurately enumerating Latinos and other population
groups, and these challenges have important implications for other
Census activities and products. In addition, evolving demographic,
economic, technological and statistical trends require the Bureau to
continue its work to modernize the census. We believe that the $2
billion level of funding we are requesting for fiscal Year 2023 will
help the Bureau carry out a more robust range of activities to make
progress in providing the most accurate data possible for our Nation.
We appreciate this subcommittee's attention to these important matters
and look forward to working with you and other Members of Congress to
achieve this important goal.
[This statement was submitted by Arturo Vargas, Chief Executive
Officer]
______
Prepared Statement of the National Congress of American Indians
On behalf of the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI), this
testimony addresses important programs in the U.S. Department of
Justice (DOJ), U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC), and the National
Science Foundation (NSF). As the most representative organization of
American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) Tribal Nations, NCAI serves
the broad interests of Tribal governments across the United States. As
Congress considers the FY 2023 budget and beyond, leaders of Tribal
Nations call on decision-makers to ensure that the promises made to
Indian Country are honored in the Federal budget.
department of justice
The public safety problems that continue to plague Tribal
communities are the result of decades of gross underfunding for Tribal
criminal justice systems, a uniquely complex jurisdictional scheme, and
the historic, abject failure by the Federal Government to fulfill its
public safety obligations on AI/AN lands. Crime rates in Tribal
communities are among the highest in the Nation, and AI/ANs experience
rates of violent crime that are 2.5 times the National average. The
2022 reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act reaffirms the
jurisdiction of all Tribal Nations to prosecute certain crimes.
Congress must now appropriate and streamline public safety funds to
ensure that Tribal Nations can implement their jurisdiction and
increase safety in Tribal communities.
Include Tribal governments in disbursements from the Crime Victims
Fund (CVF)--a mandatory account. The CVF is the Federal Government's
primary funding source for providing services to victims of crime, and
we express our sincere gratitude to appropriators for providing direct
funding to Tribal governments from the CVF for the past 5 years. For
this funding to fully achieve its purpose, Tribal Nations need the
disbursements from the CVF to be recurring in order to ensure long term
program stability for victims. We urge this subcommittee to direct an
amount equal to 5 percent of overall CVF disbursements to Tribal
Nations again this year.
Create a streamlined Tribal allocation across Office of Justice
Programs (OJP) programs. For several years, both this subcommittee and
its Senate counterpart have supported requests to streamline and
consolidate OJP Tribal programs by allocating 7 percent from all
discretionary OJP programs to address Indian Country public safety and
Tribal justice needs. Despite the subcommittees' support, the request
has never been enacted. One of the biggest shortcomings of DOJ Tribal
funding is that it is administered as competitive funding that must fit
with DOJ established priorities and guidelines. This requires Tribal
Nations--on behalf of their Tribal justice systems--to compete against
each other and develop projects that align with changing DOJ
priorities. Often, Tribal Nations cannot count on funding continuing
beyond the current grant period further limiting the ability to
effectively address public safety in the long term. A streamlined OJP
Tribal allocation would significantly improve the Federal funding
process by which Tribal Nations receive resources to establish Tribal
courts, assist in developing detention facilities, provide legal
assistance, develop and maintain juvenile delinquency prevention
programs, and provide substance abuse prevention programs. Further,
this type of Tribal allocation would give Tribal Nations the
flexibility to develop a detailed strategic plan on how best to spend
those resources. We urge the subcommittees to continue to support this
request and work with the appropriate authorizing committees to include
it.
Increase funding for Tribal law enforcement programs under DOJ's
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) grants to $52 million.
Since the creation of the COPS Office, more than 2,000 grants totaling
over $400 million have been awarded to Tribal Nations to hire more than
1,700 new or redeployed law enforcement officers. COPS grants have also
helped Tribal Nations to obtain necessary law enforcement training,
equipment, vehicles, and technology. Yet, there is still a tremendous
unmet need within Tribal justice systems for more COPS funding. The
COPS Office has acknowledged that due to limited resources, it has not
been able to adequately fund Tribal justice systems particularly in the
area of hiring and retaining Tribal law enforcement officers. In a
report released in December 2010, the COPS Office described its
practice of intermittent funding as ``problematic,'' especially ``when
referring to hiring of officers.\1\'' Indian Country urges Congress to
significantly increase funding for Tribal law enforcement programs
under the COPS program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ U.S. Department of Justice, COPS Office report to Congress as
required by Tribal Law and Order Act of 2010, available at: https://
www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/tribal/legacy/2014/02/06/cops-
congress-report.pdf, Accessed: May 13, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fully fund the programs authorized in the Violence Against Women
Act (VAWA), including the funds authorized for Tribal implementation of
VAWA Special Tribal Criminal Jurisdiction. Over 85 percent of AI/AN
women are estimated to experience violent victimization in their
lifetimes. The DOJ Office of Violence Against Women (OVW) provides
funding to Tribal governments to address violence against women in
their communities. OVW's largest source of funding for Tribal
governments is the Grants to Tribal Governments Program, which is
funded via statutory allocations from other OVW programs. Fully funding
these OVW programs results in full funding for the Grants to Tribal
Governments Program.
The Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2022 (VAWA 2022)
recognized and affirmed the inherent sovereign authority of all Tribal
Nations to exercise Special Tribal Criminal Jurisdiction (STCJ) over
all persons--Indian and non-Indian--who commit certain crimes within
Indian country and designated lands. VAWA 2022 included a new STCJ
pilot program for Alaska Native Villages and increased authorization
levels to support Tribal public safety in Alaska and in the lower 48.
The law authorizes $25 million a year for 5 years for Tribal Nations to
implement the STCJ, receive reimbursements for certain costs, and
strengthen Tribal justice systems. We urge this subcommittee to
appropriate the full amount authorized for VAWA 2022 implementation
purposes so that more Tribal communities are able to take advantage of
this lifesaving law.
department of commerce
Beginning in February 2022, the Bureau of Labor Statistics
published monthly data on AI/AN employment, using data that was
previously available through the U.S. Census Bureau's Current
Population Survey. The newly published data reveals a labor market that
would be considered catastrophic if it were representative of the full
U.S. economy-Indian Country has an unemployment rate more than double
national rate.\2\ The data further highlights that Indian Country is
still recovering from the effects of the pandemic, with unemployment
rates reaching 28.6% during the peak of the pandemic fallout--an amount
comparable to the National unemployment rate during the Great
Depression.\3\ As of January 2022, the unemployment rate for Native
Americans was still greater than the peak unemployment rate for white
workers during the pandemic.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Robert Maxim, Randall Akee, and Gabriel R. Sanchez, For the
first time, the government published monthly unemployment data on
Native Americans, and the picture is stark, available at: https://
www.brookings.edu/articles/despite-an-optimistic-jobs-report-new-data-
shows-native-american-unemployment-remains-staggeringly-high/
#::text=Prior%20to%20the%20pandemic
%2C%20Native,unemployment%20during%20the%20Great%20Depression,
Accessed: May 4, 2022.
\3\ Id.
\4\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Even when controlling for a host of factors, the Brookings
Institute posits that structural racism in the U.S. economy affects AI/
AN access to education and attainment as well as employment
opportunities.\5\ As traditionally place-based peoples with strong
cultural and historical ties to the land, AI/ANs do not tend to move
away regardless of economic situations. This means that the structural
impediments to economic growth are focused and exacerbated on Tribal
lands, underscoring the importance of Federal investment through
regular Federal appropriations. Unfortunately, cross-referencing Office
of Management and Budget data with Appropriations Committee reports
reveals that regular appropriations for the benefit of Native Americans
represents approximately 0.19% of total regular appropriations budget
authority in the fiscal Year 2022 Omnibus. With Federal investment
metrics such as these, it is no surprise that Indian Country is in a
State of catastrophe by national standards. These broken promises of
the United States dampen local, regional, and national U.S. economic
productivity and negatively impact the safety and wellbeing of
Americans--Native and non-Native alike.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Department of Commerce administers programs that could
greatly benefit Indian Country, for example, the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), International
Trade Administration, Economic Development Administration, Minority
Business Development Agency (MBDA), Census Bureau, and the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). However, the funding for
these programs benefiting Native Americans must increase from the
trickle of past years to a more robust distribution for broadband
deployment, economic and business development assistance, trade and
tourism promotion, fisheries programs, and Tribal government data
collection and analysis capacity.
This subcommittee can correct this investment deficiency by
providing: at least $1 billion to NTIA's Tribal Broadband Connectivity
Grant Program to reduce the backlog of at least $5 billion of
identified, unfunded broadband projects; $70 million to continue
supporting MBDA Business Specialty Centers, and set aside at least $5
million in grants for Native American business and procurement
assistance; $5 million for the Office of Native American Business
Development (ONABD) to coordinate within Commerce and with other
Federal agencies to promote and support Native American business
development, trade, and tourism; at least $110 million for the Pacific
Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund; $25.9 million for NOAA Mitchell Act
Hatchery Programs; and at least $100 million for Census Bureau grants
to Tribal Nations to improve internal government data capacity.
national science foundation
NSF has dedicated funding for Tribal Colleges and Universities
(TCUs) and other research activities related to arctic social sciences
to promote high-quality science and educational opportunities in social
and behavioral sciences, natural sciences, computer sciences, as well
as supporting science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM)
and STEM education, research, and outreach. As traditionally place-
based peoples with strong cultural and historical ties to the land,
investments in TCUs promote economic growth, education, career
training, social wellbeing, and cultural preservation directly within
Native communities. Similar to many Federal investments through the
regular appropriations process, cross-referencing Office of Management
and Budget data with Appropriations Committee reports reveals that
regular appropriations for NSF for the benefit of Native Americans
represents approximately 0.27% of total regular appropriations budget
authority in the FY 2022 Omnibus.
This subcommittee must increase its investment into Native Higher
Education by providing $100 million for the Tribal Colleges and
Universities Program, which includes funding for Alaska Native-Serving
institutions and Native Hawaiian-serving institutions, and $10 million
for the Arctic Social Sciences Program to support research on social
and cultural systems of the Arctic, present and past.
conclusion
Tribal Nations are uniquely reliant on the Federal Government to
fulfill its promises made in exchange for the land that created the
foundation of the bounty and wealth of the United States. Our people
have paid for every penny obligated to Indian Country hundreds of times
over by providing this Nation with our land. In order to uphold this
Nation's promises to its people, it must first uphold its promises to
this land's First Peoples. We expect to continue to be treated as
sovereign nations with governmental parity. We must continue down that
path of Nation-to-Nation growth, and only then will all of our people
be able to fully flourish.
For more information, please contact Kelbie Kennedy, Policy Manager
and Policy Lead--National Security and Community Safety, at
[email protected]; C.C. Wright, Policy Lead--Community Development &
Infrastructure, at [email protected]; Julia Wakeford, Policy Lead--
Social and Cultural Resources at [email protected]; or Tyler Scribner,
Policy Lead--Federal Revenue & Appropriations, [email protected].
[This statement was submitted by Dante Desiderio, Chief Executive
Officer]
______
Prepared Statement of National Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA)/
Guardian ad Litem (GAL) Association for Children
Chairman Leahy, Chair Shaheen, Vice Chairman Shelby, Ranking Member
Moran, and Members of the Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related
Agencies subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to submit remarks
on the Department of Justice (DOJ) FY 2023 budget including funding of
the Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) Program through the Office
of Justice Programs' State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance
Account.
CASA/GAL advocacy is a well-established model strongly associated
with improved long-term outcomes for child victims, for which the need
continues to be critical. With Congressional support at the requested
level of $15 million, the CASA/GAL network in 49 States and the
District of Columbia will enhance and advance specialized training,
tools, and resources to continue delivering vital one-on-one best-
interest advocacy that addresses the complex and ever-evolving needs of
children who have suffered trauma after experiencing abuse or neglect
by one or more primary caregivers.
Emerging issues such as the commercial sexual exploitation of
children and our Nation's growing opioid epidemic--for which children
account for an increasing number of victims--both necessitate a greater
specialization within one-on-one advocacy, with a keen and deliberate
focus on progressing toward the call within the Victims of Child Abuse
Act to serve every child victim. As we enrich CASA/GAL advocacy to
encompass evolving direct service needs, our National network will
further strengthen its capacity to serve over 250,000 child victims of
abuse and neglect.
Child victimization and maltreatment by primary caregivers remains
all too prevalent in our country and the negative impacts on children,
their families and society are significant. Traumatized victims of
child abuse and neglect face significant and multiple risk factors,
most notably, juvenile delinquency, adult criminality, and poor
educational performance that affects future employment and stability.
These issues result in a hefty impact on federal, State and local
spending-at least one-quarter of the DOJ budget is dedicated to our
Nation's prison system, and at the same time, the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates the economic and social costs of
child abuse and neglect to total $124 billion nationwide per annum.
Local CASA/GAL programs offer an effective service to child victims of
abuse and neglect that improves outcomes, increases the efficient
functioning of our court systems, and saves millions in Federal and
State taxpayer dollars annually in the process.
CASA/GAL programs are, at the heart of their operation, a highly
effective leveraging of community-based resources to provide dedicated
and sustained one-on-one advocacy for child victims and advise the
courts of the child's best interests and needs throughout abuse and
neglect proceedings. Research has shown that the presence of a caring,
consistent adult in the life of a child victim is associated with
improved long-term outcomes. These efforts, which focus on helping the
child find a safe, permanent home where they can both heal and thrive,
require thorough background screening, specialized training, and
resources to promote a nationwide system of programs that adhere to and
assure the highest quality of services and care for the child victim.
CASA Program funds through DOJ achieve and uphold national standard
setting, assessment, accountability, and evaluation across 950 local,
State, and Tribal programs to promote improved child outcomes and
effective stewardship of public investments in victim advocacy.
Evidence-based practices, intensive technical assistance, direct
program guidance and partnerships, and national program standards and
quality assurance processes all lie at the foundation of effective
CASA/GAL program service delivery in communities across the Nation.
Given the nature of the CASA/GAL advocates' intensive work with
child victims of abuse and neglect, standards of rigorous screening,
training, supervision, and service are implemented nationwide, with
Congressional support, to ensure consistent quality for victims who
directly benefit from having their needs and rights championed in the
courtroom and in the community. Comprehensive pre-service, in-service,
and issue-focused training curricula--including training in
disproportionality, cultural competency, and working with older youth--
ensures a cutting edge approach to victim services centered on the
child thriving well into the future as a member of the community.
Federal support is foundational to the solid and high-quality
functioning of a national child advocacy network for victims of abuse
and neglect.
As the needs of child victims of abuse and neglect grow and change,
so must the specialization of one-on-one advocacy and services by CASA/
GAL programs. Since the Victims of Child Abuse Act was passed, the
landscape of victims' services for children has evolved significantly.
Researchers and practitioners know more now than ever about trauma, and
its associated impacts on child development, as well as the significant
and multiple risk factors and issues faced by abused and neglected
children such as mental health/post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD),
commercial sex trafficking, overmedication, and the growing effects of
substance abuse and the opioid epidemic in particular. Further, we know
that youth of color in particular face very significant challenges--in
addition to victimization--on their path to a thriving adulthood. CASA/
GAL advocates bring one-on-one attention and a dedicated focus to each
of the issues that the child victim faces, but additional resources are
needed to enhance and build their knowledge base as part of a
continuous advocacy development process.
These complex issues warrant adaptive and responsive training,
technical assistance, and resources, while continuing on a trajectory
of maintaining quality care and services within current CASA/GAL
caseloads and also simultaneously building the capacity to take on
additional cases when appointed by the court. National CASA/GAL
Association is committed to continuous improvement of training,
technical assistance, and resource delivery to strengthen and support
local CASA/GAL programs and state organizations to help advocates
remain at the forefront of emerging child welfare issues.
Federal support at the requested level is instrumental to bridging
advocacy training and best practice tools into multiple and new
emerging issue areas including child sex trafficking, substance abuse
and opioid-overuse, and the overmedication of child victims, for
example. Advocates need to be well versed in warning signs for these
issues, as well as the available services, resources, and coordination
of community and court efforts in order to best address the child
victim's case.
FY 2023 funding of $15 million will be targeted to fortifying
resources and training generally for CASA/GAL programs, and in key
focus areas including commercial sexual exploitation, children impacted
by substance abuse disorders, children of incarcerated parents and
young people aging out of foster care, based upon existing best
practices and models. In addition, this Federal funding will be used to
target resources to serve over 250,000 child victims of abuse and
neglect, and continue efforts toward the development of strong state
CASA/GAL organizations in the States currently under resourced, that
will enhance support of program service delivery in local communities.
Additional projects include sustaining development of training on best
practices in addressing the needs of children impacted by the opioid
epidemic and other forms of substance abuse, child sex trafficking,
unaccompanied children and addressing racial disproportionality in
child welfare and the need for racially and culturally sensitive
recruitment and matching of CASA/GAL advocates.
According to the most recent government data available, the number
of child maltreatment cases was 656,000 in 2019. This remains a
significant population with equally significant and complex issues and
risk factors. Without the benefit of a specially trained CASA/GAL
advocate that is able to devote dedicated time and attention to the
details of the case, the child victim faces a complex court process and
child welfare system that is overwhelmed, under resourced and
challenging to navigate. Our ability as a national network to serve
every child victim of abuse and neglect is directly tied to
strengthening and expanding a foundational and interwoven program of
advocate training, technical assistance, standards, tools, and
resources that are funded with DOJ support.
While children who are the victims of maltreatment have suffered
deep layers of trauma, these experiences do not have to be their only
life story. Juvenile detention and adult incarceration do not have to
be the path to their future. Substance abuse, PTSD, homelessness, and
joblessness do not have to be the basis of their experiences. We can
change their trajectory, together, with Congressional support.
Caring, dedicated, and extensively trained CASA/GAL advocates bring
about positive changes in the lives of child victims. Full funding is
needed to continue expanding the advocate pipeline, enhance the
training, resources, and services provided to and through CASA/GAL
programs, and strengthen outcomes for future members of our Nation's
workforce.
We urge the subcommittee to allocate $15 million for the Court
Appointed Special Advocates Program to address the overwhelming need
for dedicated advocacy on behalf of child victims of abuse and neglect.
Thank you for your consideration.
[This statement was submitted by Tara L. Perry, Chief Executive
Officer]
______
Prepared Statement of National Fish and Wildlife Foundation
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran and Members of the subcommittee:
Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony regarding FY 2023
funding that impacts the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF).
We respectfully request your approval of robust funding throughout the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) budget,
particularly for the National Ocean Service and National Marine
Fisheries Service to allow for continued and expanding partnerships
that deliver high quality ocean and coastal conservation.
NFWF and NOAA have been strong partners since 1996 and the
Foundation continues to administer programs with NOAA that address
ongoing and emerging issues. We believe that NFWF is a sound investment
because of our proven track record for leveraging Federal funding with
private contributions to maximize the impact Federal resources can
achieve. We appreciate the subcommittee's past support and respectfully
request continued funding for the following programs and partnerships.
national coastal resilience
Resilient communities are better prepared to adapt to changing
natural resource conditions, infrastructure threats and impacts to
local economies. NFWF and NOAA working together through the National
Coastal Resilience Fund (NCRF) provide communities with invaluable
resources for restoring, enhancing, and strengthening natural
infrastructure--the natural features that help reduce the impacts of
coastal storms and floods--protecting communities while also enhancing
habitats for fish and wildlife, addressing climate change, and
sequestering carbon. NFWF also leads significant monitoring and
evaluation efforts that measure the enhanced resilience of the restored
coastal systems, including carbon sequestration. This helps improve our
understanding of which activities are associated with the greatest and
most cost-effective reductions in storm risk and storm damage.
Through the NCRF in 2021, NFWF, NOAA, and other partners awarded
$40.5 million in new grants that will support projects in 28 States and
U.S. territories. The 49 grants announced will generate more than $58.3
million in matching contributions for a total conservation impact of
nearly $98.8 million. These investments will support the restoration or
expansion of natural features such as coastal marshes and wetlands,
dune and beach systems, oyster and coral reefs, coastal rivers, and
barrier islands that minimize the impacts of storms, flooding and other
coastal hazards. In addition to NOAA, 2021 partners included the
Department of Defense, Environmental Protection Agency's Gulf of Mexico
Office, TransRe, AT&T and Shell USA, Inc. These partners pooled
resources to promote projects that advance innovative approaches to
protect communities against regional threats resulting from climate
change.
The demand for this program's financial resources continues to
significantly exceed the amount of annual funding available - in 2021,
NFWF received 269 proposals seeking more than $178 million in funding,
with only $41 million in available resources to meet this need. NFWF
expects that demand will only increase as climate related risks
increase and more communities develop capacity to utilize nature-based
infrastructure to protect lives and infrastructure from these risks.
The Foundation fully expects that even with additional funding provided
from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) that demand will continue
to greatly surpass available funding.
fisheries electronic monitoring and reporting
Since 2010, NFWF has invested significantly in fisheries around the
U.S. to catalyze projects that are modernizing the way vital fisheries
data are collected, shared, and analyzed. High quality, timely and
accurate fisheries information is critical to maintaining sustainable
U.S. fisheries. Fishermen and seafood marketers are increasingly using
information about their fishing activity to improve the efficiency and
effectiveness of their operations and to satisfy their customer demands
for legally and sustainably caught seafood.
From 2015 to 2021, the Electronic Monitoring and Reporting (EMR)
grant program has funded $25.1 million across 75 projects that
modernize U.S. fisheries data collection and received $26.3 million in
matching funds to leverage these investments. Innovation and technology
have the potential to reduce the cost of fishery monitoring; increase
the speed, reliability and transparency of fisheries data; and enable
managers and fishermen to address management challenges more
effectively. EMR isn't one size fits all. NFWF projects represent a
cross section of the advancements being made around the U.S. in
fisheries management.
coral reef conservation
Since 2000, NFWF has partnered with NOAA, FWS, and USDA-NRCS to
respond to the alarming decline in both the quantity and productivity
of the Nation's coral reef ecosystems through multiple coral
conservation initiatives that aim to improve management, increase
public awareness, and reduce threats to coral reefs. NFWF works with
local, State, territorial, Federal and regional partners to achieve its
goals in coral conservation and bolsters multi-agency initiatives like
the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force Watershed Partnership Initiative. The
program supports reef resiliency by reducing local stressors from
unsustainable harvest and land-based pollution. In 2020 the program
added a new funding priority to build capacity for direct reef
restoration efforts and launched a separate emergency funding
solicitation to respond to events like Stoney Coral Tissue Loss Disease
which can be time sensitive.
Since the creation of NFWF's coral program in 2000, the program has
awarded $22 million across 408 projects, leveraging more than $29
million in conservation resources. Funds have assisted broad-scale
coral reef management by establishing new techniques for assessing and
monitoring reef health and new fishery management models. Site-specific
initiatives have developed and implemented watershed management plans,
reduced sediment erosion through stream bank stabilization, provided
incentives or best management practices on agricultural lands, and
supported capacity-building of management and conservation
organizations to sustain conservation outcomes.
killer whale conservation
NFWF partners with NOAA's Office of Protected Resources, SeaWorld
Entertainment and BNSF Railway on the Killer Whale Research and
Conservation Program to aid in the recovery of the Southern Resident
killer whale population in the Pacific Northwest. The program
prioritizes the highest impact activities called for in the recovery
plan as more funding is sought to fund additional actions beyond
traditional management and conservation measures.
In the first 7 years, the program has awarded 46 grants totaling
$5.3 million, drawing an additional $9.2 million in grantee match for a
total conservation investment of more than $14.5 million. These awards
have fostered collaborative efforts in the three priority action areas
of recovery to increase prey availability through restoration of
important salmon runs; improve water quality and reduce disturbance in
critical habitat; and fill critical research gaps in health,
demographics and stressors. All three strategies work to partner
science with management action and restoration activities. NFWF has
taken a comprehensive food-web approach to recovering this apex
predator and works with state and transboundary managers to implement
recovery actions. DoD is expected to join this program in 2022 to
further advance the food-web approach.
papahanaumokuakea research and conservation
NFWF's and NOAA's partnership on the Papahanaumokuakea Research and
Conservation Fund provides coordinated and collaborative research and
conservation in support of effectively managing the species and
habitats in the Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument. One of the
key challenges for NOAA and its partners managing this expansive area
is its remote location. Past agency funding only allowed for a single
voyage to the Marine Monument in the Pacific Ocean to address multiple
needs and locations per year, making it difficult to do the in-depth
studies managers need. NFWF and NOAA initiated a new model for
investments to go deeper, learn more and further expand the existing
program and research dollars that are currently invested to maximize
the conservation impact.
The partnership supports collaborative research and conservation
actions to galvanize funding around a critical management theme. For
example, prioritized research on the algae Chondria is helping managers
explore mitigation of the recent unprecedented algae invasion while
support of marine debris removal cruises works to remove the
significant amounts of debris accumulating in the monument. Throughout
all investments, the program seeks to maximize conservation impact,
management capacity and cultural and outreach opportunities.
marine debris
NFWF and NOAA have several ways in which we are working together to
combat the problem of Marine Debris. Starting over two decades ago,
NFWF administered a Marine Debris Program to help NOAA's new program
understand the scope of marine debris across the Nation by advancing
science around sources, sinks and impacts to both habitats and
wildlife. These early efforts transitioned into the Fishing for Energy
program which prioritized removal and prevention of derelict fishing
gear as one of the most destructive types of marine debris. This
programmatic funding and disposal infrastructure has helped to expand
and institutionalize marine debris removal and disposal efforts in
several coastal States and port communities.
Building off this extensive experience, in 2020 NOAA asked NFWF to
assist in administering approximately $10 million in 2019 supplemental
funding to remove damaging marine debris from coastal areas of
communities impacted by hurricanes Florence and Michael, and Typhoon
Yutu and reduce impacts to communities, industry and further harm to
habitats and fish and wildlife populations. The Hurricane Response
Marine Debris Removal Fund is a partnership between NFWF and the NOAA
Marine Debris Program that awards grants to assess, remove and dispose
of marine debris caused by severe storms. Grants are awarded based on
the targeted debris' existing or potential impact to coastal
communities and resources, and to prevent further harm to sensitive
marine habitats and species listed under the Endangered Species Act.
NOAA has again requested assistance with administration of the 2021
supplemental funding which will award grants in 2022.
nfwf background
NFWF was established by Congress in 1984 to catalyze private
investments to conserve fish, wildlife and their habitats. In addition,
every dollar directly appropriated to NFWF by Congress goes to on-the-
ground conservation projects and NFWF charges no administrative costs.
NFWF raises private funds not only to leverage Federal dollars, but
also to support the associated management costs of implementing the
Federal funds. Since Congress created the foundation in 1984, NFWF and
its grantees have invested $7.4 billion in to more than 20,400 projects
while partnering with 6,000+ organizations.
NFWF remains fully transparent and is required by law to notify
Congress 30 days in advance of every grant that exceeds $10,000 in
Federal funds. Details of all projects awarded during FY 2021 can be
found in NFWF's annual investment guide and all NFWF's grants can be
found on our website: https://www.nfwf.org/grants/grants-libary.
In FY 2021, NFWF was audited by an independent accounting firm, and
they issued an unqualified report with no material weaknesses
identified and no deficiencies identified. This is the THIRTEENTH
consecutive year of unqualified audits. In addition, NFWF has
continually qualified as a low-risk auditee under OMB guidelines.
In FY 2021, through discretionary cooperative agreements, NFWF
partnered with 15 Federal and State agencies or departments and more
than 30 corporations and foundations to support implementation of
Federal conservation priorities. These efforts focused on working
landscapes, private lands, natural resource conservation, coastal
resilience and community-based restoration.
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran and members of the
subcommittee, we appreciate your continued support and stand ready to
answer any questions you or your staff might have.
[This statement was submitted by Will Heaton Director, External
Relations]
______
Prepared Statement of National Legal Aid & Defender Association (NLADA)
NLADA is America's oldest and largest national organization whose
resources are exclusively dedicated to excellence in the delivery of
legal services. Our comments concern the Legal Services Corporation
(LSC) and U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) programs.
legal services corporation
Civil legal problems jeopardize the housing, income, physical
safety and other basic human needs of millions of Americans every year.
When people have access to legal help, these problems are often
resolved positively, but people who are forced to face courts and
complex legal processes alone are more likely to experience severe
consequences that create deep unnecessary hardship for themselves and
their families. The latter is unfortunately the reality for a large
majority of low-income Americans, and the problem is growing. In 2017,
LSC published data showing that low-income Americans received no help
or inadequate help with 86 percent of their civil legal problems. This
is because despite overwhelming evidence for both the effectiveness of
civil legal aid, and the considerable social and economic return on
investment that it produces,\1\ our country has failed in recent years
to provide a level of resources for legal aid that is remotely
commensurate with the level of need.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Moore, L. and Phyper, M., Aug 2019, Return on Investment in
Civil Justice Services and Programs; Selected Annotated Bibliography of
Existing Research; Canadian Forum on Civil Justice; see pages p10-26.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While we are grateful to Congress for providing modest increases in
funding in recent years, this has not been sufficient to address the
current resource shortfall, because prior funding losses were never
rectified. Demonstratively, the appropriation level for FY2019 was the
exact dollar amount as it was in FY1994. Therefore, simply as a result
of inflation LSC is badly underfunded compared to its level almost
three decades ago, and for much of that period it was considerably
lower in real terms also. This historical understanding underpins the
current crisis, but present conditions have deepened it considerably.
In April, LSC released new data showing the extent to which this has
occurred. Last year, low-income Americans received little or no legal
help with 92 percent--more than nine in ten--of their civil legal
problems.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Legal Services Corporation, Apr 2022, The Justice Gap: The
Unmet Civil Legal Needs of Low-income Americans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is not because people are simply uneducated about the
availability of legal help, though this is true for many. Rather,
people facing serious legal problems are seeking help but denied it
because their local legal aid organization does not have the resources
needed to assist: programs had to turn away 49 percent of eligible
clients seeking help, and could not fully resolve 44 percent of the
problems of the clients they could serve. Even prior to the release of
LSC's new data, NLADA calculated LSC would need to provide $1.36
billion for FY2023 in order to provide adequate service to every
eligible person seeking help from one of its grantees. This was based
in part on a projection of the level of need in FY2023, and in part on
our understanding that it is not possible to avoid addressing the
consequences of prior underfunding any longer.
An elevated level of legal need and demand for services.--The
severe disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic has subsided, but it
has created lasting consequences for many of our country's poorest
families and the overall financial situation of low-income Americans is
becoming even more precarious. The Census Bureau Household Pulse survey
data collected at the start of April found increases of more than 30
percent in the number of households relying on credit or personal loans
to make ends meet, with far higher rates experienced by people of
color\3\. This limits the ability of families to resolve their problems
before they reach the stage at which legal assistance becomes
necessary.\4\ In particular, an eviction crisis that was blunted but
not halted \5\ by Federal eviction moratoria and emergency rental
assistance continues to create widespread unmet legal need. Household
Pulse data from the same period suggests that around 28 percent of
American households ``are not current on rent or mortgage where
eviction or foreclosure in the next 2 months is either very likely or
somewhat likely''.\6\ Eviction cases where tenants are represented are
overwhelmingly likely to resolve with the eviction avoided, but the
opposite is true when they are not,\7\ as is the case for 90 percent of
tenants.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Pete Gannon, Apr 26, 2022, Warnings Appear in Household
Finances, Axios.com.
\4\ This intersects with the economic hardship caused by the expiry
of the Federal child tax credit, which alone increased the number of
children in poverty by almost 4 million. See: Parolin, Z., Collyer, S.,
and Curran, M., Feb 17, 2022, Absence of Monthly Child Tax Credit Leads
to 3.7 Million More Children in Poverty in January 2022, Columbia
University Center on Poverty and Social Policy.
\5\ Tenants were often refused the opportunity to renew their
lease, which Federal moratoria did not protect against.
\6\ Data taken from week 44 of the Household Pulse survey, at:
https://www.census.gov/data- tools/demo/hhp/#/?measures=EVICTFOR.
\7\ For a review of recent studies finding this, see pages 50-53
in: The Economic Impact of an Eviction Right to Counsel in Baltimore
City; Prepared for The Public Justice Center, May 8, 2020, Stout Risius
Ross.
\8\ Desmond, M., Mar 2015, Unaffordable America: Poverty, housing,
and eviction, Fast Focus, Volume 22, Institute for Research on Poverty,
University of Madison-Wisconsin, p.5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Addressing the consequences of underfunding. The insufficiency of
resources provided for civil legal aid has forced many providers to
``triage'' clients, prioritizing the most urgent cases at the expense
of other worthy seekers of assistance. It has also come at the expense
of investing in other organizational needs that are nonetheless
required to provide adequate services. Most notably, compensation for
attorneys and other important staff at legal aid organizations is
currently not sufficient to recruit and retain the workforce they need.
The median starting salary for a legal services attorney in 2021 was
less than $55,000.\9\ Combined with the high student debt burden
required for a law degree, it is unaffordable for many to accept these
positions or remain over the long-term. Also affected by resource
limitations is the ability of organizations to educate their
communities about available services, contributing to the fact that 53
percent of people did not feel confident they could find a lawyer they
could afford to help with their legal problem.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ National Association for Law Placement, Inc., Sept 2021,
Starting Salaries--Class of 2020.
\10\ Legal Services Corporation, Apr 2022, The Justice Gap: The
Unmet Civil Legal Needs of Low-income Americans, p.52.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
u.s. department of justice programs
Tribal Civil and Criminal Legal Assistance, Training and Technical
Assistance
We request that FY 2023 funding be maintained for the Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, within the State and Local Law
Enforcement Assistance appropriations account, at a level similar to
that provided in recent years, which is approximately $1 to 2 million,
for the Tribal Civil and Criminal Legal Assistance, Training and
Technical Assistance grant program (TCCLA). This should continue to
include funding in FY 2023 to support the work done on behalf of Native
Americans by Indian Legal Services programs that are connected with the
Legal Services Corporation. This FY2023 funding could be either within
a specified line item for ``assistance to Indian Tribes,'' such as the
$50 million Congress appropriated in the FY2022 Consolidated
Appropriations Act, and was included in the President's Budget for
FY2023, or within a Tribal set-aside percentage of Office of Justice
Programs accounts, as this subcommittee has recommended in prior years.
The consortium of 24 Indian Legal Services programs operating in 23
States provides legal representation to thousands of American Indian
and Alaska Native individuals in Tribal and State courts, and assists
more than 160 Tribal governments and/or Tribal judicial systems to
enhance or develop their justice systems. In at least 46 Tribal courts,
these Indian Legal Services programs provide the only public defender
services available. Many of these Indian Legal Services programs have
been awarded funding under the TCCLA grants program, most recently for
FY 2021 for both Tribal civil and criminal legal assistance:
Recent examples of civil legal assistance work done under TCCLA
funding awards include drafting model domestic violence protective
order codes, as well as drafting Tribal laws and revisions to civil
codes, policies and procedures; providing representation to children
within the juvenile systems of Tribal courts as guardians ad litem;
handling Indian wills, which has included drafting Advanced Directives
for Tribal members; and collaborating and maintaining relationships
with Tribal domestic violence advocates, Tribal crime victims'
advocates, urban Indian organizations, prosecutors, Tribal public
defenders, State and Tribal social service agencies, Tribal housing
authorities, senior center staff, staff at local Bureau of Indian
Affairs and Department of the Interior Office of Special Trustee
offices, the Tribal bar, and others to improve community awareness
about available legal services and provide more comprehensive services.
Recent examples of programs' criminal legal assistance work
conducted under TCCLA funding awards include representation of
defendants in a tribal/State court dual-jurisdiction DWI healing to
wellness court; presenting on the U.S. v. Cooley case and impacts on
Tribal law enforcement when encountering non-Indians on non-Tribal
lands within the boundaries of a reservation; handling cases related to
the expungement of criminal records; providing a Public Defender for
Tribal members in the Chickasaw Nation Tribal Court pursuant to the
June, 2020, U.S. Supreme Court ruling in McGirt v. Oklahoma; assisting
juvenile Tribal members in criminal defense and court appointments of
guardian ad litem cases when parents faced criminal prosecution or
incarceration; and handling trial level casework regarding unlawful
pre-trial detention.
In FY 2023, whether the subcommittee recommends funding to DOJ for
Indian Country Tribal justice and law enforcement programs as an
overall sum, as in fiscal year 2022, or as a Tribal set-aside
percentage of overall DOJ funding, as has been proposed in prior fiscal
years, we request that both bill and report language direct that some
DOJ funding be allocated for the purpose of the provision of both
Tribal civil and criminal legal assistance to individual Tribal
citizens and to Tribal judicial systems pursuant to the Indian Tribal
Justice Technical and Legal Assistance Act.
public defender improvement
The Federal Government has an important role in ensuring quality in
State and local public defense systems, and the President's Budget for
FY2023 included $25 million for public defender improvement. We urge
the committee to fully fund this program. DOJ has previously undertaken
initiatives to support state, Tribal, and local public defense systems,
including the Smart Defense Initiative, which focused on upholding the
Sixth Amendment right to counsel, and on fostering defender-researcher
partnerships; and the Sixth Amendment Initiative, which focused on the
protection of all Sixth Amendment rights via strategic planning,
implementation of strategic plans, and innovative partnerships between
public defense service providers and other criminal legal system
stakeholder groups. These initiatives have yielded substantial benefits
for criminal legal systems and for communities more broadly. For
example, a pilot program under the Smart Defense Initiative to provide
representation at all felony arraignments in Alameda County, CA reduced
unnecessary pretrial incarceration and provided substantial cost
savings: the percentage of cases where accused individuals were
released at arraignment increased from less than 1% to 20%; motions to
reduce bail (which were virtually nonexistent without counsel) had an
83% success rate; and the assistance of counsel avoided 2,974 days of
incarceration, translating to a savings of $422,308 in a single year.
violence against women act (vawa) programs
More than 1 in 3 women and more than 1 in 4 men in the United
States had experienced rape, physical violence, and/or stalking by an
intimate partner. Civil legal aid helps survivors secure their physical
safety, break legal links with their abuser, and rebuild their lives
over the long term. We urge the committee to provide $100 million for
civil legal assistance for victims, as requested by the President. None
of this appropriation should be drawn from the Crime Victims Fund
administered by the Office for Victims of Crime, because this reduces
the total amount available to serve victims of crime and jeopardizes
the sustainability of Crime Victims Fund over the long-term. The
sustainability of the Crime Victims Fund is a bipartisan concern, as
shown by the enactment of H.R. 1652, the VOCA Fix to Sustain the Crime
Victims Fund Act.
john r. justice student loan repayment assistance program
As the cost of law school continues to rise, new lawyers are
increasingly reliant on student loans to obtain a law degree: a 2021
report shows that the average law school student borrows over $118,000
just to attend law school, and 74.1% of law school students graduate in
debt.\11\ Salaries for public defenders and prosecutors are low, so
sustaining a career in public service is often impractical if not
impossible, leading to public defender programs and prosecution offices
being unable to retain talented attorneys. The John R. Justice Student
Loan Repayment Assistance Program (JRJ) offers critical support to
relieve the pressure of student loan debt for public defenders and
prosecutors. We are grateful that the committee has doubled the
appropriation level for the John R. Justice program to $4 million for
this year, but for this program to have a meaningful national impact,
it should be funded at the authorized level of $25 million.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See e.g.; Hanson, M., December 5, 2021, Average Law School
Debt, Education Data Initiative, EducationData.org; and Hess, A. J.,
Dec 22, 2022, U.S. Student Debt Has Increased by More than 100 percent
Over the Past 10 Years, CNBC.com.
[This statement was submitted by Radhika Singh, Vice President]
______
Prepared Statement of National Marine Sanctuary Foundation
Chairwoman Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and members of the
subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to submit written testimony
regarding appropriations for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) in Fiscal Year (FY) 2023. On behalf of the
National Marine Sanctuary Foundation, I thank the subcommittee for the
$4.5 million increase in the Marine Sanctuary Program (ORF) funding and
$1 million increase in Marine Sanctuaries Construction (PAC) funding
for FY 2022, and language supporting expansion of the National Marine
Sanctuary System. As supporters, stakeholders, and partners of
America's National Marine Sanctuary System, we strongly urge the
Committee to:
1. Appropriate at least $95.5 million in National Marine
Sanctuaries in FY
2023.
2. Direct NOAA to prioritize programs in sanctuaries.
3. Cap corporate fees to no more than 5 percent of the annual
appropriations.
4. Address Section 304(f) of the National Marine Sanctuaries Act.
office of national marine sanctuaries
NOAA's Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS) serves as the
trustee for a network of 15 national marine sanctuaries and two marine
national monuments that encompass over 620,000 square miles of marine
and Great Lakes waters. The National Marine Sanctuary System conserves
some of the Nation's most critical natural, historic, and cultural
resources.
The conservation of marine ecosystems is vital to maintaining a
healthy ocean and Great Lakes, sustaining productive coastal economies,
and addressing climate change. According to the Bureau of Economic
Analysis, the marine economy accounted for $397 billion of U.S.GDP in
2019. Tourism and recreation accounted for the most significant
portion, $234 billion of the gross output, and marine living resources
accounted for $26.6 billion. Both sectors depend on a healthy ocean.
Sanctuaries drive the growth of the blue economy through fishing,
diving, recreation, hospitality, and tourism.
The ocean is central to mitigating climate change, absorbing 90
percent of the climate system's excess heat. Climate change is
disproportionately impacting the ocean and its impacts threaten the
physical well-being, economic prosperity, and food security of
communities along our coasts and businesses that rely on marine
resources. National marine sanctuaries and marine national monuments
are a key part of the solution to ocean climate impacts. They protect
ecosystems that remove atmospheric carbon and store it in marine
sediments and habitats, safeguard coastal communities from flooding and
storms and reduce non-climate stressors to support ecosystem
resilience.
For Sanctuaries and Marine Protected Areas ORF account, we urge
Congress to provide at least $87 million. ONMS manages more ocean and
Great Lakes area than the entire National Park Service on a
significantly lower budget. This is the minimum level of funding
necessary to advance conservation and restoration in U.S. waters while
addressing the threats of biodiversity loss, climate change, and
inequitable access to nature. There are three sites currently in the
designation process as national marine sanctuaries, four sites on the
nomination inventory awaiting action, and one site under consideration
for the inventory. These sites have strong community-based support and
four were nominated by Indigenous communities. Engaging communities as
stewards of these protected waters make sanctuaries unique and provides
a participatory approach to conservation. With additional resources,
ONMS can engage communities throughout the sanctuary nomination and
designation processes.
For Marine Sanctuaries PAC, we urge Congress to provide at least
$8.5 million. This funding will support the replacement or repair of
vessels that are mission-critical. ONMS maintains a fleet of small
boats that allows managers and partners to assess, monitor, research
and protect national marine sanctuaries. These efforts include
responding to entangled whales, conducting scientific missions,
maintaining mooring buoys, and enforcing regulations. Increasing
demands on an aging fleet lead to higher operating costs and challenges
to maintaining safe, efficient, and effective operations. To continue
on-the-water science and conservation programs that strengthen the
management of our ocean and Great Lakes, investment in recapitalizing
aging vessels across the National Marine Sanctuary System in addition
to upgrades, retrofits, and life-cycle extensions is critical. Funding
would also support improvements for visitor centers, facilities and
signage, and ADA compliance that anchor tourism and recreation in
communities and enhance equitable access to nature.
In October 2022, the Nation will mark the 50th anniversary of the
National Marine Sanctuaries Act. As we move towards this anniversary,
we need to invest in America's protected waters, and the communities
and businesses that depend upon them. The Build Back Better bill
proposed critical investment in ONMS facilities across the country. For
the anniversary, we urge the subcommittee to create a special
investment of $25 million in PAC for the next 5 years to improve
facilities.
prioritizing national marine sanctuaries and marine national monuments
Marine sanctuaries and monuments protect nationally significant
areas in our ocean and Great Lakes akin to national parks and national
wildlife refuges. Because of their special designation and NOAA's
responsibility to hold them in trustee, the Department of Commerce and
the agency should prioritize investment in these areas. We appreciate
Congress including report language in Consolidated Appropriations Act
for FY 2022 for National Ocean Service (NOS) to prioritize marine
debris cleanup efforts within marine sanctuaries and marine national
monuments. We request the subcommittee expand this language to include
other accounts within NOAA, specifically, Navigations, Observation and
Positioning, Coastal Science and Assessment and Coral Reef Conservation
Program within NOS, Protected Resource Science and Management and
Habitat Conservation and Restoration within NMFS, and Climate Research
and Ocean, Coastal and Great Lakes Research within OAR. In addition to
the general provision above, we respectfully request funding for
sanctuaries Line Offices. We request this funding above the President's
FY 2023 Budget request.
National Ocean Service (NOS).--We commend the Coral Reef
Conservation Program and the Office of Response and Restoration's
Marine Debris Program for supporting work in sanctuaries and monuments.
We request support in the following accounts:
--$15 million within the Navigation, Observation, and Positioning to:
characterize and monitor marine ecosystems and living
resources; understand and predict impacts from climate change;
prioritize and synthesize long-term data collections; advance
technologies for biological observing; and develop targeted
modelling, web-enabled ecosystem trends, and other tools to
inform adaptation strategies.
--$5 million within the Office of Response and Restoration for marine
debris removal in sanctuaries and monuments to enhance water
quality and reduce the impacts of debris on resources.
--$1 million within the Coral Reef Conservation Program to support
the MPA Center providing technical assistance to Pacific
Islands, Caribbean, and international partners, complementing
USAID.
--$10 million within National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science
(NCCOS) for biogeographic assessments and characterizations in
sanctuaries and monuments to evaluate regulatory and management
decisions, and grants to non-federal partners for targeted
research on priority management issues.
--$5 million within the Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS)
program to support the collection, management, accessibility
and distribution of critical natural and archaeological data
and information.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS).--We commend the Office of
Habitat Conservation for their strong support for work in sanctuaries.
We request support in the following accounts:
--$100 million for Habitat Conservation and Restoration within the
National Marine Fisheries Service and dedicate $40 million to
support habitat restoration in U.S. waters, with the increase
directed for restoration in national marine sanctuaries and
marine national monuments and assessing blue carbon
sequestration.
--Funding for the Office of Law Enforcement to increase enforcement
in sanctuaries, especially those like the Florida Keys where
there are zone programs.
--For Protected Resources Science and Management, we request an
increase of $10 million to support species recovery grants.
Sanctuaries facilitate partnerships across sectors and can
effectively develop best practices and models for improving
science and management for protected species.
--For the Integrated Ecosystem Assessment Program, we request $5
million to directly support the science needs and management of
sanctuaries and monuments.
Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR).--Sanctuaries act as living
laboratories for stewardship, education, restoration, and science to
address climate impacts. Scientists across NOAA are increasing our
understanding of the climate drivers, conditions, trends, and
predictions affecting our ocean through research conducted in
sanctuaries.
--Within OAR's climate research, we request $5 million to support
climate science in sanctuaries and monuments.
--Within the Office of Exploration and Research, $6 million to
support and conduct critical operations in the National Marine
Sanctuary System, with emphasis on the Pacific Islands Region,
Great Lakes, and Gulf of Mexico.
--$3 million in the Ocean Acidification Program to focus research on
sanctuaries and monuments aligned with the current OAP
Strategic Plan.
--$3 million for NOAA Research Laboratories to support the design,
construction, and installation of research and monitoring
instruments in sanctuaries and monuments.
office of marine and aviation operations (omao)
Within OMAO, we request $3 million in dedicated funds to support
operations in the National Marine Sanctuary System using NOAA Ships and
uncrewed systems to address science and management needs and provide
increased access to and on water presence for NOAA and partners in
these protected areas.
cap for noaa administrative costs
We urge the subcommittee to cap NOAA's and NOS's corporate and
administrative costs at five percent of total ORF appropriations for
the account. In fiscal year 2021, ONMS paid over $7 million in
administrative and corporate costs to NOAA. ONMS shoulders a
disproportionate share of corporate expenses and direct bills because
other programs are exempt from such fees. Rather than ONMS and other
non-exempt programs shouldering these costs, we urge this subcommittee
to cap costs and require NOAA budget these expenses directly. Direct
accounts for NOAA's and Line Offices' Administration, management, and
corporate services would be transparent and allow Congress to
appropriate actual costs for these expenses. More importantly, it
ensures NOAA has the necessary and deserved budget for administration
and management without impacting program and mission delivery.
Suspend Section 304(f) of the National Marine Sanctuaries Act
Section 304(f) of the National Marine Sanctuaries Act is outdated
and should be repealed as demonstrated in NOAA's findings for Mallows
Bay-Potomac River and Wisconsin Shipwreck Coast National Marine
Sanctuaries. With only 1.9% of the U.S. marine environment protected
outside of the central Pacific, our Nation needs to increase the level
and scale of marine protected areas to conserve biodiversity and all
its contributions to people and the economy. National marine
sanctuaries are an effective and cooperative approach to increase
protection. We urge the subcommittee to include language to strike
Section 304(f) or suspend the provision in FY 2023.
Thank you for this opportunity to provide testimony. Robust funding
will ensure sound management of these treasured places through strong
community engagement in stewardship; support of mission-critical tools;
active restoration of marine environments; preservation of maritime
resources; and improved understanding of ecosystems. We look forward to
working with the subcommittee during the FY 2023 appropriations
process.
[This statement was submitted by Ms. Kristen J. Sarri, President
and CEO]
______
Prepared Statement of The National Ocean and Coastal Security
Mrs. Chairwoman and Members of the subcommittee, this joint
statement is submitted on behalf of the non-profit organizations listed
above who share a deep concern for the health of the Nation's oceans,
coasts, and Great Lakes.
The ocean, coasts, and Great Lakes are experiencing dramatic
changes from sea level rise, increasing coastal storm frequency,
coastal flooding, erosion, hypoxia, harmful algal blooms, ocean
acidification, biodiversity loss, and more. Many of these changes are
caused by climate change, which is disproportionately impacting the
ocean. Warming waters are changing ocean circulation and chemistry,
raising sea levels, increasing storm intensity, and changing the
diversity and abundance of marine species. These impacts weaken marine
ecosystem's ability to provide critical ecological services and natural
infrastructure for climate resilience. This threatens the physical
well-being, economic prosperity, and food security of communities along
our coasts and businesses that rely on marine resources and
transportation.
The most recent State of U.S. High Tide Flooding report recorded
record high global sea levels and some regions across the country are
seeing up to 1,100 percent increases in high tide flooding. At the same
time, the population in coastal areas continues to increase and nearly
40 percent of coastal residents are vulnerable communities--the
elderly, children, and the poor. This interface of coastal change and
increasing coastal populations is driving the need to enhance coastal
community adaptation, mitigation, and resilience capacity. Our coastal
organizations, in partnership with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), are poised to play a leading role in addressing
these continually evolving ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes challenges
and helping people where they live.
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) recognizes the
importance of coastal infrastructure--and the critical role of NOAA and
its partners--in addressing coastal community adaptation, mitigation,
and resilience. The IIJA included one-time investments of $47 billion
for resiliency with $2.6 billion of that amount going to NOAA. The NOAA
funds include amounts for data acquisition, marine debris, forecasting
and modeling, regional management, projects for habitat restoration and
community resilience and coastal and ocean observing. Our organizations
thank Congress for making these significant investments.
The IIJA makes impressive strides to advance ocean, coastal, and
Great Lakes resilience, yet these investments are only an initial down
payment on the full need. Coastal communities are looking at multi-
billion dollar price tags to bolster themselves from rising seas and
associated coastal hazards. For example, Harris County, Texas planners
estimate it will cost more than $30 billion to provide protection
against major 100-year flood events. This is over 10 times the
investment to NOAA under IIJA. The economic and social cost of inaction
is exorbitant--Hurricane Harvey in 2017 cost $125 billion in damages
and led to the deaths of 68 people while causing the third 500-year-
flood in a 3 year period. Studies show that investments in coastal
resilience work. A project supported by NOAA and its partners in Harris
County--Exploration Green--created a wetland to absorb floodwaters, and
even though the project was in the early stages of development when
Hurricane Harvey hit, it protected 150 homes from flooding, and now it
protects over 3,000 homes from 100-year and 500-year flood events.
Our annual appropriations request for FY 2023 and ensures the full
impact of the IIJA investments are realized. The immediate and long
term success of infrastructure investments depend on community
engagement, planning, analysis of options and implementation, and
stewardship of newly restored areas--all activities that were not
supported under the IIJA. Increased capacity is needed to work with
local communities to support and implement these projects, as well as
manage the restored areas. Furthermore, many of our programs have
significant educational and outreach mandates that complement the
development of coastal infrastructure, but were not funded in the IIJA.
Education, outreach, and training within coastal communities can both
explain the value of coastal infrastructure and improve community
resilience through planning and preparedness.
Our organizations stand in strong support of NOAA's ocean, coastal,
and Great Lakes research, observing, conservation, management,
stewardship, training, and education programs which advance coastal
resilience. We support the following investments in FY 2023
appropriations to ensure robust investments in coastal resilience as
well as capacity to implement the IIJA:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$140 million for the National Sea Grant $108.5 million for Coastal
College Program and $18 million for Management Grants and $64.782
Sea Grant Aquaculture.. million for Coastal Zone Mgmt.
and Services
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$87 million for National Marine $42.5 million for National
Sanctuaries operations, research, & Estuarine Research Reserve
facilities and $8.5 million for System operations and $10
procurement, acquisition & million for procurement,
construction. acquisition & construction
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$75.3 million for the Regional $34 million for National Ocean
Integrated Ocean Observing Program. and Coastal Security Fund
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$2.5 million for Regional Ocean ...............................
Partnerships.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Sea Grant College Program.--The National Sea Grant College
Program Act authorizes the awarding of grants and contracts to initiate
and support programs at Sea Grant colleges and other institutions for
research, education, and advisory services in any field related to the
conservation and development of marine resources. A joint federal,
State, and local investment, Sea Grant provides solutions for the
issues affecting our Nation's coastal communities (including the Great
Lakes, Gulf of Mexico, and communities on the Atlantic, Caribbean, and
Pacific coasts), yielding quantifiable economic, social, and
environmental benefits. Sea Grant is a unique university-based program
within NOAA that awards over 90% of its appropriated funds to coastal
States through a competitive process to address issues identified as
critical by coastal communities throughout the United States. Sea Grant
fosters cost-effective partnerships among State universities, State and
local governments, NOAA, and coastal communities and businesses,
leveraging nearly $3 for every $1 appropriated by Congress. In 2020 the
Sea Grant program helped generate an estimated $520 million in economic
benefits; created or supported 11,000 jobs; created or sustained 1332
businesses; provided 34 State-level programs with funding that assisted
285 communities improve their resilience; helped over 11,000 people
adopt safe and sustainable fishing practices; helped restore or protect
an estimated 4.2 million acres of habitat; and supported the education
and training of nearly 2000 undergraduate and graduate students.
The Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS).--The IOOS Regional
Associations (RAs) work with Tribal, State, regional and Federal
agencies to design and operate regional observing systems which provide
actionable information to a variety of stakeholders. IOOS efficiently
links observation to modeling via data management in order to improve
the safety and efficiency of maritime operations, more effectively
protect and restore healthy coastal ecosystems, reduce public health
risks, and to mitigate the effects of coastal hazards including
flooding. The IOOS regional network enables NOAA to more efficiently
achieve their goals by increased access to non-Federal data sources and
by developing tailored information products that address the unique
needs of users around the Nation. The FY 2023 request supports the core
operation of these regional systems allowing them to continue critical
observations and to provide that information in useful formats, in a
timely manner. In addition, the support will allow for repairs to aging
infrastructure and modernization of the system to better provide
information on changing conditions including biology and marine life.
Coastal Zone Management (CZM) Programs.--The 34 State and Territory
CZM Programs, in partnership with the National CZM Program, support the
congressionally recognized priority of the effective management,
beneficial use, protection, and development of the coastal zone. The
demands on CZM Programs have increased with continuously more
complicated balancing of coastal zone uses and needs for conservation,
while emerging issues including sea level rise, increased coastal storm
frequency, and other coastal hazards such as coastal flooding and
erosion threaten the lives and livelihoods of coastal communities.
Additionally, IIJA provided for $207 million for habitat restoration
projects under the CZMA placing increased demands for directed project
execution on the CZM Programs without providing resources to address
basic capacity needs. While the IIJA funds do address some components
of the extensive needs for coastal resilience, there remain critical
gaps that are not addressed which are supported by the annual
appropriations for Coastal Management Grants. These gaps include
vulnerability assessments; long-term resilience planning; and project
planning, design, engineering, and implementation for green and gray
infrastructure projects with coastal community resilience benefits. To
ensure the effective implementation of this new legislation and the
continuation of comprehensive coastal resilience efforts, it is
imperative that the Coastal Management Grants be funded at a level that
ensures the States and Territories have the necessary capacity to meet
these mandates.
The National Estuarine Research Reserve System (NERRS).--The NERRS
include 30 special coastal places (Reserves), encompassing more than
1.4 million acres. Over 50 years, and in times of crisis, Reserves have
become trusted members of coastal communities. The NERRS is a time-
tested, mission-ready program that is prepared for growth and has a
proven track record of delivering the information and solutions
communities need to address climate change and many other challenges.
Communities look to Reserves as partners in addressing the challenges
of a changing coast and as places for safe outdoor experiences that are
essential to public health. An increase in program funding will send
more dollars to each State and enhance the NOAA services each Reserve
and its communities receive. The increase will support NERRS geographic
growth: there are two proposed reserves in Louisiana and Wisconsin in
the designation pipeline. A funding increase will also deepen and
broaden the impact of national programs that make coastal communities
and the Nation more resilient, including the NERRS System-Wide
Management Program, Coastal Training Program, Collaborative Research
competitive grant program, and Davidson Graduate Research Fellowship.
Additionally, funding for the NERRS will strengthen the impact of
investments made through the infrastructure bill. Reserves support
jobs, contribute to the economy, and provide much-needed refuge,
especially during the pandemic.
National Marine Sanctuaries Program and Habitat Restoration.--The
National Marine Sanctuary System encompasses over 600,000 square miles
of marine and Great Lakes waters protecting ecologically and
biologically significant habitats. Sanctuaries serve as living
laboratories for stewardship, education, restoration, and science to
address climate impacts. Sanctuaries also bolster tourism and robust
recreational industries, promote sustainable visitation, engage
businesses in stewardship, and drive the growth of the blue economy.
Communities across the Nation can nominate their most treasured marine
and Great Lakes places for consideration as sanctuaries. Engaging
communities as stewards of these protected waters provides a
comprehensive, highly participatory approach to managing and conserving
marine and Great Lakes ecosystems. The Office of National Marine
Sanctuaries (ONMS) needs the resources to properly engage communities
throughout the sanctuary nomination and designation process.
ONMS did not receive any IIJA funds. The FY23 request will ensure
that ONMS has the resources to conduct scientific research, effectively
manage sanctuaries and designate new ones, enforce regulations, and
engage the public in stewardship. Funding would support the
Administration's initiation of the designation process
for sanctuaries in the ONMS Inventory and complete the proposed
Papahanaumokuakea, Lake Ontario, and Chumash Heritage sanctuaries'
designation. There are an additional four sites nominated for
designation in inventory awaiting action, and one site under
consideration for the inventory. This funding level would also support
the replacement or repair of vessels that are mission-critical to
operations, management, and enforcement and provide investments that
create jobs through shipbuilding
The Regional Ocean Partnerships (ROPs).--The four ROPs play a
unique role in facilitating collaboration across State coastal
agencies, including State and Territory CZM Programs, Tribes, Federal
agencies, and other stakeholder groups, to manage the Nation's coast
and enhance coastal resilience. The IIJA provides significant resources
to support the four ROPs, Tribal engagement, and ROP equivalents in
regions without an ROP. IIJA funding together with sustained annual
appropriations will enable the ROPs and their equivalents to tackle
increasingly complex coastal issue in a coordinated way and to engage
Tribes who are a critical partner in managing the Nation's coasts who
have often been left out of these coastal management discussions.
The National Ocean and Coastal Security (NOCSA) Fund.--The NOCSA
Fund provides grants to non-profit organizations, academic
institutions, for-profit organizations, and State, Territory, local,
municipal, and Tribal governments for the purpose of investing in
conservation projects that restore or expand natural coastal features
that minimize the impacts of storms and other naturally occurring
events on nearby communities. Increased resources under IIJA and
sustained annual appropriations will enable coastal communities to
tackle the vast need for coastal habitat restoration and community
resilience projects across the Nation's coasts.
Ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes research, education, conservation,
and resource management programs funded by this subcommittee are
investments in the future health, resiliency, and well-being of our
coastal communities which will result in returns of improved quality of
life, as well as environmental and economic outcomes many times over
the Federal investment.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide this joint statement.
______
Prepared Statement of National Opinion Research Center (NORC)
The National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of
Chicago appreciates the opportunity to provide testimony on the fiscal
Year 2023 Census Bureau (``the Bureau'') budget request. In particular,
we focus on the Bureau's proposed ``Ask U.S. Panel'' pilot project, for
which the Bureau has not requested funding as part of its FY 2023
request despite its stated plans to continue to expand the Program and
Pilot over the next year.
about norc
NORC is an objective, non-partisan research institution that
delivers reliable data and rigorous analysis to guide critical
programmatic, business, and policy decisions. We have been successful
in utilizing our well-established surveys to compile reliable data for
Federal agencies, private sector clients, and others for over 75 years.
This collection of surveys includes the ``AmeriSpeak'' online
probability-based panel for rapid turnaround studies, which has been in
place since 2016. Given our experience with the ``AmeriSpeak'' panel,
we have firsthand knowledge of the time, resources, and plans needed to
successfully execute a panel like the one the Bureau is seeking to
create via the Ask U.S. Panel.
concerns about the ask u.s. panel
The Ask U.S. Panel, first proposed under the Bureau's June 2020
Notice of Funding Opportunity, was intended to ``establish a research
platform that is developed and maintained by a third-party collaborator
but, open to government and other non-profit researchers and policy
makers that can allow a more frequent measurement of the population and
can include repeated measures designs.'' The Bureau awarded the project
to RTI International through a cooperative agreement.
We have numerous concerns regarding the development of the Panel,
including the use of a cooperative agreement, the duplication of
resources already existing in the private sector, and the diversion of
taxpayer dollars and Bureau personnel from other important priorities
related to the Bureau's unique functions. However, our main concern is
the lack of transparency surrounding the Bureau's plans for the Panel.
Since awarding the cooperative agreement in 2020, the Bureau has
avoided numerous requests from stakeholders for information about its
methodology, data collection processes, and intended uses for the
Panel.
This lack of transparency, combined with the rapid implementation
of the Panel, raises concerns regarding the need, validity, and
usability of the Panel. The Bureau has pursued rapid implementation of
new data products and data collection programs in recent years. While
NORC applauds the Bureau's recent innovations, we suggest that
additional diligence may be necessary to ensure the Ask U.S. Panel
fulfills its intended purposes and that the Bureau communicates with
its users on the best fit for each of its products. Recent Federal
Register Notices and statements under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
from the Bureau on the Ask U.S. Panel indicate that the plans and
methodology are rapidly evolving. The Bureau must be transparent about
its methodology and planned implementation to ensure this product
produces valid and usable results and is not a waste of taxpayer
dollars.
To this end, stakeholders have repeatedly reached out to the Bureau
for additional information on this project and the Bureau has been
dismissive and/or nonresponsive to these requests. This lack of
transparency by the Bureau is evidenced in their lack of response to
stakeholder comments through the PRA process (comments submitted on
February 4, 2022; March 29, 2022; and May 3, 2022). The lack of
consideration by the Bureau of public comments calls into question its
commitment to the consultative process established by the PRA and the
transparency of the Bureau in its actions. We note that in a recent
Director's blog post Director Santos stated, ``An important aspect of
that is cultivating trust with all our Nation's communities, be they
urban or rural, low-income or high income, and regardless of race or
ethnicity or other socio-demographic groups. That is why seeking,
listening to and incorporating feedback is critical to garnering trust
from the full range of our Nation's communities. It also promotes the
production of relevant, quality data and therefore facilitates
excellence at the Census Bureau.'' \1\ NORC agrees with this
perspective and believes meaningful engagement with the Bureau's
stakeholders and transparency in the Bureau's operations are essential
factors in engendering trust and confidence in the Bureau's programs
and products. In the case of inquiry and feedback regarding the Ask
U.S. Panel, the Bureau's actions to date, both through the PRA process
and other channels, do not meet the standard laid out in the Director's
blog post.
It also is notable that the Bureau did not include any references
to the Ask U.S. Panel in its FY 2023 budget request despite recent
Federal Register Notices indicating its plans to implement the Panel.
It is unclear to us and other stakeholders how the Bureau plans to fund
the Panel and how this effort fits in with the Household Pulse Surveys
and High Frequency Data Program. Despite approaching the Bureau through
various channels, both directly and indirectly, we have not received
any clarity about how these programs interact and what funding the
Bureau plans to utilize to build out the Ask U.S. Panel in the next
year.
request for the fiscal year 2023 cjs appropriations bill
Given these concerns, we respectfully ask the Committee to instruct
the Bureau to be more transparent with stakeholders, as well as provide
more detailed information about its plans for the Panel. Providing
proper oversight of the implementation of this project will ensure the
scope of the Ask U.S. Panel stays within its parameters and does not
waste public funds.
To that end, we request the Committee include the following
language in the report accompanying the fiscal Year 2023 CJS
appropriations bill.
Ask U.S. Panel Survey. The Committee is concerned about
the lack of transparency related to the Census Bureau's
plans for implementation of the Ask U.S. Panel Survey,
particularly given the lack of congressional
authorization and the expanding scope of the project
since it was initially announced. The Committee also is
concerned about the use of taxpayer dollars for the
development of a panel survey given the wide range of
options that currently exist in the private sector for
these types of activities. The Committee directs the
Census Bureau to provide a report to the Committee
within 60 days about the panel's methodology, data
collection processes, implementation, incurred and
projected costs, and procurement strategy to allow the
Committee to evaluate the project's use of Federal
resources.
conclusion
While the Census Bureau should be lauded for its recent
innovations, the lack of transparency surrounding the Ask U.S. Panel
raises serious concerns, which ultimately question the need for the
Panel as a government developed program. We hope the Committee will
provide active oversight to ensure the Bureau is fully transparent
about its plans for this product, including responding to stakeholder
requests.
Thank you for the opportunity to offer testimony on the Ask U.S.
Panel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.census.gov/newsroom/blogs/director/2022/02/
thinking-differently-perpetuating-
excellence.html, February 14, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Prepared Statement of the National Seafood Marketing Coalition
Dear Chairman Shaheen and Ranking Member Moran:
As you begin to prepare the fiscal Year 23 Appropriations bill, the
National Seafood Marketing Coalition (NSMC) requests that you work with
all of your colleagues to ensure increased funding for the Saltonstall-
Kennedy (S-K) Grant Program. The NSMC includes 70 US Fisheries
organizations from across the country as well as signed support from 9
separate State Legislatures.
Enacted in 1954, the S-K Act aims to `` . . . aid the American
commercial fishing industry by promoting the free flow of domestically
produced products in commerce and developing and increasing markets for
those products,'' through a federal, competitive grant program. As you
know, the S-K Grant Program is funded by a tariff on imported seafood
and these funds are transferred from USDA into NOAA's ``Promote and
Develop Seafood Products'' account. The tariffs capitalizing the
Promote and Develop account have increased almost every year from $82
million in 2007 to now over $240 million in 2021. Regardless of this
dramatic and consistent increase, the S-K Grant program has stayed in
the $8M--$12M range of Congressional funding. The fiscal year 2022
funding for the S-K Grants turned out to be $11.8M, which is
approximately 4.8% of the ``transfer'' from USDA. However, the S-K Act
clearly States that:
(e) Allocation of fund moneys
(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, all moneys in the
fund shall be used exclusively for the purpose of promoting
United States fisheries in accordance with the provisions of
this section, and no such moneys shall be transferred from the
fund for any other purpose . . . .(A) the Secretary shall use
no less than 60 per centum of such moneys to make direct
industry assistance grants to develop the United States
fisheries and to expand domestic and foreign markets for United
States fishery products pursuant to subsection (c) of this
section;
Increased S-K funding is needed for the U.S. seafood industry now
more than ever. World events have closed markets and significantly
raised tariffs on many U.S. seafood exports. Moreover, because of the
war in Ukraine and other U.S. policies, several foreign nations have
severely restricted the import of our US seafood products and at the
same time, the US Seafood market is a ``center or the target'' for all
other foreign seafood products! (The U.S. imports approximately 90% of
seafood consumed domestically). Increased S-K funding should focus on
increasing domestic consumption of U.S. produced seafood as well as the
secondary processing of seafood within the U.S. American fisheries are
also challenged by disproportionate foreign government spending to
support their fishing industries. For example, Norway spends more than
10 times the amount of money on marketing Norwegian salmon in U.S.
markets as the US does on all of our seafood products, everywhere.
Increased S-K allocations could, in part, help to level the playing
field in promotion of U.S. produced seafood.
Recently, Congress re-established the American Fisheries Advisory
Committee (AFAC Committee) to work with NOAA to prioritize and direct
S-K funding. The NSMC as a representative of the Alaska and US Seafood
Industry, is looking forward to AFAC's new leadership role in the
application of S-K funding. It has been 50 years since S-K funding
decisions have had the industry input that was intended by the 1954
enabling legislation. According to the legislation, the purpose of S-K
funding is ``to assist persons in carrying out research and development
projects addressed to any aspect of United States fisheries, including,
but not limited to, harvesting, processing, marketing, and associated
infrastructures.'' The AFAC Committee, as designed, will have both
geographical and experiential diversity including fishermen, scientists
and regulators drawing from six regions across the country. As such,
AFAC will be an effective advisory body, ensuring that increased S-K
funding is strategically invested to return maximum benefit to the
American Seafood Industry.
As one of the US Seafood industry's representatives and advocates,
we would like to see the S-K Grant funding begin to approach the
percentage of U.S. tariffs on imported seafood that were envisioned
when the original statute was passed. For FY 23, UFA encourages you to
consider funding the S-K Grant program at no less than 15% of the
transfer to NOAA's ``Promote and Develop Seafood Products'' account
derived from tariffs on imported seafood as a specific Lt numbered line
item in the FY23 budget. This equates to approximately 35 million
dollars, and is a step in the right direction towards the 60% language
contained in the S-K Act. In future years, we recommend continued
incremental increases towards the statutory 60% allocation in the SK
Act.
We very much thank you for being the champion you have been for so
long in our request for increased S-K Grant funding that will address
the new and increased needs of America's fishing industry and ensure
the new AFAC Committee's ability to maximize a newly refreshed desire
for a National Seafood Marketing campaign and to finally begin
addressing the rebuilding and expansion of America's Seafood markets.
[This statement was submitted by Bruce Schactler, Director]
______
Prepared Statement of Natural Science Collections Alliance
The Natural Science Collections Alliance appreciates the
opportunity to provide testimony in support of fiscal year (FY) 2023
appropriations for the National Science Foundation (NSF). We encourage
Congress to provide the NSF with at least $11 billion in FY 2023.
The Natural Science Collections Alliance is a non-profit
association that supports natural science collections, their human
resources, the institutions that house them, and their research
activities for the benefit of science and society. Our membership
consists of institutions that are part of an international network of
museums, botanical gardens, herbaria, universities, and other
institutions that contain natural science collections and use them in
research, exhibitions, academic and informal science education, and
outreach activities.
Scientific collections, and the collections professionals and
scientists who make, care for, and study these resources, are an
important component of our Nation's research infrastructure. These
collections and their associated experts contribute to the expansion of
our bioeconomy. Whether held at a museum, government managed laboratory
or archive, or in a university science department, these scientific
resources form a coordinated network of specimens, samples, and data
(for example, genetic, tissue, organism, and environmental) that are a
unique and irreplaceable foundation from which scientists are studying
and explaining past and present life on earth.
Natural science collections advance scientific research and
education, and that informs actions to improve public health,
agricultural productivity, natural resource management, biodiversity
conservation, and American economic innovation. Current research
involving natural science collections also contributes to the
development of new cyberinfrastructure, data visualization tools, and
improved data management practices. A few examples of how scientific
collections have saved lives, enhanced food production, and advanced
scientific discovery include:
--Scientists used museum specimens in U.S. collections to gather data
on the distribution of the mosquito Culex quadrofaciatus, which
is known to carry West Nile Virus and other pathogens. They
then modeled the distribution under different scenarios of
changing climates to predict regions where the species may
expand in the future. Predicting the spread of disease vectors
such as these mosquitoes helps the health care community
prepare for disease outbreaks and where they will happen.
--Researchers from Boston University documented Tau proteins in the
brains of fluid preserved museum specimens of Downy Woodpecker.
These proteins are also found in traumatic brain injuries in
humans. Because of the life history traits of woodpeckers, the
researchers argue these birds may have evolved a level of
resistance to traumatic head injuries that could have
implications for treatments for humans.
--Citrus bacterial canker disease wreaks havoc on fruit crops in
Florida. Using plant specimens collected a century ago,
scientists have analyzed the bacterium and traced its source.
Knowledge of how the bacteria spreads allows scientists to
develop effective control methods and to protect the U.S.
citrus industry.
--When the 2001 anthrax attacks happened in the United States,
specimens collected decades earlier allowed researchers from
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to quickly
identify the strain involved.
Scientific collections enable us to tell the story of life on
Earth. There are more than 1,600 biological collections in the United
States. These resources are the result of more than 200 years of
scientific investigation, discovery, and inventory of living and fossil
species. Scientists have collected and curated more than one billion
specimens within those collections. This work is on-going as new
questions continue to be asked and answered.
The institutions that care for scientific collections are important
research infrastructure that enable other scientists to study the basic
data of life; conduct biological, geological, anthropological, and
environmental research; and integrate research findings from across
these diverse disciplines. Their professional staff members train
future generations with the tools and expertise required to move
science forward. In-house institutional staff expertise is vital to the
development and deployment of this critical research infrastructure.
Recent reports highlight the value of mobilizing biodiversity
specimens and data in spurring new scientific discoveries that grow our
economy, improve our public health and wellbeing, and increase our
National security. In 2019, the Biodiversity Collections Network issued
a community-informed call for the development of an Extended Specimen
Network. The report, ``Extending U.S. Biodiversity Collections to
Promote Research and Education,'' outlines a national agenda that
leverages digital data in biodiversity collections for new uses and
calls for building an Extended Specimen Network. This endeavor requires
robust investments in our Nation's scientific collections, whether they
are owned by a Federal or state agency or are part of an educational
institution or free-standing natural history museum or another research
center.
A 2020 report by the National Academies of Science, Engineering and
Medicine, ``Biological Collections: Ensuring Critical Research and
Education for the 21st Century,'' provides guidance to the NSF
regarding the sustainability of living stock and natural history
collections. The report argues that collections are a critical part of
our Nation's science and innovation infrastructure and a fundamental
resource for understanding the natural world.
According to the U.S. Interagency Working Group on Scientific
Collections (IWGSC), ``scientific collections are essential to
supporting agency missions and are thus vital to supporting the global
research enterprise.'' A 2020 report by the IWGSC, ``Economic Analyses
of Federal Scientific Collections,'' presents a framework for
estimating and documenting the long-term benefits, both monetary and
non-monetary, generated by Federal institutional collections.
The NASEM, BCoN, and IWGSC reports, articulate a common vision of
the future of biological collections and define a need to broaden and
deepen the collections and associated data to realize the potential for
biodiversity collections to inform 21st century science. Because the
NSF is the only agency that supports research in all fields of science,
it is ideally suited lead a national effort to build the Extended
Specimen Network, which will require the engagement of computer and
information scientists, geoscientists, life and environmental
scientists, and anthropologists.
Collections are a critical resource for advancing the knowledge
needed to address current global challenges such as climate change,
biodiversity loss, and pandemics. The COVID-19 crisis has illustrated
how inextricably linked humans are to the natural world. Biological
collections, their extended data, and the experts that build and study
them are globally important for understanding where viruses such as
SARS-CoV-2 exist in nature or when they cross from their current hosts
to humans.
The United Nation's (UN) Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform
on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) has warned that about a
million species of plants and animals worldwide face extinction within
the next few decades. This would not only be an unprecedented loss of
global biodiversity but also a loss of valuable genetic diversity that
has implications for human health and well-being. Robust investments
must be made to support efforts to grow and digitize natural history
collections and conduct critical collections-based science that can
help prevent these losses.
The NSF plays a unique role in protecting and expanding access to
our Nation's scientific collections. It supports research that uses
existing collections as well as studies that gather new natural history
specimens. NSF's Directorates for Biological Sciences (BIO),
Geosciences (GEO), and Social and Behavioral and Economic sciences
support research and student training opportunities in natural history
collections. The NSF is also an important supporter of national
biological research infrastructure that houses natural history
collections, such as living stock collections and field stations.
The NSF funds evolving work to digitize high priority specimen
collections. The result of this effort is that irreplaceable biological
specimens and their associated data are now accessible through the
Internet to researchers, educators, and the public. More than 130
million specimens are now online, with millions more awaiting
digitization. This project involves biologists, computer scientists,
and engineers in multi-disciplinary teams who develop innovative
imaging, robotics, and data storage and retrieval methods. Resulting
new tools and approaches expedite the digitization process and
contribute to the development of new products and services of value to
other industries. Museum specimens and associated data also represent
an extraordinary resource for teaching core concepts in science.
An example is the multi-institutional openVertebrate (oVert)
project, which creates high-resolution 3D anatomical data for
scientific specimens of amphibians, reptiles, fishes, mammals, and
birds held in U.S. museums. Through its NSF-supported partner
MorphoSource, an open-access online repository, these data have been
downloaded more than 100,000 times and viewed over 1 million times by
faculty, veterinarians, exhibit designers, K12 teachers, and artists
resulting in more than 200 scientific publications. In addition, more
than 2,000 undergraduate students have learned from these data and
visualizations while studying zoology, veterinary science, art, and
design.
In addition to supporting research, NSF's science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education programs enhance the
ability of museums, botanic gardens, zoos, and other research
institutions to provide science learning opportunities for students.
NSF's Advancing Informal STEM Learning program furthers our
understanding of informal science education outside of traditional
classrooms. The program makes important contributions to efforts to
make STEM more inclusive of historically underrepresented groups.
conclusion
Investments in NSF have always been in the National interest and
their value continues to grow. Scientific collections contribute to
improved public well-being and national economic security. It is not
possible to replace this important documentation of our Nation's
heritage. Specimens collected decades or centuries ago are increasingly
used to develop and validate models that explain how species, including
viruses, parasites, and pathogens have dispersed around the world, as
well as how and when they might infect humans now and in the future.
NSF is the primary funding source that provides support to institutions
that preserve at-risk scientific collections. These small grants help
ensure these collections are not destroyed and their data lost.
Please support funding of at least $11 billion for NSF in FY 2023.
Investments in NSF programs that support natural science collections
research and education are essential if we are to maintain our global
leadership in innovation and biodiversity research.
In addition to appropriations, Congress is currently considering
multiple proposals to significantly expand NSF's mission and budget.
The proposed investments in technological research will enable the
biodiversity collections community to build the cyberinfrastructure and
databases necessary to mobilize biodiversity data in ways that bolster
21st century science and drive innovation. We applaud these efforts to
invest in our Nation's scientific and technological enterprise and urge
that robust investments also be made in basic and foundational
research.
Furthermore, we also request that Congress provide additional
economic relief--such as the provisions outlined in the RISE Act
(HR.869, S.289) that are now part of the U.S. Innovation and
Competition Act (S. 1260)--to the U.S. research community, including
natural history museums, botanical gardens, and other science centers,
that have suffered significant budget disruptions resulting from
reduced public attendance or closures associated with responding to the
COVID-19 pandemic.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this request and for
your prior support of the National Science Foundation.
[This statement was submitted by Gil Nelson, PhD, President]
______
Prepared Statement of The Nature Conservancy
Chair Cartwright, Ranking Member Aderholt and members of the
subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to comment on the fiscal
year 2023 (FY2) appropriations for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA). The Nature Conservancy (TNC) is a nonprofit
working around the world to conserve the lands and waters on which all
life depends. TNC appreciates Congress's work last year to pass the
bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). These
investments complement but do not supplant the need for ongoing program
funding through the appropriations process. The subcommittee
acknowledged that need when it included moderate by necessary program
increases for NOAA in the FY22 omnibus spending bill. We again ask you
to provide a robust appropriations package that will serve as the
foundation for implementing the IIJA and ensuring long-term success for
critical programs under the subcommittee's jurisdiction.
Investment in ocean, coastal and Great Lakes restoration and
management can be part of the country's economic recovery. Each year,
the ocean and coastal economies contribute $304 billion to the Nation's
GDP and 3.3 million jobs. NOAA's funding keeps that economic engine
running. It helps NOAA catalyze local and regional action and reduces
risk and saves money based on the tangible economic and societal
benefits that natural resources provide. The demand for NOAA's products
and technical and financial assistance exceeds available funding. The
NOAA budget levels detailed below represent a prudent investment in the
United States' future.
national ocean service
Title IX Fund--National Coastal Resilience Fund Grants.--TNC
supports no less than the FY22 enacted funding of $34 million, and
requests at least $5 million be set aside for planning, technical
assistance, and assessment activities. In an otherwise strong budget,
the administration has proposed to terminate this critical grant
program. The National Coastal Resilience Fund provides the resources
and tools to build coastal resilience to avoid costly Federal disaster
assistance and sustain healthy fisheries, maintain robust tourism
opportunities, provide for increased shipping demands and support other
coastal industries. Throughout its budget request, NOAA emphasizes the
need to make its climate products and services more available to the
communities that need them. It is profoundly inconsistent with that
need to terminate the very grants that enable communities to reduce
their climate risks. While IIJA did provide temporary supplemental
funding for these grants, the reality is demand for this funding far
exceeds even this increased amount at a time when the country is facing
an increase in billion-dollar climate-related disasters. More funding
for planning and technical assistance will help more communities access
future grants and leverage other funding to implement the resulting
risk reduction projects. This is particularly important in under-
resourced communities that do not have the capacity to begin this work
on their own and may be particularly vulnerable to disasters. TNC
appreciates Congress's support for this transformational program and
urges the subcommittee to continue to fund it.
Coastal Zone Management and Services.--TNC supports funding of no
less than the requested level of $49.48 million. This level of funding
will provide for continued capacity to provide coastal resilience
technical assistance to communities across the country, including
additional emphasis on under-resourced and underserved communities.
Continued funding of at least $3 million for the Digital Coast
Partnership will support new and improved products, services and
technical assistance to communities through this public-private
partnership. Funding would also support communities through the
development of the next generation of coastal managers via the Coastal
Management and Digital Coast Fellows programs. Providing competitive
salaries and expanded recruitment efforts will enhance the ability to
reach underrepresented communities. This increase will support the
designation process for three new National Estuarine Research Reserves
in Louisiana and Wisconsin to provide better representation and
connectivity of habitats across the system.
Coastal Management Grants.--TNC supports funding of no less than
the FY22 enacted level of $79 million for coastal zone management
grants. TNC collaborates with State and territorial coastal programs
around the country to meet multiple goals for coastal communities,
including economic development, enhancement of public access and
recreation, coastal resilience and conservation of coastal resources.
After years of essentially flat funding, the IIJA provided additional
but temporary funding to support State and territorial coastal zone
management programs expanding coastal resilience and restoration
projects. Continued funding for core grants is necessary to address the
full suite of activities in the approved coastal programs.
National Estuarine Research Reserve System (NERRS).--TNC supports
funding of no less than the FY22 enacted level of $29.7 million. NERRS
partners with States and territories to ensure long-term education,
stewardship and research on estuarine habitats. The reserves advance
knowledge and estuary stewardship and serve as a scientific foundation
for coastal management decisions. By using local management needs to
help shape research, NERRS aims to fill critical gaps. This funding
would maintain the capacity of NERRS to conduct research and monitoring
and incorporate this research into training and technical assistance to
local communities. With the designation of the new NERRS in Connecticut
earlier this year, it is important to maintain core funding so as not
to dilute efforts across the system.
Coral Reef Conservation Program.--TNC supports the requested level
of $34 million. The modest increase will help NOAA, States, territories
and community, research, and non-governmental partners address the
continued decline of coral reefs. This decline has had significant
social, economic and ecological impacts on people and communities in
the United States and around the world. TNC works with NOAA's Coral
Reef Conservation Program under a competitively awarded, multiyear
cooperative agreement to address the top threats to coral reef
ecosystems: changing ocean conditions, overfishing and land-based
sources of pollution. Together, TNC and NOAA develop place-based
strategies, measure the effectiveness of management efforts, and build
capacity among reef managers.
Sanctuaries and Marine Protected Areas.--TNC supports the requested
level of $86.771 million. National marine sanctuaries support economic
growth and hundreds of coastal businesses in sanctuary communities,
preserve vibrant underwater and maritime treasures for Americans to
enjoy and provide critical public access for more than 42 million
visitors each year. Through a transparent, inclusive approach, the
marine sanctuaries provide for the conservation of marine resources
while balancing multiple uses and diverse stakeholder needs. The
increased funding would enable expanded engagement with partners,
underrepresented communities, Tribes and Indigenous communities;
increase capacity for protection, conservation and stewardship; and
support the designation process for five community-nominated candidate
sites.
national marine fisheries service (nmfs)
Fisheries and Ecosystem Science Programs and Services.--TNC
supports the requested level of $180.246 million. Science is the
foundation of successful fisheries management. While many gains have
been achieved, there remain unfunded opportunities in each NMFS region,
especially related to electronic monitoring and reporting (EM/ER). NMFS
has also begun a fisheries information management modernization effort
that would enhance its capacity to take in, integrate and make
accessible data from a variety of sources to improve management.
Modernizing data management would support the implementation of related
science efforts. This includes the proposed $10 million for enhanced
science and assessments as part of the cross-program Climate,
Ecosystems, and Fisheries Initiative and the proposed $8.669 million to
enhance the ability to conduct offshore wind assessments to understand
and mitigate potential impacts in support of these vital renewable
energy developments. The enhanced research capacity would help fill
gaps in stock productivity, fisheries adaptations, improve future
projections and risk assessments and translate these efforts into
management strategies to support decision-makers.
Habitat Conservation and Restoration.--TNC supports no less than
the requested level of $61.353 million. NOAA funding for coastal
habitat restoration supports, on average, 15 jobs per $1 million
invested and up to 30 jobs per $1 million spent on labor-intensive
restoration projects. Project funds are awarded on a competitive basis
and typically leverage the resources and capacity of multiple partners.
While habitat restoration activities did receive a temporary
supplemental increase through the IIJA, base program funding is
necessary to support the timely implementation of those awards and the
other core functions of the program. This includes NOAA's consultations
on and implementation of Essential Fish Habitat. The Regional Fishery
Management Councils address fishing impacts on these areas, and NOAA
must have sufficient capacity to provide technical assistance to the
councils and to work with Federal agencies to avoid, minimize and
mitigate non-fishing impacts on these important fishery habitats. The
proposed funding would support large-scale habitat restoration to build
climate resilience as well as competitive grants for multiyear awards
to develop restoration planning, project design and permitting and
project implementation.
Fisheries Management Programs and Services.--TNC supports no less
than the requested level of $149.081 million. With a $214 billion
fisheries and seafood sector, U.S. fishing communities rely on
management services and information from NOAA to make the most informed
decisions on where, how and when to fish. NOAA Fisheries has made
important strides in addressing these challenges and strengthening
fisheries management. Support for these efforts is necessary to recover
fish stocks so they can provide food and jobs now and in the future.
Increased funding will enable NOAA to take the next steps to better
incorporate ecosystem and changing climate considerations into
management activities. The proposed $6.155 million in funding would
increase consultation capacity to assess the effects of planned
renewable offshore energy activities.
Observers and Training.--TNC supports no less than the FY22 enacted
level of $57 million, including $10.3 million to fully fund industry
costs for at-sea monitoring in the New England multispecies fishery.
This funding should cover both electronic monitoring and observers.
After several years of collaborative work with fishery participants,
scientists and other stakeholders, NOAA approved the New England
Fishery Management Council's proposal to increase monitoring on
groundfish vessels to 100 percent for a period of at least 4 years if,
and only if, funding is available to support it. Because of ongoing
support from Congress to develop electronic monitoring systems,
fishermen can now meet the at-sea monitoring requirement with these
systems or observers. Continued funding along with leveraged private
funding should provide sufficient resources to aid in the near-term
transition to increased monitoring and expand the use of electronic
monitoring.
Fisheries Data Collections, Surveys and Assessments.--TNC supports
no less than the requested level of $212.095 million. Limited or poor-
quality information on the status of fishery stocks undermines the
effectiveness of fisheries management and can erode community support
for conservation measures. Within this proposed increase, $11.5 million
would provide long-needed funding to expand surveys, sampling and
analysis capabilities to better track shifting species as part of the
cross-program Climate, Ecosystems and Fisheries Initiative. The funding
would increase the use of technology to conduct surveys, a capacity
that became increasingly important when the pandemic disrupted data
collection. Also within the proposed increase, $17.38 million would
establish a national program to mitigate the potential impacts of
renewable energy activities on NMFS scientific surveys.
Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund (PCSRF).--TNC supports the
request level of $65 million. PCSRF has funded hundreds of successful
on-the-ground salmon conservation efforts, but habitat project needs
exceed available funding. PCSRF has catalyzed thousands of partnerships
among federal, State, local and Tribal governments and conservation,
business and community organizations.
Protected Resources Science and Management.--TNC supports the
requested level of $239.965 million. Within this increase is $10
million for the competitive Species Recovery Grants to enable the
agency to strengthen and expand state, Tribal and territorial
partnerships to address the growing number of listed species and allow
for larger-scale, ecosystem-level recovery efforts. Additional listed
species and emerging offshore wind activities have increased the number
and complexity of NOAA's consultation and permitting requirements.
Funding is needed to aid NOAA's ability to complete these requirements
in a timely and predictable manner.
Thank you for this opportunity to share TNC's priorities. Please
contact me if you have questions or would like additional information.
[This statement was submitted by Stephanie Bailenson, Senior Policy
Advisor for the Ocean and Coasts]
______
Prepared Statement of New England Innocence Project and the National
Innocence Network
My name is Cynthia Mousseau and I serve as a Staff Attorney at the
New England Innocence Project (NEIP). On behalf of NEIP and as a member
of the Innocence Network, a coalition of approximately 60 local
innocence organizations working to exonerate the innocent and prevent
wrongful convictions nationwide, thank you for the subcommittee's
critical funding increases and strong support for innocence and
forensic science programs in FY22. Thank you also for allowing me to
submit written testimony for the record as you consider appropriations
requests for FY23. I urge you to please increase funding for the
following programs at the Bureau of Justice Assistance at the
Department of Justice and at the National Institute of Standards and
Technology at the Department of Commerce, including:
--$20 million for the Wrongful Conviction Review Program at the
Department of Justice's (DOJ) Bureau of Justice Assistance
(BJA) (the Wrongful Conviction Review Program is part of the
Capital Litigation Improvement Program);
--$20 million for the Kirk Bloodsworth Post-Conviction DNA Testing
Program at DOJ/BJA
--$25 million for the Department of Commerce's National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST) to support and conduct
foundational forensic science research, including $2 million
for technical merit evaluations.
These innocence and forensic science programs endeavor to increase
the fairness and accuracy of the criminal legal system; address
arbitrary racial disparities and inequities; provide the strongest
possible forensic science tools to legal system stakeholders; and
generate greater public safety for our Nation.
Data from the National Registry of Exonerations show that the
number of exonerations has significantly increased since Federal
innocence programs--the Bloodsworth Post-Conviction DNA Testing and
Wrongful Convictions Review programs--began receiving funding in 2008
and 2009, respectively. Between 2009 and 2016, the total number of
exonerations increased by 84%. This dramatic increase is in part a
result of the decision to invest in these programs.
2020 set the record for the highest number of years individuals
lost to being wrongfully convicted--an average of 13.4 years per
exoneree. More than 27,000 life years have been lost to wrongful
incarceration. The National Registry of Exonerations currently lists
more than 3,100 exonerations since 1989. Half of the people exonerated
are Black, and innocent Black people spend approximately 45% longer
wrongfully imprisoned than innocent white people. This racial disparity
holds true across different types of convictions. Investing in
innocence and forensic science progams helps to increase the accuracy,
equity, and integrity of the criminal legal system.
The New England Innocence Project (NEIP), headquarted in
Massachussetts, is the only innocence organization serving Vermont,
Maine, Rhode Island, and New Hampshire. Federal grant funds help expand
its reach into States that have insufficient resources to meet their
needs. In fact, as a direct result of a grant from FY21, NEIP will be
litigating its first case in New Hampshire, a State that has not
enjoyed robust post-conviction litigation to date. With the support of
Federal funds, NEIP has provided direct representation and/or support
that has resulted in 16 exonerations over the past 17 years. 5 recently
released exonerees collectively spent 160 years in prison.
Additionally, NEIP has: (1) been able to provide more significant
support to exonerees upon their release from prison through our
Exoneree Network, which is lead and run by exonerees; (2) conducted
numerous trainings throughout New England for prosecutors, defense
attorneys, law enforcement, judges, and the public to raise awareness
and prevent causes of wrongful conviction; and (3) expanded our staff
to include work on pre-trial issues that will prevent wrongful
convictions from occurring.
Cases without DNA evidence are difficult and often take many years
to complete. It is a long, arduous, and resource intensive process to
prove an individual's innocence after he/she has been wrongfully
convicted. An average case at NEIP requires years of work and thousands
of dollars to adequately investigate and litigate. During this long
time period, the innocent person is languishing behind bars.
Freeing innocent individuals and preventing wrongful convictions
through reform also greatly benefits public safety. Every time DNA
identifies a wrongful conviction, it enables the possible
identification of the person who actually committed the crime. Such
true perpetrators have been identified in more than half of the 375 DNA
exoneration cases. Unfortunately, many of these individuals went on to
commit additional crimes while an innocent person was convicted and
incarcerated in their place.
The value of Federal innocence programs and forensic science
research is not only for exonerated people, but for all stakeholders in
the criminal justice system. It is important to fund these important
Federal programs because reforms and procedures that help to identify,
remediate, and prevent wrongful convictions also enhance the accuracy
of criminal investigations, strengthen criminal prosecutions, and
result in a fairer and more accountable system of justice that provides
true justice to victims of crime.
wrongful conviction review program
We know that wrongful convictions occur in cases where DNA evidence
may be insufficient or unavailable to prove innocence. The National
Registry of Exonerations currently lists more than 3,100 exonerations
since 1989, the vast majority of which did not have the presence or
benefit of testable DNA. The Wrongful Conviction Review Program
provides critical support to ensure that experts are available to
navigate the complex landscape of post-conviction litigation, as well
as oversee the thousands of volunteer hours local innocence
organizations leverage to help investigate these complex non-DNA cases
and support the significant legal work they require. The Wrongful
Conviction Review Program has contributed to approximately 50
exonerations over the past few years with more in the pipeline.
For example, in 2019, Darrell Jones, who was wrongfully convicted
of murder and served 32 years, was freed as a result of the work of the
Committee for Public Counsel Services Innocence Program. The Wrongful
Conviction Review Program provided funding that enabled his team to
hire an investigator who identified exculpatory witnesses as well as
two forensic experts. In 2020, Arturo Jimenez, who was wrongfully
convicted of murder and served 25 years, was freed because the Wrongful
Conviction Review program funded an investigator who uncovered key
evidence that helped the Northern California Innocence Project secure
his exoneration.
The Wrongful Conviction Review Program provides funding to local
innocence organizations, such as NEIP, so that they may provide this
type of expert, high quality, and efficient representation for innocent
individuals. The program's goals also are to help alleviate burdens
placed on the criminal legal system through costly and prolonged post-
conviction litigation and to identify, when possible, the person who
actually committed the crime.
In recent years, only a few local innocence organizations received
Wrongful Conviction Review funding during each grant cycle. Even with
the FY22 funding increase, there is still a need to expand this program
further to resolve the long waiting lists of wrongfully convicted
individuals--lists that are often hundreds of individuals long for just
an individual innocence organization. These cases require evaluation,
investigation, and often representation, which helps to improve the
fairness and reliability of the criminal legal system. We urge you to
provide $20 million for the Wrongful Conviction Review Program in FY23.
(Please note that the Wrongful Conviction Review grant program is a
part of the Capital Litigation Improvement Program.)
I also urge you to include in the FY23 report for the Commerce,
Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill the final
FY22 report language for the Wrongful Conviction Review program. It
described the need for legal representation and investigation services
for individuals with post-conviction claims of innocence. It also
directed at least 50 percent of funds appropriated to the Capital
Litigation Improvement and Wrongful Conviction Review grant programs
support Wrongful Conviction Review grantees providing high quality and
efficient post-conviction representation for defendants in post-
conviction claims of innocence. It also clarified that Wrongful
Conviction Review grantees shall be nonprofit organizations,
institutions of higher education, and/or State or local public defender
offices that have in-house post-conviction representation programs that
show demonstrable experience and competence in litigating
postconviction claims of innocence. Finally, the report language
directed that grant funds shall support grantee provision of post-
conviction legal representation of innocence claims; case review,
evaluation, and management; experts; potentially exonerative forensic
testing; and investigation services related to supporting these post-
conviction innocence claims.
the bloodsworth post-conviction dna testing program
The Bloodsworth Program supports States and localities that want to
pursue post-conviction DNA testing in appropriate cases, and grantees
range from State and local prosecutor offices to law enforcement
agencies and crime labs. These grantees can collaborate with local
innocence organizations when appropriate. For example, a grant to
Arizona allowed the State's Attorney General's Office to partner with
the Arizona Justice Project to create the Post-Conviction DNA Testing
Project. This effort canvassed incarcerated individuals in Arizona,
reviewed cases, located evidence, and filed joint requests with the
court to have evidence released for DNA testing. In addition to
identifying the innocent, Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard noted
that the ``grant enable[d] [his] office to support local prosecutors
and ensure that those who have committed violent crimes are identified
and behind bars.''
The Bloodsworth program is a powerful investment for States seeking
to free innocent individuals and identify the individuals who actually
committed the crimes. The program has resulted in the exonerations of
at least 54 wrongfully convicted persons in 14 States. The person who
actually committed the crime was identified in 13 of those cases. In
2020, an additional 5 people were exonerated through the program. The
success of this program both in generating individual exonerations
while supporting broader system review when problems arise has made it
popular--DOJ has reported previously that it has received twice as many
qualified applicants as it has funding to grant.
For example, Virginian Thomas Haynesworth, who was wrongfully
incarcerated for 27 years, was freed thanks to Bloodsworth-funded DNA
testing that also revealed the person who actually committed the crime.
The culpable person in that case went on to terrorize the community by
attacking 12 women, with most of the attacks and rapes occurring while
Mr. Haynesworth was wrongfully incarcerated. Given the importance of
this program to both innocent individuals and public safety, I urge you
to provide the $20 million to continue and expand the work of the
Bloodsworth Post-Conviction DNA Testing Program in FY23.
forensic science improvement
To continue the critical work to improve forensic science, and help
prevent wrongful convictions, I urge you to provide $25 million for
NIST to support foundational forensic science research, including $2
million to conduct technical merit evaluations.
As the Federal entity that is both perfectly positioned and
institutionally constituted to conduct foundational forensic science
research, NIST's work will improve the validity and reliability of
forensic evidence, a need cited by the National Academy of Sciences
2009 report, Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A
Path Forward. NIST's reputation for innovation will result in
technological solutions to advance forensic science applications and
achieve a tremendous cost savings by reducing court costs posed by
litigating scientific evidence.
Additionally, some forensic science methods have not yet received
an evaluation of their technical merit and NIST needs additional
support to conduct these vital reviews. The forensic science activities
and research at NIST will help to improve forensic disciplines and
propel forensic science and the criminal legal system toward greater
accuracy and reliability, and as a result, help prevent wrongful
convictions and improve system equity.
conclusion
Thank you for your leadership in ensuring the accuracy, equity, and
integrity of our Nation's criminal justice system. I urge you to
support all of the aforementioned programs, including the Wrongful
Conviction Review and Bloodsworth grant programs, as well as NIST
forensic science research. If you have questions or need additional
information, please contact Jenny Collier, Federal Policy Advisor to
the Innocence Project, at [email protected].
[This statement was submitted by Cynthia Mousseau, JD]
______
Prepared Statement of New Hampshire Superior Court
Chairwoman Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and distinguished members
of the subcommittee, I am honored to have the opportunity to submit my
testimony on behalf of our country's nearly 4,000 treatment court
programs and the 150,000 people they will connect to lifesaving
addiction and mental health treatment this year alone. Given the
ongoing substance use crisis, I am requesting that Congress provide
funding of $95 million for the Drug Court Discretionary Grant Program
and $29 million for the Veterans Treatment Court Grant Program at the
Department of Justice for fiscal year 2023.
I serve as Chief Justice of the New Hampshire Superior Court. In
nearly two decades on the bench, I have never seen a program more
effective than treatment courts, including drug courts and veterans
treatment courts, at promoting public health while upholding the
justice system's promise to protect public safety. Like many of my
fellow judges, I felt frustrated by the limited options available in
the traditional court model to change the behavior of offenders I was
seeing in the court room repeatedly. When I began presiding over drug
court in Rockingham County in 2006, I saw a new, more effective
approach. Treatment court programs address the unique underlying
conditions of each participant. Strong empirical evidence shows that
treatment courts not only reduce crime, but also save lives and reunite
families by connecting participants to evidence-based treatment
services and recovery support. In my home state of New Hampshire,
treatment court graduates have a 90 percent employment rate, and 78
percent of graduates do not reoffend within 2 years. New Hampshire
treatment courts cost $9 per day compared to $84 per day it costs to
incarcerate someone.
Just one of many success stories from New Hampshire is Nick, who
was just 13 when his relationship with alcohol started. From there, he
became more and more dependent on different substances. For a long
time, he was able to hold down a job while trying to raise two children
with his partner, who also struggled with addiction. But Nick's
substance use caught up to him in 2012, when he was sent to prison for
the first time. Nick said his time in prison hardened him, and instead
of turning his life around, he just ``learned new tricks'' to keep up
his old habits. After his first 2 years in prison, he turned to
methamphetamine and heroin. He lost custody of his children and
experienced homelessness and more stints in jail. Nick tried treatment
but could not stay sober for long. When he came to treatment court, he
was feeling hopeless and suicidal. The treatment court program provided
both the accountability and the treatment he needed to change. In
treatment court, Nick, like other participants, was assessed by a
multidisciplinary team and given an individualized treatment plan
designed by substance use treatment professionals using evidence-based
methods. Instead of being put behind bars, they set a goal of and path
to long-term recovery and supervised him every step of the way. The
treatment court team gave Nick a new understanding of his substance use
disorder and a real desire for change. Drug court also gave him
something else he'd been missing: hope. I'm happy to say that Nick has
been in active recovery for years. He got his driver's license back,
started his own carpentry business, and got engaged. Most importantly,
he was reunited with his two children, of whom he now has full custody.
He is proud to be a father and says he is now ``someone who shows up,
and who is responsible, peaceful, and kind.''
Nick isn't alone in his success. Treatment courts have connected
1.5 million people struggling with substance use and mental health
disorders with evidence-based treatment options, including medication
for addiction treatment when appropriate, tailored to their specific
needs. Together, the court team offers the tools to overcome substance
use disorder and past trauma to create true recovery and healthy
relationships.
I have seen hundreds of individuals in our justice system overcome
their substance use or mental health disorders and became productive
citizens in their communities. Most, like Nick, go on to start careers
and raise families, and many now help others in the horrible position
they were once in themselves. I can say for certain that the treatment
court model deserves credit for the health and restored lives of these
individuals. I can also say that New Hampshire, like many other States,
is not immune to the deadly opioid epidemic. This crisis continues to
bring to the fore the critical need to ensure all people, even those
whose substance use leads to trouble with the law, have access to
treatment, including medication for addiction treatment when
appropriate. While there is no single solution to the opioid crisis,
for individuals before the courts with a severe substance use or mental
health disorder, treatment courts are a key solution to the crisis.
There is overwhelming empirical evidence that shows the
effectiveness of treatment court programs. The Government
Accountability Office finds the drug court model reduces crime by up to
58 percent. Further, the Department of Justice's Multi-Site Adult Drug
Court Evaluation confirmed drug treatment courts significantly reduce
both drug use and crime, while saving taxpayer money-an average of
$6,000 saved for every individual served. Other benefits include
improved employment, financial stability, housing, and family
reunification. Veterans treatment courts expand on the drug court model
to include veteran justice outreach specialists from the Department of
Veterans Affairs, volunteer veteran mentors from the community, and
other local, State, and Federal resources, and have proven equally
effective. It is critical that we have interventions like veterans
treatment court in place to ensure that when our heroes return home, if
they do struggle, they have the treatment, structure, and support to
transform their lives.
Continued support for the Drug Court Discretionary Grant Program at
the Department of Justice ensures the nearly 4,000 treatment courts in
the United States today provide critical services to those in need,
while keeping communities safe. But we know there are many individuals
who still need this opportunity. I strongly urge this subcommittee to
recommend funding of $95 million to the Drug Court Discretionary Grant
Program and $29 million to the Veterans Treatment Court Grant Program
in fiscal year 2023 so treatment courts in New Hampshire and across the
country can continue to save lives, reunite families, and keep our
communities healthy and safe.
[This statement was submitted by the Honorable Tina Nadeau, Chief
Justice]
______
Prepared Statement of Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission (NWIFC)
Chair Jeanne Shaheen, Ranking Member Kerry Moran and Honorable
Members of the subcommittee, my name is Ed Johnstone, and I am the
Chair of the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission (NWIFC). The NWIFC
is composed of the 20 Tribes that are party to United States v.
Washington, which upheld the Tribes' treaty-reserved right to harvest
and manage various natural resources on and off-reservation, including
salmon and shellfish. On behalf of the NWIFC, I'm providing testimony
for the record on the natural resource and fishery management program
funding requests for the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA)/National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Fiscal Year 2023 (FY23)
appropriations. These programs support the management of salmon
fisheries, which contribute to a robust natural resource-based economy
and the continued exercise of Tribal treaty rights to fish. Given the
onslaught of pressures we face, it is now more important than ever for
the Federal trustee to support management, supplementation, and
restoration of fisheries--vital to the Tribes physical, cultural and
economic wellbeing, as well as an important link in our Nation's food
supply chain.
summary of fy23 appropriations requests
--$70.0 million plus for NOAA Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund
--$7.0 million for NOAA Hatchery and Genetic Management Plans
--$43.5 million for NOAA Pacific Salmon Treaty
--$26.5 million for NOAA Mitchell Act Hatchery Programs
The member Tribes of the NWIFC ceded much of the land that is now
western Washington in exchange for reserving the continued right to
harvest and manage various natural resources including salmon and
shellfish. Salmon are the foundation of Tribal cultures, traditions and
economies in western Washington. To ensure that Tribal treaty rights
and lifeways are protected, it is essential that the Federal Government
provide support to all aspects of salmon management including, harvest
planning and implementation (e.g. Pacific Salmon Treaty), hatchery
production, (e.g. Mitchell Act Hatchery Programs and Hatchery and
Genetic Management Plans) and habitat protection and restoration (e.g.
Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund).
justification of requests
Provide, at a minimum, $70.0 million for NOAA Pacific Coastal Salmon
Recovery Fund (PCSRF) and preferably restore funding to FY02
levels ($110.0 million)
We respectfully request, at a minimum, $70.0 million for PCSRF,
which is an increase of $5.0 million over the FY22 enacted level and
President's Budget Request of $65.0 million. It is worth noting that
this request is a significant departure from the PCSRF peak level of
$110.0 million in FY02 or subsequent years in which appropriations were
maintained upwards of $80.0 million through FY11. We ultimately would
like to see PCSRF funding fully restored to FY02 levels. This level of
funding would help carry out the original congressional intent of these
funds to support the Federal Government's obligations to salmon
recovery and the treaty fishing rights of the Tribes. However, we
understand that budget restriction may require Congress to take a more
incremental approach toward this end goal.
The PCSRF is a multi-State, multi-Tribe program established by
Congress in FY00 with a primary goal to help recover dwindling salmon
populations throughout the Pacific coast region. Through PCSRF, Tribes
work collaboratively to help protect and restore salmon habitat to
increase natural salmon productivity. To accomplish this, Tribes
implement scientifically based salmon recovery plans developed for each
watershed in concert with federal, State, and local partners. Tribes
also participate in sustainable harvest management activities such as
monitoring fish abundance, which is then used to forecast adult returns
and subsequently develop annual harvest rates that achieve conservation
objectives and provide for Tribal and non-Tribal harvest opportunities.
Since its inception, PCSRF has been the primary salmon recovery
response. This has resulted in the restoration and protection of over
1.1 million acres of spawning and rearing habitat and re-established
salmon access to more than 11,489 miles (as of FY20) of previously
inaccessible streams in our region.
Provide $7.0 million for NOAA Hatchery and Genetic Management Plans
(within NOAA--Pacific Salmon)
We respectfully request $7.0 million to support review, approval
and implementation of Hatchery and Genetic Management Plans (HGMPs). We
also respectfully request continued report language to ensure funding
passed through to the Tribes can be used to implement approved HGMPs.
We recommend that the overarching Pacific Salmon account be funded at
$78.0 million to accommodate this request and ensure maintenance of
existing programs and agency requests. This recommendation is $11.0
million above FY22 enacted level of $67.0 million and $4.858 million
above the President's Budget Request of $73.142 million.
Review and approval of HGMPs is necessary to provide hatcheries
with Endangered Species Act (ESA) coverage and implementation of the
plans is necessary to accomplish their conservation goals. NMFS uses
the information provided by HGMPs to evaluate the impacts of State and
tribally operated hatcheries on salmon and steelhead listed under the
ESA and recommends improvements to operations to meet conservation
objectives. With the lack of improvement in salmon stocks, hatchery
operations have become even more important to achieving recovery goals
and maintenance of salmon fisheries. However, the lack of improvement
in natural origin salmon has also resulted in scrutinizing hatcheries
for their potential genetic impacts on natural spawning populations.
This has resulted in increasingly specific performance standards and
management expectations included in Tribes' HGMPs.
Implementing the activities described in the HGMPs includes
biological monitoring and evaluation of hatchery programs. Monitoring
and evaluation assess whether the goals of the program are being met
and ensures the compatibility of the program with regional and co-
management salmon recovery plans. These monitoring and evaluation
programs generally involve various methodologies to monitor the
juvenile fish released by the hatchery, sample the returning adult
fish, and evaluate the interactions of hatchery and wild fish.
Tribes need help addressing the escalating costs of hatchery
management associated with the monitoring and adaptive management
practices called for by HGMPs. For example, requirements to closely
monitor natural and hatchery produced salmon interactions on the
spawning ground are costly and time-intensive. Therefore, it is
essential that HGMP funding is increased to address these rising costs
and that flexibility is provided to ensure that funding can be used by
the Tribes to implement the plans' recommendations, which both the
Federal Government and Tribes have extensively invested in.
Provide $43.5 million to implement the National commitments in the
Pacific Salmon Treaty agreements (within NOAA--Salmon
Management Activities)
We support the Pacific Salmon Commission (PSC) U.S. Section's FY23
request of $43.5 million for the Pacific Salmon Treaty line within
Salmon Management Activities, an increase of $4.0 million over the FY22
enacted level of $39.5 million. Included in this request is $3.06
million for annual operational costs for hatchery conservation
programs, $2.33 million for habitat restoration for Puget Sound
critical stocks, $4,110,000 for Southeast Alaska Chinook Salmon Fishery
mitigation, and $4,470,000 to increase prey availability for Southern
Resident Killer Whales.
The FY23 request would support implementation of the National
commitments in the renegotiated Pacific Salmon Treaty (PST) Annex
Chapters. The recommended funding is also necessary to meet the
requirements of the biological opinion for listed species and supports
effective, science-based implementation of negotiated salmon fishing
arrangements and abundance-based management approaches for Chinook,
southern Coho, and Northern Boundary and Transboundary River salmon
fisheries.
Adult salmon returning to most western Washington streams migrate
through U.S. and Canadian waters and are harvested by fishers from both
countries. For years, there were no restrictions on the interception of
returning salmon by fishers of neighboring countries. Eventually, the
U.S. and Canada agreed to cooperate on the management of salmon by
developing and ratifying the PST in 1985. The PSC was created to
implement the PST and is responsible for developing management
recommendations and assessing compliance with the treaty. Negotiations
to revise the provisions of the Annex Chapters were successfully
completed in 2018 and 2019. These chapters contain the specifics for
implementing the treaty for each species in each geographic area. These
revised chapters represent the combined efforts of the participants to
ensure healthy salmon populations for the next 10 years, and as such
include commitments from the U.S. to improve current management
strategies.
Provide $26.5 million for NOAA Mitchell Act Hatchery Programs (within
NOAA--Salmon Management Activities)
We respectfully request $26.5 million for the Mitchell Act Hatchery
Programs, an increase of $3.5 million over the FY22 enacted level of
$22.0 million. The request for this additional increase in Mitchell Act
funds is needed to ensure that mitigation hatcheries operate at full
production level to meet Federal obligations. This program is funded
through the Salmon Management Activities subactivity.
Mitchell Act hatchery production is intended to mitigate for fish
and habitat loss caused by the Federal hydropower dam system on the
Columbia River. Funding for these programs supports the operation and
maintenance of hatcheries that release around 42 million juvenile
salmon and steelhead in Oregon and Washington. This represents about 30
percent of the total hatchery salmon and steelhead released in the
Columbia River Basin. Adequate funding for Mitchell Act hatcheries is
of particular importance to us because it supports salmon production
for Tribal treaty harvest along the Washington coast. Additionally,
adequate funding to ensure full production from the Mitchell Act
hatcheries dampens the impact of Canadian and Alaskan ocean fisheries
on Washington and Tribal fisheries under the terms of the PST.
conclusion
The treaties between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes, as
well as the treaty-reserved rights to harvest, manage and consume fish
and shellfish, are the ``supreme law of the land'' under the U.S.
Constitution (Article VI). It is, therefore, critically important for
Congress and the Federal Government to provide continued support in
upholding the treaty obligations and carrying out its trust
responsibilities. An important component of these obligations is to
fully fund the sustainable salmon fisheries management programs that
provide for improved harvest planning, hatchery production and habitat
management. We respectfully urge you to continue to support our efforts
to protect and restore our treaty-reserved rights and natural resources
that in turn will provide for thriving ecosystems and economies for
both Indian and non-Indian communities alike. Thank you.
[This statement was submitted by Ed Johnstone, Chairman]
______
Prepared Statement of OpenSecrets
Dear Chairman Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and distinguished members
of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Commerce, Justice and
Science, and Related Agencies:
Thank you for the opportunity to submit written testimony before
the Committee to discuss fiscal year 2023 budget priorities regarding
the modernization of the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), a
statute intended to inform the American public of foreign influence and
lobbying operations attempting to impact U.S. policy or public opinion.
This written testimony is respectfully offered on behalf of
OpenSecrets to the Committee for use during its consideration of
Department of Justice funding and for inclusion in the official
committee record.
OpenSecrets is a nonpartisan nonprofit research organization
tracking money in U.S. politics and its effect on elections and public
policy. Our vision is for Americans across the ideological spectrum to
be empowered by access to clear and unbiased information about money's
role in the U.S. political system and to use that knowledge to
strengthen our democracy.
Activities of foreign agents and lobbyists divulged under FARA are
a subject of sustained public interest. In this testimony, we
respectfully request that the Committee include report language
directing a review of the U.S. Department of Justice's implementation
of FARA and a comprehensive audit of the use of the Lobbying Disclosure
Act (LDA) exemption that will both be publicly accessible.
A publicly-accessible report to Congress is necessary to evaluate
the feasibility and steps needed to require all filings by foreign
agents to be made in an electronic, machine-processable electronic
format yielding structured data. This would allow users to search and
sort or download FARA data, ensuring the same level of accountability
from lobbyists representing foreign interests as domestic ones.
The Justice Department Inspector General's 2016 ``Audit of the
National Security Division's Enforcement and Administration of the
Foreign Agents Registration Act'' \1\ included 14 recommendations to
improve NSD's enforcement and administration of FARA. With regard to e-
filing, the inspector general report recommended ``that e-file develop
with timeliness as a consideration.''
Despite recommendations from the Department's Inspector General and
outside experts, the Justice Department has been slow to implement
changes to improve the public's access to information about foreign
influence and lobbying intended to impact U.S. policy or public
opinion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2016/a1624.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In September 2019, the Department of Justice launched new features
enabling registrants to submit data through a web-form yielding some
standardized data. While we believe this is a step in the right
direction, only initial registrations are required to be submitted this
way, so information reported in some of the most important records such
as semi-annual supplemental statements may remain trapped in less
accessible formats.
Continuing implementation of a modernized FARA reporting system
that collects detailed structured data would provide the tools
necessary for better oversight and ensure information about foreign
influence is provided in an accurate, complete, and timely manner.
The current e-filing system requires filers to submit data in
either image or PDF formats. Yet, much of the supplemental,
registration, and amendment information is originally produced in
electronic formats, such as CSV files. Image and PDF formatted files
destroy critical aspects of the included data, and cannot be marked for
sensitive information or be used for automated calculations. It is
virtually impossible to transform a PDF into a structured spreadsheet
that supports analysis and reuse of the information. Even the basic
disclosure of how much money foreign actors spend to influence U.S.
policy and public opinion can be obscured, leaving the American public
in the dark about how our laws are shaped and influenced.
The DOJ FARA unit should continue developing systems for users to
submit information in structured data formats. A sample template could
allow registrants to standardize their responses in formats that could
easily be processed by computers. This would streamline the processing
of data by the FARA Unit, enabling faster review and more uniform
reporting.
Structured data yielded from e-filing could optimize this process,
improving the quality, utility, and clarity of information collected by
the FARA Unit. Structured data would also enable Federal officials to
more efficiently identify potential issues with filings as they come in
or even set automated detection systems.
Examples of problems that would be ameliorated by this change
include the accidental release of sensitive personal information such
as bank account numbers and the prevalence of inaccurate reports to
Congress caused by miscalculations or incomputable data.
Registrants working on behalf of foreign principals are only
required to file a supplemental statement every 6 months and
registrants often wait even longer so reported dates of receipt can
sometimes occur in a different year than the work happened.
Structured data on the payment amounts registrants report in
question 14(a) of the supplemental statement shows when the payments
actually took place rather than just the date at the end of the
reporting period covered by the supplemental statement. This would
ensure totals reflect amendments or retroactively filed supplemental
statements that may be filed after the Report to Congress covering a
period is compiled would allow for a more complete and accurate picture
of activities reported under FARA. Sometimes amendments result in a
lower amount of spending being reported than was in the initial
supplemental statement and other times additional previously unreported
spending is reported so it could cause differences in both directions.
Cataloging information about the purpose of receipts or
disbursements in the structured data would streamline extrication of
activities required to be reported under FARA from any non-FARA
registerable activities that may also be included in a filing.
While it is a simpler system, by way of comparison, new
registrations under the LDA must be filed to Congress electronically,
are published as structured data, and made available to the public.
More parity between disclosure requirements under the LDA and FARA is
necessary to ensure at least the same level of transparency from
lobbyists representing foreign interests as domestic.
We recognize the importance of addressing concerns about
information security as part of modernization. A computer virus can
hide inside most types of file formats.
When accessing those files, it is important to have an up-to-date
virus scanner. However, there are file formats, known as ``plain-
text,'' that are generally recognized as safe. For spreadsheets, this
includes files in CSV format. For documents, this includes documents in
TXT format. In addition, generating spreadsheets as CSV files, and
documents as TXT files, is widely supported across many platforms,
including Microsoft Office and Google Docs, so it is easy for
submitters to generate the files in the required format. In addition,
problems of incomplete and inaccurate data can be addressed through use
of better formats in which the data is filed, including the use of
forms that ensure that users file valid information.
Increased use of unique or common identifiers to represent data,
and wherever possible draw the identifiers from unique IDs used by
other government entities or create crosswalks would allow for more
interoperability of data and for FARA Unit to validate the data upon
entry. It can also increase consistency and accuracy, while making the
process easier on the filer.
Using web-forms or submitting data in other structured formats
across the board would allow the government to provide this information
in an accessible form with little or no additional burden. FARA
reporting is already conducted through an e-filing system that requires
a web browser unless a registrant demonstrates limited access to the
internet. Modernizing FARA's e-filing system can ultimately help ease
the administrative burden associated with FARA registration.
FARA also has a number of exemptions that can be misunderstood or
exploited.
One commonly used exemption enables some foreign agents to claim an
exemption from FARA registration and disclosure rules if they register
as lobbyists under the LDA, a disclosure statute designed to regulate
the activities of domestic lobbyists. Any individuals lobbying on
behalf of a foreign commercial interest, rather than a foreign
government or political party, may evade FARA disclosure requirements
by merely registering under the LDA.
Domestic lobbying records are already required to be filed to
Congress electronically and are immediately converted to structured
data that are available to the public over the Internet. More parity
between disclosure requirements under the LDA and FARA is necessary to
ensure at least the same level of transparency from lobbyists
representing foreign interests as domestic ones.
We respectfully urge the Committee to direct the Comptroller
General of the United States, in consultation with the Inspector
General of the Department of Justice, to conduct a comprehensive audit
of the use of the LDA exemption examining (1) whether the LDA exemption
has contributed to a decline in the number of registrations under FARA;
(2) whether the LDA exemption has contributed to a lack of public
awareness of lobbying activities on behalf of foreign entities; (3) the
impact and feasibility of phasing out the LDA exemption; and (4) how to
develop policy recommendations for increasing compliance with Federal
lobbying registration and disclosure requirements.
We are confident that the report will provide valuable insight to
the American people and pave the way to increased transparency of the
activities disclosed by those foreign agents. We urge you to
appropriate the funding necessary to evaluate modernizing this
invaluable resource.
Our recommendations are based on our experiences using FARA,
including efforts to republish FARA data online in ways that support
greater access and meaningful analysis. OpenSecrets built the Foreign
Lobby Watch database containing foreign lobbying documents and data.
Our reviews of the DOJ's available foreign lobbying records found
significant problems with how the data is currently structured. We've
designed our databases to make up for some of the shortfalls in how
foreign lobbying information is currently made available to the public.
Structured data directly from the government could streamline this
process, improving the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected by the FARA Unit.
Thank you for your attention to our concerns on this critical
issue. We would welcome the opportunity to work with you further on
this issue and make any additional recommendations about this or other
important issues before the Committee.
______
Prepared Statement of the Pacific Salmon Commission
Mr. Chairman, and Honorable Members of the Committee, I am W. Ron
Allen, the Tribal Commissioner and Chair for the U.S. Section Budget
Committee of the Pacific Salmon Commission (PSC). I am also the Tribal
Chairman/CEO of the Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe located on the Olympic
Peninsula of Washington State. The U.S. Section prepares annual budgets
for the implementation of the Pacific Salmon Treaty. The implementation
of the Treaty is funded through the Departments of Commerce, Interior
and State.
Department of Commerce funding in support of implementing the
Pacific Salmon Treaty is part of the Salmon Management Activities
account in the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) budget. The
United States and Canada completed negotiations of revised Annex
Chapters to the Treaty in 2019. Funding in the Department of Commerce
budget is for the programs to fulfill national commitments created by
the revised Treaty Annex Chapters. The U.S. Section recommends FY 2023
funding of $43,500,000 to implement national commitments created by the
Treaty.
The Department of Commerce principally funds programs conducted by
the States of Washington, Oregon, Idaho and Alaska and the NMFS.
However, the cost of programs conducted by the States to fulfill
national commitments created by the Treaty continue to be substantially
greater than the funding provided in the NMFS budget. Consequently, the
States have supplemented the Federal Treaty appropriations from other
sources, including State general funds. Many of those funding sources
are limited or no longer available and this has been exacerbated by the
ongoing global pandemic.
The increases in the FY 2020 budget and in the FY 2021 budget were
greatly appreciated, however it falls short of what the U.S. Section
estimates is needed to fully implement the revised Annex Chapters to
the Pacific Salmon Treaty.
The U.S. Section recommends that the Pacific Salmon Treaty line
item in the Salmon Management Activities section of the NMFS budget be
funded at $43,500,000 for FY 2023. This line item includes $21,400,000
to provide base support for the States of Alaska, Washington, Oregon,
and Idaho. NMFS activities to implement the Treaty's conservation and
allocation provisions for Coho, Sockeye, Chinook, Chum, and Pink salmon
fisheries is funded through overhead fees. Effective, science-based
implementation of negotiated salmon fishing arrangements and abundance-
based management approaches for Chinook, southern Coho, and Northern
Boundary and Transboundary River salmon fisheries.
The U.S. Section recommends annual operational costs of $3,060,000
for hatchery conservation programs and $2,330,000 for habitat
restoration for Puget Sound critical stocks, $5,990,000 for Southeast
Alaska Chinook Salmon Fishery Mitigation, and $4,470,000 to increase
prey availability for Southern Resident Killer Whales. The recommended
funding includes $6,250,000 for sound science initiatives to fill key
science gaps and improve fishery management effectiveness. The
recommended funding helps meet requirements of the biological opinion
for species listed as endangered or threatened under the Endangered
Species Act.
The sound science funding includes recommends restoring the funding
for the Chinook Salmon Agreement line item in Salmon Management
Activities to $1,800,000. This funding supports research and stock
assessments necessary to acquire and analyze the technical information
needed to fully implement the abundance-based Chinook salmon management
program provided for by the Treaty. The States of Alaska, Washington,
Oregon, and Idaho, and the twenty-five Treaty Tribes conduct projects
selected in a rigorous competitive process.
The International Fisheries Commissions line, under Regional
Councils and Fisheries Commissions in the NMFS budget was funded at
$457,000 in FY 2022 and provides the U.S. contribution to bilateral
cooperative salmon enhancement on the transboundary river systems,
which originate in Canada and flow to the sea through Southeast Alaska.
This project was established in 1988 to meet U.S. obligations specified
in the Treaty and annual funding should continue at $475,000 annually.
The core Treaty implementation projects included in the Pacific
Salmon Treaty line, and the U.S. Chinook Agreement line under Salmon
Management Activities, as well as the International Fisheries
Commission line under Regional Councils and Fisheries Commissions
consist of a wide range of stock assessment, fishery monitoring, and
technical support activities for all five species of Pacific salmon in
the fisheries and rivers between Cape Suckling in Alaska to Cape Falcon
in Oregon. The States of Alaska, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and the
NMFS conduct a wide range of programs for salmon stock abundance
assessment, escapement enumeration, stock distribution, and fishery
catch and effort information. The information is used to establish
fishing seasons, harvest levels, and accountability to the provisions
of Treaty fishing regimes.
Prior to FY 2020, the base annual Treaty implementation funding
remained essentially flat since the inception of the Treaty in 1985. In
order to continue to fulfill the Federal international commitments
created by the Treaty, as costs and complexity increased over time, the
States had to augment Federal funding with other Federal and State
resources. However, alternative sources of funding have seen reductions
or, in some cases, have been eliminated. The increases for the last
three Federal fiscal years to implement the revised Annex Chapters were
a welcome change.
Negotiations to revise the provisions of the Annex Chapters to the
Treaty, except for the Fraser River Chapter, were successfully
completed in 2018. The revised provisions will last for 10 years. These
chapters contain the specifics for implementing the Treaty for each
species in each geographic area. The provisions for a revised Fraser
River Chapter were completed in 2019. The revised chapters represent
the combined efforts of the participants to ensure healthy salmon
populations for the next 10 years. They require commitments to increase
efforts to improve upon current management strategies for numerous
salmon populations.
Finally, it is important to consider that the value of the
commercial harvest of salmon subject to the Treaty and managed at
productive levels under the Treaty, supports the infrastructure of many
coastal and inland communities. The value of the commercial and
recreational fisheries, and the economic diversity they provide for
local communities throughout the Pacific Northwest and Alaska, is
immense. The Pacific Salmon Commission recently funded an economic
study of these fisheries and determined that this resource creates
thousands of jobs and is a multi-billion dollar industry. The U.S.
Section estimates these fisheries support 26,700 full-time equivalent
jobs and generate $3.4 billion in economic value annually. The value of
these fish to the twenty-five Treaty Tribes in Washington, Oregon,
Idaho and Alaska goes far beyond their monetary value, to the cultural
and religious lives of American Indian and Alaska Native peoples. A
significant monetary investment is focused on salmon due to the
listings of Pacific Northwest salmon populations under the Endangered
Species Act.
Given these resources, the U.S. Section will continue to utilize
the Pacific Salmon Commission process to develop recommendations that
help with the development and implementation of solutions to minimizing
impacts on listed stocks. We will continue to work towards the true
intent of the Treaty, and with your support, we will manage this shared
resource for mutual enhancements and benefits.
This concludes the statement of the U.S. Section of the Pacific
Salmon Commission submitted for consideration by your Committee. We
wish to thank the Committee for the support given to us in the past.
Please let us know if we can supply additional information or respond
to any questions the Committee Members may have.
Thank you.
______
Prepared Statement of Partnership for America's Children
Dear Chairs Shaheen and Cartwright, and Ranking Members Moran and
Aderholt:
On behalf of the Partnership for America's Children, I am writing
to urge you to provide $2 billion in FY 2023 funding for the U.S.
Census Bureau, $495 million more than the Administration's proposed
budget, and $646 million above the enacted FY 2022 level. Our support
for this funding level is consistent with the position taken by The
Census Project; we have also signed a group letter circulated by The
Census Project concerning Census Bureau funding. I am submitting this
testimony separately to emphasize the importance of this funding for
children.
The Partnership's mission is to support its network of State and
community multi-issue child advocacy organizations in effective
advocacy. The Partnership has 49 member organizations in 40 States that
advocate to improve policies for children at the State, local and
Federal level. Collectively they represent over 90% of the Nation's
children. Partnership members use Census data in their advocacy, and
thirty Partnership members are also KIDS COUNT grantees in their state,
serving as that State's data hub on children for policy makers,
administrators, and nonprofits.
The Partnership for America's Children served as the National hub
on the undercount of young children in the 2020 Decennial Census. In
this role the Partnership formed and continues to co-lead a national
working group of child-serving organizations that is working to improve
the count of young children in all Census Bureau demographic products.
We are aware that funding for over 300 Federal spending programs is
distributed based on figures compiled from the decennial census and
other Census Bureau surveys, totaling $1.5 trillion in FY 2017. Many of
the programs utilizing these funds are especially important for
children. Examples include Medicaid and community health programs, SNAP
and child nutrition programs, housing, education and special education,
child care funding, WIC, and much more.
Because the 2020 Census was beset by problems, the Bureau has
reported that the undercount of young children, particularly young
children of color, is dramatically higher than it was in 2010. Since
young children were the age group most missed in 2010, and the number
of young children missed has been growing steadily since 1980, this is
very problematic for many of the purposes of the decennial census and
particularly for funding allocation.
Therefore, it is vitally important that the Census Bureau do all it
can to improve the accuracy of the count for young children, so that
children most in need get their fair share of resources. The Census
Bureau needs to invest in a number of approaches to compensate for the
2020 Census' inaccuracies, and to work towards a more accurate 2030
Census, to prevent inequitable distribution of Federal funds.
The Bureau has developed a blended base approach to the population
estimates that are used to allocate some Federal funds and to design
the American Communities Survey which is also used to allocate Federal
funds. This approach is intended to correct the undercounts in the 2020
census, but more research is needed. We support $10 million in
additional funding beyond the President's request for the Population
Estimates program, in order to mitigate the undercount in the 2020
Census. The annual Population Estimates can be used to better estimate
the count for young children and racial and ethnic subgroups in
geographic areas below the state level, and to identify new data
sources that would improve the accuracy of the count.
The Partnership also supports a significant increase in funding for
the American Community Survey of $100--$300 million beyond the
Administration's request, to increase the ACS's sample size and to
address its declining response rates. We believe the ACS needs to be
expanded in order to be an accurate annual measure of income, poverty,
and many other subject areas. Of particular importance for children, it
needs to be expanded to be able to provide subgroup data including
different age groups for children and data about smaller racial and
ethnic groups within those age groups. We support the Administration's
request for increased funding to improve the Current Population Survey
and other Census products, and strongly favor the continuation of the
Household Pulse survey for its timely responsiveness in showing levels
of hardship and program utilization for children. It has been
particularly important in showing the value of various Federal policies
in reducing hardship for children.
The Partnership supports the Administration's requests for
continued compilation of 2020 decennial data products and for a much
higher increase for the 2030 Census than was provided in the FY 2013
year for the 2020 Census. We believe that much work must be done to
learn from the mistakes of the 2020 Census and to incorporate the
participation of non-federal partner groups at an earlier stage in the
process, to allow for a more effective ramp-up of outreach activities
to overcome decreasing response rates. The Partnership has been and
remains a Census partner and believes the outreach by independent
organizations helps build trust among community members who tend to be
undercounted.
Thank you for considering the needs of the Census Bureau in
relation to its vital role in assuring that Federal resources are
fairly and accurately provided, with special attention to the needs of
children. If you have any questions you can reach me at
[email protected].
Sincerely,
Deborah Stein, Network Director
______
Prepared Statement of Population Association of America/Association of
Population Centers
Thank you, Chair Shaheen and Ranking Member Moran and other
distinguished members of the subcommittee, for this opportunity to
express support for the Census Bureau, National Science Foundation
(NSF), National Institute of Justice (NIJ), and Bureau of Justice
Statistics (BJS). These agencies are important to the Population
Association of America (PAA) and Association of Population Centers
(APC), because they provide direct and indirect support to population
scientists and the field of population, or demographic, research
overall. In FY 2023, we urge the subcommittee to recommend the
following funding levels for these agencies: Census Bureau, $2 billion;
NSF, $11 billion; NIJ, $50 million; and, BJS, $60 million.
The PAA and APC are two affiliated organizations that together
represent over 3,000 social and behavioral scientists and the over 40
population research centers that receive Federal funding and conduct
research on the implications of population change. Its members, which
include demographers, economists, sociologists, and statisticians,
conduct scientific and applied research, analyze changing demographic
and socio-economic trends, develop policy and planning recommendations,
and train undergraduate and graduate students. Their research expertise
covers a wide range of issues, including adolescent health and
development, aging, health disparities, immigration and migration,
marriage and divorce, education, social networks, housing, retirement,
and labor. Population scientists compete for funding from the NSF and
NIJ and rely on data produced by the Nation's statistical agencies,
including the Census Bureau and BJS, to conduct research and research
training activities.
the census bureau
The Census Bureau is the premier source of data regarding U.S.
demographic, socio-economic, and housing characteristics. While PAA/APC
members have diverse research expertise, they share a common need for
access to accurate, timely data about the Nation's changing socio-
economic and demographic characteristics that only the U.S. Census
Bureau can provide through its conduct of the decennial census,
American Community Survey (ACS), and a variety of other surveys and
programs.
PAA and APC understand that the Census Bureau's funding level
declines dramatically in the initial years of the decennial planning
cycle, and the Administration's request reflects, appropriately, this
anticipated decrease in funding. Nonetheless, PAA and APC urge the
subcommittee to support increased funding for the Census Bureau in FY
2023 above the Administration's request as recommended by The Census
Project. In FY 2023, Congress has a unique opportunity to initiate
multi-year funding for the Bureau, providing the agency with resources
that it needs to not only sustain and strengthen its mission, but also
to recover from years of postponed enhancements and pursue numerous
necessary operational improvements. The ambitious FY 2023 funding
recommendation ($2 billion) that census stakeholders are supporting
would enable the Bureau to purse initiatives not only in the
President's budget, but also additional activities recommended by
census stakeholders, including:
--The American Community Survey.--While the President's budget
requests an additional $10 million to improve how the ACS
measures the sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI)
population, census stakeholders and data users in the public,
private, non-profit sectors believe the ACS needs an immediate
infusion of substantial funding to pursue other long overdue
enhancements to the survey. These enhancements include
increasing the survey's sample size, improving its non-response
follow up operations, addressing steadily declining response
rates, revising content, and making other methodological and
operational improvements. An independent report issued in 2022
by The Census Project urges an infusion of $100 to $300 million
to protect the ACS from further data quality deficiencies and
take up a long list of activities to ensure the survey is
accurately capturing data about the Nation's increasingly
complex population and households. PAA and APC support the
report's recommendations and urge the Committee to provide the
Bureau with additional funding to pursue necessary innovations
to the survey's content, operations, and data products.
--2030 Census.--The President's Budget proposes $252 million for the
2030 Census in FY 2023 (a $249 million increase from only $3
million in FY 2022). This is nearly twice the increase
requested a decade ago for the 2020 Census in the comparable
cyclical year (FY 2013) ($64.8 million), as the Bureau intends
to continue research and testing to design the next decennial
headcount, including work to develop and maintain the
completeness of the address list (so that less of the country
must be updated in the field), the use of administrative
records as a source of data for enumeration, and bringing
efficiencies to field operations to reduce non-response follow
up. Early decade investments in the decennial census will allow
the Bureau to sustain critical capabilities and, as a result
reduce the risk of additional funding needs in the peak years
later in the decade.
--Modernize and Sustain the Survey of Income and Program
Participation (SIPP).--Policymakers, particularly as the
economy emerges from the COVID-19 pandemic, need high quality,
accurate data to assess the impact of government assistance
programs on families and communities. The Survey of Income and
Program Participation (SIPP) is designed to achieve that goal,
yet its funding has fluctuated routinely, especially during
years in which the government has been funded via a series of
continuing resolutions. Stabilizing and increasing support for
SIPP, to no less than $48 million in FY 2023--an increase of
$1.4 million from FY 2022 enacted ($46.6 million)--will help
Congress make evidence--based policy decisions on the
effectiveness of government assistance program. However,
additional funding for SIPP would enable the Bureau to pursue
necessary innovations designed to enhance the survey's sample,
address decreasing response rates, and improve the survey's
content. Restoring minor cuts to the SIPP program does not
provide the resources necessary to modernize the survey and its
operations. A bolder investment in the survey is warranted.
--Innovations to Existing Surveys and Programs.--The President's
fiscal Year 2023 budget proposes several initiatives that would
improve existing surveys and programs, including: $4.5 million
to develop and test a self-response web-based instrument for
the Current Population Survey (CPS), which is the primary
source of information regarding national unemployment rate and
provides other data regarding employment, unemployment, and
people not in the labor force; an additional $3.7 million to
support the Community Resilience Estimates (CRE) program, which
began during the pandemic to provide more granular population
data; and, an additional $66.6 million to support ``critical
updates to data collection methods for surveys that produce
vital statistical data on the U.S. population and economy.''
In sum, PAA and APC join other census stakeholders in urging the
subcommittee to provide the Census Bureau with $2 billion in FY 2023 to
complete all 2020 Census operations and data delivery objectives;
enhance the ACS, initiate planning for the 2030 Census; improve the
SIPP; and, enrich the quality and granularity of all census data sets.
national science foundation (nsf)
For over 75 years the mission of NSF has been to promote the
progress of science; to advance the National health, prosperity, and
welfare; and to secure the National defense. Understanding the
implications of complex population dynamics is vital to the agency's
mission, and in particular the Directorate of Social, Behavioral and
Economic (SBE) Sciences, which is the primary source of support for the
population sciences within the NSF. The SBE Directorate funds critical
large-scale longitudinal surveys, such as the Panel Study of Income
Dynamics, which inform pressing policy decisions and provide the
empirical evidence to help policy makers to formulate effective
decisions. It also has participated in cross-cutting, interdisciplinary
initiatives of interest to population scientists, such as the
Coastlines and People program, which supports research on the
implications of climate change on populations, and Mid-scale
Infrastructure--two areas of emphasis among the agency's research
priorities.
NSF is the funding source for about 27 percent of all federally
supported basic research conducted by America's colleges and
universities, including basic behavioral and social research. However,
the SBE Directorate funds approximately 65 percent of basic,
university-based social and behavioral sciences research in the Nation.
PAA and APC, as members of the Coalition for National Science
Funding (CNSF), applaud the Administration's proposed NSF FY 2023
budget request, $10.5 billion, which represents a 19 percent increase
in funding over the FY 2022 enacted level. Moreover, the budget request
envisions an allocation for SBE of $330 million, which would represent
a historical high-water mark for this directorate, and an estimated
increase of one-third over what we anticipate the FY 2022 allocation
will be. We note that the PBR indicates that SBE priority investments
include climate change research and a boost to the National Center for
Science and Engineering Statistics (NCSES), which plays a key role in
the development of the National Secure Data Service. We continue to
support the Committee's longstanding practice of not stipulating
specific funding levels for individual NSF directorates; however, it is
helpful to understand the Administration's views on research
priorities, and in this instance we concur.
We note that efforts are currently underway in Congress to reach
bi-cameral agreement on legislation to advance translational and
interdisciplinary research, emerging technologies, and public-private
partnerships. Meanwhile, NSF has launched a new Technology, Innovation
and Partnerships (TIP) directorate in anticipation of, and to dovetail
with, enactment of this legislation. We urge the Committee to continue
to ensure that funding for the TIP will not come at the expense of
other, existing directorates.
We urge Congress to accelerate the growth of NSF's budget by
providing NSF with at least $11 billion in FY 2023. The funding level
will enable the NSF SBE Directorate to continue its support of social
science surveys and a robust portfolio of population research projects.
The NSF also continues to focus on interdisciplinary research
initiatives, recognizing that social and behavioral science contributes
to many critical areas of research. For example, the Mid-scale
Infrastructure program is currently funding broad-scale, sensor-based
data collection projects that represent collaborations among population
scientists and computer scientists. Increased funding in FY 2023 will
allow NSF to continue funding the most promising grant applications and
reduce the number of high caliber proposals that are rejected solely
for lack of sufficient funds.
bureau of justice statistics and national institute of justice
After years of declining budgets, PAA and APC are participating in
the new Office of Justice Programs Research and Statistics Coalition to
raise awareness about the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) and
National Institute of Justice (NIJ). Both agencies are important
sources of data and funding for population scientists conducting
research on topics such as prisoner reentry, the social and
environmental dynamics of health and crime, and the effects of
incarceration across the lifespan. The coalition's recommendations,
which PAA and APC support, would provide BJS with $60 million and NIJ
with $50 million in FY 2023.
Thank you for considering our requests and for supporting Federal
programs that benefit the population sciences under the subcommittee's
jurisdiction.
[This statement was submitted by Mary Jo Hoeksema, Director,
Government and Public Affairs]
______
Prepared Statement of Research!America
Research!America appreciates the opportunity to submit testimony
for the record regarding the FY23 Commerce, Justice, Science and
Related Agencies appropriations deliberations. We are the Nation's
largest nonprofit alliance advocating for science, discovery, and
innovation to achieve better health for all. We greatly appreciate the
subcommittee's dedicated stewardship over funding for such critical
priorities as the National Science Foundation (NSF). As you consider
fiscal year 2023 (FY23) allocations, we urge that the subcommittee
allocate at least $11 billion to the National Science Foundation in
FY23, an increase of 20% over FY22, to advance the frontiers of
research, deliver the benefits of research to society, develop STEM
talent, and secure global leadership in science and engineering (S&E).
The NSF's strategic plan aligns with several national priorities,
including pandemic response, global economic competitiveness, racial
equity, and addressing climate change. Allocating robust funding for
NSF is a sound strategy for advancing the United States' strategic
interests in an ever-more complex international landscape and meeting
the aspirations of the American people.
what nsf provides
The NSF invests in S&E at over 2,000 funded academic institutions
in all 50 States, the District of Columbia, and three U.S. territories.
Research topics include important national priorities such as advanced
manufacturing, infrastructure resilience & sustainability, innovations
in AI decision-making, cybersecurity, and data analytics, among others.
The NSF allocates 94% of its budget to research projects, facilities,
and STEM education, which supported over 300,000 students, postdoctoral
fellows, researchers, trainees, and teachers in 2019. Since its
inception in 1950, the NSF has supported more than 248 Nobel Prize
winners, including six Nobel Laureates in 2019 alone. Continued NSF
investments will fuel our economy for decades to come while producing
high-paying jobs for American workers, improving American prosperity
and quality of life, and enhancing national security.
NSF is at the Forefront of Research and Innovation
The NSF supports a broad spectrum of research and innovation in
basic science, engineering, and STEM learning research, and it actively
seeks research proposals for new tools, advanced instrumentation, data
analysis, computation, and novel facilities. Furthermore, the NSF
fosters a culture of smart risk-taking, looking for potentially high
rewards that justify taking risks. For instance, the SARS-CoV-2
pandemic highlighted the need for more research on prediction and
mitigation of current and future pandemics. It also demonstrated the
need for research on remote distributed work and remote learning. NSF-
funded researchers rapidly mobilized to conduct research that led to
the development of the COVID Information Commons (CIC), an interactive
platform that consolidated in one place information on the full range
of COVID-related awards made by NSF. This tool and platform enabled
researchers from all disciplines to efficiently search for information
and discover linkages among highly varied, yet often complementary,
efforts. This progress would not have been possible without NSF
investment.
NSF is Essential to Training the Next Generation of American Scientists
and Innovators
The U.S.'s global leadership is directly tied to its strength in
the fields of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM).
The NSF cultivates future American leaders in these strategically
important disciplines. Since 1952, the NSF has supported more than
60,000 students through Graduate Research Fellowships and has provided
grant support to thousands of postdoctoral fellows and young
investigators.
NSF investments have also sustained and enhanced U.S.
competitiveness on a global stage. In partnership with other sectors,
the NSF has supported S&E research and innovation that has led to the
development of breakthrough technologies and solutions to national and
societal problems. This includes the new Technology, Innovation, and
Partnerships (TIP) Directorate, which will enable the NSF to focus
cross-disciplinary expertise and foster cross-sector partnerships to
develop solutions at speed and scale. TIP will build on successful
innovation programs such as the NSF Convergence Accelerator, as well as
the world-leading Lab-to-Market Platform, which spans the NSF
Innovation Corps, Partnerships for Innovation, Small Business
Innovation Research and Small Business Technology Transfer programs.
Research!America appreciates the complex task facing the
subcommittee as it seeks to prioritize funding in a manner that best
serves the American people, and we thank you for your continued
leadership and consideration of our funding request. Please call on us
if we can be of any assistance.
Sincerely,
Mary Woolley
President and CEO
______
Prepared Statement of The Sea Grant Association
The Sea Grant Association (SGA) recommends Congress appropriate
$140 million in FY 2023 for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration's National Sea Grant College Program (Sea Grant) and $18
million for Sea Grant Aquaculture Research. Sea Grant is funded through
appropriations to NOAA's Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research in
the Operations, Research, and Facilities account.
The SGA recommendation of $140 million for Sea Grant is roughly
equal to the total amount the Sea Grant program is managing in FY 2022
when one factors in funding provided in the Consolidated Appropriations
Act, 2022 (Public Law 117-103) ($76 million for Sea Grant and $13.5
million for Sea Grant Aquaculture) and the Infrastructure Investment
and Jobs Act (Public Law 117-58) ($50 million for marine debris). The
SGA's request includes funding to expand Sea Grant's capacity to
address coastal resilience issues.
Sea Grant consists of a network of 34 university-based programs and
has supported coastal and Great Lakes communities through research,
extension, and education for over 50 years. SGA is a nonprofit
association made up of the academic institutions participating in the
program dedicated to furthering Sea Grant's vision, mission, and goals.
The SGA advocates for greater understanding, use, and conservation of
marine, coastal, and Great Lakes resources.
Sustained, bipartisan congressional support for the program led to
the enactment of a 5-year reauthorization, the National Sea Grant
College Program Amendments Act of 2020 (Public Law 116-221). The
legislation identified several priority activities for FY 2021-2025--
including coastal resilience and sustainable aquaculture--and
authorized additional funding for competitive grants in these areas.
The request made in this testimony would provide the resources
necessary for Sea Grant to meet those programmatic objectives.
Justification for the FY 2023 SGA Request for Sea Grant
Throughout its 50-year history, Sea Grant has supported coastal
communities, focusing on healthy coastal ecosystems, sustainable
fisheries and aquaculture, resilient communities and economies, and
environmental literacy and workforce development. However, the demand
for services now outweighs existing capacity and resources. Additional
funding would allow Sea Grant to better serve more diverse
constituencies, including economically disadvantaged groups, land/
property owners, businesses, Tribes, state/local planners, engineers,
community leaders, fisheries coalitions, developers, and citizen
community groups. SGA makes the following recommendations so that it
can have the capacity to meet the needs of our coastal communities:
National Sea Grant College Program (Sea Grant): $140 million
Sea Grant Resilient Coasts Initiative.--The last several years have
brought unprecedented challenges to our Nation, from the ongoing human
health crisis to increasing natural disasters. For those living in
coastal areas-which is more than 40 percent of the United States'
population--the 2022 hurricane season is expected to again pose a
significant threat, with predictions indicating another above-average
season with 16-22 named storms and nine hurricanes, four to five of
which are expected to be major ones. It is imperative that coastal
communities have the resources to prepare for, mitigate the effects of,
and recover from such events, as well as the many other challenges
these communities face, including coastal inundation and erosion, oil
and chemical spills, and harmful algal blooms.
Specifically, the funding requested in FY 2023 would enable a focus
on capacity building to support recruitment of additional resilience
extension, communication, or education staff in each State Sea Grant;
to provide funding for a State-based national Sea Grant resilience
coordinator; and to enable research, engagement, decision support, and
implementation to support local State-based research, training,
technical assistance, and coordination that enhance community
resilience.
Racial Equity and Inclusion.--Sea Grant invests heavily in its
people: those in its workforce and those in the communities they serve.
There is more that must be done to ensure the Sea Grant workforce is
representative of the broader communities they work with across the
Nation and that underserved and underrepresented communities are not
overlooked when addressing coastal issues.
Sea Grant already has long-standing and trusted relationships with
local, Tribal, and indigenous communities that depend on the coastal
and marine environment for livelihood and substance and whose cultures
are deeply tied to it. Funds appropriated for FY 2023 would advance
innovative initiatives to further connect to, learn with, and empower
historically marginalized communities by supporting research, training,
mentorship, and fellowship opportunities supporting underserved and
underrepresented communities.
Sustainable Aquaculture: $18 million
Enhancing Sea Grant's aquaculture program will enable local farmers
to produce sustainable seafood for the growing population while also
helping lessen our Nation's seafood trade deficit, which was over $16.9
billion in 2019. In FY 2020, Sea Grant turned a $13 million
appropriation into over $80 million in economic impact, creating or
sustained over 1,000 aquaculture-related jobs and over 400 related
businesses.
Sea Grant's work around aquaculture includes support and assistance
to those across the food chain. The program supports research,
education, and workforce development on issues of importance to State
and local communities, including farm siting and permitting, production
technologies, seafood safety and quality, environmental risks, user
conflicts within coastal communities and working waterfronts, animal
welfare, and food security. Through research and extension services,
Sea Grant assists in increasing sustainable domestic production of
currently farmed and promising new species through improvements in
feeds and feeding practices, reproduction, larval rearing and genomics,
and animal health and through growing adaptations to changing
environmental conditions. Sea Grant conducts research and provides
technical assistance and outreach to aquaculture producers, resource
managers, scientists, and consumers to ensure the safety and quality of
sustainably cultured seafood products. Finally, Sea Grant also provides
aquaculture literacy programs for the next generation of farmed seafood
producers through K-12 education. The funding requested for FY 2023
would expand the Sea Grant aquaculture program, further enabling
farmers to produce sustainable seafood that competes with imports and
provides a safe and nutritious source of protein.
Examples of Recent Sea Grant Accomplishments
--Alaska Sea Grant is funding a project to help communities adapt and
respond to the changing climate, with a goal of providing
communities in Bristol Bay with specific data to inform build
solutions and to budget and apply for grant funds\1\.
--Connecticut Sea Grant, with National Sea Grant Law Center and state
Bureau of Aquaculture, developed a best practice guide for
regulating raw seafood for human consumption and developed the
first domestic public health hazards guide for seaweed
aquaculture\2\.
--Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Consortium awarded the first Clean
and Resilient Marina certification to Saunders Yachtworks for
its best management practices to protect and promote clean
water and to reduce water pollution\3\.
--New Hampshire Sea Grant partnered with oyster growers to provide
financial relief and to encourage participation in research and
conservation, which provided immediate economic relief for
growers during the pandemic and explored alternate revenue
streams to help oyster growers build economic resilience\4\.
concluding thoughts
The Sea Grant Association is grateful for the long-standing
consistent support this subcommittee has provided the program. Our ``on
the ground'' efforts in coastal resilience, sustainable aquaculture,
and other key Sea Grant objectives could not happen without the
guidance and support this subcommittee and the rest of the Congress has
provided over the years. The Sea Grant Association's request for the
National Sea Grant College Program of $140 million, while more than the
amount requested by the Administration for FY 2023, is similar to the
request the Administration submitted in FY 2022 and is close to the
total amount the Congress has entrusted Sea Grant to manage in FY 2022
when one views the program through the lens of the omnibus
appropriations act and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
Thank you again for your time and for your consideration of this
request. SGA would be happy to answer any questions or provide any
additional information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ A. Gore, ``Storm-related data help Bristol Bay communities plan
for change,'' 2022, available at: https://alaskaseagrant.org/2022/04/
26/storm-related-data-help-bristol-bay-communities-plan-for-change/.
\2\ Sea Grant Connecticut Annual Report, 2021, available at:
https://seagrant.uconn.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/1985/2022/02/
2021.AR--.webversion.pdf.
\3\ K. Maghan, ``Saunders Yachtworks named Alabama's first clean
and resilient marina,'' 2021, available at: https://masgc.org/news/
article/saunders-yachtworks-named-alabamas-first-clean-and-resilient-
marina.
\4\ New Hampshire Sea Grant, ``NH oyster COVID relief and
restoration,'' 2021, available at: https://seagrant.unh.edu/blog/2021/
12/nh-oyster-covid-relief-restoration.
[This statement was submitted by Dr. Susan White, President]
______
Prepared Statement of Seattle Indian Health Board
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and members of the Senate
Committee on Appropriations--Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice,
Science, and Related Agencies, my name is Esther Lucero. I am Dine, of
Latino descent, and third generation in my family living outside of our
reservation, I strongly identify as an urban Indian. I serve as the
President & CEO of the Seattle Indian Health Board (SIHB), one of 41
Urban Indian Organizations (UIO) nationwide. I have had the privilege
of serving SIHB for 6 years and have been providing congressional
testimonials for the past 4 years. I am honored to have the opportunity
to submit my testimony today requesting the Department of Commerce
appoint a Senior Advisor for the Office of Native American Affairs.
SIHB is an Indian Health Service (IHS)-designated UIO and a Health
Resource and Service Administration (HRSA) 330 Federally Qualified
Health Center, which serves nearly 5,000 AI/AN living in the Greater
Seattle Area in Washington state. Nationwide, UIOs operate 74 health
facilities in 22 States and offer services to over 5.4 million AI/AN
people in select urban areas. As a culturally attuned service provider,
we offer direct medical, dental, traditional health, behavioral health
services, and a variety of social support services on issues of gender-
based violence, youth development, and homelessness. We are part of the
Indian healthcare system and honor our responsibilities to work with
our Tribal partners to serve all Tribal people, wherever they may
reside.
We are home to a Tribal public health authority, Urban Indian
Health Institute (UIHI), 1 of 12 Tribal Epidemiology Centers (TEC) in
the country and the only TEC with a national purview- serving both
rural and urban AI/AN's. For over 20 years, UIHI has managed public
health information systems, managed disease prevention and control
programs, communicated vital health information and resources,
responded to public health emergencies, and coordinate these activities
with other public health authorities and UIO's nationwide. Due to a
lack of access to disease surveillance data, UIHI released the only AI/
AN COVID-19 Data Dashboard,\1\ utilizing the over 45 UIO service areas
providing direct service to communities combating COVID-19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Urban Indian Health Institute (April 2022) COVID-19 Among
American Indian/Alaska Natives. Retrieved from: https://www.uihi.org/
covid-19-data-dashboard/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
economic investments in indian country by the department of commerce
To advance economic wellbeing of AI/AN populations, the Department
of Commerce previously maintained the appointment of a Senior Advisor
for Native American Affairs. Today, in lieu of a Senior Advisor, the
Department of Commerce holds multiple Tribal liaison positions. I
believe this is insufficient to meet the economic demands of Indian
Country. I insist a Senior Advisor be appointed to: lead the
coordination and communication of AI/AN issues with Tribes, Tribal
organizations, and UIOs; implement the department's Tribal Consultation
Policy Plan, and; guide combined efforts of the Federal Government,
Tribal governments, and private sectors to promote economic growth for
Tribes, UIOs, and AI/AN people nationwide.
To increase economic advancement in Indian Country, we also request
the Department of Commerce support economic advancement initiatives for
marginalized communities with funding through the Economic Development
Administration (EDA), Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA), and
the U.S. Census Bureau. Economic advancement for AI/AN populations can
be achieved through investing in healthcare, education, housing, and
supporting economic sustainability of AI/AN communities. Economic
advancement can also be achieved through budgetary earmarks and grant
carve outs support AI/AN populations. SIHB encourages the use of the
Federal statute language of Tribes, Tribal organizations, and urban
Indian organizations as defined by 25 U.S.C. Sec. 1603.
A persistent barrier for Indian Country's economic development is
Federal dollars not reaching urban AI/AN communities in the intended
amount. For example, the Department of Commerce's Federal funding can
be channeled through State and local governments before being allocated
community-based organizations, like SIHB and UIHI. Due to indirect
State and local administrative processes, reduced funding is allocated
to community-based organizations to implement Federal initiatives. To
increase funding for community-based organizations, Federal agencies
need to combine resources and provide direct funding to UIOs and BIPOC
organizations conducting Federal initiatives. Together, we can properly
channel Federal dollars to foster economic empowerment and advancement
in Indian Country.
economic inequities effecting ai/an livelihood
The Commission on Civil Rights documented the history of unmet
Federal obligations to Tribal nations in a report titled Broken
Promises,\2\ which included lack of investment to improve Indian
Country's economic wellbeing. In alignment with Executive Order 13985:
Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through
the Federal Government and the Department of Commerce's Strategic Goal
2: Fostering Inclusive Capitalism and Equitable Economic Growth, we
request the Department of Commerce strategize and evaluate
opportunities to promote economic growth within AI/AN communities both
on and off Tribal territories.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ U.S. Commission On Civil Rights (December 2018). Broken
Promises: Continuing Federal Funding Shortfall for Native Americans.
Retrieved from: https://www.usccr.gov/files/pubs/2018/12-20-Broken-
Promises.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Economic growth of AI/AN people has been stunted due to social
determinants of health impacting economic outcomes, resource extraction
on Tribal lands, and limited funding for AI/AN communities. AI/AN
populations have the highest poverty rate among all minority groups and
nationally, 22.7% of urban AI/AN people live in poverty compared to
6.9% for Non-Hispanic White (NHW) populations.\3\ Additionally, nearly
one in six AI/AN families live in poverty, which is 4.8 times the
proportion of NHW families.\4\ Of our relatives (patients) served at
SIHB, 84% fell 200% below the Federal poverty level (FPL). Poverty can
limit a family's access to health services, nutrition, quality housing
options, and economic opportunities to build wealth and assets.
The social and economic consequences of poverty are inextricably
connected to health outcomes.\5\ In the Nation, Medicaid is a major
source of financing maternal and infant health with 42% of all births
covered by Medicaid.\6\ Of our relatives served at SIHB, 54.8% are on
Medicaid/Children's Health Insurance Program, 10.7% are on Medicare,
5.3% are dual eligible, and 19.4% are uninsured. As the President and
CEO of a UIO offering health and human services, I recognize our
relatives have limited resources and accessibility to the services they
need, which is why I adamantly increase our wraparound services with
nutrition, behavioral health, gender-based violence, and homelessness
investments.
To address economic discrepancies children born under Medicaid
experience in their lifetime, Washington State is leading economic
equity policy initiatives through the proposed Future Fund Trust which
will aid children born under Apple Health Coverage with $3,000 upon
reaching 18, to spend on higher education, housing payments, and
business initiatives. Nationally, Senator Booker has introduced the
American Opportunity Accounts Act which provides children with $1,000
savings account upon birth with annual contributions up to $2,000
depending on a family's income. These types of initiatives provide
economic empowerment to children potentially affected by inter-
generational poverty and can support their access to education,
housing, and health services to improve their wellbeing.
SIHB has taken steps to support financial capital of AI/AN
populations by providing career advancement opportunities for urban AI/
AN through healthcare workforce development. Nationally, 20.5% of AI/AN
people aged 25 and older in UIO service areas did not complete high
school or pass the General Education Development (GED) exam compared to
the 5.5% of Non-Hispanic White population.\7\ SIHB's workforce
development program currently supports 6 family medicine residents, 6
public health interns, and 4 Master of Social Work program students. Of
our 6 family residents, 4 identify as AI/AN and recent graduation rates
show 80% of our previous residents go on to work in communities of
color and 50% go on to work in Native communities. These types of
training programs increase AI/AN representation in healthcare provider
positions, support financial capital built by AI/AN professionals, and
improve economic equity amongst AI/AN populations.
u.s. census and american indian and alaska native representation
The most recent 2020 U.S. Census reported the largest increase in
AI/AN representation, thanks, in part, to trusted community messengers'
educating and incentivizing accurate and appropriate data collection
practices for Tribal community members. Key census findings reported
that 76% of AI/AN populations reside outside of Tribal regions, within
urban areas.\8\ King County, the 13th most populous county in the
Nation,\9\ has a population of over 39,000 AI/AN's residing in the
region.\10\ Coinciding with the Department of Commerce Strategic
Objective 4.1, we support increased funding for culturally attuned data
collection practices on AI/AN populations to better document existing
social determinants of health in our community and ensure Federal
resources reach our AI/AN populations to address systemic inequities.
UIHI supported the 2020 Census by partnering with 42 health centers
to award subcontracts for organizations to promote the National `We
Count' campaign and strengthen AI/AN participation in the census.\11\
Additional efforts included UIHI partnering with other Indian
healthcare providers and Native leaders to produce culturally attuned
media, educational campaigns, and monetary incentives to encourage
participation in the `We Count' census campaign. These national
community-based efforts resulted in an 86.5% increase in the AI/AN
population from the 2010 Census.\12\
To build upon 2020 Census efforts, increased investments into
improving data collection practices are needed to accurately report on
social demographics of AI/AN populations. Previous Census barriers to
report accurate AI/AN population statistics include lack of community-
based resources, technological limitations, and general mistrust from
the community. Inaccurate reporting leads to government agencies
undercounting AI/AN populations and misinterpreting AI/AN social
demographics, which drastically impacts the allocation of resources and
funding reaching Indian Country.
Taken collectively and intentionally implemented, these requests
will help address barriers to economic development impacting AI/AN
populations. Together, we can advance economic well-being for Indian
Country and support equity across BIPOC communities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ American Community Survey. (2018). American Community Survey:
2013-2017 5-year Data Release.
\4\ American Community Survey. (2018). American Community Survey:
2013-2017 5-Year Data Release.
\5\ Urban Indian Health Institute. Data Dashboard, Poverty in
Seattle. https://www.uihi.org/urban-indian-health/data-dashboard/.
\6\ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention--National Center for
Health Statistics. (2020). Birth in the United States. NCHS Data Brief.
No 387. Retrieved from: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db387-
H.pdf.
\7\ Urban Indian Health Institute. (October 2021) Community Health
Profile, National Aggregate of Urban Indian Organization Service Areas.
Retrieved from: https://www.uihi.org/urban-indian-health/urban-indian-
health-organization-profiles/.
\8\ U.S. Census Bureau. (2021). County Population by
Characteristics: 2010-2020. https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/
popest/technical-documentation/research/evaluation-estimates/2020-
evaluation-estimates/2010s-county-detail.html.
\9\ U.S. Census Bureau (2020). State and County Quick Facts King
County, Washington. Retrieved from: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/
fact/table/kingcountywashington/PST045221.
\10\ Urban Indian Health Institute (March 2012). American Indian/
Alaska Native Population by Census Tract- Seattle Indian Health Board
Service Area, Seattle WA, 2010 Census. Retrieved from: https://
www.uihi.org/uihp-profiles/seattle/.
\11\ Urban Indian Health Institute. (April 2020) We Count.
Retrieved from https://wecount.uihi.org/#engage.
\12\ U.S. Census Bureau (August 2021). 2020 Census Results on Race
and Ethnicity. Retrieved from: https://www.census.gov/content/dam/
Census/newsroom/press-kits/2021/redistricting/20210812-presentation-
redistricting-jones.pdf.
[This statement was submitted by Esther Lucero, MPP, President &
CEO]
______
Prepared Statement of Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics
(SIAM)
Summary
This written testimony is submitted on behalf of the Society for
Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM) to ask you to continue your
support of the National Science Foundation (NSF) in fiscal year (FY)
2023 by providing NSF with at least $11 billion. In particular, we urge
you to provide strong support for the Research and Related Activities
Account (R&RA) that supports key applied mathematics and computational
science programs in the Division of Mathematical Sciences and the
Office of Advanced Cyberinfrastructure. SIAM also requests your support
for the Education and Human Resources (EHR) directorate that addresses
fundamental challenges in mathematics and STEM education.
Full Statement
On behalf of SIAM, we submit this written testimony for the record
to the subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies
of the Committee on Appropriations of the U.S. Senate.
SIAM has over 14,000 members, including applied and computational
mathematicians, computer scientists, numerical analysts, engineers,
statisticians, and mathematics educators. They work in industrial and
service organizations, universities, colleges, and government agencies
and laboratories all over the world. In addition, SIAM has almost 500
institutional members, including colleges, universities, corporations,
and research organizations. SIAM members come from many different
disciplines but have a common interest in applying mathematics in
partnership with computational science to solve real-world problems,
which affect national security and industrial competitiveness.
First, we would like to emphasize how much SIAM appreciates your
Committee's continued leadership on and recognition of the critical
role of the National Science Foundation (NSF) and its support for
mathematics, science, and engineering in enabling a strong U.S.
economy, workforce, and society.
Today, we submit this testimony to ask you to continue your support
of NSF in FY 2023 and beyond. In particular, we join with the research
and higher education community and request that you provide NSF with at
least $11 billion in funding for FY 2023. This is $500 million over the
President's budget request for FY 2023 that calls for $10.49 billion.
After years of inadequate funding, NSF needs bold growth to protect
U.S. competitiveness as countries such as China are rapidly increasing
their science and engineering investments. According to the National
Science Board, in FY 2020, NSF rejected close to four billion dollars
of proposals rated ``very good or higher'' due to budget constraints.
At least $11 billion in funding is needed to ensure NSF can meet
Congress's vision for the agency, launch new programs in priority areas
such as Regional Innovation Engines to transform regional economies in
critical technology areas, invest in revolutionary breakthroughs to
address resilience and catalyze clean energy innovation, and provide
sustainable growth to the core research and education activities
undergirding our science and technology ecosystem.
As we are reminded every day, the Nation's health, economic
strength, national security, and welfare are being challenged in
profound and unprecedented ways. Many of these challenges are fueled by
gaps in our understanding of complex systems such as biologic
processes, the energy grid, cyberspace, terrorist networks, or the
human brain. Mathematics and computational science play a foundational
and cross-cutting role in understanding these systems through advanced
modeling and simulation, developing techniques essential to designing
new breakthrough technologies like artificial intelligence (AI), and
providing new tools for managing resources and logistics. Progress in
computational sciences and applied mathematics also underpins advances
across an array of fields and challenges in computing, materials,
biology, engineering, and other areas.
national science foundation
NSF serves a unique and critical function supporting all areas of
science and engineering to further innovation and seed the knowledge
and technologies for a strong future America. NSF provides essential
Federal support for applied mathematics and computational science,
including more than 60 percent of all Federal support for basic
academic research in the mathematical sciences. Of particular
importance to SIAM, NSF funding supports the development of new
mathematical models and computational algorithms, which are critical to
making substantial advances in such fields as neuroscience, energy
technologies, genomics, and nanotechnology. In addition, new techniques
developed in mathematics and computing research often have direct
application in industry. Modern life as we know it--from search engines
like Google to the design of modern aircraft, from financial markets to
medical imaging--would not be possible without the techniques developed
by mathematicians and computational scientists using NSF funding. NSF
also supports mathematics education at all levels, ensuring that the
next generation of the U.S. workforce is appropriately trained to
participate in cutting-edge technological sectors and that students are
attracted to careers in mathematics and computing.
SIAM supports NSF's efforts to launch the Directorate for
Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships and encourages Congress to
give NSF the resources it needs to truly launch new programs such as
Regional Innovation Engines and enabling support for NSF priorities in
climate, clean energy, emerging industries, and broadening
participation. While investment in these priority areas is important,
SIAM urges Congress to provide sufficient NSF support for core
programs, such as those funded by the Division of Mathematical Sciences
(DMS) and the Office of Advanced Cyberinfrastructure (OAC), which have
stagnated in recent years and whose foundational investments underpin
advances across many science and engineering challenges.
SIAM urges strong investment in the Research and Related Activities
account (RRA) to enable robust funding for the Division of Mathematical
Sciences (DMS), the Office of Advanced Cyberinfrastructure (OAC), and
other core programs and crosscutting initiatives for essential
mathematical and computational science research, workforce development
programs, and early career researcher support.
nsf division of mathematical sciences
The NSF Division of Mathematical Sciences (DMS) in the Directorate
for Mathematical and Physical Sciences (MPS) provides core support for
all mathematical sciences. DMS also funds national mathematical science
research institutes; infrastructure, including workshops, conferences,
and equipment; and postdoctoral, graduate, and undergraduate training.
The activities supported by DMS and performed by SIAM members, such as
modeling, analysis, algorithms, and simulation, underpin advancements
across science and engineering and provide new ways of obtaining
insight into the nature of complex phenomena, such as the power grid,
software for military applications, and the human body.
Investment in DMS is critical because of the foundational and
cross-cutting role that mathematics and computational science play in
sustaining the Nation's economic competitiveness and national security,
and in making substantial advances on societal challenges such as
energy and public health. NSF, with its support of a broad range of
scientific areas, plays an important role in bringing U.S. expertise
together in interdisciplinary initiatives that bear on these
challenges. DMS has taken a leadership role in promoting partnerships
with other agencies and foundations to leverage Federal funding for
maximum impact. In addition, DMS funding supports a broad array of
activities in modeling, analysis, algorithms, and simulation that
underpin advancements across science and engineering. Agencies such as
the Department of Defense and National Institutes of Health depend on
the NSF-supported applied math and computational sciences ecosystem to
fulfill their missions as they build on NSF-funded modeling, algorithm,
and simulation breakthroughs and leverage the workforce trained using
NSF support. Both agencies and foundations partner with NSF thereby
leveraging Federal funding for maximum impact, such as with the Joint
NSF/National Institutes of Health Initiative Quantitative Approaches to
Biomedical Big Data (QuBBD).
nsf office of advanced cyberinfrastructure
Work in applied mathematics and computational science is critical
to enabling effective use of the rapid advances in information
technology and cyberinfrastructure. Programs in the NSF Office of
Advanced Cyberinfrastructure (OAC) in the Directorate for Computer and
Information Science and Engineering (CISE) focus on providing research
communities access to advanced computing capabilities to convert data
to knowledge and increase our understanding through computational
simulation and prediction. SIAM strongly endorses NSF's and OAC's role
advancing high performance computing to meet critical national security
needs, fully leverage computing technology for economic competitiveness
and scientific discovery, and position the U.S. for sustained technical
leadership. OAC funding will support its role as steward for
computational science, building bridges across NSF to accelerate
transformational science and engineering.
supporting the pipeline of mathematicians and scientists
A lack of sufficient funding for NSF's Education and Human
Resources (EHR) directorate has left critical gaps in addressing
fundamental challenges for mathematics and STEM education across
educational levels. SIAM supports EHR and its programs like Improving
Undergraduate STEM Education (IUSE), which is key to both advancing
STEM professional development and developing a STEM literate citizenry.
SIAM notes that mathematical education is foundational to STEM learning
across disciplines, and NSF should continue to fund development of
mathematical and computational skills, including at the undergraduate
level when young scientists and engineers gain critical interests and
competencies. SIAM supports the NSF CAREER awards, Graduate Research
Fellowships, and Mathematical Sciences Postdoctoral Research
Fellowships (MSPRF) that are crucial to the training and professional
development of the next generation of leadership in mathematical
sciences research and education.
conclusion
We would like to thank you again for your ongoing support of NSF
that enables the research and education communities it supports,
including thousands of SIAM members, to undertake activities that
contribute to U.S. health, security, and economic strength. NSF needs
sustained growth to maintain our competitive edge in science and
technology, and therefore we respectfully ask that you continue robust
support of these critical programs in FY 2023.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide testimony to the Committee
on behalf of SIAM. SIAM looks forward to providing any additional
information or assistance you may ask of us during the FY2023
appropriations process.
______
Prepared Statement of Society for Industrial and Organizational
Psychology
On behalf of the Society for Industrial and Organizational
Psychology (SIOP), we are pleased to provide this written testimony to
the House Appropriations subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, and
Science, and Related Agencies for the official record. In this
testimony, SIOP urges the subcommittee to consider three requests:
--Provide the requested amount of $11 billion for the National
Science Foundation (NSF), including strong support for the
Directorate for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences
(SBE), and the new Directorate for Technology, Innovation, and
Partnerships (TIP) in the fiscal year (FY) 2023 appropriations
process;
--Include report language to encourage NSF to more rigorously
implement the science of team science in the agency's funding
strategies for large-scale and multi-disciplinary research
projects; and
--Support for workforce evaluation and technical assistance at the
Department of Justice's Community Oriented Policing Services
Office.
appropriations support for nsf
SIOP is a community of nearly 10,000 members worldwide with a
common interest in promoting the research, practice, and teaching of
industrial and organizational (I-O) psychology to enhance human well-
being and performance in organizational and work settings. SIOP
provides a platform for scientists, academics, consultants,
practitioners, and students to collaborate, implement, and evaluate
cutting-edge approaches to workplace challenges across sectors.
We have evidence that Federal investment in social and behavioral
science research directly and positively impacts the U.S. economy,
national security, and the health and well-being of Americans. Through
SBE, NSF supports basic research to develop a scientific evidence base
for improving the performance, effectiveness, management, and
development of organizations and the workforce. The methods,
measurements, and theories developed through this Federal investment
enhance business practices, policymaking, and interprofessional
collaboration. The evidence base derived from basic research in the
science of organizations is applied throughout the public and private
sectors.
SBE is critically important to NSF and has been highly responsive
to the transformative events of the past few years. SBE rapidly
responded to the challenges and opportunities posed by the COVID-19
pandemic, supporting the second most pandemic-related research grants
among NSF Directorates. This included significant support for the field
of I-O psychology as the nature of work has fundamentally shifted. SBE
investments, particularly those from the Science of Organizations
program, have allowed I-O psychologists to develop data-driven methods
to address workplace disruption, issues of work-life balance, workforce
participation by women and underserved populations, and the challenges
and opportunities related to the shift to remote work. This research
will be crucial as we continue to emerge from the pandemic and deal
with its lasting effects on our workplaces and organizations.
NSF SBE has also provided the foundation for I-O psychologists to
understand how our rapidly emerging technologies affect the workforce.
As the rate of technological change continues to accelerate, I-O
psychologists are already seeking to understand how technologies like
Artificial Intelligence and automation affect American workers and
develop responsive employee training programs necessary to reskill our
workforce.
Continued Federal support for I-O psychology keeps its knowledge
and expertise in the public domain and enhances shared workplace
efficiency and understanding of worker well-being at all levels. Other
applications of I-O psychology include transitioning veterans and
service members to civilian jobs, managing age diversity in the
workplace, and developing preventative sexual harassment workforce
interventions, among many others.
NSF has also launched a new Directorate for Technology, Innovation,
and Partnerships (TIP). SIOP applauds NSF and Congress for investing in
TIP and encourages the new directorate to continue focusing on use-
inspired research that will position the Foundation to drive innovation
in industries and technologies of the future. In order to fully reach
its potential, the TIP Directorate must incorporate social and
behavioral science topics into its research agenda, particularly
workforce needs and impacts to the workplace as a result of these new
technologies or research advancements. Furthermore, as the TIP
Directorate recruits and hires new staff, effort must be taken to
ensure that the program officers are drawn from a broad variety of
professional disciplines, including I-O psychology and other behavioral
sciences. SIOP encourages NSF and TIP to utilize and support I-O
concepts and research in its plans for the future success of the
directorate, as well as employ I-O experts as part of its staff.
Given NSF's critical role in supporting fundamental research and
education across science and engineering disciplines, SIOP supports an
overall FY 2023 NSF budget of $11 billion. SIOP requests robust support
for the NSF SBE Directorate, which funds important research studies,
enabling an evidence base, methodology, and measurements for improving
organizational function, performance, and design across sectors and
disciplines. SIOP also requests the new TIP Directorate be fully funded
and empowered to support innovative research that will drive America's
global competitiveness, including in the social and behavioral
sciences.
science of team science
SIOP requests that Congress direct NSF to further adopt of the
Science of Team Science (SciTS) in NSF programs and policies. SciTS is
the empirical examination of the processes by which large and small
scientific teams organize, conduct, and communicate research. I-O
psychologists with expertise in SciTS have engaged with NSF program
officers and leadership, as well as some congressional staff to ensure
their findings are fully ingrained in the agency's new models and
approaches for funding cross-disciplinary science and/or large-scale
research projects. With the launch of the new Directorate for
Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships (TIP), SIOP believes it is
increasingly important that the agency take additional steps to ensure
evidence-based team science is considered in multi-partner initiatives
to improve communication between researchers, productivity, efficiency
and cost-effectiveness. New programs focused on multi-disciplinary
collaboration between academia, industry, and other community partners,
such as the Regional Innovation Engines, require targeted SciTS
approaches to ensure their success.
Team science is a well-known research subject at NSF and the
language should be understood by the agency. NSF has funded several
team science studies through SBE and program officers across
directorates have expressed interest in leveraging team science to
improve multi-disciplinary awards, including participating in one-on-
one conversations with SIOP experts and inviting them to present on NSF
panels. SIOP appreciates NSF's interest in learning more about
leveraging SciTS to improve programs and collaborations at the agency.
While NSF has taken some steps forward to address the importance of
team science in some multi-disciplinary awards, we feel that
appropriations report language that specifically mentions the
importance of team science would build on this existing momentum and
further catalyze meaningful action.
For further reference, SIOP members served on the National
Academies'
Committee on the Science of Team Science, which produced the 2015
report on
this topic: https://www.nap.edu/catalog/19007/enhancing-the-
effectiveness-of-team-science. Also, slides and recordings from NSF's
2018 Accelerating Engineering Research Center Preparedness Workshop can
be found at: https://ercbiennial.asee.org/2018-pgw/program/. SIOP
members Drs. Steve Kozlowski and Kara Hall present on team science.
requested report language
Team Science.--NSF is encouraged to continue to seek ways to
implement the science of team science to improve scientific
collaboration as the agency develops new models and approaches for
funding large-scale and cross-disciplinary research projects, including
via the Technology, Innovation, and Partnership (TIP) Directorate. In
particular, NSF is encouraged to ensure that it is implementing the
recommendations from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering,
and Medicine report, Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science.\1\
department of justice (doj) community oriented policing services (cops)
office
DOJ's COPS Office is responsible for advancing the practice of
community policing by the Nation's State, local, territorial, and
Tribal law enforcement agencies through information and grant
resources. The COPS Hiring Program (CHP), the agency's signature
initiative, provided $165 million for law enforcement agencies in FY
2022. Hundreds of law enforcement agencies have benefited from this
program since its inception, but little is known about these recipients
and the unique issues they face in key areas like recruitment,
retention, training and more. Collectively, CHP recipients make up an
ideal study group to explore important questions over what factors and
activities drive people toward careers in policing, as well as what may
drive people away. When there is more evidence about what works and
what some persistent issues are to be addressed, the COPS Office can
better tailor technical assistance programming to meet the needs of law
enforcement agencies.
To this end, Congress should provide funding for the COPS Office to
support a volunteer evaluation study of CHP recipients to better
understand common recruitment, hiring, and retention practices and
leverage the findings to target future Federal assistance. Congress
should also specify that the COPS Office work with an outside
organization with expertise in workforce and workplace sciences. SIOP
has a relationship with the COPS Office to provide expert input on
priorities regarding hiring and selection, reducing officer burnout,
providing meaningful training and professional development, and other
topics of I-O expertise. SIOP could be key partners in assisting the
COPS Office as they develop and carry out the study to ensure it is
designed properly for impactful results.
requested report language
Workforce Study.--The Committee recognizes that persistent
recruitment, hiring, and retention issues are plaguing law enforcement
agencies nationwide. The COPS Office provides support to address these
issues through the COPS Hiring Program, but little is known about
specific challenges facing grantees. With the appropriations provided,
COPS should carry out a voluntary assessment of COPS Hiring Program
recipients to understand workforce challenges facing police
departments, identify best practices, and collect other findings to
better target future technical assistance programming. In carrying out
this study, the COPS Office shall enter into a partnership with
qualified organizations with extensive expertise in workforce and
workplace sciences, such as industrial and organizational psychology.
Thank you for the opportunity to offer SIOP's support for NSF and
DOJ. Please do not hesitate to contact SIOP should you have any
questions. Additional information is also available at www.siop.org.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.nap.edu/catalog/19007/enhancing-the-effectiveness-
of-team-science.
[This statement was submitted by Dr. Mo Wang, President and Tracy
L. Vanneman, Executive Director]
______
Prepared Statement of Society for Neuroscience
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and members of the
subcommittee, on behalf of the Society for Neuroscience (SfN), we are
honored to present this testimony in support of robust appropriations
for biomedical research at the National Science Foundation (NSF). SfN
urges you to provide at least $11 billion, an increase of approximately
$2.162 billion, in funding for NSF in FY23. As both a researcher and a
Professor in the Department of Biology at Brandeis University, I
understand the critical importance of Federal funding for neuroscience
research in the United States. My own research identified the ability
of brain circuits to ``tune themselves'' to maintain the appropriate
level of excitability, which is critical for healthy brain function.
My research group, supported by NSF funding, made fundamental
discoveries in how neurons self-adjust their excitability, making it
easier or harder to send electrical messages to other neurons. Over the
past two decades, we have unearthed a family of mechanisms that allow
for this unique flexibility called ``homeostatic plasticity'', so
neurons can change the rate they send messages and protect
communication in the face of outside disturbances. Our work has many
wide-reaching implications: We are studying how learning and memory
suffer when these mechanisms malfunction; We are exploring how being
awake or asleep affects these mechanisms; and we are investigating how
States of being too excitable or not excitable enough contribute to
disorders like epilepsy and autism spectrum disorder. Basic research,
like my own, is paramount to understanding the brain at a level deep
enough to develop treatments and interventions for diseases and
disorders.
SfN believes strongly in the research continuum: basic science
leads to clinical innovations, which lead to translational uses
positively impacting the public's health. Basic science is the
foundation upon which all health advances are built. To cure diseases,
we need to understand them through fundamental discovery-based
research. However, basic research depends on reliable, sustained
funding from the Federal Government. SfN is grateful to Congress for
its support of the important mission of the NSF, which includes a focus
on promoting the progress of science and advancing the National health,
prosperity, and welfare, through increased appropriations in recent
years.
the importance of the research continuum
NSF funding for basic research is critical for facilitating
groundbreaking discoveries and for training researchers at the bench.
For the United States to remain a leader in biomedical research,
Congress must continue to support basic research fueling discoveries as
well as the economy. The deeper our grasp of basic science, the more
successful those focused on clinical and translational research will
be. We use a wide range of experimental and animal models not used
elsewhere in the research pipeline. These opportunities create
discoveries--sometimes unexpected discoveries -expanding knowledge of
biological processes, often at the molecular level. This level of
discovery reveals new targets for research to treat all kinds of brain
disorders that affect millions of people in the United States and
beyond.
NSF basic research funding is also a key economic driver of science
at universities and research organizations across the country. Federal
investments in scientific research fuel the Nation's pharmaceutical,
biotechnology and medical device industries. The private sector
utilizes basic scientific discoveries funded through NSF to improve
health and foster a sustainable trajectory for American's Research and
Development (R&D) enterprise. Basic science generates the knowledge
needed to uncover the mysteries behind human diseases, which leads to
private sector development of new treatments and therapeutics. This
important first step is not ordinarily funded by industry given the
long-term path of basic science and the pressures for shorter-term
return on investments by industry. Congressional investment in basic
science is irreplaceable in the pipeline for development of drugs,
devices, and other treatments for brain-related diseases and disorders.
Another example of NSF's success in funding neuroscience is the
Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies (BRAIN)
Initiative. A part of the research landscape in neuroscience, the BRAIN
Initiative has been critical in promoting future discoveries across
neuroscience and related scientific disciplines. By including funding
in the 21st Century Cures Act, Congress helped maintain the momentum of
this endeavor. Note, however, using those funds to supplant regular
appropriations would be counterproductive. There is no substitute for
robust, sustained, and predictable funding for NSF. SfN appreciates
Congress' ongoing investment in the BRAIN Initiative and urges its full
funding in FY22. Some recent exciting advancements in NSF funded
neuroscience research include the following:
n95 mask smart monitoring devices
As SARS-CoV-2 is a respiratory virus, face masks have emerged as a
protective mechanism. N95 masks are recommended by medical
professionals. At Northwestern University, researchers have taken the
N95 mask and engineered a smart monitoring device, calling it a
``Fitbit for the face''. The device is a small sensor that attaches to
the inside of an N95 mask and can detect heart rate, respiration rate,
and the mask wear time. These are all collected on a smart phone app,
and the app can also alert users when there are mask leaks. The
device's portability and ability to harvest energy from the heat and
motion of mask wearers increases the sensors battery life of up to 11
days or more. Researchers hope this device will help medical
professionals better detect Covid-19.
opioid epidemic may be countered by respiration-detecting technology
There is an opioid epidemic in the United States. In 2019, the
National Institute on Drug Abuse reported nearly 50,000 people in the
United States died from opioid overdoses. The opioid crisis has only
worsened over the course of the Covid-19 pandemic. However, scientists
at the University of Washington have created a wearable device that can
reverse an opioid overdose. When people overdose on opioids, this
causes respiratory failure. The new device works by detecting
respiration patterns and motions in its user during an opioid overdose.
If the user stops breathing or moving, the device administers naloxone,
a competitive antagonist that works to restore respiration. The
researchers at the University of Washington have tested this device in
both a supervised injection facility and a hospital. They found their
closed-loop system accurately tracked breathing rate in self-injected
and simulated opioid-induced apneas. This system has the potential to
detect opioid overdoses before becoming fatal and could reduce the
burden of the opioid epidemic.
funding in regular order
SfN joins the biomedical research community in supporting an
increase in NSF funding to at least $11 billion, a $2.162 billion
increase over FY22. This proposed increase is necessary to provide
certainty to the field of science, allowing for the exploitation of new
scientific opportunity, additional training of the next generation of
scientists, increased economic growth and further improvements in the
public's health. Equally as important as providing a reliable increase
in funding for biomedical research is ensuring funding is approved
before the end of the fiscal year. Continuing Resolutions have
significant consequences on research, including restricting NSF's
ability to fund grants. For some of our members, this means waiting for
a final decision to be made on funding before knowing if their
perfectly scored grant would in fact be realized or operating a lab
with 90 percent of the awarded funding until appropriations are final.
This negatively impacts all the positive benefits research provides the
field. SfN strongly supports the appropriation of NSF funding in a
timely manner which avoids delays in approving new research grants or
causes reductions in funding for already approved research funding.
SfN thanks the subcommittee for your strong and continued support
of biomedical research and looks forward to working with you to ensure
the United States remains the global leader in neuroscience research
and discovery. Collaboration among Congress, the NSF, and the
scientific research community has created great benefits for not only
the United States but also people around the globe suffering from
brain-related diseases and disorders. On behalf of the Society for
Neuroscience, we urge you to continue this critical cooperation and
support of biomedical research.
[This statement was submitted by Gina Turrigiano, PhD, President]
______
Prepared Statement of United Fishermen of Alaska (UFA)
Dear Chairman Shaheen and Ranking Member Moran:
United Fishermen of Alaska (UFA) is the Alaska commercial fishing
industry trade association, representing 37 commercial fishing
organizations based in both Alaska and Washington that participate in
fisheries throughout the Alaska, and Federal fisheries off the Alaska
and Washington/Oregon coasts.
As you prepare the FY 23 Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related
Agencies (CJS) appropriations bill, UFA requests that you work with
your colleagues to ensure increased funding in the CJS bill for the
Saltonstall-Kennedy (S-K) Grant Program.
Enacted in 1954, the S-K Act aims to `` . . . aid the American
commercial fishing industry by promoting the free flow of domestically
produced products in commerce and developing and increasing markets for
those products,'' through a federal, competitive grant program. As you
know, the S-K Grant Program is funded by a tariff on imported seafood,
the revenues from which are transferred from USDA into NOAA's ``Promote
and Develop Seafood Products'' account. The tariffs capitalizing the
Promote and Develop account have increased almost every year from $82
million in 2007 to over $240 million in 2021. Regardless of this
dramatic and consistent increase, the S-K Grant Program has stayed in
the $8- $12 million range of Congressional funding. The fiscal Year 22
funding for the S-K Grant Program is $11.8 million, approximately 4.8%
of the ``transfer'' from USDA. However, the S-K Act clearly States
that:
(e) Allocation of fund moneys
(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, all moneys in
the fund shall be used exclusively for the purpose of promoting
United States fisheries in accordance with the provisions of
this section, and no such moneys shall be transferred from the
fund for any other purpose . . . .(A) the Secretary shall use
no less than 60 per centum of such moneys to make direct
industry assistance grants to develop the United States
fisheries and to expand domestic and foreign markets for United
States fishery products pursuant to subsection (c) of this
section;
Increased S-K funding is needed for the U.S. seafood industry now
more than ever. World events have closed markets and significantly
raised tariffs on many U.S. seafood exports. Moreover, because of the
war in Ukraine and other U.S. policies, several foreign nations have
been restricted from importing seafood to the U.S. (The U.S. imports
approximately 90% of seafood consumed domestically). Increased S-K
funding should focus on increasing domestic consumption of U.S. caught
seafood as well as the secondary processing of seafood within the U.S.
American fisheries are also challenged by disproportionate foreign
government spending to support their fishing industries. For example,
Norway spends more than 10 times the amount of money allocated to
market U.S. produced salmon on marketing Norwegian salmon in U.S.
markets. Increased S-K allocations could, in part, level the playing
field in the promotion of U.S. produced seafood to U.S. markets.
Recently, Congress re-established the American Fisheries Advisory
Committee (AFAC Committee) to work with NOAA to prioritize and direct
S-K funding. UFA, as a representative of the Alaska Seafood Industry,
is looking forward to AFAC's new leadership role in the application of
S-K funding. It has been 50 years since S-K funding decisions had
industry input as was intended by the 1954 enabling legislation.
According to the legislation, the purpose of S-K funding was ``to
assist persons in carrying out research and development projects
addressed to any aspect of United States fisheries, including, but not
limited to, harvesting, processing, marketing, and associated
infrastructures.'' The AFAC Committee, as designed, will have both
geographical and experiential diversity including fishermen, scientists
and regulators drawing from six regions across the country. As such,
AFAC will be an effective advisory body, ensuring that increased S-K
funding is strategically invested to return maximum benefit to the
American seafood industry.
UFA, as the Alaska seafood industry's representative and advocate,
would like to see the S-K Grant funding begin to approach the
percentage of U.S. tariffs on imported seafood that were envisioned
when the original statute was passed. For FY 23, UFA encourages you to
consider funding the S-K Grant Program at no less than 15% of the
transfer to NOAA's ``Promote and Develop Seafood Products'' account
derived from tariffs on imported seafood as a specific line item in the
budget. This equates to approximately $35 million and is a step in the
right direction towards the 60% language contained in the S-K Act. In
future years, we recommend continued incremental increases up to 60%.
We thank you for considering UFA's request for increased S-K Grant
funding that will address the new and increased needs of America's
fishing industry and ensure the new AFAC Committee's ability to
maximize national seafood marketing as they begin to address the
rebuilding and expansion of America's seafood markets.
Sincerely,
Matt Alward, President
Tracy Welch, Executive Director
______
Prepared Statement of University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
On behalf of the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
(UCAR), a nonprofit consortium of more than 122 North American colleges
and universities focused on research and training in the Earth system
sciences, I appreciate the opportunity to submit for the record our
fiscal year (FY) 2023 funding priorities for the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the National Science Foundation
(NSF), and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).
These agencies serve an incredibly--and increasingly--important role in
our understanding of climate change and how we can mitigate its adverse
effects. The below funding priorities reflect my view of what resources
are needed so they can meet their missions.
By way of background, UCAR is the manager of the National Center
for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) on behalf of NSF. Founded in 1960, we
are trusted administrators of the financial, human resources,
facilities, and information technology functions that are essential to
NCAR's success.
We bring together the Earth system science community to exchange
ideas, discuss challenges, and share what we've learned. By connecting
researchers and educators with cutting-edge resources--and with the
private sector--we take research out of the lab into the real world for
the benefit of society. UCAR members constitute a self-governing body
representing nearly all academic programs in Earth system science in
North America. We provide a clear voice for our membership, in
collaboration with the broader community, to convey the value of our
research, education, and partnerships to policymakers and decision
makers.
It is undeniable that we have entered a new era of extreme weather
driven by climate change. While the U.S. is no stranger to extreme
events, impacts from recent events have been unprecedented. Many parts
of our country have been drowned in devastating floods, baked under
deadly heat, suffered multi-year droughts, and burned from fast-moving
and intensely hot wildfires. This includes many of our own staff who
fled their homes in December, some of whom lost their homes, and many
more who are still feeling the impacts to this day. In addition, new
forms of extreme weather have appeared in recent years, including
severe tornados that level entire towns and Arctic cyclones that erode
coastlines.
These phenomena are just the beginning. Whereas the incremental
warming of our Earth system may seem small, on-the-ground impacts are
massive. In addition to local devastation, the impact of extreme
weather reverberates through our natural, physical, and social systems.
The Federal Government must not waver in its commitment to produce
breakthrough research that benefits science, human safety, economic
prosperity, and national security.
I appreciate and support the widespread increases to atmospheric
research in the President's budget request. I respectfully request the
subcommittee consider UCAR's recommendations regarding targeted
investments, in the following areas of priority. I believe these
modifications will better prepare the country to combat the growing
climate-related challenges that will affect every American.
national institute of standards and technology
I respectfully request at least $975 million for Scientific and
Technical Research and Services (equal to the request).
The formation and impacts of wildfire must be better understood to
protect communities in the western United States that are dealing with
the year-round threat of destruction and displacement from fire events.
In particular, the wildland-urban interface must be studied to better
understand air quality impacts and fuels composition. This should be
part of a more comprehensive, all-of-government approach to addressing
wildfires.
I appreciate the subcommittee significantly increasing funding for
Scientific and Technical Research and Services (STRS) in its FY 23
request. I respectfully request that within the total for STRS, an
additional $25 million is designated for NCAR to begin the cross-
disciplinary and interagency work necessary to protect life and
property from the increasing threat of wildland fire.
The Fire Research Division develops, verifies, and utilizes
measurements and predictive methods to quantify the behavior of fire
and means to reduce the impact of fire on people, property, and the
environment. This work involves integration of laboratory measurements,
verified methods of prediction, and large-scale fire experiments to
demonstrate the use and value of the research products.
Residents of Colorado are acutely aware of the dangers posed by
wildland fire, in particular when wildfire encroaches on the urban
environment. As a Colorado-based entity, NCAR is uniquely positioned to
lead community efforts to better understand wildfire and develop an
integrated approach to addressing impacts.
In the wake of the NCAR, Marshall, and Middle Fork fires, this
issue is top of mind for not only Colorado and the organization, but
scientists and policy makers across the American West. NCAR can use
additional funding to build out a wildfire research test bed.
Additional funding at NIST can allow for increased research into
understanding wildfire interactions with the wildland urban interface
(WUI). NCAR can also use increased funding to couple the CESM2
(Community Earth System Model Version 2) with local models like WRF-
Fire (Weather Research and Forecasting--Fire) and WRF-Chem (Weather
Research and Forecasting coupled with Chemistry) to understand how
large-scale changes to the Earth system will impact local fire
dynamics, air quality, and local decision making on the ground. NCAR is
well positioned with its existing expertise to take advantage of
additional funding to accelerate wildfire research, and to collaborate
with others in the Earth system science community to address this
critical issue.
national oceanic and atmospheric administration
I respectfully request at least $7.2 billion for NOAA (6 percent
more than the request).
NOAA plays a critical role in our efforts to both understand and
mitigate the threat of climate change. To ensure that NOAA and its
subagencies have the dedicated resources it needs to continue and
expand upon its important work, I respectfully request at least:
--$9 million for sustained funding of climate intervention research
at NCAR, within the Office of Atmospheric Research (equal to
the request). We have yet to achieve a full understanding of
the impacts of climate intervention activities and their
associated risks and benefits. Further research is needed to
study climate dynamics and air chemistry impacts of
geoengineering the Earth system. NCAR is uniquely positioned to
study both the climate dynamics and air chemistry impacts of
geoengineering on the Earth system.
--$4.48 billion for Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (equal to the
request), including at least $16.27 million in dedicated
funding to support NCAR's continued development of Airborne
Phased Array Radar (APAR). These resources are needed in
anticipation of NSF completing its award process in early 2023.
APAR is a critical tool for studying weather and related
hazards, especially over rugged terrain or the open ocean where
operations are inherently challenging. Major advances in radar
technology have paved the way for development of APAR to
provide more detailed observations from within high-impact
weather systems. An APAR system is currently being designed and
developed by NCAR for installation on the NSF/NCAR C-130
aircraft. This will provide more agile scanning strategies and
enhanced capabilities for researchers to advance science
frontiers.
--$15 million for NOAA-wide activities that support Software
Development and Code Design of next generation predictive
models. NCAR's Computational and Information Systems Lab (CISL)
manages and operates two state-of-the-art supercomputers for
the Earth system science community. However, supercomputing-
built infrastructure is only as valuable as the code developed
for advanced model runs. The research community plays a
critical role in supporting the operational mission of NOAA,
but more must be done to ensure continued community engagement
with investments in training programs and sustainable pathways
for the next generation of Earth system software developers. I
respectfully request $15 million in FY 2023 for additional
investments in code design and software engineering, coupled
with physical sciences, to advance predictability of high
impact weather.
national science foundation
The National Science Foundation and its numerous facilities perform
essential functions in our understanding of the physical world. In
addition, Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences (AGS) are vital for
tracking and analyzing extraterrestrial impacts to Earth's weather and
climate. To help NSF meet its mission, I respectfully request at least
$301.4 million for AGS (equal to the request) and $124.92 million for
NCAR Operations and Maintenance of NCAR's Facilities (7.5% more than
the request).
--I thank the subcommittee for its continued support of operations
and maintenance of NCAR facilities. However, rising inflation
means that more money will be needed to adequately maintain NSF
facilities, including NCAR. This increase is necessary so that
NCAR can continue to attract top scientists, while also
modernizing NCAR's Mesa Laboratory in Boulder, Colorado. I
respectfully request at least $124.9 million (7.5% above the
request) for NCAR Facilities.
--Funding for AGS should include dedicated support for further
development of the Coronal Solar Magnetism Observatory (COSMO),
a proposed suite of complementary ground-based instruments
designed to study magnetic fields and plasma conditions in the
Sun's atmosphere.
The impacts of space weather are felt across multiple sectors,
including the growing aerospace industry, necessitating increased
investments in research and observations of the Sun. Tiny,
electrically-charged particles hurled toward Earth from a solar storm
can disrupt radio communications, GPS signals, and other technologies
that people rely on daily. Understanding solar storms and space weather
will help protect electric grids that power communities in an
increasingly telecommunication-reliant world.
I thank the subcommittee for providing a preliminary investment of
$5.6 million in FY 2021 to survey prospective locations for COSMO.
Additional funding beyond the initial award is needed to complete site
survey, choose a candidate site, and to finish construction design and
get an accurate cost estimate of all remaining elements of COSMO. I
respectfully request an additional $8 million in FY 2023, specified in
report language, to support this next stage of progress for this
critical endeavor.
Again, I thank the subcommittee for its attention to these matters
and commitment to ensuring NOAA, NSF, and NIST can continue and expand
their increasingly important work. I am more than happy to be a
resource for the subcommittee as it progresses through the FY 2023
appropriations process.
[This statement was submitted by Dr. Antonio J. Busalacchi,
President]
______
Prepared Statement of Western Governors' Association
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and Members of the
subcommittee, the Western Governors' Association (WGA) appreciates the
opportunity to provide testimony on items within the jurisdiction of
the subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies,
all of which relate to the U.S. Department of Commerce. WGA is an
independent organization representing the Governors of the 22
westernmost States and territories. The Association is an instrument of
the Governors for bipartisan policy development, information sharing
and collective action on issues of critical importance to the western
United States.
Western Governors support strong and dedicated funding for the
National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS) program under
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). WGA is
well-acquainted with the significant environmental, economic, and
social effects of drought on the West and its communities. Drought
contributes to the incidence of forest and rangeland wildfire, impairs
ecosystems and wildlife habitat, degrades agricultural productivity,
and poses threats to municipal and industrial water supplies. A growing
population's dependence on limited water resources creates challenges
for water management across the West, from the Great Plains to the
Intermountain West to the coastal, estuarine, and marine environments
of the Pacific States and islands. Planning for an adequate, reliable,
and clean water supply requires accurate and complete water and weather
information.
NIDIS promotes a coordinated and integrated approach to managing
future drought. This approach involves improved forecasting and
monitoring to provide the kind of authoritative, objective, and timely
drought information that farmers, water managers, decision-makers, and
State and local governments require for effective drought preparation
and response. Through NIDIS, NOAA is building a network of early
warning systems for drought while working with local resource managers
to identify and address unique regional drought information needs.
Western Governors value the approach used to build and improve
NIDIS. Rather than creating a new NIDIS bureaucracy, the system draws
from existing capacity in States, universities, and multiple Federal
agencies, as called for in the original authorizing legislation. Given
our shared fiscal challenges, WGA regards this as a model for Federal-
State collaboration in shared information services.
Water users throughout the West--including farmers, ranchers,
Tribes, land managers, business owners, recreationalists, wildlife
managers, and decision-makers at all levels of government--must be able
to assess the risks of drought before its onset to make informed
decisions and implement effective mitigation measures. For these
reasons, Western Governors request continued support and strong funding
for the National Weather Service River Forecast Centers and Weather
Forecast Offices and the NIDIS program, which perform a valuable role
in western water management and drought response.
Many western communities, especially Tribal communities, lack
access to broadband internet due to the high cost of infrastructure and
the economic challenges of serving low customer densities in rural
areas. When communities do have access to broadband, download and
upload speeds are often insufficient to meet bandwidth demands. These
realities have left many rural businesses at a competitive disadvantage
and citizens without access to telework, telemedicine, and distance
learning opportunities. Consequently, Western Governors support efforts
to adopt a Federal definition of broadband that is higher and more
scalable than 25/3 Mbps. In addition, the Governors support efforts to
leverage state expertise through State block grants and opportunities
to improve connectivity on rural and Tribal lands. To ensure that
Tribal areas receive adequate investment, Federal broadband programs
should allocate a designated portion of their available funding to
Tribal projects. Western Governors applaud the historic level of
broadband funding in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA,
Public Law 117-58), particularly the funds allocated to the existing
Tribal Broadband Connectivity Program and the new Broadband Equity,
Access, and Deployment Program administered by the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). The Governors
look forward to engaging with NTIA on this funding and stand ready to
implement projects for the benefit of rural and Tribal communities.
Deployment of broadband infrastructure to these underserved and
unserved communities requires an accurate picture of nationwide
broadband availability. Western Governors appreciate the Federal
Communications Commission's plans in 2022 to implement the Broadband
Deployment Accuracy and Technological Availability Act, known as the
Broadband DATA Act, and address the accuracy of broadband data coverage
and mapping. The Governors support continued investment in these
efforts, which are especially critical with the NTIA deploying the
second disbursement of IIJA funds to States using a formula based on
new FCC maps. WGA also encourages the coordination of data collection
strategies among the Federal Communications Commission, U.S. Department
of Agriculture, and other agencies involved in broadband mapping and
deployment.
On the subject of data collection, Western Governors are supportive
of the implementation of the Foundations for Evidence-Based
Policymaking Act of 2018 (the Evidence Act, Public Law 115-435). The
act established a new set of comprehensive requirements for Federal
agencies regarding their collection, use, and management of data in
evidence-building functions. One such requirement in the Evidence Act
is for Federal agency heads to ``consult with . . . State and local
governments.'' Western Governors have been actively engaging with
Federal agencies as they carry out the provisions of the Evidence Act
and are intent on assuring that States are robustly engaged by agencies
in the required development of agency learning agendas. Overseen by the
head of each Federal agency, the purpose of the learning agendas,
according to the Evidence Act, is ``identifying and addressing policy
questions relevant to the programs, policies, and regulations of the
agency.''
According to a recent Government Accountability Office (GAO)
report, (GAO-20-119, Evidence-Based Policymaking), however, ``evidence-
building activities are fragmented within . . . agencies and occur at
multiple levels and entities within and across the agencies'' and that
``uncoordinated or poorly coordinated efforts can waste scarce funds
and limit their effectiveness.'' The report went on to say that
``[e]ffectively-coordinated [evidence building] processes can help
agencies ensure they are comprehensively and systematically looking
across their organizations to leverage their existing evidence and
focus limited resources on building new evidence . . . Such processes
can help ensure agencies are well positioned to meet forthcoming
Evidence Act requirements related to assessing and prioritizing
evidence across the entire agency.'' GAO reiterated the importance of
active Federal agency engagement, as ``through this engagement,
agencies may find that external stakeholders (and States), have, or are
aware of, existing evidence that helps the agency meet its needs or
provide a fuller picture of performance . . . [and] ensure it is
meeting the evidence needs of decision makers.''
Given the numerous Federal agency programs, policies, and
regulations that directly affect the collective States, agency
coordination with States and the integration of state data into those
relevant Federal programs is paramount to their success. For these
reasons, Western Governors encourage the subcommittee to direct Federal
agencies to improve their internal processes required in the Evidence
Act to coordinate with States on Federal data policies and procedures
and incorporate state data into Federal decision-making processes.
Western Governors also support full and consistent Federal funding to
carry out the requirements of this critical legislation and ensure that
agencies have the capacity and resources required to fulfill GAO's
evidence-based policymaking recommendations.
Finally, the Economic Development Administration (EDA) plays a
critical role in rural economic development, particularly in light of
recently allocated supplemental funding that has significantly expanded
assistance available to communities. Western Governors encourage
increased flexibility in the allowable uses of EDA funds so rural
communities can prioritize investments that improve quality of life and
amenities. Relatedly, outcome metrics based solely on the absolute
number of jobs created do not reflect the important economic benefits
of such investments. Nor do they account for the relative effect of job
creation in communities with small populations or areas with high
unemployment or poverty rates.
Western Governors recommend an increase in the proportion of
economic development and infrastructure funding that goes toward
capacity building. Strengthening local capacity by providing ample and
consistent Federal funding for institutions, training, and technical
assistance is essential to maximize the effect of State and Federal
resources and to ensure that assistance reaches the communities that
need it most.
Western Governors recognize the enormous challenge you have in
balancing competing funding priorities, and we appreciate the
difficulty of the decisions the subcommittee must make. These
recommendations are offered in a spirit of cooperation and respect, and
WGA is prepared to assist you as the subcommittee discharges its
critical and challenging responsibilities.
[This statement was submitted by James D. Ogsbury, Executive
Director]
LIST OF WITNESSES, COMMUNICATIONS, AND PREPARED STATEMENTS
----------
Page
Alliance to End Slavery and Trafficking, Prepared Statement of
the............................................................ 312
Ambassador Katherine Tai, The United States Trade Representative,
Prepared Statement of.......................................... 268
American:
Educational Research Association, Prepared Statement of...... 318
Geophysical Union, Prepared Statement of The................. 320
Indian Higher Education Consortium, Prepared Statement of the 322
Institute of Biological Sciences, Prepared Statement of...... 325
Association:
For Psychological Science, Prepared Statement of......... 339
Of Science and Technology Centers, American Alliance of
Museums, Association of Children's Museums, and
Association of Science Museum Directors, Prepared
Statement of........................................... 341
Physiological:
Association Services, Inc., Prepared Statement of........ 327
Society, Prepared Statement of........................... 303
Society for:
Engineering Education, Prepared Statement of............. 330
Microbiology, Prepared Statement of The.................. 333
The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Prepared Statement
of the................................................. 334
Society of:
Agronomy (ASA), Prepared Statement of the................ 336
Plant Biologists, Prepared Statement of.................. 337
Board Member of Youth Advocate Programs, Inc., Prepared Statement
of............................................................. 343
Boozman, Senator John, U.S. Senator From Arkansas, Questions
Submitted by
Braun, Senator Mike, U.S. Senator From Indiana, Questions
Submitted by
Capito, Senator Shelley Moore, U.S. Senator From West Virginia,
Questions Submitted by
Collins, Senator Susan M., U.S. Senator From Maine, Questions
Submitted by
Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, Prepared Statement
of............................................................. 345
Consortium of Social Science Associations, Prepared Statement of. 348
Coons, Senator Christopher A., U.S. Senator From Delaware,
Questions Submitted by......................................... 295
Demand Progress, Prepared Statement of........................... 353
Department of Justice, Prepared Statement of..................... 305
Entomological Society of America, Prepared Statement of.......... 356
Environmental and Energy Study Institute, Prepared Statement of.. 358
Family Based Alternative Sentencing (FBAS), Prepared Statement of 359
Federation of:
American Societies for Experimental Biology, Prepared
Statement of............................................... 361
Associations in Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Prepared
Statement of............................................... 363
Feinstein, Senator Dianne, U.S. Senator from California,
Questions Submitted by
Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University, Prepared
Statement of................................................... 365
Garland, Hon. Merrick B., Attorney General of the United States,
Department of Justice:
Prepared Statement of........................................ 61
Questions Submitted to....................................... 97
Statement of................................................. 60
Geological Society of America, Prepared Statement of the......... 367
Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission (GLIFWC),
Prepared Statement of.......................................... 369
Hagerty, Senator Bill, U.S. Senator From Tennessee, Questions
Submitted by
Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Prepared Statement of...... 371
Humane Society Legislative Fund and The Humane Society of The
United States, Prepared Statement of........................... 373
Indigenous Cannabis Coalition, Prepared Statement of............. 375
Insights Association, Prepared Statement of...................... 375
International Fund for Animal Welfare, Prepared Statement of..... 378
Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe, Prepared Statement of the............. 380
Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, Prepared Statement of the..... 383
Kennedy, Senator John, U.S. Senator From Louisiana, Questions
Submitted by
Leahy, Senator Patrick, U.S. Senator from Vermont:
Opening Statement of......................................... 226
Questions Submitted by
Learning and Education Academic Research Network (LEARN),
Prepared Statement of the...................................... 386
Manchin, Senator Joe, III, U.S. Senator From West Virginia,
Questions Submitted by
Monterey Bay Aquarium, Prepared Statement of..................... 387
Moran, Senator Jerry, U.S. Senator From Kansas:
Opening Statement of
Questions Submitted by
Murkowski, Senator Lisa, U.S. Senator From Alaska, Questions
Submitted by
National:
Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO)
Educational Fund, Prepared Statement of the................ 389
Congress of American Indians, Prepared Statement of the...... 392
Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA)/Guardian Ad Litem
(GAL) Association for Children, Prepared Statement of...... 394
Fish and Wildlife Foundation, Prepared Statement of.......... 396
Legal Aid & Defender Association (NLADA), Prepared Statement
of......................................................... 399
Marine Sanctuary Foundation, Prepared Statement of........... 402
Ocean and Coastal Security , Prepared Statement of the....... 405
Opinion Research Center (NORC), Prepared Statement of........ 408
Seafood Marketing Coalition, Prepared Statement of the....... 410
Natural Science Collections Alliance, Prepared Statement of...... 411
Nature Conservancy, Prepared Statement of the.................... 413
Nelson, Hon. Bill, Administrator, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration:
Prepared Statement of........................................ 119
Questions Submitted to....................................... 150
New England Innocence Project and The National Innocence Network,
Prepared Statement of.......................................... 416
New Hampshire Superior Court, Prepared Statement of.............. 419
Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission (NWIFC), Prepared Statement
of............................................................. 420
NSF Responsiveness to COVID-19................................... 128
Opensecrets, Prepared Statement of............................... 423
Pacific Salmon Commission, Prepared Statement of the............. 425
Panchanathan, Hon. Sethuraman, Director, National Science
Foundation:
Prepared Statement of........................................ 123
Questions Submitted to....................................... 157
Partnership for America's Children, Prepared Statement of........ 426
Population Association of America/Association of Population
Centers, Prepared Statement of................................. 428
Raimondo, Hon. Gina, Secretary of Commerce, Department of
Commerce:
Prepared Statement of
Questions Submitted to
Statement of
Research!America, Prepared Statement of.......................... 430
Schatz, Senator Brian, U.S. Senator From Hawaii, Questions
Submitted by
Sea Grant Association, Prepared Statement of the................. 431
Seattle Indian Health Board, Prepared Statement of............... 434
Securing:
Taxpayer-Funded Research..................................... 129
The Future................................................... 123
Shaheen, Senator Jeanne, U.S. Senator From New Hampshire:
Opening Statement of
Prepared Statement of........................................ 167
Shelby, Senator Richard, U.S. Senator From Alabama, Questions
Submitted by................................................... 54
Society for:
Industrial and:
Applied Mathematics (SIAM), Prepared Statement of........ 437
Organizational Psychology, Prepared Statement of......... 439
Neuroscience, Prepared Statement of.......................... 442
Tai, Ambassador Katherine, U.S. Trade Representative:
Questions Submitted to....................................... 293
Statement of................................................. 266
United Fishermen of Alaska (UFA), Prepared Statement of.......... 443
University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, Prepared
Statement of................................................... 445
U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) and the U.S. Department of
Justice (DOJ), Prepared Statement of........................... 307
Van Hollen, Senator Chris, U.S. Senator From Maryland, Questions
Submitted by................................................... 154
Western Governors' Association, Prepared Statement of............ 447
Wildlife Conservation Society, Prepared Statement of The......... 310
World-Class Research Infrastructure.............................. 128
Wray, Hon. Christopher A., Director, Federal Bureau of
Investigation:
Prepared Statement of........................................ 230
Statement of................................................. 227
SUBJECT INDEX
----------
Page
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Additional Committee Questions
Questions Submitted by Senators:
Boozman, John............................................ 46
Braun, Mike.............................................. 53
Capito, Shelley Moore.................................... 48
Feinstein, Dianne........................................ 200
Hagerty, Bill
Kennedy, John
Leahy, Patrick........................................... 42
Moran, Jerry............................................. 42
Murkowski, Lisa
Raimondo, Gina........................................... 198
Schatz, Brian............................................ 205
Shelby, Richard.......................................... 54
Affordable Connectivity Program and Digital Equity Grants........ 18
Anomalous Health Incidents....................................... 197
Bead Funding..................................................... 10
Bead Funding to:
Alaska....................................................... 13
Vermont...................................................... 12
Broadband........................................................ 176
Broadband Development Grants..................................... 185
Broadband Equity Access Deployment (BEAD) Mapping................ 8
Broadband--Notice of Funding Opportunity......................... 190
China Opposition to the Usica Bill............................... 189
Chip:
Fabrication Facilities Process............................... 181
Manufacturing in America..................................... 22
Chips and Semi-Conductors........................................ 180
Climate.......................................................... 179
Climate Change and Current Weather Priorities.................... 197
Coastal Resilience and Habitat Funding........................... 26
Commerce:
Department Entities' List.................................... 24
Funding Priorities........................................... 169
Commitment to Unserved Areas..................................... 37
Competition And Affordability.................................... 30
Competitives in the Indo-Pacific................................. 183
Ensuring:
Long Term Affordability...................................... 21
Success of Department Investments............................ 194
Export Control Restrictions and Sanctions........................ 188
Export Controls.................................................. 173
FCC Mapping Completion........................................... 36
Fisheries:
Enforcements on Lobster Industry............................. 186
Surveys...................................................... 175
Food Aid in the Ukraine.......................................... 196
Funding:
Assistance to States......................................... 11
For the Supply Chain Challenges.............................. 195
Priority: The Unserved and the Underserved................... 20
Under a CR................................................... 18
Government Spending.............................................. 28
Grant and Stakeholder Engagement................................. 31
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act........................... 194
Insufficient Mapping and Coverage................................ 35
International Standard Setting Organizations..................... 187
ITA and Promoting Exports........................................ 195
Job Creation for Infrastructure Programs......................... 27
Labor Negotiations With West Coast Ports......................... 191
Maximizing Funding Efficiency for Local Governments.............. 28
NOAA Funding for At-Sea Monitoring............................... 193
Offshore Wind Deployment......................................... 180
Opening Statement of Senator Jerry Moran......................... 174
Operations and Maintenance....................................... 38
Pilot Training Program for NOAA.................................. 177
Right Whale Regulations.......................................... 40
Rising Cost of Fertilizer........................................ 39
Role of U.S. Companies in Reconstructing the Ukraine............. 196
Service Concerns................................................. 32
Solar:
Statute...................................................... 183
Supply Chain................................................. 179
State Preparation for Funding.................................... 19
Statistical Methods and Assumptions Used by Census............... 181
Submarine Cables for Connectivity................................ 25
Super Computing in West Virginia................................. 189
Tariffs.......................................................... 177
The American Economy............................................. 192
Timeline for Service Maps........................................ 33
Tribal Connectivity Funding...................................... 25
Tribal Connectivity Funding Process.............................. 17
Workforce for the Tourism Industry............................... 174
__________
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Additional Committee Questions................................... 96
Questions Submitted by Senators:
Braun, Mike.............................................. 110
Collins, Susan........................................... 106
Hagerty, Bill............................................ 109
Kennedy, John............................................ 106
Leahy, Patrick........................................... 97
Manchin, Joe, III........................................ 102
Murkowski, Lisa.......................................... 105
Schatz, Brian............................................ 101
Garland, Hon. Merrick B., Attorney General of the United States,
Department of Justice, Prepared Statement of:
I. GKeeping our Country Safe
A. GReducing Violent Crime and Gun Violence.............. 63
B. GProtecting National Security......................... 64
C. GCombating Drug Trafficking and Preventing Overdose
Deaths................................................. 65
D. GProtecting Vulnerable Populations.................... 65
E. GProtecting Our Democratic Institutions............... 65
II. GProtecting Civil Rights
A. GReinvigorating Civil Rights Enforcement.............. 66
B. GFostering Trust and Accountability in Law Enforcement 66
C. GExpanding Access to Justice and Reforming Criminal
and Juvenile Justice Systems........................... 66
D. GAdvancing Environmental Justice and Tackling the
Climate Crisis......................................... 66
III. Safeguarding Economic Security, Fairness, and
Opportunity
A. GPreventing the Theft of Technology and Intellectual
Property............................................... 67
B. GReinvigorating Antitrust Enforcement and Consumer
Protection............................................. 67
C. GCombating Corruption and Financial Crime............. 67
D. GPromoting the Integrity and Efficiency of the
Bankruptcy System...................................... 67
E. GRevitalizing Tax Enforcement......................... 68
IV. Administering Just Immigrationcourt and Correctional
Systems
A. GAdministering an Equitable and Efficient Immigration
Court System........................................... 68
B. GMaintaining a Safe and Humane Correctional System.... 68
__________
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Additional Committee Questions................................... 261
Wray, Hon. Christopher, Director, Federal Bureau of
Investigation, Prepared Statement of........................... 230
Criminal Threats............................................. 235
Civil Rights............................................. 237
Crimes Against Children and Human Trafficking............ 236
Transnational Organized Crime (``TOC'').................. 236
Fiscal Year 2023 Budget Overview............................. 230
Key Cross-Cutting Capabilities and Capacities................ 238
Conclusion............................................... 239
Data Analytics and Technical Tools....................... 238
Key Threats and Challenges................................... 230
National Security............................................ 231
Cyber.................................................... 232
Foreign Influence........................................ 234
Top Terrorism Threats.................................... 231
__________
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
Additional Committee Questions................................... 150
Questions Submitted by Senators:
Feinstein, Dianne........................................
150....................................................
Kennedy, John............................................
156....................................................
Manchin, Joe, III........................................ 152
Schatz, Brian............................................
151....................................................
Van Hollen, Chris........................................ 154
__________
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Additional Committee Questions................................... 150
Questions Submitted by Senators:
Capito, Shelley Moore.................................... 52
Feinstein, Dianne........................................ 157
Hagerty, Bill............................................ 163
Manchin, Joe, III........................................ 159
Schatz, Brian............................................ 158
Additional Grant Funding With Fiscal Year 2023 Request Level..... 141
Aeronautic Capabilities.......................................... 131
Applied Research vs Basic Research............................... 144
Arctic and Antarctic Research.................................... 149
Commerical Lander................................................ 135
Encouraging State Participation in EPSCOR........................ 139
Heliophysics and Space Weather................................... 147
Historically Black Colleges and Universities..................... 135
If USICA/Competes Act Advances................................... 146
Maintaining Basic Research Levels While Establishing Tip
Directorate.................................................... 142
Moon Flight Timeline............................................. 141
NSF's Fiscal Year 2023 Budget to Congress........................ 121
Directorate for Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships..... 122
New Program: Granted......................................... 122
Regional Innovation Engines.................................. 122
Research Security............................................ 123
Panchanathan, Director, Prepared Statement of....................
123............................................................
Conclusion...................................................
129........................................................
Introduction.................................................
123........................................................
NSF Responsiveness to COVID-19...............................
128........................................................
Investing in:
A Diverse and Inclusive STEM Workforce...............
127................................................
Innovation and Emerging Industries...................
125................................................
Securing:
Taxpayer-Funded Research.............................
129................................................
The Future...........................................
123................................................
Strengthening Established NSF................................
124........................................................
World-Class Research Infrastructure..........................
128........................................................
Project Cost Overruns............................................ 148
Public Investment in Science vs Competing Nations................ 145
Quantum Information Science...................................... 134
Research Security Strategy Policy and China...................... 137
Returning Humans to the Moon..................................... 131
Wallops Flight Facility.......................................... 132
__________
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE
Additional Committee Questions................................... 293
Questions Submitted by Senators:
Boozman, John............................................ 297
Capito, Shelley Moore.................................... 299
Collins, Susan........................................... 297
Coons, Christopher....................................... 295
Feinstein, Dianne........................................ 293
Kennedy, John............................................ 300
Moran, Jerry............................................. 296
[all]