[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]