[House Hearing, 119 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                   AI IN MANUFACTURING: SECURING AMERICAN 
                   LEADERSHIP IN MANUFACTURING AND THE 
                   NEXT GENERATION OF TECHNOLOGIES

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                     SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, MANUFACTURING, 
                               AND TRADE

                                 OF THE

                    COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                      WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2025

                               __________

                            Serial No. 119-5


     Published for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce
     
 [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]    

                   govinfo.gov/committee/house-energy
                        energycommerce.house.gov
                        
                                __________

                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
59-655 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2025                  
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------     
                        
                    COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE

                        BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky
                                 Chairman
ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio                FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey
H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia           Ranking Member
GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida            DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado
RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina       JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois
EARL L. ``BUDDY'' CARTER, Georgia    DORIS O. MATSUI, California
GARY J. PALMER, Alabama              KATHY CASTOR, Florida
NEAL P. DUNN, Florida                PAUL TONKO, New York
DAN CRENSHAW, Texas                  YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York
JOHN JOYCE, Pennsylvania, Vice       RAUL RUIZ, California
    Chairman                         SCOTT H. PETERS, California
RANDY K. WEBER, Sr., Texas           DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan
RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia               MARC A. VEASEY, Texas
TROY BALDERSON, Ohio                 ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois
RUSS FULCHER, Idaho                  NANETTE DIAZ BARRAGAN, California
AUGUST PFLUGER, Texas                DARREN SOTO, Florida
DIANA HARSHBARGER, Tennessee         KIM SCHRIER, Washington
MARIANNETTE MILLER-MEEKS, Iowa       LORI TRAHAN, Massachusetts
KAT CAMMACK, Florida                 LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas
JAY OBERNOLTE, California            ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ, New York
JOHN JAMES, Michigan                 JAKE AUCHINCLOSS, Massachusetts
CLIFF BENTZ, Oregon                  TROY A. CARTER, Louisiana
ERIN HOUCHIN, Indiana                ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey
RUSSELL FRY, South Carolina          KEVIN MULLIN, California
LAUREL M. LEE, Florida               GREG LANDSMAN, Ohio
NICHOLAS A. LANGWORTHY, New York     JENNIFER L. McCLELLAN, Virginia
THOMAS H. KEAN, Jr., New Jersey
MICHAEL A. RULLI, Ohio
GABE EVANS, Colorado
CRAIG A. GOLDMAN, Texas
JULIE FEDORCHAK, North Dakota
                                 ------                                

                           Professional Staff

                     MEGAN JACKSON, Staff Director
                SOPHIE KHANAHMADI, Deputy Staff Director
               TIFFANY GUARASCIO, Minority Staff Director
           Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade

                       GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida
                                 Chairman
RUSS FULCHER, Idaho, Vice Chairman   JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois
DIANA HARSHBARGER, Tennessee           Ranking Member
KAT CAMMACK, Florida                 KATHY CASTOR, Florida
JAY OBERNOLTE, California            DARREN SOTO, Florida
JOHN JAMES, Michigan                 LORI TRAHAN, Massachusetts
CLIFF BENTZ, Oregon                  KEVIN MULLIN, California
ERIN HOUCHIN, Indiana                YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York
RUSSELL FRY, South Carolina          DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan
LAUREL M. LEE, Florida               MARC A. VEASEY, Texas
THOMAS H. KEAN, Jr., New Jersey      ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois
GABE EVANS, Colorado                 KIM SCHRIER, Washington
CRAIG A. GOLDMAN, Texas              FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey (ex 
BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky (ex              officio)
    officio)
                             C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Hon. Gus M. Bilirakis, a Representative in Congress from the 
  State of Florida, opening statement............................     2
    Prepared statement...........................................     4
Hon. Jan Schakowsky, a Representative in Congress from the State 
  of Illinois, opening statement.................................     7
    Prepared statement...........................................     9
Hon. Brett Guthrie, a Representative in Congress from the 
  Commonwealth of Kentucky, opening statement....................    10
    Prepared statement...........................................    12
Hon. Russ Fulcher, a Representative in Congress from the State of 
  Idaho, opening statement.......................................    15
    Prepared statement...........................................    16
Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr., a Representative in Congress from the 
  State of New Jersey, opening statement.........................    17
    Prepared statement...........................................    19

                               Witnesses

Jason Oxman, President and Chief Executive Officer, Information 
  Technology Industry Council....................................    21
    Prepared statement...........................................    23
Elisabeth B. Reynolds, Ph.D., Professor of the Practice, 
  Massachusetts Institute of Technology..........................    36
    Prepared statement...........................................    38
Jeff Kinder, Executive Vice President, Product Development and 
  Manufacturing Solutions, Autodesk..............................    51
    Prepared statement...........................................    53
Barbara Humpton, President and Chief Executive Officer, Siemens 
  USA............................................................    65
    Prepared statement...........................................    67

                           Submitted Material

Inclusion of the following was approved by unanimous consent.
List of documents submitted for the record.......................   115
Report of the National Association of Manufacturers, ``Working 
  Smarter: How Manufacturers Are Using Artificial Intelligence,'' 
  May 2024.......................................................   116
Statement of the National Association of Manufacturers, February 
  12, 2025.......................................................   132

 
AI IN MANUFACTURING: SECURING AMERICAN LEADERSHIP IN MANUFACTURING AND 
                  THE NEXT GENERATION OF TECHNOLOGIES

                              ----------                              


                      WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2025

                  House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade,
                          Committee on Energy and Commerce,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 11:07 a.m., in 
the John D. Dingell Room 2123, Rayburn House Office Building, 
Hon. Gus M. Bilirakis (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
    Members present: Representatives Bilirakis, Fulcher, 
Harshbarger, Cammack, Obernolte, James, Bentz, Houchin, Fry, 
Lee, Kean, Evans, Goldman, Guthrie (ex officio), Schakowsky 
(subcommittee ranking member), Castor, Soto, Trahan, Clarke, 
Dingell, Veasey, Kelly, Schrier, and Pallone (ex officio).
    Also present: Representative Joyce.
    Staff present: Ansley Boylan, Director of Operations; 
Jessica Donlon, General Counsel; Sydney Greene, Director, 
Finance and Logistics; Natalie Hellman, Professional Staff 
Member, Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade; Megan Jackson, 
Staff Director; Daniel Kelly, Press Secretary; Sophie 
Khanahmadi, Deputy Staff Director; Alex Khlopin, Clerk, 
Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade; Giulia Leganski, Chief 
Counsel, Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade; Joel Miller, Chief 
Counsel; Brannon Rains, Professional Staff Member, Commerce, 
Manufacturing, and Trade; Evangelos Razis, Professional Staff 
Member; Chris Sarley, Member Services/Stakeholder Director; 
Kaley Stidham, Press Assistant; Matt VanHyfte, Communications 
Director; Hannah Anton, Minority Policy Analyst; Rasheedah 
Blackwood, Minority Intern; Keegan Cardman, Minority Staff 
Assistant; Tiffany Guarascio, Minority Staff Director; Perry 
Hamilton, Minority Member Services & Outreach Manager; Lisa 
Hone, Minority Chief Counsel, Commerce, Manufacturing, and 
Trade; Mackenzie Kuhl, Minority Digital Manager; Phoebe Rouge, 
Minority FTC Detailee; and Andrew Souvall, Minority Director of 
Communications Outreach and Member Services.
    Mr. Bilirakis. The committee will come to order. Good 
morning, everyone.
    The chairman recognizes himself for 5 minutes.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GUS M. BILIRAKIS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
               CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA

    First of all, I want to say ``Happy birthday'' to one of 
our greatest Presidents, if not the greatest President we ever 
had: Abraham Lincoln. Today is the 12th, right? Absolutely.
    And then also I want to make sure I remember this. One of 
my staffers who has been with me about 10 years, including the 
internship, he has made me a better Member, and he has worked 
really hard on healthcare but also this committee, this 
particular committee. He is assigned to be my staffer for this 
committee.
    And I tell you what, he has made me a better Member, and I 
want to congratulate him for all his work. His name is Jim--
excuse me--Chris Jones, and he will be going over to the other 
side, but you know what--not the Senate--but he deserves a lot 
of credit. I think we have done a lot in this committee. And I 
tell you what, we have terrific staff.
    But thank you very much, Chris, for all your hard work. 
Congratulations and God bless you.
    [Applause.]
    All right. So good morning, everyone, and welcome to the 
first Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade Subcommittee hearing 
of the 119th Congress.
    I would like to express my sincere congratulations to my 
good friend, the chair, Mr. Guthrie, on his appointment to the 
powerful Energy and Commerce Committee, the oldest standing 
legislative committee in the House--I don't care what Ways and 
Means says--and the best darn committee in Congress, by far.
    I also want to thank the chair for putting his faith in me 
to lead this important subcommittee, which has broad 
jurisdiction over a great many important matters. This will be 
a busy Congress, and I am excited to lay the groundwork to 
accomplish a robust legislative agenda.
    I would be remiss if I didn't identify and welcome to this 
wonderful panel the new members of the Energy and Commerce 
Committee: Mr. Bentz from Oregon; Ms. Houchin from Indiana--we 
will be working closely together; Mr. Fry from South Carolina; 
Ms. Lee from the great State of Florida is a great friend of 
mine, and go Gators; and Mr. Kean from New Jersey, Mr. Evans 
from Colorado, and Mr. Goldman from Texas. Welcome. Welcome.
    I also want to thank my very good friend Russ Fulcher from 
the great State of Idaho. He will be serving as my vice chair. 
He is going to do an outstanding job. So it is either Gus or 
Russ. That is what he says.
    And, finally, it is good to be sitting next to my good 
friend Ms. Schakowsky from Illinois. I am greatly looking 
forward to working with you again and all the Members on this 
particular subcommittee.
    Now on to the business at hand. I am excited to kick this 
Congress off with an educational hearing examining the state of 
American manufacturing and how it can be revolutionized with 
the use of artificial intelligence.
    We know generative AI is currently dominating the headlines 
for its specific use case of AI, such as how DeepSeek is 
capturing warranted attention with their collection of 
Americans' personal data and subsequently sharing it with the 
Chinese Communist Party.
    But I think we must remember that generative AI--and, of 
course, you know, has some positive aspects, there is no 
question. But generative AI is only a specific use case of this 
technology, and AI's applications are much broader than what 
has claimed the spotlight recently.
    We have seen how AI applied to vehicles is paving the way 
for the next generation of vehicles that will drive themselves. 
I tell you what, it is very, very exciting, particularly with 
someone with disabilities such as myself.
    These autonomous vehicles promise to greatly improve auto 
safety, which is the most important thing, and provide vast 
mobility benefits to every American, including those with 
disabilities.
    We have also seen how the technology holds the power to 
completely revolutionize American manufacturing and bolster our 
supply chain. By integrating AI and machine learning into 
supply chain systems, we can better predict constraints and 
find potential weak points, which can be used to prevent shocks 
that disrupt entire industries.
    Our committee has led on supply chain mapping and 
monitoring legislation before and empowering companies to 
deploy emerging technologies like AI to better understand our 
supply chains. It could help us protect against the next 
pandemic or the next major labor shortage, and that is huge.
    We need to send that legislation--and I know Representative 
Bucshon, Dr. Bucshon, had it last session, but he is no longer 
on the committee, unfortunately, but he will be helping us. 
But, anyway, we ought to send it to the President's desk as 
soon as possible so we can begin work on making America 
resilient.
    Industries can also utilize the power of AI in our 
manufacturing ecosystems to find where redundancies exist and 
reduce waste in the developmental pipeline. To bring this 
country back to the forefront of what made it great, we need to 
reduce unnecessary waste and optimize our building 
capabilities.
    We know the American people are the most innovative in the 
world. Our job here in Congress will be to provide a pathway 
for these innovators to succeed. This is exciting stuff, folks. 
America's global leadership in the 21st century will be 
contingent on our ability to promote emerging technologies and 
establishing a pathway to unleash them throughout American 
manufacturing.
    We have a great panel of witnesses today to share examples 
of how AI is actively being used in manufacturing and supply 
chains. I want to thank them for being here today, particularly 
with this bad weather. Thanks for coming in. I think the 
chairman did a great job in giving us an extra hour to get 
here, so we appreciate that very much. I didn't run Greek time 
today because I had that extra hour.
    So, in any case, I yield back.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Bilirakis follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Bilirakis. And before I yield back, though, I want to 
recognize my good friend, the ranking member, Ms. Schakowsky, 
for 5 minutes for her opening statement. You are recognized.

 OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JAN SCHAKOWSKY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
              CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

    Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. And I just 
want to really welcome you back. I am wearing my Valentine's 
Day----
    Mr. Bilirakis. I appreciate that.
    Ms. Schakowsky [continuing]. For you. And I just wanted to 
say that we have been working on this committee for 12 years. 
We have really been partners here. And I want to say just at 
the beginning we have a lot of wonderful things that we have 
done for consumers.
    We have made life better for many children by protecting 
them. And, you know, we almost made it to the TICKET Act. So 
there are still things that are left undone that we want to do, 
and I know that we want to work on them together.
    So we are focusing today on the--we are focusing on AI, and 
we are focusing on manufacturing, and this is all very 
important. Let me just say that we saw, under President Biden, 
that, after many years of outsourcing, we saw a focus on 
providing wonderful things in the United States and a lot more 
building of things and doing of things here. But, you know, we 
have a long way to go to make sure that all the manufacturing 
is brought to the United States of America.
    And I wanted to talk a little bit about AI. You know, we 
have not done in this subcommittee a lot of work on holding 
tech accountable. And we made it partway to protect privacy. We 
have talked a lot about caring for children and protecting 
their privacy, but actually, when it comes to the dramatic 
improvements or increases you would say for tech companies, we 
really haven't done enough to count on them.
    What is really important, I believe, is that the tech 
companies right now have had a free rein from the beginning, 
and we have done so little to really make sure that consumers 
are considered all the time on what these tech companies are 
able to do.
    And I think we still are at the place that people feel that 
their most private information, their children's information, 
is not reined in. And I think it is time for us to take a look 
at what Big Tech is doing and if there are things that we might 
want to change and take them under control.
    So AI, I think what we have to make sure is that AI, which 
will certainly increase the volume of work that we do, that we 
are able to bring about in manufacturing, but what I am 
concerned about is that ordinary workers are also going to be 
considered when we talk about AI, and that they are not going 
to be--because there is going to be a lot more manufacturing 
that is done with AI, but what is going to happen to everyday 
Americans? So I think that has to be part of the consideration.
    I also just want to say that I am concerned about the 
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. And I know that I am out 
of time, but I am very disappointed that that agency which 
protected consumers--did a great job, $20 billion returned to 
consumers because of what they do. So we need to do more of 
consumer protection, and I hope we will.
    And with that, I yield back. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Schakowsky follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Bilirakis. I thank the gentlelady.
    And now I will recognize the chairman of the full 
committee, my good friend from the State of Kentucky, the great 
State of Kentucky, Mr. Guthrie. You are recognized for 5 
minutes for an opening statement, sir.

 OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BRETT GUTHRIE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
           CONGRESS FROM THE COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY

    Mr. Guthrie. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And as my friend the 
ranking member from Evanston, Illinois, may have on her car 
``Land of Lincoln,'' February 12th in 1809, he was born in 
Hodgenville, Kentucky, in the great Commonwealth of Kentucky, 
so lived there until he was a young boy. So you can come visit. 
National Park has a great service there. So thanks.
    It is important to be here today. And I just want to say 
that my path to the middle class as a family, my family's path 
is right through the factory floor. My dad worked for a big 
automotive foundry and worked his way into management from the 
union floor to management.
    And then, when I was in high school, they announced they 
were getting out of the foundry business and closed the 
foundry. So I saw the disruption that happens when that 
happens. I saw my dad being--he moved up into management, kind 
of became the leader of saving the plant. So we were kind of at 
our kitchen table where people gathered to try to--how are we 
going to try to keep the plant open? And I saw grown men that 
had coached me in Little League crying because they don't know 
how they are going to feed their families.
    So things are disruptive. And what we have to remember is 
that--I will never forget this lesson--when people in authority 
make decisions, it does affect real people. And what my friend 
the ranking member talked about, and we have to factor that in. 
I like to say what we do in the people's House affects people 
in their homes. So we have to be mindful.
    But, having said that, we know that we have to be more 
productive and continue to be more productive, and AI gives us 
the opportunity to be more productive. We have to outpace our 
competitors, and particularly in Asia and China, and AI gives 
us a great opportunity to do so.
    And we have to remember that we have to improve the 
fundamental skills of the people that work in manufacturing so 
they can take advantage of AI to become more productive. As AI 
gets more involved in the manufacturing process, people who 
know how to program it, people who know how to fix it and 
repair it and do all of the things make far more money than 
people who just operate.
    And that is what we need to focus on, and I think it will 
lift everybody--a more productive society is more beneficial 
for everyone, so we need to look and focus in on that. And I do 
believe by utilizing AI, the U.S. can return to its rich 
history of global leadership in manufacturing.
    So I appreciate this hearing. This is a subcommittee that 
is dear to me since I worked in--my dad, after the plant 
closed, started his own business, and I worked with my 
brothers. And some of the men who had coached me in Little 
League moved to Kentucky to work together and build a 
successful foundry.
    So this is near and dear to my heart, because I know that 
it is the pathway for a lot of families to the middle of the 
middle class.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Guthrie follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Guthrie. And I will yield the remainder of my time to 
the vice chair, Mr. Fulcher from Idaho.

  OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RUSS FULCHER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
                CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF IDAHO

    Mr. Fulcher. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you to you 
and to the subcommittee chair for the honor to serve here. It 
is truly an honor, and I am thankful for that.
    We were talking about President Lincoln, and most people 
don't realize there is also a connection to Idaho with 
President Lincoln. It was Abraham Lincoln who established the 
Idaho Territory in 1863, and that was the precursor to our 
statehood in 1890. So there is an honored connection there.
    Mr. Chairman, manufacturing is the core of our economy. It 
contributes to more applications, is more sophisticated, and 
operates in a highly competitive environment with countries 
like China. China's manufacturing value-add and contribution to 
global GDP continues to outpace the United States', and China 
produces more goods than the U.S. in 9 of the top 11 
manufacturing industries. But the U.S. could outcompete and 
outperform China or any other country if we fully utilized our 
technologies, resources, and personnel.
    For example, in my home State of Idaho, global food 
manufacturers locate there because of our agricultural 
resources. And we have other manufacturers fulfilling contracts 
on major weapon systems, like the F-35 aircraft. We have major 
semiconductor producers developing chips for the next 
generation of mobile logic and industrial computing needs.
    But, in all these cases, innovation and production, 
identification of defects, ordering parts for machines before 
they fail, helping workers improve safety and productivity are 
all crucial. Speaking for myself and I think for most of my 
other colleagues here, we need to learn how AI can help improve 
the production process, empowering the line worker to catch 
defects, innovate processes, and improve safety.
    We need to know how AI can help predict machine failures 
better to prevent production interruptions. We need to 
understand how to provide for data sharing for these needs 
while ensuring privacy among our end users.
    And, finally, we need to find ways for the Federal 
Government to properly optimize its position to enable 
manufacturers to recruit, train, and reskill new and existing 
people. That is our challenge, but it needs to be in the 
appropriate fashion.
    Thank you, and I yield back.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Fulcher follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Bilirakis. I thank the vice chairman. I look forward to 
working with you, sir.
    Next, we have the ranking member of the full committee, Mr. 
Pallone, a good friend of mine from the great State of New 
Jersey.
    You are recognized for 5 minutes for your opening 
statement, sir.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK PALLONE, Jr., A REPRESENTATIVE 
            IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY

    Mr. Pallone. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I want to thank the witnesses for taking the time to 
testify this morning.
    But, to the Republican majority, I want to express extreme 
frustration that we are not addressing the fact that the Trump 
administration has given billionaire Elon Musk and his young, 
anonymous henchmen unfettered access to government systems 
containing vast amounts of incredibly sensitive personal data 
about all Americans.
    Musk and his team have access to all the data of the 
Department of Health and Human Services and the Centers for 
Medicare and Medicaid Services, and that means that they can 
access and may be able to delete, modify, and transfer for 
their own purposes detailed healthcare information about tens 
of millions of Americans, including virtually all of our 
Nation's seniors.
    And they also have access to Treasury Department data that 
includes Social Security numbers, tax returns, payment 
information, all tied to names, addresses, phone numbers, and 
email addresses.
    And, for decades, we have had strong privacy and data 
protection laws in place that govern access to these government 
records to protect Americans' privacy and the security of their 
personal information. But, with the full support of President 
Trump and House Republicans, Musk and his minions have ignored 
those protections, and civil servants attempting to protect 
Americans' data from Musk's unauthorized access have been 
fired.
    If a foreign adversary or a domestic hacking group got 
access to any one of these government systems containing 
Americans' sensitive personal information, we would consider it 
a major data breach, a privacy disaster, and a consequential 
national security incident.
    And State's attorneys general, public interest 
organizations, and the courts are doing their part to put a 
stop to the Trump administration's decision to hand over 
Americans' most sensitive data to the richest man in the world 
and his cronies.
    But Congress and this subcommittee in particular should be 
using all of the tools at our disposal to protect Americans' 
privacy. Unfortunately, instead of expressing outrage or 
holding hearings and demanding accountability for Musk stealing 
Americans' personal information, my Republican colleagues have 
chosen silence. And so I urge my Republican colleagues to raise 
their voices to protect Americans' personal health and 
financial data and all of the other sensitive personal data 
that is now in the hands of Elon Musk and his henchmen.
    Now, turning to today's hearing, Mr. Chairman, a strong and 
technologically advanced manufacturing base creates a healthy 
economy that uplifts hardworking middle-class Americans, lowers 
the cost of American-made goods, and bolsters our national 
security and promotes global leadership.
    And yet, in just the first few weeks of the Trump 
administration, Republicans have turned their back on American 
families by attempting to illegally steal resources being put 
to work to grow and modernize the manufacturing sector. The 
CHIPS and Science Act made a transformative $52 billion 
investment to develop the advanced infrastructure and workforce 
needed to build critical semiconductors here in America. And 
this will reduce the cost of American-made semiconductors and 
end our dangerous dependence on foreign manufacturers.
    The Inflation Reduction Act recharged our domestic energy 
sector by providing $369 billion to lower energy bills for 
American families and grow our economy so we can lead the 
global clean energy transition.
    And Republicans say they want to foster innovation and beat 
China, support American workers, and lower costs. Yet they are 
choosing to look the other way as President Trump steals money 
from the American people, businesses, and communities. American 
companies are being put at a disadvantage by President Trump's 
constant chaos. It is simply not realistic to expect American 
manufacturers, especially small- and medium-size companies, to 
confidently make investments in their future when they are at 
risk of having to confront a senseless trade war or having 
Federal funding they rely on illegally stripped away.
    This is not a recipe for success. In my opinion, if 
Republicans are actually interested in securing American 
leadership in manufacturing and the next generation of 
technologies, they should work with us to defend the programs 
that are bolstering American manufacturing and the dedicated 
civil servants who work tirelessly to implement them.
    So it is time for Republicans to stand up to the senseless 
Trump chaos that threatens American workers and small 
businesses and our economy.
    And, with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Pallone follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Bilirakis. Well, I guess I thank the gentleman. Thank 
you very much. But the honeymoon is over.
    But I will say this. I think. respectfully, because he is a 
great guy and a good friend: I think the President is doing 
exactly what he said he was going to do, and so far, so good. 
So, anyway, let's get on to it.
    Our witnesses today are Mr. Jason Oxman, president and CEO 
of Information Technology Industry Council; and we have Dr. 
Elisabeth B. Reynolds, Professor of Practice at MIT; and then 
we have Mr. Jeff Kinder, executive vice president, Product 
Development and Manufacturing Solutions, Autodesk; Ms. Barbara 
Humpton, the president and CEO of Siemens Corporation.
    I want to welcome all of you, and thank you very much for 
your patience this morning. And this is going to be a great 
hearing. We are going to learn so much.
    So I want to recognize Mr. Oxman. You are recognized, sir, 
for 5 minutes, please.

   STATEMENTS OF JASON OXMAN, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE 
OFFICER, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY COUNCIL; ELISABETH B. 
   REYNOLDS, Ph.D., PROFESSOR OF THE PRACTICE, MASSACHUSETTS 
INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY; JEFF KINDER, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, 
PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT AND MANUFACTURING SOLUTIONS, AUTODESK; AND 
BARBARA HUMPTON, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SIEMENS 
                          CORPORATION

                    STATEMENT OF JASON OXMAN

    Mr. Oxman. Thank you, Chairman Bilirakis and Ranking Member 
Schakowsky. It is an honor to be here with you at the first 
hearing of the 119th of this subcommittee.
    I am Jason Oxman, president and CEO of the Information 
Technology Industry Council, or ITI. Thank you for inviting me 
to testify today in a period of remarkable and dynamic change 
in the U.S. economy and in global competition for artificial 
intelligence.
    Technology is key to our Nation's continued growth. And 
manufacturing is the economic lifeblood of the communities that 
this subcommittee's members represent, and manufacturing 
increasingly is powered by artificial intelligence. AI, as with 
all technology, requires digital innovation, but it also 
requires hardware, networks, infrastructure, energy. In other 
words, AI requires manufacturing innovation.
    As the trade association of the technology industry, ITI 
represents the entire AI ecosystem, including Siemens here 
today and other global innovators that are investing in AI to 
drive manufacturing and to solve industry's biggest challenges. 
Indeed, ITI, as a trade association, in its 109-year history 
has represented the largest manufacturers in the world.
    Now, today ITI member companies manufacture and build the 
digital infrastructure that powers the AI economy, including AI 
models and software, memory, semiconductors, networking 
equipment and servers, cooling systems, infrastructure, power, 
data centers, and much more.
    Now, for the manufacturing sector, AI means increased 
efficiency, productivity, safety, and innovation. For example, 
AI in manufacturing today includes predictive maintenance, 
where AI can analyze in real time, using sensor data, the 
manufacturing equipment that may need predictive maintenance 
and also analyze predictive equipment failure; supply chain 
management, where AI can optimize operations by analyzing data 
from multiple sources, including demand forecasts, inventory 
levels, and logistical constraints; and digital twinning, an 
AI-powered digital representation of physical assets or a 
process that can allow virtual planning in advance of actual 
manufacturing.
    Now, these innovations and investments, among others, will 
greatly benefit the manufacturing sector and the U.S. in 
maintaining its competitive edge. We appreciate that this 
committee is focused on harnessing U.S. opportunities for 
investment in AI to the benefit of the U.S. economy and job 
creation, and we also appreciate that the new Trump 
administration is focused on advancing U.S. AI leadership 
internationally, as the Vice President just returns from the 
Paris AI Summit.
    Now, reaching these clear goals will require close 
collaboration between the private sector and government. And I 
would like to offer the committee five specific recommendations 
on areas where we can ensure a bright future for AI 
manufacturing in the U.S.: First, create an enabling 
environment for innovation to allow manufacturers to realize 
the full benefits of AI through competitive tax measures, such 
as the advanced manufacturing investment credit and restoring 
the immediate deduction of R&D expenses; second, accelerate the 
adoption of AI in manufacturing by developing a skilled AI 
workforce that can leverage these new capabilities and create 
new jobs; third, maintain a data policy environment that 
enables private sector innovation by increasing access to 
Federal datasets, by unlocking the data necessary to create new 
AI solutions for manufacturers; fourth, continue public and 
private partnerships that spur private-sector investment in AI 
and manufacturing, such as supply chain security through the 
Promoting Resilient Supply Chains Act, a bipartisan bill that 
originated in this subcommittee; and, fifth, remove barriers to 
U.S. manufacturers' ability to compete in global markets by 
advancing digital trade agreements and by revisiting hastily 
drafted policies from the prior administration, like the AI 
Diffusion Rule.
    We see increasing global competition for AI development and 
deployment. For America to win, we must get these policies 
right. We are keen to work with you to unleash the power of AI 
to expand domestic manufacturing, to ensure that the United 
States builds on its competitive lead in AI, and enable AI to 
transform all sectors of the economy and generate economic 
growth and job opportunities that benefit manufacturers, 
workers, and consumers.
    Thank you again for the opportunity to be here today, and I 
look forward to your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Oxman follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much.
    Now I will recognize Dr. Reynolds. You are recognized for 5 
minutes, and we appreciate you being here.

           STATEMENT OF ELISABETH B. REYNOLDS, Ph.D.

    Dr. Reynolds. Good morning and thank you, Chairman 
Bilirakis, Ranking Member Schakowsky, Chairman Guthrie, Ranking 
Member Pallone, and members of the subcommittee. It is an honor 
to be here with you this morning and speak about a topic that 
is of the utmost importance to the country's national and 
economic security.
    My name is Elisabeth Reynolds. I am a professor of practice 
at MIT and former special assistant to the president for 
manufacturing and economic development in the National Economic 
Council in 2021 and 2022.
    I am also originally from Manchester, New Hampshire, home 
of the Amoskeag Mills, the largest textile mills in the world 
at one point and now the center of global research on 
regenerative medicine.
    Rebuilding the U.S. industrial base using AI and advanced 
manufacturing technologies is an urgent priority. We are in the 
midst of the next industrial revolution, one where the U.S. has 
the opportunity to catch up and rebuild its manufacturing 
capacity and capabilities.
    The U.S. has made significant gains in the past few years 
in rebuilding these capabilities as a result of largely 
bipartisan government investments in areas critical to the 
country's industrial base: semiconductors, critical minerals, 
defense, and energy infrastructure.
    Recent legislation has led to several positive 
developments: A tripling of manufacturing construction spending 
since 2021; $450 billion of private-sector investments in 
semiconductor production across over 40 facilities; over $80 
billion of private sector investment in clean energy-related 
production across over 200 manufacturing facilities, including 
over $5 billion invested in each of Georgia, Michigan, 
Tennessee, North Carolina, and Ohio.
    These energy investments in particular are essential to 
ensuring energy security, particularly when the rise of AI and 
data centers will only increase energy demand. The leverage of 
these public dollars is significant. Roughly between four to 
seven private dollars invested for every Federal dollar spent.
    All of these steps underscore there is an important role 
for the Government to play in catalyzing economic growth, 
prosperity, and innovation. My written testimony has a complete 
list of my recommendations, but I am going to focus on several 
areas right now.
    First, we need to focus on increasing adoption of new 
technology by small and medium-size enterprises, SMEs, to 
increase productivity and wages. U.S. manufacturers are behind 
in technology adoption. Many SMEs, the backbone of our 
industrial base, are hesitant to change existing manufacturing 
processes, despite the return on investment associated with 
digital technologies that can increase both productivity and 
wages.
    Several steps could be taken to encourage adoption of AI 
and advanced manufacturing, including providing Federal 
matching funds to State-led programs that offer incentives, 
like programs in Indiana, Massachusetts, and Michigan; 
incenting large manufacturers that have contracts with the 
Federal Government to support AI adoption and digitalization in 
their suppliers; and modernizing the manufacturing extension 
partnership to work with SMEs to focus on promoting lean 
principals while also supporting digitalization.
    Two, we need to increase investment in manufacturing 
workforce training and education. It is estimated the U.S. 
could face a shortage of nearly 2 million manufacturing workers 
by 2033. We must both upskill current workers with digital 
skills as well as attract a new generation into the sector. AI 
can play a positive role in this process by augmenting the 
skills of frontline manufacturing workers and democratizing the 
technology so workers are part of continuous improvement. The 
process can lead to improving manufacturing wages, which today, 
on average, are less than the average all-industry hourly wages 
for nonsupervisory workers. Several steps also can be taken 
here, including creating robust preapprenticeship and 
apprenticeship programs, identifying the most successful 
training programs in the country, encouraging 4-year 
institutions of higher education to partner with community 
colleges to advance digital skills, and increasing the number 
of women working in manufacturing, who currently represent 
about 30 percent of the manufacturing workforce.
    Three, we need to accelerate innovation and scale up. The 
U.S. is the envy of the world and is renowned as the startup 
Nation, but we must now become the scaleup Nation. Because of 
their often large capital requirements and longer time 
horizons, manufacturing startups have challenges attracting 
growth capital from investors, who prefer asset-light 
investments. We must develop financing models that are helping 
with the missing middle capital gaps. This could include 
Federal procurement, such as advanced market commitments, 
providing tax incentives for startups that are building their 
first manufacturing facility, exploring the role of the Federal 
Industrial Finance Corporation that could operate like the 
Development Finance Corporation, and expanding the role of 
Manufacturing USA Institutes.
    Fourth, we must invest in the research and development and 
deployment of advanced manufacturing technologies. 
Historically, U.S. Federal R&D institutions have underinvested 
in advanced manufacturing processes. Additional RD&D funding is 
required in emerging advanced manufacturing technologies to 
help the U.S. stay ahead in such areas as biomanufacturing, 
quantum, energy, defense, critical minerals, robotics and 
additive manufacturing.
    Through investments in scientific and engineering 
breakthroughs, the U.S. can leapfrog current standard 
manufacturing processes and lead the world in advanced 
manufacturing.
    In conclusion, I will thank the committee for the 
opportunity to speak, and I hope that my remarks have 
underscored the importance of U.S. advanced manufacturing 
agenda to the country and the urgency with which we must 
address these issues. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Dr. Reynolds follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you, Doctor. Appreciate it very much.
    Now, Mr. Kinder, you are recognized for 5 minutes for your 
opening statement.

                    STATEMENT OF JEFF KINDER

    Mr. Kinder. Thank you, Chairman Bilirakis, Ranking Member 
Schakowsky, for holding a hearing on this important, timely 
topic and inviting me to testify today.
    My name is Jeff Kinder, and I oversee design and 
manufacturing at Autodesk. Autodesk is an American company that 
designs and makes software, spanning product design and 
manufacturing, architecture engineering and construction, and 
media and entertainment.
    I am also proud to have grown up in Indiana, the State 
where President Lincoln, by the way, spent his formative 
teenage years. I grew up in a family of factory workers. I 
studied engineering in college on an ROTC scholarship and then 
became an officer in the U.S. Navy.
    Following my service, I went on to lead digital 
transformations for several technology companies. This is a 
dynamic time in the manufacturing industry. We face supply 
chain disruptions, skilled labor shortages, inflation, and a 
changing geopolitical and economic landscape, yet the demand 
for products isn't slowing down.
    Autodesk believes the U.S. is poised for growth in 
manufacturing. Reshoring initiatives and a reimagining of 
supply chains have led to a surge in new factory starts. But 
the manufacturing industry has a capacity challenge to meet 
this growth opportunity.
    To increase our capacity, to innovate, and to compete on a 
global scale, we need new technologies such as AI. 
Manufacturers are ready, and it is in our national interest to 
help. And while cutting-edge technologies have historically 
advantaged larger manufacturers, we are democratizing access by 
offering manufacturers of all sizes the same advanced 
capabilities at a fraction of the cost. We believe empowering 
small and medium-size manufacturers with technology like AI is 
key to unleashing a renaissance in American manufacturing.
    Autodesk began investing in AI research more than 10 years 
ago. We are the world's leading publisher of peer-reviewed 
original research on AI models trained for computer-aided 
design, and we are focused on developing pragmatic AI 
capabilities that help product designers and manufacturers do 
their work more productively.
    We have three primary areas of focus with AI: First, 
augmenting creative exploration. Take, for example, our work 
with Stewart-Haas racing team. Using AI-enabled design, 
Stewart-Haas were able to reduce the weight in the brake pedal 
of Cole Custer's number 41 Mustang, resulting in a reduction of 
the pedal that was 32 percent lighter and 50 percent stiffer, 
reducing weight without sacrificing safety.
    Our second area of focus is reducing repetitive and tedious 
tasks. Manufacturers design products in 3D, but they still need 
to translate those to 2D for documentation. Skilled engineers 
spend as much as 40 percent of their time doing this manually. 
Now, with the click of a button, Autodesk AI creates those 2D 
drawings automatically, freeing up time for more creative and 
more productive work.
    Our third area of focus is accelerating time to production. 
Computer numerical control, or CNC machines, are automated 
manufacturing machines that perform precise and complex 
operations. Programming code for these machines can take hours 
or even days.
    By using AI to generate machining strategies, we save 
manufacturers hundreds of production hours a year. Autodesk is 
also dedicated to equipping educators, students, and workers 
with the tools and curricula they need to learn the 
manufacturing skills of the future.
    We provide free access to most of Autodesk's portfolio of 
professional software. We also partner with institutions like 
the University of Florida, where we are establishing the 
world's first-ever industrialized construction program, 
bringing manufacturing methods to construction.
    My testimony offers recommendations for the committee to 
consider on how to foster AI in manufacturing. This includes 
bringing together tech companies and manufacturers to develop 
national strategies that elevate the importance of AI in 
manufacturing, providing tax credits and access to low-cost 
capital to small and medium-size manufacturers, and digital 
skills training for the manufacturing workforce.
    We have a tremendous opportunity to realize our collective 
mission to revitalize American manufacturing. Embracing AI will 
increase innovation and productivity, strengthen the 
competitiveness of American manufacturing, and fuel long-term 
economic growth and prosperity. Autodesk is eager to help you 
realize this vision.
    Thank you, and I look forward to answering your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Kinder follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you so very much.
    Now I will recognize Ms. Humpton. You are recognized for 5 
minutes for your statement.

                  STATEMENT OF BARBARA HUMPTON

    Ms. Humpton. Chairmen Guthrie and Bilirakis, Ranking 
Members Pallone and Schakowsky, and to all of the members of 
the committee, thank you for the invitation to be here.
    I serve as president and CEO of Siemens USA. Siemens is a 
leading technology company pioneering a new industrial tech 
sector. We were founded during Abraham Lincoln's lifetime, I 
will note, and have been building our American business for 
more than 160 years.
    Today, the U.S. is our largest market. We have more than 
45,000 people and 12,000 suppliers nationwide. In recent years, 
we have invested more than $650 million, expanding our own U.S. 
manufacturing plants.
    Since 2007, Siemens has invested $10 billion in U.S. 
software companies to strengthen our digital capabilities, and 
we recently acquired Michigan-based Altair Engineering, adding 
another $10 billion of investment in U.S. software. We did this 
to make American industry more state of the art and 
competitive. We did this to help regrow domestic manufacturing, 
which brings us to today.
    Siemens is a world leader in industrial AI. This is 
different than consumer AI. Industrial AI uses controlled data 
from the manufacturing environment to help manufacturers create 
business value. Think better products, more efficient 
operations, a more prepared workforce. Think about a safer 
automotive industry.
    Using industrial AI, Siemens built a predictive maintenance 
model for a major automotive OEM. Instead of manually analyzing 
data from 10,000 machines, the company uses AI to help workers 
detect machine failures up to 6 months in advance. Or what 
about a more innovative aerospace industry? Consider startup 
JetZero. With our AI-enabled software, JetZero is using real-
time data and virtual simulations to design the next generation 
of ultraefficient commercial aircraft. And when their first 
factory opens, Siemens Industrial AI will optimize their 
operations, electrifying and automating the manufacturing 
process.
    This is just the beginning. Industrial AI is transforming 
construction for commercial and residential buildings. It is 
addressing national energy challenges by managing electricity 
use and data centers. It is improving energy efficiency in 
semiconductor factories to help expand American chip 
production.
    Now, of course, technological leaps like this raise 
questions for workers. Will technology replace people? No. 
Industrial AI expands what is humanly possible. It will create 
more opportunities for workers at all stages of their career. 
This is even more true with the introduction of generative AI.
    GenAI is making technologies more intuitive, letting 
workers speak to machines using natural language instead of 
code. Siemens has led the industry in this area, deploying the 
first GenAI-powered assistant. We call it an industrial 
copilot. What it does is improve worker productivity by 
managing repetitive tasks. It helps people start manufacturing 
careers without specialized skills.
    We are going to need this to help fill more of America's 
500,000 open positions in manufacturing. We continue to 
encourage government to guide AI development in a way that 
balances innovation and safety.
    Like this committee, at Siemens we recognize the advantage 
that industrial AI leadership will bring to American 
manufacturing. Industrial AI will enable all companies, from 
startups to small and medium enterprises to industrial giants, 
to thrive in this new era of American manufacturing.
    I will finish with a quick example of how industrial AI is 
supercharging the growth of U.S. manufacturing. In 3 weeks, 
Siemens will celebrate the opening of a new manufacturing 
facility in Fort Worth, Texas.
    To build the factory, we used industrial AI to develop a 
digital twin of the factory's product as well as its production 
lines. To staff the facility, we created 480 new jobs, with 
another 320 to come next year. To train workers, we recruited 
former high school teachers to develop a program for people 
with no manufacturing experience.
    And, when that facility starts operations, it will produce 
the electrical components that power American data centers, the 
very foundation of AI. Fort Worth shows what industrial AI can 
do for U.S. manufacturing. With these technologies, we can 
boost economic growth, create jobs, empower innovation, and 
secure the next generation of American industrial leadership.
    Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Humpton follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much. Very informative. I 
thank all of you for your testimony.
    And now I will recognize myself for 5 minutes for 
questioning.
    So we will start with Ms. Humpton. AI has already enveloped 
itself into the manufacturing ecosystem, and it is creating 
more efficient systems to build here in America. We need to do 
more to encourage this type of growth here at home.
    As I mentioned in my opening statement, AI and its 
applications are incredibly broad and can't let generative AI 
control how the world sees AI in its entirety. So I am glad you 
gave that example, though. That is good.
    What is important to view AI in manufacturing in a 
different lens than generative AI?
    Ms. Humpton. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the question. And 
industrial AI is really quite different from consumer AI. Let's 
think first about the data that is used. In generative AI in 
the consumer applications, we have seen the use of large swaths 
of data from many, many sources.
    In a manufacturing environment, what we are typically doing 
is gathering data from multiple sensors in a very controlled 
environment, in fact, so controlled that many manufacturers 
don't want that data shared with anyone. This is a competitive 
advantage they have, being able to own and manage their own 
data.
    That is why they trust a company like ours. They trust 
Siemens to build the AI tools that will operate in a secure 
environment using what we have learned over decades with 
machine learning, with deep network, neural networks, to be 
able to take advantage of that data and draw conclusions that 
would literally be impossible for any one of us to do if we 
were standing on that floor.
    I mentioned the automotive manufacturer. Imagine the 
question of, how do we ensure the quality of doors as they are 
coming off a production line? Well, it is really difficult to 
do with the human eye, but with a sensor, with a sensor and 
machine learning, we are able to define perfect, what does 
perfect look like, and then compare every door that is produced 
to that standard, identifying defects earlier and taking action 
to correct the manufacturing process.
    The difference with industrial AI is the data it operates 
on, the environment in which it is used, and the tools that are 
applied. Trust will be the foundation of our future work in 
this area.
    Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much. Excellent.
    Mr. Oxman, the National Association of Manufacturers found 
that, after deploying AI in their manufacturing operations, 72 
percent reported reduced costs, improved operational 
efficiency, 51 percent reported improved operational visibility 
and responsiveness, and 41 percent reported improved process 
optimization and control. These statistics show just how 
beneficial AI can be in the manufacturing sector.
    Can you provide examples of use cases that may be 
attributed to these statistics, please?
    Mr. Oxman. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. It is not surprising to 
hear those statistics that you cited about the importance of AI 
to manufacturers. Just to give one example from across the ITI 
membership: Ericsson, one of our member companies that is the 
reason that we have the robust mobile networks that we have in 
the United States.
    Ericsson has a 5G smart factory in Texas. And what they 
have done with that smart factory, to your point about the 
importance of AI-enabled manufacturing, is they use advanced 
analytics for machine learning. And they do predictive 
maintenance, as Ms. Humpton was talking about. They deploy 
autonomous robots to help with the manufacturing process, 
particularly areas that would be too dangerous for human 
beings. They do process automation. They do demand prediction.
    So a huge number of what I will call intelligent automation 
tools that are made possible by AI. They don't replace humans, 
but they take areas where human error could be dangerous or 
could be inefficient, and they make humans better in their 
deployment.
    And the stats are remarkable: 120 percent improvement in 
output per employee and a 65 percent reduction in manual 
material handling at that Ericsson USA 5G smart factory in 
Texas.
    Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much.
    Mr. Kinder, whenever we talk about the greater adoption of 
sophisticated technologies, I think it is equally critical to 
talk about protecting these systems. Can you walk us through 
how Autodesk addresses this question of cybersecurity for AI 
manufacturing?
    Mr. Kinder. Sure. Thank you for your question, Chairman.
    Cybersecurity is paramount. And, as a company, we 
prioritize this, and we work continually to evolve our 
processes to mitigate any vulnerabilities. Our approach is--and 
our chief trust officer is fond of saying this: Build secure, 
run secure, and stay secure. And that is integral to 
engendering customer trust.
    And what we mean is, ``build secure'' is using secure 
methods in software development right from the beginning, ``run 
secure'' is implementing security controls across the platform, 
like identity and access management, encryption, and ``stay 
secure'' is continually assessing the products for 
vulnerabilities and any compromises.
    Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much.
    And I will yield back the rest of my time. I don't have any 
left. But, in any case, we will have the ranking member. You 
are recognized for your questioning, 5 minutes of questioning, 
please.
    Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I have two questions for you, Dr. Reynolds. One is, 
yesterday I met with a manufacturing company, but they also are 
engaged in getting young people more engaged in manufacturing. 
So I asked them, so how many of those students that are signing 
up and want to do this, how many are women? And they said, 
``Well, I know there is at least 13 percent or something.'' It 
was a low number.
    And you had mentioned trying to engage more women in 
manufacturing. I am just wondering if just the name 
``manufacturing'' sounds like a guy. And how can we get more--
certainly, there is a lot of room for women. What are you doing 
to make that happen?
    Dr. Reynolds. Thank you very much for that question. And it 
is very important, particularly given the shortage of workers 
we have just been talking about, half a million currently and 
close to 2 million within 10 years. We need to bring everybody 
into the manufacturing workforce, including women, who 
represent about 30 percent of the workforce today, which is 
underrepresented, given that they are 46 percent of the total 
workforce in the country.
    So I think there are a number of things that we could be 
doing. The first point is to say that the kind of manufacturing 
we are talking about now with AI and automation and all of the 
developments we are talking about really should change the view 
of manufacturing in this country.
    Historically, we think of it as dirty, dull, physically 
laborious. That is completely gone now in the 21st century. And 
I think that will be helpful in terms of attracting the next 
generation into manufacturing, particularly also new 
technology. This next generation is much more interested in 
working with advanced technologies than working with older 
industrial systems.
    Right now, we know that women who are working in 
manufacturing earn, on average, 16 percent more than the median 
income for women nationally. So this is attractive from a wage 
point of view.
    It may be less attractive from a flexibility point of view, 
and that is one area that I think we could hopefully see 
manufacturers work toward attracting more women into the field 
is whether, given childcare responsibilities, et cetera, can we 
see more flexibility in the workweek? But we really need to get 
the next generation in, particularly starting in high school.
    Ms. Schakowsky. I hope so. I wanted to also mention I am 
concerned about manufacturing jobs and when wondering how AI is 
going to fit into this, is there some reason to worry for 
everyday workers that their jobs will begin to disappear 
because of AI, a different way to get the technology out?
    Dr. Reynolds. So I think it is always important to look at 
the impact of technology on work and on workers, because we 
know that technology has had an effect on increasing inequality 
in this country and hollowing out a lot of our middle-class 
jobs, because it replaces workers.
    The important way to address that is, when we use 
technology to enhance and augment workers, how do we make the 
technology a tool for workers so that they themselves can 
benefit from its use? That has often been tracked by the level 
of education that jobs have and the level of routine operations 
that we have in jobs.
    The important opportunity with AI is that, while it may 
reduce waste and get rid of some of the automated work that is 
quite tedious, it does have a chance to really augment the 
skills of our workers and particularly lower-skilled, lower-
educated workers, who can use AI, as described earlier, as a 
copilot, where it is actually helping guide workers who don't 
necessarily have the skills.
    And this is the opportunity for digitalizing our workforce. 
And I think we have to look and work very hard to make sure 
that AI is the tool and provides the opportunity right now for 
bringing workers who have actually perhaps less education, less 
skills, into career paths and into promising, well-paying jobs.
    Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you for that, because I think it is 
really important that we consider that not only really highly 
educated people but the many people who are right now involved 
in technology that there is going to be a place for them and 
not just for the most educated and, it turns out, the 
wealthiest either. So thank you.
    And I yield back.
    Mr. Bilirakis. I thank the gentlelady.
    I now recognize the vice chair of the full committee, Vice 
Chairman Fulcher. Thank you. You are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Fulcher. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Ms. Humpton, most of my private-sector life was in the 
semiconductor industry with Micron Technology, and at the 
time--I am dating myself here--but Siemens AG was a competitor 
in the memory component, D-RAM, business, and so--I know that 
is not your focus. I am not even sure that they are in that 
anymore, because it was years ago.
    But you were talking about your involvement with generative 
AI--and I have been out of this for a while--and you mentioned 
about the potential to--the use of these copilots in speaking 
to machines and whatnot.
    Where is this going to go? I mean, are we talking about 
when you are speaking to machines? Is this mirroring human 
interaction? Just talk a little bit more about this. Where is 
this going?
    Ms. Humpton. Thank you so much, Vice Chairman, and I want 
to first comment, we did sell the semiconductor business. It 
became Infineon.
    But today we have a fantastic EDA component so we are using 
exactly these technologies to help semiconductor manufacturers 
work their design and plan out their factories. So it is an 
exciting time for the semiconductor industry.
    But the question you ask really ties to the conversation we 
have just had about workforce. Where is this going? What I am 
excited about is that, for the first time, we have a technology 
that actually comes to the people instead of forcing them to go 
to school, learn more, et cetera.
    And I am going to tell you just my personal experience with 
this. I went to a recent tech show, and my team was there 
showing what they are doing with industrial AI.
    And they said, for instance, the programming of robots for 
a factory floor, they said this would typically be done by an 
individual who would get on a bicycle and ride along the floor 
because you had to go to each machine, you had to know the 
programming language.
    Instead, I stood in front of a laptop and texted in, 
``Please sort the following items by size.'' The computer 
generated the code, and the machinery was then commanded to do 
the sorting.
    The team looked at me and said, ``By the way, do you enjoy 
writing comments for the code that you have to write?'' It is 
just one of--it is drudgery. And I said, ``Oh, I hate that.''
    They said, ``Well, press this button,'' and 5 seconds 
later, I had all of the commentary that was required to go with 
that code.
    I am telling you, this is going to be such a cool era 
because, yes, we can bring young people in. If you can play a 
video game, you will be able to----
    Mr. Fulcher. So is verbal interaction next?
    Ms. Humpton. Verbal interaction is already here. Verbal 
interaction is already here. I encourage anyone who would like 
to visit us at the Hanover Fair that is coming up next month, 
we will be demonstrating much of this technology right here, 
right now.
    So I think we have the opportunity to see it and be able to 
envision the future today.
    Mr. Fulcher. Thank you for that.
    Mr. Oxman, I didn't know about the word ``reskilling'' 
until I was going through some of this testimony, and I would 
like to flesh out your thoughts on the reskilling component 
here.
    We have got a lot of middle-aged workers, we have got older 
workers that change is always a challenge, and trying to 
recruit young people at the same time.
    Talk about recommendations for reskilling, and understand 
that you are talking to a congressional panel here, so in the 
sense of--talk about recommendations for reskilling, and what 
might be the proper role of the Federal Government in that 
effort?
    Mr. Oxman. It is a great question, and I do think that the 
role of the Federal Government is to partner with industry to 
make sure that we are working on STEM education and reskilling 
wherever it can benefit the workforce.
    Mr. Fulcher. Keeping in mind, we don't want to be where we 
are going to hinder, but----
    Mr. Oxman. Absolutely.
    Mr. Fulcher [continuing]. Let industry be industry, but--go 
ahead, I am sorry.
    Mr. Oxman. No, that is absolutely right. You know, for 
example, in Boise, where ITI member company Applied Materials 
is very active, they are working in partnership with local 
community colleges on reskilling, to train the workforce that 
is necessary.
    Meta is currently investing in an $800 million data center 
in your district, or adjacent to your district, and needs the 
workers for that data center.
    So the kind of public-private partnership I am talking 
about is the Government making sure that local educational 
institutions have the resources they need and the training 
programs they need, and making sure that workers have the 
opportunities they need to get the skills necessary to get the 
jobs of tomorrow.
    As Ms. Humpton mentioned, 500,000 open jobs in the 
technology industry. We need to find those workers with the 
skills that they have and fill those positions.
    Mr. Fulcher. Great. Thank you for that.
    Mr. Chairman, I do have a question for Mr. Kinder on 
interoperability standards, but I know I am out of time, so----
    Mr. Bilirakis. Go ahead.
    Mr. Fulcher. So, Mr. Kinder, briefly, please, it sounds 
like, when you are talking interoperability standards, it 
sounds like you are talking about the sharing of data, having 
the ability to adapt new technologies to improve productivity 
in the overall manufacturing process.
    Do I read you correctly on that? Is that your intent with 
interoperability standards?
    Mr. Kinder. Thank you for the question, Vice Chairman. Yes, 
it is. The interoperability of data, as you heard in all of our 
testimony, data is critical for training AI models. With 
interoperability across different software applications, we 
will have more data, and it will be smarter on how the whole 
system operates.
    Mr. Fulcher. Great. Thank you very much.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Mr. Bilirakis. The gentleman yields back.
    Now I recognize the gentlelady from the great State of 
Florida, from the great city of Tampa.
    Ms. Castor. Thank you.
    Mr. Bilirakis. Representative Castor has been--we have 
worked on several issues together on this subcommittee. I have 
enjoyed working with you. Thank you.
    Ms. Castor. Yeah, Chairman Bilirakis. It has been a 
pleasure working with you. Congratulations on leading the 
subcommittee again.
    Thank you for recognizing Chris, your aide. I am sorry to 
see him go. He was instrumental in helping us get out of the 
committee the Kids Online Safety Act and the Kids Online 
Privacy Protection Act.
    Unfortunately, they didn't get across the finish line.
    Mr. Bilirakis. We are going to do it this year.
    Ms. Castor. That is good to hear your commitment on that.
    Mr. Bilirakis. We are going to get it done this year. Top 
priority.
    Ms. Castor. There were a number of things out of the 
committee that did not, that were stripped out at the last 
minute, and I hope that we can get back to working on those 
expeditiously.
    But I know we are gathered here today to talk about AI and 
advanced manufacturing, and it seems like it is vital that we 
continue to build on the success of the past few years. And Dr. 
Reynolds highlights a lot of the progress in her testimony.
    She says, ``The U.S. has made significant strides in the 
past few years to rebuild these capabilities with largely 
bipartisan support'' in ``semiconductors, critical minerals, 
defense, and energy infrastructure'' and that the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law, the CHIPS and Science Act, the Inflation 
Reduction Act has led to manufacturing construction spending 
having been tripled since 2021, $450 billion of private-sector 
investment in semiconductor production, over 40 facilities, 
approximately $80 billion of private-sector investment in clean 
energy across 200 manufacturing facilities, particularly 
batteries, a crucial area for U.S. leadership in the future, 
and investments going to all sorts of States.
    I wish there were more in Florida, but a lot are going into 
the battery belt in the Midwest, and so that is so important to 
see because of the drain in jobs and offshoring of jobs over 
the past decades.
    But this hearing does seem like a big disconnect today 
because of, right at the outset of the new Trump 
administration, they threw a wrench into so much of the 
progress that we have been making.
    They illegally shut down loans and grants that, you know--I 
focus a lot on on the Department of Energy--the Executive 
orders and the default on grants and loans have thrown a lot of 
the manufacturing sector into chaos.
    Just yesterday I had a critical mineral developer in my 
office. They do not--they cannot get answers from the 
Department of Energy because of the halt in payments. We have 
had a Federal court say, ``You must continue to disburse these 
moneys.''
    So we are seeing layoffs, business capital pulling back 
already. So, Dr. Reynolds, are you hearing these same stories 
here just over the past few weeks?
    Dr. Reynolds. Thank you for that question and for raising 
what is a very concerning situation right now in the country. 
As you said, we have had significant investment, looking at 
over $1 trillion over the next decade across physical 
infrastructure, across our digital infrastructure, if you will, 
and with our energy infrastructure.
    But these latest steps by the current administration are 
very concerning, I think first and foremost, because what we 
have are contractual obligations, with the backing of the 
Federal Government in many of these cases, for funds that are 
expected to flow in many important projects.
    Right now, there are approximately over 400 clean-energy 
projects that have been announced. They have not yet broken 
ground, but those plans are in motion, and those companies have 
been banking on a lot of that funding that is supposed to be 
coming.
    A lot of this is really about what we see today, but I 
think we have to also think about what is potentially lost if 
these investments do not flow as they have been intended, and 
also passed by Congress.
    Right now, what some estimates are, certainly recently by 
Johns Hopkins, is that if the IRA pulls back on a lot of these 
investments, what we are going to see is foreign companies--
foreign countries, including China, stepping in, and that U.S. 
companies, and the U.S. as a whole, are at risk of losing 
approximately $50 billion in annual lost exports, et cetera. So 
the stakes are enormous.
    We have already got tremendous momentum, and as you said, a 
number--many States across the country who are benefiting from 
these investments, communities benefiting as well as the 
workers.
    So I hope that we are going to see some common ground and 
an understanding that really we need to maintain some order and 
continue those investments as we passed them in the past.
    Ms. Castor. Thank you. I agree. I think China is cheering 
this on. Any wrench that is thrown into building up our 
advanced manufacturing and AI and progress is to the detriment 
of our people.
    Thank you. I yield back.
    Mr. Bilirakis. The gentlelady yields back.
    Now I will recognize my favorite pharmacist on the 
committee--I know Buddy is going to kill me for this.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. You are just----
    Mr. Bilirakis. Anyway, I am telling the truth.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Thanks, Gus.
    Mr. Bilirakis. I recognize you for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to 
the witnesses for being here. I don't have an Abraham Lincoln 
story, but Davy Crockett is from my district, FYI.
    Mr. Bilirakis. And so is----
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Stop it, stop it.
    Well, let's just get back to the crux of this. Ms. Humpton, 
your company has a digital industry design and testing facility 
in my district that employs 202 Tennesseans, and my question to 
you is, When you train your employees to use AI, do you offer 
that training for advanced engineering staff or to all the 
employees?
    Ms. Humpton. Thank you so much, and I am going to tell you, 
we actually have 219 in Johnson City.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Johnson City. Well, dang, I didn't--let 
me correct the record.
    Ms. Humpton. Yes. This business is growing and thriving, 
and we have made the AI training within the Siemens Corporation 
available to all. We actually have a learning platform that 
uses AI so that an individual learner can come in, give a 
little bit of information about where they are with their 
knowledge base, and have recommendations made.
    Now, we are going to take this one step further because 
what we recognize is that everyone needs to be able to learn 
these skills. So we are working now on a project to make this 
training available on a platform publicly so that anyone who 
wants to get engaged would be able to understand the 
technologies we are implementing at Siemens and be able to get 
on that learning ladder themselves.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Well, that is fantastic. You talked about 
predictive maintenance, and I thought that was very 
interesting, where you could--it helps manufacturers identify 
machines that might break down 6 months ahead of time.
    So can you give us a couple other examples for the 
committee, where it shows this predictive maintenance and what 
role AI plays with that?
    Ms. Humpton. Yes, I am happy to describe this. This is 
really interesting. I mean, how do you know when something is 
going to break down? It is a little bit like the door example I 
gave before, that to the human eye, you may not notice a change 
in vibrations, a change in the noise that is being made by a 
machine.
    I think we all know that in any business, there are those 
savants, the experts who actually can smell it in the air when 
something is wrong. But we can't all be as smart as that 
individual.
    What we are able to do with our predictive maintenance 
tools is use sensors of all kinds--sound, sight, smell, et 
cetera--to give us those indicators of when something isn't 
performing as expected. That alerts people in the loop to 
figure out, is this something that we need to take action on 
now.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. You always need a human component--smell.
    Ms. Humpton. We absolutely do.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Unless you come up with something on AI. 
OK. Thank you, ma'am.
    Mr. Oxman, you spoke a little bit about the President's 
recent Executive order and that it will develop an AI action 
plan that will chart the course for the new industry.
    So my question to you is, What details do you think the 
administration should consider which would benefit innovation 
and growth in American manufacturing?
    Mr. Oxman. We absolutely--thank you, Congresswoman, for 
that question. We absolutely do appreciate President Trump's 
Executive order on AI, and particularly because he is focused 
on input from industry, to make sure that the regulatory 
roadmap is appropriate for continued AI leadership in the 
United States. So we are looking forward to providing that 
input.
    The Vice President, as I mentioned, was in Paris yesterday 
at the AI summit, and he noted that the regulatory environment 
is really going to control who wins. And so, in this Executive 
order, our hope is the President advances a public-private 
partnership that focuses on industry, voluntary standards, and 
not taking an overly regulatory approach as some other 
jurisdictions like Europe have done, that has hindered their 
leadership on AI.
    So I think we have a real opportunity here, and we are 
grateful to the President.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Well, continue to give him input.
    Mr. Kinder, you know, I am a compounding pharmacist--Gus 
didn't tell you that--but that is what I am, and I understand 
how critical it is to strengthen the resilience of our domestic 
healthcare supply chains and stop the dependence on foreign 
adversaries.
    Can you share with me how AI technology is used in 
healthcare manufacturing, sir?
    Mr. Kinder. Sure, thank you for your question, 
Congresswoman. Pharmaceutical companies use Autodesk software 
to build their factories, to produce medicines, and to produce 
the packaging that the medicines they come in.
    Our tools help ensure that the entire supply chain stays 
connected and optimized. I can give you an example. One of our 
partners saved over $350 million annually by using a fully 
integrated digital twin model of their factories, and, you 
know, these twins help with renovations, with space and 
resource allocation, and energy consumption.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. OK. I just have one other question and 5 
seconds. NASCAR----
    Mr. Bilirakis. Go ahead.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. OK. Well, it is just a fun one. NASCAR, 
how in the heck did you get that lightweight brake past the 
specs? Because I have Bristol Motor Speedway in my district, 
and you got to go through a lot to make sure they meet the 
specs.
    So how did you get that through tech, is my question. Did 
you do that before, or did you even do that? Do they even know 
about this brake?
    Mr. Kinder. I don't think it is a secret. But it did pass--
--
    Mrs. Harshbarger. OK. Just checking, because he won the 
championship.
    Mr. Kinder [continuing]. It did pass the weight test for 
the car.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. OK. I am just checking. You know, we have 
got to keep it above board now. OK? Thank you, sir.
    I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Bilirakis. All right. Very good.
    I recognize my good friend Darren Soto from the great State 
of Florida. You are recognized for 5 minutes for your 
questioning.
    Mr. Soto. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and congratulations on 
your new granddaughter. We are so happy to see that amazing 
addition.
    You know, it wasn't that long ago we saw a chips shortage 
because of the pandemic, and it raised the prices of vehicles, 
of appliances, of computers, and many Americans found out chips 
are in everything nowadays.
    And so we came together to pass the CHIPS Act, all the 
Democrats and some of the Republicans. We appreciate their 
support on that. And it has been a big help for Florida's Ninth 
Congressional District.
    We are home to the biggest CHIPS Act project in the State 
at NeoCity, near St. Cloud in Kissimmee, and we just welcomed 
our next fabricator, ELSPES, which is going to be working on 
capacitors that work directly on lowering energy for AI 
technology.
    We also saw the Inflation Reduction Act be a huge help for 
central Florida--Green Garden Village, where we are going to be 
making solar panels as well as EV charging stations;
    We are going to see the largest solar plant in North 
America in south Osceola County, thanks to Florida Power & 
Light; the largest, fast-charging station, thanks to Tesla 
going to Yeehaw Junction in the south part of my district; and 
the first used electric vehicle dealership, also by Tesla.
    We have seen, because of the CHIPS Act and because of the 
IRA, factory construction has surged and manufacturing capacity 
is expanding, both in Florida and across the Nation.
    Many of you may be surprised to know that Florida has the 
second-most electric vehicles of any State in the Nation, even 
though we are the third-most populous State, so just after 
California. Just another interesting example from the Sunshine 
State.
    And so we are concerned that President Trump, with his 
freeze order, could stop some of these projects from going 
through, whether it is the CHIPS Act, whether it is projects 
under the Inflation Reduction Act.
    And then what is this going to do? It is going to raise 
costs, it is going to raise pollution, and it is going to limit 
our competitiveness at a time when China and so many other 
countries are trying to advance these issues.
    We just filed a letter today taking on President Trump's 
attempt to take back the national EV charging station 
infrastructure we see across the Nation.
    This is going to affect rural areas. This is going to 
affect a lot of urban areas. We need to make sure our Big Three 
remain competitive, knowing that EVs and hybrids are a big part 
of this future transition that we see.
    And then I am concerned about the reconciliation package 
that will attempt to gut these programs for more oil. You know, 
we are already at record production right now. And so we need a 
balanced approach.
    And all this is at the backdrop of an inflation report 
where we saw inflation is now at a 6-month high, tariffs, 
deportations, division, chaos, the four horsemen of 
Trumpflation that could get worse.
    It doesn't have to be this way. We could work together, and 
this committee has a long history of doing that. We need a 
balanced approach where we continue with electric vehicle 
progress, continue to work on the CHIPS Act, keep oil 
production steady, to keep gas prices affordable, and have a 
transition over time.
    Ms. Humpton, thank you so much for being here. We 
appreciate Siemens' great investment in Orlando in partnership 
with University of Central Florida, focusing on energy systems, 
sustainable energy solutions.
    How critical is it for us to continue to be competitive in 
clean energy and to have workforce development programs to meet 
this demand?
    Ms. Humpton. Thank you, Congressman. It is vitally 
important that we attend to the mega trends that have driven us 
for such a long time. And in fact, what is so exciting about 
where we are in this moment is that it is, in fact, the private 
sector who has stepped up to the plate.
    Many statistics have been shared this morning about the 
level of investment, first being made by the Federal Government 
as a down payment, but pouring--the private sector funds that 
have been pouring in.
    Our customers are demanding the kinds of technologies that 
we as a Nation have been focused on these last few years.
    What is exciting is that industrial AI can contribute to 
our progress overall. You see, the same technologies that help 
us address the goals that we have had for sustainability, et 
cetera, also make us more efficient. They make our businesses 
more productive.
    We really can have it all in this moment by deploying 
technology to make American manufacturing cleaner, smarter, and 
more cost-effective, competitive on the world stage.
    Mr. Soto. And we appreciate Siemens' contributions to this 
factory renaissance, this manufacturing renaissance, that has 
been pushed onward because of the IRA, CHIPS Act, and many 
other private-sector companies coming together.
    Thanks, and I yield back.
    Mr. Bilirakis. The gentleman yields back.
    Now I will recognize the gentleman from California, Mr. 
Obernolte, for his 5 minutes of questioning.
    Mr. Obernolte. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Congresswoman 
Harshbarger recommended that I continue her line of questioning 
about NASCAR brake pedals, but instead I am going to focus on 
something else she was asking about.
    Mr. Oxman, you and she were talking about regulation and 
the executive branch and the President's Executive orders. 
Could I follow on to that discussion with a question about what 
we, in Congress, should be doing to establish a regulatory 
environment that, as you say, encourages innovation and the use 
of AI in the manufacturing space?
    Mr. Oxman. Well, thank you, Congressman Obernolte. As the 
AI scientist on the panel, you have been very focused in the 
last couple of years on legislative solutions that we have been 
proud to support, ranging from the Center for AI Advancement 
and Reliability, to the CREATE AI Act.
    And of course, we are starting over in the 119th, but the 
work that you have been focused on, encouraging public and 
private partnerships, I think, is the shortest answer to your 
question. That is where we really need to be focused.
    We need to be focused on how the Government can partner 
with research institutions, not only on the reskilling issues 
that we have been talking about, but organizations like the 
NAIRR, the National AI Research Resource, that you have been 
very vocal and supportive, and we have as well.
    That is the kind of public-private partnership I think we 
need to be focused on, not focusing on the regulations so much 
as how can government and the private sector partner together 
to make these investments a reality. That is where I think the 
focus really should be.
    Mr. Obernolte. Right. Well, obviously I completely agree 
with you about NAIRR and Create AI and the AI Advancement and 
Reliability Institute. You know, I think that those would be 
really vital public-private partnerships in that sense.
    I am hopeful that you read our AI Task Force report, and I 
am wondering, what do you think we got right and wrong in our 
approach to regulating the use of AI in manufacturing?
    Mr. Oxman. Yes, and congratulations to you and Mr. Lieu, 
your cochair in that effort, on a remarkable task force 
initiative. It was a--I did read the report. It was very long, 
very comprehensive.
    The things you got right in there, I think, were a focus on 
what the Vice President talked about in Paris, which was those 
jurisdictions that have taken a regulation-first approach, like 
Europe, are now behind in the race to dominate globally.
    I also really appreciated the focus on the competition that 
we face internationally and how other countries are looking to 
lead the way, and if we are not making the right kind of 
focused investments and not ensuring that the regulatory 
environment is appropriate to investment, we are going to fall 
behind.
    We have got a lead now, but that lead is by no means 
guaranteed to lead to future success.
    I also appreciated your focus on training, workforce 
development in the report and ways in which investment in those 
kind of initiatives can also lead to further U.S. leadership in 
AI.
    And finally, I think the focus of the report on encouraging 
Congress to hold hearings to better inform itself, like this 
hearing today, about what is necessary for congressional 
solutions, if any, to the challenges that we face in AI, 
particularly in manufacturing. I think that is important as 
well.
    Mr. Obernolte. Is there anything that you think we should 
have focused more on?
    Mr. Oxman. I think if I had to pick one area that more 
focus could have been on, it would be on how we can solve 
energy issues. I think you certainly touched on it in the 
report, but I think we have seen just in recent months since 
the report came out that energy issues have become more 
prominent, particularly for data center construction.
    And I think we have an opportunity to look at this not only 
from the energy pathway side, but also the regulatory side, 
about permitting and the way in which energy is authorized for 
use for data centers for AI.
    I think that is going to be an issue for U.S. leadership 
going forward, and I think that is going to be an important 
issue for Congress to focus on as well.
    Mr. Obernolte. Yes, I agree with you.
    Ms. Humpton, I was very interested in the distinctions that 
you highlighted between industrial AI and consumer AI, and I 
really hadn't done a lot of thinking about this, but it 
certainly seems to me that the regulatory approach to those two 
technologies should be probably pretty different, given the 
differences and how tightly curated the trading data is for 
industrial AI and the more limited operating environment. It is 
much more controlled.
    So what can you think--what would you say would be the 
differences in our regulatory approach to those two 
technologies? How is industrial AI different?
    Ms. Humpton. Thank you, Congressman. As I mentioned 
earlier, we really do need to look at those key distinctions. 
It is going to be very tempting for the public to take one big 
paintbrush and sweep all of this into the category of AI.
    If we can be very clear on those definitions, we can 
actually think through the key questions of trust and risk. 
What do we need to secure in order to maintain and build trust? 
Where do we see the risk areas?
    We all know that consumer AI, we are running dramatic risks 
across our entire society. But with industrial AI, we have a 
very unique, controlled environment. I would be delighted for 
my team to further engage with you and your staff as----
    Mr. Obernolte. Great.
    Ms. Humpton [continuing]. As you work forward.
    Mr. Obernolte. I would welcome that. Well, thanks to our 
witnesses. It has been a fascinating hearing.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Bilirakis. The gentleman yields back.
    Now I will recognize Representative Clarke from the State 
of New York for your 5 minutes of questioning.
    Ms. Clarke. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I thank 
our ranking member. Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you to 
our witnesses for being here to testify. I know it may not have 
been easy to navigate through DC in this weather and political 
uncertainty.
    I believe, as many of my colleagues on this committee do, 
that it is in our best interest to support the adoption of 
emerging technologies, like AI, in the manufacturing sector and 
that we should make the critical hardware that power AI tools, 
like chips, at home, right here in the United States.
    That is why, unlike many of my colleagues on the other side 
of the aisle, I was proud to support President Biden and 
Democrats in passing the CHIPS and Science Act, a $53 billion 
investment in bringing semiconductor supply chains back to the 
United States.
    All over the country, we have seen the benefits and 
successes of the CHIPS Act, not only supporting manufacturing 
and innovating at home, but also with the creation of over 
115,000 jobs as of last summer.
    My home State of New York has been a leader in the 
semiconductor manufacturing industry, and the benefits are 
showing. Thanks to CHIPS and Science Act, 34,000 New Yorkers 
are employed by semiconductor and supply chain companies.
    The importance of supporting the domestic manufacturing of 
AI tools is undeniable and essential to our workforce and 
economy, and that is why I remain committed to supporting the 
implementation and disbursement of CHIPS funding that uplifts 
the industry, national security, and our workforce.
    While I am disappointed, I am not surprised to see the 
chaos of the current administration giving way to an unstable 
business environment that undermines the progress that we have 
seen in the American semiconductor manufacturing.
    Illegal freezes, tariff threats undermine the work 
Democrats have done to modernize critical domestic 
manufacturing sectors.
    Dr. Reynolds, can you speak to the steps Congress can take 
to support stability in the industry and further the progress 
we have already made?
    Dr. Reynolds. Thank you, Congresswoman, for that question, 
and for also underscoring the importance of the CHIPS Act and 
its impact already on the U.S. economy and U.S. 
competitiveness.
    I will mention as well that we now see that TSMC in Arizona 
is manufacturing four nanometer chips, frontier chips, out of 
Arizona for the first time in American history.
    And this is a very exciting time for building the 
semiconductor industry in the country and ensuring that we have 
global competitiveness going forward and are not at the mercy 
of foreign adversaries and other countries.
    In terms of how we take this work forward, I think first 
and foremost, as we have discussed, is we want to see the 
obligations that have been made already followed through and 
supported over time.
    So while perhaps these obligations have not been expended 
yet, we know that we have important taxpayer interests involved 
in the payment of these CHIPS Act grants, the importance of the 
tax incentives.
    We want to make sure that all of these important parts of 
the legislation passed in the last few years continue forward 
under the intention of Congress.
    I think also that we are seeing, as you said, an enormous 
amount of momentum already at the State level. Whether that is 
in the CHIPS Act, around a number of places around the country, 
whether that is in the clean energy space, whether that is in 
other areas of manufacturing, it is very important for the 
Federal Government to be a partner in ensuring that those 
investments continue and that those partnerships help us in 
building out those investments and those clusters of 
excellence.
    I think the importance of the U.S. strategy under this 
legislation was not just about a few projects here and there, 
but creating critical mass, and with that critical mass we 
develop globally competitive industries.
    And our goal, of course, is to not only develop the 
expertise and provide the quality jobs but to export and to 
become a world leader in many of these areas, and we are on 
that path.
    And through the creation of these new factories and 
facilities, using new technology that we have just discussed, 
we are now in a position to really be leaders in areas that we 
have not been and where we have been lagging in the past--so 
semiconductors, EVs, batteries, all of these areas where now 
the U.S. is really in a competitive position.
    We may have lost in many ways on the generation--on the 
first generation of technology. You know, invented the 
technology here, it went elsewhere.
    But now we are in a different position. Now we are in a 
place where the U.S. can actually compete and lead. And so that 
requires that we maintain these investments, that we support 
them on the ground, and that we build through a new generation 
for U.S. manufacturing.
    Ms. Clarke. Very well. Thank you so much for your response, 
and I thank all of our witnessesfor bringing the expertise to 
the table.
    With that, I yield back.
    Mr. Bilirakis. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Now I will recognize Mr. James from the great State of 
Michigan. You are recognized for 5 minutes of questioning, sir.
    Mr. James. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would be remiss if I 
didn't recognize you for your leadership and also bestowing on 
me the very high honor of leading supply chain and 
manufacturing policy for the subcommittee in the 119th 
Congress.
    So I look forward to working to make this committee proud 
and make America strong and great again.
    I would also like to give Chairman Cruz a shout. I was 
pleased to hear the Senate Commerce Committee approved the 
Promoting Resilient Supply Chains Act, and I look forward to 
leading this bill in the House.
    And I recognize the grand opportunity that we have in front 
of us to pass real, substantive policy to benefit the American 
people as it pertains to AI and manufacturing.
    If we don't lead in AI, the Chinese Communist Party will 
have all the brainpower because they have stolen our IP. And 
they will have all the manpower because they are using slave 
labor to end western civilization without firing a shot.
    It is simply not enough to close our eyes and hope for the 
best. We are in global competition with communist regimes that 
are hell-bent on building their economy on the backs of ours.
    AI in manufacturing here means not relying on goods made 
with slave labor, on brainpower stolen from Americans.
    It means predictive modeling to reduce costs and risk in 
supply chains.
    It means minimizing supply chain disruptions before they 
occur.
    It means making people more productive, allowing them to 
upskill and businesses to upscale into the future.
    This Congress I am also going to be launching bicameral and 
bipartisan Reindustrialize Caucus. This new caucus will serve 
as a natural convening body for Congress to engage with the 
broader ecosystems of sectors vital to national security, 
economic resilience, and global competitiveness, taking 
feedback from industry leaders and experts such as yourself.
    We will increase manufacturing in a smart way. We will 
industrialize, and we recognize that folks are not afraid of 
the future, but we demand to be a part of it.
    So in that vein, I am very concerned about our supply 
basis--our supply basis and the ability to keep up. Forty-seven 
percent of manufacturers view data fragmentation as a major 
obstacle to effectively implementing AI, while small and 
midsized manufacturers, which make up 98.6 of U.S. 
manufacturing firms, often lack the capital to invest in AI.
    Can you speak, Ms. Humpton, on some of the suppliers who 
you rely on, the important nature for them to help you 
accomplish your mission, and also what the R&D tax credit would 
do for you and your suppliers' survival?
    Ms. Humpton. Thank you, Congressman James, for the 
question, and I am going to share with everyone that Siemens 
USA has been localizing its supply chain for quite some time.
    You may know us as the manufacturers of America's high-
speed rail when Brightline West proceeds, and what we have 
built is a very robust supply chain that activates across 40 
States whenever we build a train, as an example.
    But we also believe that there is a trend going on here 
that we want to share with everyone: ``glocalization,'' the 
idea that we can take advantage of global innovation but 
actually build and perform locally, closer to the point of 
demand.
    And this is going to be a key concept for strengthening us 
here in the United States. The idea of incentivizing research 
and development is key because it is here that we are able to 
bring these concepts together. Now, one----
    Mr. James. So R&D tax credits are vital?
    Ms. Humpton. Excuse me?
    Mr. James. The R&D tax credits are vital?
    Ms. Humpton. We are looking forward to having tax credits 
that actually make the U.S. a net exporter to the rest of the 
world in innovation.
    Mr. James. Perfect. I would like to piggyback on another 
one. You operate the largest digital twin in the world for the 
Navy. Can you tell me a little bit more about that and how AI 
will help address the bottlenecks in the defense industrial 
base, in about 30 seconds, please?
    Ms. Humpton. In 30 seconds, what I can tell you, the 
world's largest digital twin is the digital twin of the Navy's 
shipyards.
    How do we get a bigger Navy? We do it by making sure that 
ships spend less time in repair, maintenance, and overhaul.
    How do we do that? We have to redesign the process in the 
shipyards. The digital twin that Siemens has been supporting 
the Navy with, at first look, there were notions about what do 
we need to do to fix the problem.
    By using a digital twin, the team was able to discover that 
what they thought were the bottlenecks were not. We would have 
spent billions of dollars solving a problem that didn't solve 
the bottleneck problem. The digital twin----
    Mr. James. Perfect. Sounds like a great technology to bring 
to Michigan to help us build ships.
    Mr. Oxman, we hear the demand for more computing power and 
data center processing to service AI is going to increase. Can 
you give us a heads up on permitting reform, all-of-the-above 
energy production, and maybe cite a couple of the unworkable 
environmental regulations that might hinder the energy required 
for this AI revolution?
    Mr. Oxman. Thanks, Congressman James, we definitely need an 
all-of-the-above energy solution for data centers. Data centers 
power the AI revolution that is taking place in the U.S., and 
you are absolutely right to highlight hindrances to the rollout 
of energy to supply those data centers.
    An all-of-the-above energy solution will support the 
construction of data centers and make sure that there is not 
too much of a burden on the existing grid.
    The biggest obstacle by far is the one you highlighted--the 
local, the State, the county permitting requirements that hold 
up the deployment of energy. And we are looking forward to 
working with you on making sure that those challenges can be 
addressed so we can move forward with the energy solutions that 
data centers need.
    Mr. James. Thank you.
    Mr. Chairman--and I don't have a Lincoln story as well--but 
my youngest son turns 6 today, so I am going to go FaceTime 
with him.
    Mr. Bilirakis. Oh, happy birthday.
    Mr. James. Thank you so much for your leadership. I yield.
    Mr. Bilirakis. Great. Thank you.
    All right. Now we will recognize Representative Dingell for 
her 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Dingell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I look forward 
to working with you, Ranking Member Schakowsky, and all the 
members of this subcommittee on this issue because it really is 
one of the most important issues facing us in this country--how 
do we ensure that America stays at the forefront of innovation 
and technology?
    And I want to thank the witnesses, many of whom I have 
worked with, some who have workers in my district, and I want 
to increase those workers and keep them building.
    Over the last several years, we have made real progress 
advancing policies that strengthen our manufacturing sector, 
foster innovation, and create jobs.
    I am deeply concerned about where things are headed, 
though, in this Congress. It is only February, and we have 
already seen too many actions that have been done by this new 
administration, and maybe Mr. Musk, seem an attempt upon 
dismantling our Federal Government and ceding American 
leadership to our adversaries.
    This is more than troubling, and I hope my colleagues will 
help us keep the United States at the forefront of 
manufacturing innovation on the global stage before it is too 
late.
    Last Congress, this committee worked in a bipartisan manner 
on supply chains. We passed the Promoting Resilient Supply 
Chains Act in the House, which included several provisions I 
helped colead, and we reached bipartisan, bicameral agreement 
on a supply chain provision to be included in the end-of-the-
year continuing resolution, which has been removed when Mr. 
Musk tweeted his opposition to that very carefully negotiated 
bill.
    Strengthening our supply chains is critical for our 
industrial base, for our economic security, and our national 
security. The Federal Government must have the tools to prevent 
vulnerabilities from escalating into full-blown crises.
    I am also concerned about efforts to roll back investments 
from the Inflation Reduction Act, especially the 45X tax 
credit, which has been vital in driving domestic manufacturing 
and innovation, and where I come from, particularly in the auto 
industry.
    Everyone--everyone--has told me that these incentives are 
critical for our global competitiveness. One of the backbones 
of American manufacturing is the auto sector.
    We have seen the devastating consequences of uncertainty 
and divestment on manufacturers and suppliers. We have got to 
bring our supply chains home--and not just steel and aluminum 
and autos as we are talking about, but pharmaceuticals and many 
others.
    We should not be producing 80 to 90 percent of our 
medicines overseas. That is a national security issue.
    For decades, poorly negotiated trade deals, the outsourcing 
of jobs have hollowed out our industrial base, and at the same 
time the rise of automation has cost many workers their 
livelihoods.
    Yes, innovation is critical, and we have got to lead, but 
we have to be honest about the impact on workers and ensure 
that progress does not come at the expense of the middle class. 
We cannot leave labor behind.
    As we look to the future of advanced manufacturing, labor 
must have a seat at the table and have access to the training 
and tools necessary to develop the skills they need to help the 
companies they work for compete in the world of advanced 
manufacturing.
    And we, as the Federal Government, have a duty to protect 
American manufacturing and its workers. As we have seen, doing 
so is instrumental to our national security and economic 
vitality.
    Mr. Kinder, can you speak to the importance of passing 
bipartisan Federal supply chain legislation in this Congress? 
And fast, because I went too long.
    Mr. Kinder. Thank you, Congresswoman Dingell, and thank you 
for representing so many of our employees in your district.
    We are--I don't know what you are specifically referring to 
on supply chain legislation. Like I say, the supply chain--and 
particularly small and medium-sized manufacturers who populate 
that supply chain--are the backbone of the manufacturing 
industry. They create jobs in every district.
    Those manufacturers struggle to make investments in digital 
transformation and in AI. And to the extent that, you know, 
this subcommittee and to the extent that Congress can come 
together to help strengthen that segment of the supply chain, 
that is going to be positive for the manufacturing sector.
    Mrs. Dingell. Thank you.
    Dr. Reynolds, tell us how important labor is in the 
advanced manufacturing conversation.
    Dr. Reynolds. Thank you, Congresswoman. Well, of course, 
labor is essential. We are unable to make any of these 
products. A lot of people like to talk about the lights-out 
factory, but what we say at MIT is a lights-out factory really 
can't innovate. We need our workers to be able to do that.
    Currently manufacturing jobs represent just under about 10 
percent of all jobs in the economy, but they come with a very 
large multiplier effect, very important for the economy.
    And they are also tied to technologies and industries of 
the future, and they underpin the economic growth and 
prosperity for the country. Whether that is in transportation, 
in energy, or in manufacturing, we see our industrial systems 
really throughout the economy relying on our workers.
    And we know that manufacturing can provide career paths and 
quality jobs. Our challenge in this country has not been about 
creating new jobs and the quantity of jobs. It has been about 
the quality of jobs.
    And so I think that the fact that we are thinking about and 
talking about how can AI augment workers and support workers is 
really the first step to making sure this technology helps 
workers through increasing productivity, which can also lead to 
increasing wages.
    As it stands right now, our small and medium-sized firms 
are struggling to adopt this technology, to find workers, to 
pay their workers, and we can find a path forward that invests 
both in technology and in workers for the country.
    Mrs. Dingell. I obviously yield back. I would like to 
submit some questions for the record, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Bilirakis. Next, we will recognize Mr. Fry from the 
great State of South Carolina. Thank you again, and welcome to 
the committee.
    Mr. Fry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for your 
leadership on this issue.
    Good afternoon to our witnesses. I really appreciate the 
professional discussion in which you are informing us. I think 
that partnership is absolutely needed as we launch into this 
brave new world called AI.
    Back home in my district in Florence, South Carolina, GE 
HealthCare manufactures some of the best MRI machines and 
systems in the world. These systems are used to provide high-
quality patient care in the U.S. and around the world, and they 
leverage AI to enhance imaging speed and quality, helping 
doctors make faster and more accurate diagnoses.
    But AI's impact extends far beyond just healthcare. It is 
improving forecasting, planning, and process optimization at GE 
HealthCare's manufacturing facilities, ensuring efficiency from 
the production line to the supply chain.
    And it is not just changing manufacturing. It is really 
redefining our economic future, as you have testified to. It 
offers unprecedented opportunities to strengthen American 
industry, enhance our global competitiveness, and secure our 
technological future.
    But to fully realize these benefits I think we must ensure 
that policies support rather than stifle AI innovation. And as 
we discussed today, I look forward to hearing from our 
witnesses on how we can do that.
    Ms. Humpton, thank you for being here today. Siemens has 
operated not only across the U.S., but really in a global 
market and across the globe.
    Do you find--with all the States and all the different 
countries and all the different approaches in which they are 
treating AI, do you find that regulatory uncertainty or 
fragmented legal requirements, do you find that to be 
cumbersome for U.S. manufacturers to adopt AI?
    Ms. Humpton. Thank you for the question, and I think my 
team, who has joined me here today, would tell you they are 
burning a lot of calories trying to track everything that is 
happening at the Federal, the State, the local level, and with 
regulation, you know, obviously regulation being formed all 
around the world.
    This is why we are thrilled that the Congress has invited 
industry to the table. We really believe that, as responsible 
businesses, if we raise our voice in this environment, we can 
help the Congress understand what we know.
    But the thing that we really appreciate from the Congress 
is a better understanding of the risks we face as a Nation. So 
this sharing of information is vitally important right now.
    Mr. Fry. Absolutely. Thank you so much.
    Mr. Oxman, you have discussed how AI could strengthen our 
supply chain resilience and improve operational efficiency for 
our manufacturers.
    But the regulations like the Bureau of Industry and 
Security's AI diffusion rule have raised concerns about 
unintended consequences on U.S. innovation and global 
competitiveness.
    How should Congress and the administration approach AI-
related regulations to protect our national security without 
hindering that very vital private-sector innovation?
    Mr. Oxman. Thanks, Congressman Fry. I am glad you mentioned 
that AI diffusion rule, because that is something we were very 
disappointed to see happen in the waning days of the Biden 
administration.
    The good news is, there is an opportunity, there is an open 
rulemaking, and the Trump administration can make that rule 
better.
    These are complicated issues. Protecting national security 
is obviously vital as we look at opportunities to continue 
global leadership by the U.S. in AI.
    So our hope is that the industry collaboration that we will 
see in the coming weeks and months will lead to a better rule 
than was adopted the first time around, and that is 
particularly important because, as you noted, these supply 
chain issues are also supply chain security issues.
    So we need to make sure that American manufacturers have 
access to everything they need to build and grow the economy 
here, but we also need to make sure that vital American 
national security interests are protected overseas.
    And we are looking forward to working with the 
administration on striking that balance and working with 
Congress to make sure that there's proper analysis here as well 
to make sure that balance is struck.
    Mr. Fry. Thank you for that.
    Mr. Kinder, you talked about this with my colleague, Mrs. 
Dingell. What do you think the biggest challenges are for SMEs 
right now as it relates to AI?
    Mr. Kinder. Thank you for the question.
    Small and medium-sized enterprises, you know, they face 
global competition, and they need to invest to stay 
competitive.
    They need to be able to invest in digital transformation, 
they need to be able to invest in AI, and, you know, switching 
costs are high. So they have systems that are in place now that 
they are using. Those switching costs are high.
    The thing that can help them most is support from Congress, 
either whether it is access to capital, whether there could be 
some incentives or tax credits. It would help them to make that 
investment, be willing to make that investment, to leapfrog and 
be competitive.
    Mr. Fry. All right. Thank you.
    Mr. Kinder. As long as they are competitive, the even 
larger manufacturers they work with will benefit.
    Mr. Fry. Great, thank you, and just to wrap up, what is 
Autodesk doing? I think one of the concerns that I hear from my 
constituents is bias that might be in AI.
    What is Autodesk doing to ensure that AI is safe and not 
biased?
    Mr. Kinder. Yes. I mean, similar to, I think, what Siemens 
is doing on industrial AI, we train on very specific datasets 
that are around the manufacturing process. We don't run into 
some of the probably--the concerns around bias of large, public 
datasets where you don't know where that may be coming from.
    Mr. Fry. Thank you for that.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Bilirakis. I thank the gentleman and now recognize Mr. 
Veasey from the great State of Texas. You are recognized for 5 
minutes for questioning.
    Mr. Veasey. Mr. Chairman, thank you.
    You know, one of the great things that have happened in the 
Dallas-Fort Worth area is that we have really emerged as 
leaders in this area, to lead manufacturing facilities and 
operations in this new cutting-edge technology that we are 
seeing.
    And I think it is really part of a generational shift when 
it comes to the future of domestic manufacturing, and it is 
amazing to see it right in your own backyard.
    And I think that long-term that we are going to see 
continued investments in the DFW area that are going to make 
the United States keep its competitive edge in innovation 
against global competitors, and obviously artificial 
intelligence is going to be a really big part of that.
    However, we also have to acknowledge that there are some 
risks involved with AI that we need to continue to be talking 
about, that we are not mentioning enough.
    And if we think that social media is out of control, I can 
tell you that AI will even be more dangerous if we don't make 
sure that we are taking these protective measures to make sure 
that middle-class, hardworking Americans don't become left 
behind.
    And, unfortunately, one of the things I am worried about is 
President Trump's recent Executive order, titled, ``Removing 
Barriers to American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence,'' 
because I think that has undermined some essential AI 
protections that are accelerating the unchecked spread of AI 
across the country.
    And so I wanted to ask Dr. Reynolds, what measures do you 
think Congress should take to mitigate the increased risk of 
cyber attacks and other threats to our national security as 
manufacturing increasingly adopts to AI without sufficient 
regulation?
    Dr. Reynolds. Thank you very much for the question, 
Congressman. Certainly the concerns about cybersecurity have 
been around for several years and have been escalating, and 
particularly in our manufacturing base, which has been most 
directly attacked.
    So I think that the issue has been elevated, and I think 
there is bipartisan concern about how we address this.
    How actually we go about doing that is another question, 
and I think you have heard a range of comments here this 
afternoon about exactly what the role of government should be.
    My hope is that we find a path forward that is going to 
accelerate our investigation and our research in this area but 
also find a pathway forward in which cybersecurity is front and 
center, but also the issues you raise--whether it is privacy, 
protection of minors, security of information for the consumer, 
et cetera--those are critical issues.
    And I think at this point in time, we have had a lot of 
discussion and debate, but we need to find a collaborative and 
bipartisan path forward which is going to protect not just the 
consumer and the worker but also our manufacturing base.
    Mr. Veasey. Yes. No, absolutely. And also, I want to talk 
about energy use--AI and energy use. That has gotten a lot of 
attention, and it should.
    Last year I visited Siemens. They have a new facility in my 
district in Fort Worth, and I understand that Siemens' digital 
twin offerings can provide real-time insights into the energy 
usage of various components in the data center.
    But I am worried that if we don't reform our permitting 
process to allow energy of all forms to be generated and put 
onto the grid, that there are going to be risks to constituents 
in the manufacturing sector.
    I wanted to ask particularly, Ms. Humpton, do you think 
that that is something that we should be concerned about?
    Ms. Humpton. Congressman Veasey, we were thrilled to host 
you at Fort Worth, and I have been bragging today about this as 
a real illustration of the power of AI in not only building but 
in staffing, training our staff, and bringing people from 
outside the manufacturing world into manufacturing in Fort 
Worth.
    The power that is going to be required for AI is absolutely 
essential, and actually technologists like us, but in 
particular Siemens has been working in the field of electricity 
management for almost our entire existence.
    And what we have right now is a brilliant opportunity to 
use AI as we solve this problem. We do need to use new 
techniques like microgrids, the ability for people to generate 
power onsite, perhaps sell it back to the grid when they are 
not using it, the ability to control those microgrids for 
maximum up time.
    The AI that is available now in the energy sector is very 
exciting, and we have been working with--very closely with the 
Department of Energy and with several administrations to make 
sure that we are making these things visible and available.
    So I do believe that we need to consider both the AI itself 
as well as the power provision.
    Mr. Veasey. Thank you very much.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Bilirakis. All right. Thank you, Mr. Veasey. I 
appreciate he yields back, and now we will recognize Ms. Lee 
from the great State of Florida, Tampa Bay area. And she is 
doing a great job representing my former constituents. So I 
will recognize you for 5 minutes of questioning.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is, indeed, big shoes 
to fill in Pasco County.
    Ms. Humpton, thank you very much for being here today and 
for providing your testimony. Your perspective on artificial 
intelligence empowering employees really resonates, I think, 
with many of us on this committee. There is a fear that AI will 
replace the American employee, but I agree with you that we 
need to look at AI as an assistant to the American manufacturer 
rather than its replacement.
    Can you provide some examples of how Siemens is using AI in 
manufacturing and supply chains to help its workers do their 
jobs more effectively and productively?
    Ms. Humpton. Thank you, Congresswoman Lee. And, yes, this 
is really fun, because there are a couple of fantastic stories 
here.
    Imagine a couple of engineers thinking that they want to 
design a light motor to be used in aviation, electric aviation. 
What you have to do is take weight out of the motor. How are 
you going to do that?
    What these engineers did is they collaborated. They were 
debating back and forth. They were going to have votes on the 
team of who had the better design for one element.
    And one member of the team said, ``Well, why don't we ask 
our generative design assistant?'' And it turned out that 
assistant drew a picture that was unlike what either of the 
expert engineers had come up with, and in fact its performance 
was better than what could have been designed using paper and 
pencil.
    Now, let me tell you another funny story. We work with 
battery manufacturers all the time, and I met with one startup 
about 18 months ago. And the president of the company was 
telling me about his new U.S.-based factory that he was getting 
ready to build.
    I asked him if he had used a digital twin to plan that 
facility. And he said, ``No, I have done something even better. 
I am actually building a scale model. We are going to have just 
one-line, small-scale production."
    I saw that same CEO several months later. And he said, 
``Barb, I should have gone the digital route. When I built it, 
I forgot to put in any overflow area, and so anytime one part 
of the line stopped, we had a mess on our hands."
    These are just examples of the kinds of things that come up 
where the use of AI can actually elevate the results that we 
get. And that is not to mention the things that are happening 
every day.
    We have operations that require intensive stocking and 
restocking, and, frankly, that is drudgery. But the ability now 
to use artificial intelligence to help us plan that work, plan 
the movement of goods through our factories, we are making our 
own factories safer, more productive and, frankly, just plain 
more fun to work in.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Ms. Humpton.
    Now, Mr. Kinder, I want to first congratulate you on the 
grant that Autodesk received from my alma mater, the University 
of Florida, to advance the field of industrialized construction 
engineering.
    As I understand it, this work will dramatically reduce 
construction cost while doubling the speed of construction, and 
I look forward to seeing what this partnership can accomplish.
    Could you tell us about how Autodesk's software makes 
manufacturers more resilient and ready to adapt to supply chain 
disruptions, inflation, and other things?
    Mr. Kinder. Thank you for your question, Congresswoman Lee.
    We are incredibly excited about the project with the 
University of Florida. Industrialized construction is something 
that we have supported for a long time. It is basically 
bringing manufacturing practices and the efficiencies of that 
into the construction process, which does save time and money.
    When you talk about industrialized construction, we are 
talking about building some things off site and then bringing 
them and assembling them on site. We talk about taking 
software, including AI, and bringing manufacturing software, 
the HVAC system in the building, you know, into the 
architectural software and combining those. Historically, those 
have been very disconnected.
    So all of this drives efficiency. And, when you add AI on 
top of that and digital twins, it becomes a much more efficient 
process.
    Ms. Lee. And in addition to the added efficiencies that you 
describe, how can the use of artificial intelligence in this 
way also foster innovation?
    Mr. Kinder. We have a capacity challenge in the U.S. in 
terms of a shortage of skilled labor and manufacturing jobs 
that are unfilled.
    AI, by taking some of the drudgery, as described or some of 
the more mundane or tedious, low-value-added tasks, by 
automating those, you augment the worker. So you are augmenting 
the worker, freeing up some of their time so they can focus on 
much more creative and more productive tasks.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you.
    And, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Bilirakis. I thank the gentlewoman.
    I now recognize Representative Trahan for her 5 minutes of 
questioning.
    OK. Well, Ms. Kelly will go first. Thank you. You are 
recognized.
    Ms. Kelly. Thank you, Rep. Trahan. And thank you to the 
chair and ranking member for holding this very important 
hearing to discuss the importance of AI's role in the future of 
American manufacturing.
    Last Congress, I joined former Rep and now U.S. Senator 
Lisa Blunt Rochester and Reps Dingell and Wild in coleading 
multiple bills to make up the supply chain act, which garnered 
the support of over 160 stakeholders.
    These vital bills would have established a new office 
within the Department of Commerce charged with monitoring 
supply chains, identifying supply chain gaps and 
vulnerabilities, as well as addressing supply chain risks. 
Unfortunately, many of these critical provisions were pulled 
from the bipartisan continuing resolution that failed to 
receive a vote.
    Dr. Reynolds, based on your experience with the supply 
chain shock during the pandemic, do you agree that it is 
important that the Federal Government take a leading role in 
mapping and monitoring supply chain vulnerabilities?
    Dr. Reynolds. Well, thank you, Congresswoman. It is an 
important question and one that I lived and breathed for my 
couple of years in the White House. I still have PTSD, I think, 
from the experience.
    But what we learned from that experience at the beginning 
of the COVID crisis was that, in fact, maybe the U.S. 
Government did not have sufficient information--we knew that--
about supply chains2, but what was more disturbing is that the 
private sector didn't have the information either.
    When the semiconductor crisis hit and we brought in a lot 
of the semiconductor companies or leaders in auto and medical 
devices, they themselves were not clear what their supply chain 
looked like and what the semiconductor industry, you know, in 
supply was facing.
    So it really underscored the role of government here, that 
there is an important role for the Federal Government to play, 
to try and collect the data, obviously, in a way that is 
respecting privacy, to disseminate the data, and be able to 
look around the corner at what the next vulnerability will be.
    And so, while we have really made, I think, significant 
progress on that, we have to realize there is a long way to go. 
And I applaud the work that you have done and the creation of 
more capabilities at the Federal Government level to do this.
    If we think about the recent crisis we had after Hurricane 
Helene hit and all of a sudden the one facility that produced 
IV fluids in this country was wiped out, was that something we 
could have predicted ahead of time? Would we have known that 
that was a challenge? And, in fact, I think AI, generative AI 
will be helpful for us to understand our supply chains and our 
vulnerabilities.
    So I think it's an incredibly important area. I think we 
now look at the U.S. economy in a way that we never did before, 
through the lens of supply chains, and I applaud that work.
    Ms. Kelly. Thank you. Illinois has a history of 
manufacturing, as one of the largest manufacturing centers in 
the Midwest. Chicago and other parts of my district became a 
hub for trade and commerce due to its access to strategic 
waterways and railroads.
    I believe that Illinois' history, coupled with existing 
infrastructure to accommodate large industrial sites of 
manufacturing facilities, will ensure the State has a major 
role in the U.S.' effort to increase domestic manufacturing. 
But to accomplish this goal, we must ensure that small and 
medium-size manufacturers can compete.
    And, Dr. Reynolds, in your written testimony, you mention 
that there are 250,000 small and medium-size manufacturers in 
the U.S. and that we need financial incentives to help them 
make the leap into digital manufacturing.
    What are your best arguments for why, in this budget-
constrained environment, we should invest more Federal funds in 
small and medium-size manufacturers?
    Dr. Reynolds. Yes. We have been talking about the role of 
the SME as the backbone of manufacturing for this country. And 
I bring that statistic forward, the 250,000 small and medium-
size firms in the country. If we just wanted 20 percent of 
those to be digitally advanced and leading the country, that is 
50,000 small and medium-size firms. And right now we have no 
way of reaching those firms through any direct mechanisms.
    So what we have to really think is creatively, how do we 
try and support those firms at scale? And I think the argument 
here is that we know that our small and medium-size firms are 
less productive than our larger firms.
    And the positive spillover effects that happen if we can 
get them to become more productive are important not just for 
national security, which would be the first argument you made. 
We have a shrinking supply chain base, and our defense 
industrial base is really suffering from that.
    To the extent that the DoD highlighted in its national 
industrial strategy report last year, supply chain resilience 
among our SMEs is critical for them. But we need that not just 
for defense and national security purposes but also for the 
supply chain resilience.
    As we are looking at ways in which we are trying to invest 
in resilience, not just efficiency, we really have to see how 
our small and medium-size firms play into that and how we can 
support them in being more resilient.
    Ms. Kelly. Thank you. And I am out of time. I yield back.
    Mr. Bilirakis. I thank the gentlewoman.
    Now I will recognize Representative Kean for his 5 minutes. 
Welcome to the committee.
    Mr. Kean. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And thank you to our witnesses for being here today.
    In an era of innovation driven by emerging technologies 
such as AI, it is essential that the Federal Government support 
equally innovative policy solutions to maximize the benefits of 
this technological growth but also allow businesses to innovate 
to stay competitive.
    A successful program in New Jersey has been the 
Manufacturing Extension Partnership. This public-private 
partnership with centers in all 50 States was dedicated to 
helping small and medium-size manufacturers grow and to 
compete.
    Ms. Humpton, as a large manufacturer provides critical 
technologies and tools to a company, what policy tools should 
Congress consider prioritizing the needs of smaller and medium-
size manufacturers who need access to AI-enabled technologies 
to optimize their operations and to drive their long-term 
success?
    Ms. Humpton. Congressman Kean, thank you. And we are so 
proud that our research headquarters are located in Princeton, 
as well as many of our headquarters functions are in the Iselin 
area.
    The role today of public-private partnership is key. How do 
we reach those small and medium enterprises at scale? We know 
that we have a lot of people, you know, working on that 
problem.
    I believe the work of the manufacturing institutes has been 
critical to progress. And so we alone participate in six or 
seven of the manufacturing institutes, with the goal of 
bringing technologies into an environment where others, 
including small and medium enterprises, can actually experiment 
and adopt.
    One of the things that business can do is to actually look 
at the way technology is provided. We have done an analysis and 
have determined that we need new licensing structures, for 
instance, for small and medium enterprises so that they can 
afford the entry level, you know, to get into the same toolsets 
that large enterprises are using.
    I do believe that a critical piece, then, to cap all of 
this and tie the workers back in is the network of community 
colleges across the United States can be an excellent partner 
in scale.
    Mr. Kean. They are crucially partners in that regard. I 
agree with you on that.
    Mr. Oxman, as you know, there have been ample conversations 
regarding preparing the AI workforce. What do you recommend 
that we as Congress do to position ourselves to better remain 
competitive amidst the growing technological landscape?
    Mr. Oxman. Thank you, Congressman Kean. And I also want to 
thank you for your sponsorship to the LIFT AI Act, which is 
focused entirely on this very important issue. The technology 
industry is laser focused on finding top talent and filling 
hundreds of thousands of open roles and making sure that 
American workers are trained for those opportunities.
    And what we look forward to working with you on in the new 
Congress is opportunities to partner industry and government 
together. The LIFT AI Act, what was great about that is it was 
focused on the National Science Foundation funding research 
opportunities, grant opportunities, educational opportunities 
for STEM education.
    And we would like to work with you on that as well again, 
because that is the important key to making sure we have an 
educated, AI-enabled workforce.
    Mr. Kean. And thank you for that partnership, and look 
forward to continuing to work with you.
    Last month, several of your member companies announced a 
multibillion-dollar investment in a Stargate project over the 
next 4 years to build AI infrastructure, which will power 
future-generation AI technologies here in the United States. 
This is an exciting development for job growth, future 
innovation, and shows another example of U.S. leadership in AI 
development.
    Can you discuss how this project will catalyze U.S. 
economic and AI growth, and what are the direct impacts on U.S. 
manufacturing?
    Mr. Oxman. This is such an exciting announcement. It 
happened on just the second day of the Trump administration. 
The President had leaders from three ITI member companies--
OpenAI, Oracle, and Softbank--at the White House to announce 
it.
    It is a multihundred-billion-dollar investment in building 
these incredible data center campuses. The first one that has 
been announced has been in Texas, but there are announcements 
pending in multiple States around the country.
    This is going to cement AI leadership in the United States, 
and it is going to create just in the first announced campus 
40,000 jobs. That is what OpenAI predicts will happen. And it 
is going to be a partnership across the entire AI ecosystem 
that will eventually create hundreds of thousands of jobs.
    And, as I mentioned, they are targeting $500 billion worth 
of investment in the United States. So this is a great 
opportunity, another great example of how AI and manufacturing 
together can really partner and grow the U.S. economy and 
create incredible jobs.
    Mr. Kean. Thank you. And I yield back my time.
    Mr. Bilirakis. I thank the gentleman.
    Now I will recognize the ranking member of the full 
committee, Mr. Pallone, for his 5 minutes of questioning.
    Mr. Pallone. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am deeply concerned 
that the chaotic and destructive environment being created by 
President Trump and congressional Republicans is costly for 
consumers and for businesses, including manufacturers.
    American manufacturers are working hard to modernize their 
facilities by adopting AI and other new technologies and 
training their workforce to meet the demands of advanced 
manufacturing. And many of them rely on Federal financial 
support, tax incentives, and other Federal programs to make 
this transition possible.
    But, instead of continuing to promote our vital 
manufacturing sector, President Trump and his billionaire 
friends are sowing seeds of destruction, illegally halting 
Federal funding across the Government, and thrusting our Nation 
into nonsensical trade wars with our allies.
    So, Dr. Reynolds, I have three questions. I will try to get 
them in the 4 minutes.
    How have the programs, investments, and tax credits created 
by the Inflation Reduction Act, CHIPS and Science Act, and the 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law enabled American manufacturers to 
compete in the global economy, if you will?
    Dr. Reynolds. Thank you, Congressman.
    And I agree with you that, for all of the great investments 
and the progress we are making in our advanced manufacturing, 
we also have experienced in the last few weeks a lot of 
uncertainty. And uncertainty is bad for business, it is bad for 
planning, it is bad for U.S. manufacturing.
    But these investments that have come through the different 
parts of legislation have really sown enormous amounts of 
investment and opportunity going forward. Particularly the use 
of tax incentives, I think, has encouraged private-sector 
investment and leveraged numbers that we have discussed already 
that have been very important.
    Those investments are just getting underway. We have at 
least a decade ahead of us of watching them come to fruition 
and bring jobs and investment in communities across the 
country.
    And I think it is in industries that not only are important 
for the country in terms of national security and supply chain 
resilience but also in terms of export opportunities, places 
where the U.S. can lead globally and where we haven't 
historically.
    Our companies have been put between a rock and a hard place 
over time, over decades. On one side, we have actors, such as 
China, who are engaged in sort of nonmarket activities that 
have made it very hard for our manufacturers to compete. On the 
other hand, we have investors who are looking for short-term 
returns from our manufacturers without a long-term view.
    We now have an opportunity through this legislation in 
which we have invested in the long-term capabilities of 
manufacturing in the U.S. And this is an inflection point, a 
moment for the U.S. in which we can lean in and lead globally 
in these areas.
    Mr. Pallone. Well, I am going to compress my last two 
questions into one. You mentioned tariffs, and this is, of 
course, one of my concerns, that the President and Republicans 
are raising costs for American families who are already 
struggling by throwing the United States into trade wars with 
these tariffs for our closest allies: Canada, Mexico, European 
Union.
    So can you discuss the importance of preserving trade 
relationships with our close allies for access to intermediate 
goods and external markets for finished products, if you will?
    Dr. Reynolds. Well, of course, there are appropriate places 
for tariffs, when it comes to national security, when it comes 
to unfair trade practices.
    But, when it comes to our largest trading partners and 
allies, it is really not the right place for the use of these 
tariffs. I think it raises a number of issues. First, of 
course, it creates this enormous amount of uncertainty. We have 
seen our manufacturers have to, you know, have whiplash over 
whether they were going to see major tariff impositions on 
Mexico and Canada, and then to have that paused. It is costly 
to the economy, it is costly to our manufacturers.
    Second, as you said, it raises the price of intermediate 
goods, and it is not just for some industries. It is for all of 
our manufacturing industries. And so that kind of cost not only 
makes them less competitive, it also puts at risk our 
manufacturing jobs.
    Third, I think it is important for us to recognize that we 
have had trade agreements that we have all come around with our 
allies, Mexico and Canada, and that, if you break those trade 
agreements, you are losing the trust and you are losing 
credibility long term. I think it also makes it harder for us 
to sell our end products, our finished goods in those markets.
    And it is important to understand as well that we have 
built a manufacturing ecosystem that not just ends at our 
borders, it is a North American innovation ecosystem, and it is 
one that the auto industry in particular benefits from.
    Just as a reminder: Mexico supplies about 42 percent of our 
intermediate goods in our auto industry, and Canada supplies 
around 13 percent. So it is very hard to imagine that you are 
putting tariffs on some of these partners who actually are part 
and parcel of our auto industry.
    Mr. Pallone. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Bilirakis. Appreciate it very much. The gentleman 
yields back.
    Now I will recognize Representative Evans from the great 
State of Colorado. Welcome to the committee. And, also, I 
enjoyed our conversation on this very subject yesterday. So I 
recognize you for 5 minutes for questioning.
    Mr. Evans. Thank you so much for that, Mr. Chairman. I 
enjoyed the conversation as well.
    Thank you to the ranking member. And thank you, of course, 
to all of our witnesses for coming on this snowy day to have 
this conversation.
    Mr. Oxman, I will start with you first. We have talked a 
lot about competition with China and the CCP. In my district, I 
have a company that uses AI both in the manufacture and the 
deployment of technology that is used to stabilize suspended 
loads. So, right now, it is predominantly used for helicopter 
rescue hoists, military search and rescue, things like that.
    But this technology can also be applied to critical 
infrastructure around, for instance, cranes, port cranes, 
cranes for construction. And so I think most of us are probably 
familiar with some of the risks of the U.S. relying on Chinese 
cranes for that critical infrastructure.
    And so my question to you is, what role does AI play, both 
in being able to protect and harden some of our critical 
infrastructure from malicious attacks abroad, and how can we 
best protect and promote that intellectual property rights and 
keep that from being compromised by some of our foreign 
competitors?
    Mr. Oxman. Thank you, Congressman Evans, for the question. 
This is actually the topic that I think the Trump 
administration is spending some of the most time on, with the 
very early release of the AI Executive order and the recent 
announcement from the Office of Science and Technology Policy 
opening a request for input, for inquiry from industry into AI 
rulemaking.
    We are very pleased to see this early attention to this 
issue because, as you noted, there are critical national 
security implications of making American AI technology 
available internationally. But we have to balance that with the 
need to address international markets and give American 
companies the opportunity to sell around the world to the 95 
percent of the people who live on the planet who don't live in 
the United States.
    So you are right that these are critically important 
issues. And that balance of national security and economic 
interest is one that is very important and very challenging, 
because we do want to make sure that these use cases of AI that 
we have talked about today are available here and also 
available to our allies.
    As you noted, AI can be a critical tool in cybersecurity 
defenses, for example, augmenting human capability and making 
sure that we are hardening our networks and our infrastructure 
against potential adversaries.
    So I think all of these issues are critically important. It 
is heartening to see the Trump administration paying such close 
attention and soliciting industry input, and we look forward to 
working with you on these important issues as well.
    Mr. Evans. Thank you.
    Moving on to Mr. Kinder, in your testimony you talked a lot 
about the use of AI in manufacturing. And we oftentimes hear 
when we are having this conversation that oil and gas levels in 
the U.S. are at record level productions. But I know from 
conversations with my local electric utility that we are going 
to need--at least in my area, we are going to need three times 
as much electricity as currently produced right now to meet 
some of the growing demands for digital and for AI purposes.
    And so my question to you is specifically with regard to 
energy availability, what can Congress do to help ensure that 
the United States and not our foreign adversaries remains the 
global leader both in AI and also in the manufacturing that AI 
supports?
    Mr. Kinder. Thank you for your question, Congressman Evans. 
With respect to energy, AI will use a tremendous amount of 
energy.
    I think what Congress can do is to both strengthen the 
grid, establish policies to help us to strengthen the grid, and 
also help us to find all sources of energy production--
renewable, nonrenewable--to be able to power.
    Now, I would also add that we are in a stage right now 
where I believe chips will get more efficient. I believe the 
training of models will become more efficient, and the energy 
use will become more efficient in AI. We are still in early 
days in terms of training a lot of these models.
    Mr. Evans. Thank you.
    And then last question to Ms. Humpton. You brought up one 
of my favorite topics, which is microgrids and using AI to be 
able to implement. We were just talking about that all-of-the-
above energy policy.
    So can you just talk a little bit more about how AI can be 
used when you have rooftop solar panels that are feeding 
electricity into the grid. Then the cloud cover rolls over, the 
temperature drops. Now the heaters kick on, and in the space of 
just a few minutes, now you have electrons flowing the other 
way to now powerhouses that used to be powering the grid, but 
now it is going the other way.
    Can you talk about the complexity of managing the grid and 
AI?
    Ms. Humpton. Thank you, Congressman. This is my favorite 
topic. I actually think this is the most exciting segment of 
the U.S. economy right now, is the grid edge, right, where the 
old-fashioned grid and its transmission and distribution meets 
all those users. Well, now all those users of electricity can 
also produce electricity, everything from our cars to our homes 
to our carports.
    So the idea of using the power of software, with large 
utilities now using software to manage the flow across their 
distribution networks to even now the smallest users.
    My mom put rooftop solar on her house. She sells back to 
the utility when she has extra and she buys when she needs to, 
and she has the lowest electricity bills she has ever had.
    These are simple concepts, but they are complex when they 
come together into basically what the National Academy of 
Engineers called the greatest invention of the last century: 
the grid. It is a very complex organism.
    So I think the work of Congress to ensure that we support 
the administration in finding ways to trim back regulation that 
prevents us from being able to make changes, the attention to 
technologies and the ability to educate policymakers--and, by 
the way, Siemens stands ready to work side by side with you. 
This is exciting times.
    Mr. Evans. Thank you so much. I yield back.
    Mr. Bilirakis. The gentleman yields back.
    Now I will recognize Representative Trahan for her 5 
minutes of questioning, and I appreciate her patience.
    Mrs. Trahan. Thank you, Chair Bilirakis.
    Good afternoon, everyone. Although I am not sure that we 
are always going to reach agreement in this committee on a 
whole host of issues, I think everyone in the room absolutely 
agrees that America needs to lead the world on advanced 
manufacturing and artificial intelligence, especially with the 
constant geopolitical threats to our supply chain.
    Stability and reliability in public-private partnerships is 
vital to ensure that American businesses can plan for the long 
term and trust that the Government will be there to build out 
programs to foster these types of partnerships, the CHIPS and 
Science Act, the Infrastructure Law, the Inflation Reduction 
Act.
    You know, in my district in Massachusetts, I have seen the 
powerful impact that those strong public-private partnerships 
can have on stimulating the local economy and onshoring high-
paying jobs. And, when done together with groundbreaking 
research institutions, like UMass Lowell, those programs are 
one of the best ways legislators can work to increase American 
competitiveness.
    Dr. Reynolds, how does direct investment in public-private 
partnerships accelerate the onshoring of manufacturing? I know 
you have answered this question, but I wanted to set the stage.
    Dr. Reynolds. Sure. Thank you very much. It is a great 
question, and appreciate that, particularly coming from the 
State of Massachusetts, which is really a leader in these kinds 
of partnerships.
    What we have seen, of course, is that some of our best 
innovation is coming out of the university partnership that 
occurs between universities and investors and basically the 
larger ecosystem in a place like Massachusetts.
    And those innovations are leading to some of the most 
advanced new technologies as well as startups. And our hope in 
developing that kind of investment and building up that 
pipeline is that in fact we grow these companies, we grow these 
technologies, and they become global leaders for the country 
and for export.
    So we have a lot of great examples of how we do this. I 
think the investments that we have seen to date in university 
research, in early stage research, is critically important for 
driving some of the later developments. We saw it, of course, 
with the COVID vaccine.
    Mrs. Trahan. Absolutely. I don't know if you could just 
follow up. How are those manufacturers affected when sudden 
changes, like a blanket Federal funding freeze, are announced? 
I mean, I am hoping that you can just describe the impact that 
that kind of unpredictability has on the investments in these 
partnerships or deter even private-sector engagement in those 
ongoing efforts.
    Dr. Reynolds. Well, I think that we have talked to date 
about the importance of certainty and predictability in the 
business context and what it means for firms as they decide 
what to invest in and when to make those investments that they 
can see ahead. And it certainly has been an uncertain few weeks 
here in the United States.
    I think that is also the case when it comes to 
collaborators and partners like universities. Budgets are laid 
out years in advance. The importance of building up labs and 
building up the knowledge base and capabilities in a lab does 
not happen overnight. It happens over years. It is also very 
expensive to build that kind of capability.
    And so having some predictability on budgets is something, 
of course, everybody in this room can appreciate how that helps 
us deliver the important outputs we are looking for.
    Mrs. Trahan. Thank you, Dr. Reynolds. I can tell you that 
manufacturers in my district and across Massachusetts are 
deeply distressed when they hear the President threaten to take 
those funds away. In some cases, it will be catastrophic. And 
even the threats weaken America as a place to do business.
    Mr. Kinder, you mentioned in your testimony that the U.S. 
manufacturing sector has 622,000 unfilled jobs. And you 
highlighted the critical role of STEM education from K through 
12, technical training, apprenticeship programs in addressing 
this gap.
    This administration is threatening to cut those very 
educational programs, even going so far as dismantling the 
Department of Education. The development of our technical and 
manufacturing workforce would be decimated.
    How would you, how would Autodesk have to adjust as an 
employer to meet that demand in workforce if that was to 
happen?
    Mr. Kinder. Thank you for your question. We work with the 
education community at length. We have over 19,000 institutions 
from kindergarten all the way through graduate schools, 
vocational schools, to provide free software to be able to 
train that next generation.
    We think that is absolutely critical, and we will be 
training them in tools that include AI going forward, helping 
to upskill that workforce.
    Mrs. Trahan. Well, thank you. I know I have run out of 
time. I will submit my other questions for the record.
    Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much.
    Now I will recognize Mr. Goldman for his 5 minutes of 
questioning.
    Mr. Goldman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much.
    Mr. Oxman, Lockheed Martin and other defense manufacturers 
in my district use AI into their assembly lines and supply 
chain logistics to improve efficiency, enhance quality control, 
and more. Why is it important both to our economic and national 
security that this industry have access to cutting-edge 
technology in manufacturing?
    Mr. Oxman. Thank you, Congressman Goldman. And your 
district is, in fact, a hotbed of innovation. ITI member 
company Medtronic is also doing a lot of investment in AI-
powered medical devices in your district as well.
    So the short answer to your question is, This is key to the 
manufacturing renaissance that is taking place in the United 
States. And what we are particularly excited about is how, as 
you hear from all the witnesses today, this is an ecosystem in 
the technology sector that is powering this.
    So you have got software companies, hardware companies. 
Data center operators is another area that is just exploding in 
Texas in particular. Semiconductor manufacturers also exploding 
in Texas right now, the investment of literally tens of 
billions of dollars in semiconductor manufacturing facilities 
in Texas.
    So all of this is taking place at a time that we are 
focused on the right solutions to power that kind of investment 
in innovation. And power is quite literally one of those areas 
that we need to focus on as well, making sure the energy grid 
can support it, that we are investing in an all-of-the-above 
energy strategy to make it happen.
    So we are very excited about working together to make sure 
that the policy environment is right. But, as you can tell, in 
Texas and across the country, this investment is taking place 
today.
    Mr. Goldman. Thank you so much.
    And, Ms. Humpton, I know you know something about not 
necessarily my district, Mr. Veasey's district, but welcome to 
Fort Worth. Siemens is opening a new facility there, exactly 
the type of activity we need to enhance our technological 
leadership and support onshoring domestic manufacturing.
    I understand that Siemens is innovating not only with 
industrial AI but is also experienced in how to drive 
efficiency and maximize operations at data centers.
    Can you please elaborate on Siemens' expertise in this 
arena and how you view data centers as critical to domestic 
manufacturing?
    Ms. Humpton. Thank you so much, Congressman. And by the 
way, you would be delighted to know that our technology is also 
used by some of those other manufacturers.
    So here is the interesting thing about this technology: It 
is in and around the manufacturing life cycle. And so it is 
fascinating to think about where does a company like Siemens 
play in the data center marketplace. Not only are we helping 
the semiconductor manufacturers design their chips so that we 
can achieve that, you know, enhanced energy efficiency, 
cooling, et cetera, and enhanced performance, we are also 
helping those who are constructing the data centers to build 
their data centers and provide the critical power to them.
    So my colleagues at Siemens Energy are off generating 
power, and they put it on high-voltage transmission lines, 
medium- and low-voltage switchgear. I mean, don't get me 
started, because it is great stuff.
    But we are using those AI tools and in fact manufacturing 
them close to you at Fort Worth, all of those components that 
go into the data center. And then we ourselves are users of the 
AI that gets managed inside those data centers.
    This is truly--I heard a phrase recently that may apply 
right now: ``Partnership is the new leadership.'' That is the 
era we are in now, and I am excited about what we can do 
together.
    Mr. Goldman. We are glad to be your partner. Can you also 
describe the likelihood of autonomous manufacturing facilities 
in the short term? What are the pros and cons and which 
regulations should we consider removing or adding to facilitate 
U.S. innovation versus those we should create as guardrails to 
protect workers?
    Ms. Humpton. Well, as we have talked about today, we 
actually have a shortage of workers in manufacturing. So what 
we know for sure is that we need to make every individual who 
is in a manufacturing environment as productive as they can 
possibly be. Technology can help us do that. That is wonderful.
    We have had a little bit of conversation about lights-out 
facilities, and I don't know about many of them. Sure, there 
are many things that can be done on a lights-out basis. If we 
think about, you know, let's say the pharmaceutical production 
line, and when we get to the point of individualized medicine, 
the ability for an autonomous line to actually control and 
monitor the progress of materials that are flowing through the 
manufacturing line.
    We know that will come. But, in most cases, what we are 
really doing is making things that need to be assembled within 
a larger supply chain. There is a lot of logistics, yhere is a 
lot of tracking. People are needed in the creativity that puts 
all of those pieces together. And I think we are going to see 
that for quite some time.
    Mr. Goldman. You timed that perfectly. Thank you very much.
    Thank you, all the panelists.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield.
    Mr. Bilirakis. I appreciate it very much. The gentleman 
yields back.
    Now we are at--I believe we have Ms. Schrier.
    Dr. Schrier, you are recognized for 5 minutes for your 
questioning.
    Ms. Schrier. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to our 
witnesses. We have heard from each of you that we need 
significantly more workers with targeted technical expertise, 
including in AI-assisted manufacturing, in order for America's 
advanced manufacturing industry to stay competitive in a global 
market.
    However, what I am hearing from the business community is 
that President Trump's erratic, emotional behavior has brought 
uncertainty and chaos to American businesses that are looking 
to invest in the future and plan and train up labor.
    My Republican colleagues have spoken at length about the 
need to protect America's competitive advantage within the 
increasingly competitive field of advanced manufacturing. And I 
agree with them. We have got to keep our competitive edge in 
every industry where it makes sense for us to be leading in 
manufacturing.
    But, at the same time, the Trump administration's recent 
governmentwide Federal funding freeze and efforts to dismantle 
the Department of Education, a career and technical information 
source, tariffs on our strategic allies--I have heard just 
radio silence from my Republican colleagues about this. And 
this is ultimately going to undermine the United States' 
competitive and educational workforce and technological 
competitiveness.
    Ms. Humpton, you are the CEO of Siemens USA, a subsidiary 
of the much larger Siemens International, based in Germany. And 
in fact your ultrasound headquarters is just down the street 
from my house in my congressional district, and I have visited 
many times and have been so impressed by the way that you have 
used AI to diagnose fatty liver disease with a simple 
ultrasound. And so thank you for using that and saving lives.
    On Monday night, President Trump issued an Executive order 
imposing 25 percent tariffs--excuse me--on steel and aluminum 
imports. Germany is one of the largest exporters of steel to 
the United States.
    And you talked about sourcing materials here, but the issue 
is complicated because, if there is scarcity here, prices go 
up, and there are retaliatory tariffs. You are going to have 
difficulty exporting--you are going to have difficulty 
exporting----
    Ms. Humpton. I wonder if I understand the question. Let me 
say this, that I don't think you will get any business to say, 
``Yes, we want more cost in our supply chain.'' Nobody would 
say that.
    But what we do recognize is that we have an administration 
that is very supportive of manufacturing overall in the United 
States.
    We are going to stay laser focused on our customers' needs, 
make sure we are responsive to them and make sure we do 
everything we can, even as policies and regulations change, to 
make the most of American manufacturing and the opportunity 
ahead of us.
    Ms. Schrier. Thank you. I am going to yield back because of 
my cough. I apologize.
    Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you. It happens. It happens. It 
happened to me the other day, so we understand. Thank you.
    The gentlelady yields back. Now I will recognize my good 
friend, who represents the University of Florida. I know what 
she is going to talk about, what she is going to highlight, I 
am sure. I will recognize her for her questioning, her 5 
minutes of questioning.
    Mrs. Cammack. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And, of course, go Gators, as always.
    Actually, my questions were asked earlier by my good friend 
also from the Sunshine State, Representative Laurel Lee. And so 
now that we are towards the tail end of the committee hearing, 
a lot has been discussed.
    Certainly, I wanted to talk about digital twins, the 
investments the University of Florida is making, but I wanted 
to open up the floor to each of our witnesses, because I know 
there is always something that gets left out of these hearings.
    So I am going to start with you, Ms. Humpton, if you can 
maybe speak to some of the things that you wanted to cover or 
didn't get asked in this hearing yet today.
    Ms. Humpton. This has been a phenomenal conversation. And I 
am looking down at my notes of things that I wanted to make 
sure we covered, and I am coming up empty.
    Thank you for making sure that we have a comprehensive 
dialogue. I think the thing that I hope we all leave with today 
is that industrial AI is different from consumer AI. Thank you.
    Mrs. Cammack. Absolutely. And thank you for all the work 
that you do on digital twins. It is absolutely revolutionary, 
and I am very excited for the possibilities of digital twins in 
multiple different industries and sectors. So thank you.
    Mr. Kinder, I know Representative Laurel Lee, she mentioned 
the University of Florida and the College of Engineering. 
Anything that you wanted to add as part of your response to her 
question or expand on that?
    I should clarify a little bit: more specifically, the 
importance of R&D and the investments that we have to make at 
the university level in order to continue pushing this type of 
technology.
    Mr. Kinder. Yes. Thank you for the question, Congresswoman. 
We are very excited about the Florida partnership. I think it 
is going to launch this fall, I believe is the plan for the 
degree program.
    We think bringing manufacturing techniques to the building 
sector will revolutionize how we build, especially housing, of 
which there is a critical shortage in the U.S. Our software, 
the training we provide teaches students how to reduce those 
costs by 50 percent. And this is where Autodesk brings together 
both manufacturing and architecture, engineering, and 
construction.
    We partnered with a modular construction company in 
Oakland, California, to design more than 300 AI-enabled 
affordable housing units at about half the cost and half the 
time and half of the waste in the process. So we are very proud 
of that and look forward to, you know, working with and 
partnering with universities to further that type of research.
    Mrs. Cammack. And, along with that, in Congress we are 
doing everything we can to make sure that the regulatory 
environment doesn't trip everybody up as we are innovating. And 
you guys are doing so much more with half the cost and half the 
time. We need to do it with half the regulation. So this is my 
shameless plug for the REINS Act right now. But thank you for 
that.
    Dr. Reynolds, I saw you flipping through your notes to make 
sure that there was nothing that you hadn't missed. Was there 
anything that you wanted to cover that we haven't touched on 
today?
    Dr. Reynolds. You know, I might just reinforce a few points 
that I think have been made today. The first one I want to make 
is a sense of urgency. I think that we have an understanding 
that we really need to do a collaborative project here. This is 
going to take government, it is going to take industry, it is 
going to take academia, take the civil society.
    But we have an urgent moment here, because I think the U.S. 
is at an inflection point. And we have done so much over the 
last few years to rebuild this manufacturing base, to build 
momentum.
    We now have hundreds of new facilities being built. We have 
a whole new crop of manufacturing startups that are really 
changing the face, particularly in AI. All of that momentum 
must continue. And if we can get aligned and ensure that we 
don't have too much disruption or changing of the rules 
midstream, I think that we are really going to be able to 
accelerate the work here and succeed with our tipping point.
    And so I want to also just emphasize that the path forward 
is really an investment in the technology, but it is also an 
investment in our workers, and those together will help us do 
this.
    Mrs. Cammack. Excellent. Thank you.
    The floor is yours.
    Mr. Oxman. Thank you, Congresswoman. I think the one issue 
that didn't come up today that I just want to mention is tax 
policy. And I realize this is not the tax -riting committee, 
but everyone here is going to have an opportunity to vote on 
taxes at some point.
    The expiration of the provision in the 2017 Tax Cuts and 
JOBS Act that allows companies to deduct the investment that 
they make in research and development----
    Mrs. Cammack. Absolutely.
    Mr. Oxman [continuing]. In the year in which that 
investment takes place, the expiration of that provision has 
been enormously harmful to the ability of companies to invest 
in R&D here in the U.S. Restoring that provision will be kind 
of the fuse that ignites a renaissance of investment in 
manufacturing and other industries here in the U.S. So that is 
the one thing that I would mention.
    Mrs. Cammack. And thank you for mentioning that. As someone 
who represents one of the top biotech hubs and incubators in 
the world, the R&D tax credit deduction is absolutely important 
and critical to so many industries.
    So thank you all so much for your time and expertise today. 
And the future is bright. I am so glad that we are not having a 
doomsdayer conversation today. So thank you.
    And, with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Bilirakis. I appreciate it very much. And that was a 
great move, Kat. Thank you for giving them the opportunity to 
elaborate on these issues. We appreciate it very much.
    Next, we have--we don't have anybody on the Democrat side. 
Dr.--oh, yes, yes. I am sorry. Mrs. Houchin. She is a great, a 
valuable member of our committee, and we are very fortunate to 
have her. And we will be working on quite a few issues 
together.
    I will recognize you for 5 minutes of questioning.
    Mrs. Houchin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am pleased to be a 
member of the subcommittee.
    And thank you to the ranking member and to our witnesses 
for your testimony today.
    My home State of Indiana is one of the most manufacturing-
intensive States in the country. According to the Indiana 
Manufacturers Association, manufacturing makes up 28 percent of 
Indiana's GDP and 17 percent of our workforce. When you account 
for the broad impact beyond the workforce that it directly 
employs, more than half of all jobs in Indiana do have a 
connection to the manufacturing sector.
    It is no secret, however, that the industry has had its 
challenges, from international competitors like China that seek 
to undermine our U.S.-based companies to the difficulties 
facing domestic supply chains. The manufacturing sector must 
have necessary tools to compete in a global economy.
    Fortunately, AI offers a potential solution to several of 
these problems. In its applications in American manufacturing, 
AI has been found to reduce costs, improve workforce 
efficiency, and make U.S. States like Indiana better places to 
do business.
    And I acknowledge that this technology is new and rapidly 
advancing. I am excited by the opportunities it presents 
manufacturers back home as we look to bring jobs back to the 
United States.
    Mr. Kinder, my question for you is, Much of the 
manufacturing that happens in districts like mine come from 
small to midsize businesses. When you are engaging and working 
with manufacturers of this size, if you could just highlight a 
few of the challenges that you think--the biggest challenges 
they face.
    Mr. Kinder. Thank you for your question, and great to be a 
fellow Hoosier.
    Small and medium-size manufacturers face global competition 
even though they may operate in, you know, Columbus, Indiana. 
And they don't want to fall behind, yet for them to be able to 
invest and keep up the pace, it is a challenge. They don't have 
the economies of scale, and they don't have, you know, a 
government that may be completely subsidizing the investments 
that they are trying to make.
    So the challenges that I see or that we hear from our 
customers, our small and medium-size customers, is they want to 
invest, they want to be as efficient as they can, but that 
requires often new processes, new equipment, new factories, new 
software. And that is an investment, a hurdle for them to get 
over to be able to invest in what we call digital 
transformation, of which AI is just another next step in it.
    Now, the promise of AI, the beautiful promise of AI is it 
can make our small and medium-size enterprises more 
competitive. It can take out some of the cost that they would 
pay, have to pay manually that larger companies or global 
manufacturers wouldn't have to.
    Mrs. Houchin. Is that something that you think the R&D tax 
credit could play a part in helping them make some of those 
investments?
    Mr. Kinder. I think tax credits that help to support 
investment in R&D absolutely can help, yes.
    Mrs. Houchin. So we want our small businesses to remain 
competitive, and you have touched on this a little bit, how 
adopting AI for technologies and processes can be helpful.
    Could you talk a little bit about Autodesk, how that helps 
manufacturers access AI? What are some of the challenges that 
are inherent in adopting that technology, and then what steps, 
if any, should Congress take to support our small and medium-
size manufacturers in adopting AI?
    Mr. Kinder. I think what we do at Autodesk in terms of 
introducing AI is we try to solve specific problems. So we look 
at, you know, industrial-level data, constrained datasets, not 
kind of large amounts of data, that apply to the manufacturing 
process.
    And we figure out what the problems are that these small 
and medium-size manufacturers face and solve those, such as 
automated drawings. We recently rolled out automated sketch 
constraints. When you are building a table or modeling a table 
and you change the dimensions, you want the legs to move too at 
the same time. You can do all of that using AI, and it speeds 
up the overall process.
    Mrs. Houchin. Great. Well, as we work to make the United 
States the best possible place to work and build things, we 
also have to look at the resiliency of our supply chains, 
making it easier for companies to adapt when disruptions 
happen.
    Ms. Humpton, what role can AI play in the optimization of 
resources and processes within manufacturing supply chains, 
with the few seconds we have remaining?
    Ms. Humpton. What I would tell you is that we all know that 
our supply chain and logistics experts have become heroes over 
the last few years. Giving them the superpower to analyze 
networks and understand where bottlenecks are, find 
alternatives, AI can help them every single day.
    Mrs. Houchin. Thank you.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you, Mrs. Houchin, appreciate it very 
much.
    Now we have the vice chairman of the full committee, my 
very good friend and fellow Pittsburgh Pirate fan, Vice 
Chairman Joyce, John Joyce. Thank you, Doctor, appreciate it. I 
will recognize you for your 5 minutes of questioning.
    Mr. Joyce. First, I want to thank you, Chairman Bilirakis, 
for allowing me to waive onto this important hearing.
    As we have covered in several hearings across multiple 
Energy and Commerce subcommittees, the AI revolution is here, 
and it will ultimately influence so many aspects of our lives 
with everything from medical services to manufacturing 
optimization. AI adds the efficiency and precision that will 
allow Americans to receive faster results and have a more 
productive and dynamic economy.
    In the changing geopolitical climate that we live in, it is 
critical that we stay ahead of our adversaries. The competition 
for the fastest and most capable AI is heating up. And China 
has made it clear of its intentions to dominate in this space.
    America and the free world can't afford to fall behind and 
allow the Chinese Communist Party to be the leader in this 
critical sector for the future of our economy and for our 
national security.
    Fortunately, America has a strong advantage. As tech 
leaders like Elon Musk have said, AI could lead energy demand 
as much as twice of what it is currently. And that energy, that 
energy that Elon Musk referenced, exists today under the feet 
of my constituents in Pennsylvania.
    The access to energy and energy infrastructure is the tide 
that will lift all boats. We have already begun to see this in 
my home State with data center agreements between AWS and Talen 
Energy at the Susquehanna nuclear generation facility and the 
reopening of Three Mile Island, thanks to a purchase power 
agreement between Constellation Energy and Microsoft.
    These deals will lead to billions of dollars of investment 
in these communities, and they will provide family-sustaining 
wages, jobs that are so necessary. They will also provide 
revenue, revenue for schools, for libraries, for police 
stations, firehouses, and hospitals.
    As we look forward to engaging not only our merchant 
nuclear assets for AI but the robust natural gas electricity 
generation we have in this country, opportunities for rural 
America will only continue to grow, and grow we must.
    AI has a large role to play in bringing back American 
manufacturing. President Trump has made it clear: In this new 
golden age of America, we need to ensure products are made 
right here and that family-sustaining jobs stay here.
    Increases in efficiency and worker productivity that the 
use of AI will give American companies the edge that they need 
to compete and they need to win. The faster that we develop AI 
and build the needed data centers, the better we can protect 
our Nation's interests and bring back the economic 
opportunities that America has not seen in the past 4 years.
    Mr. Oxman, from the AI perspective, why is getting our 
energy policy right important for securing American leadership 
in artificial intelligence?
    Mr. Oxman. Dr. Joyce, thank you for the question, and 
grateful to you for highlighting what ITI member companies like 
AWS and Microsoft are doing in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 
to bring this energy discussion to the forefront because, to 
your question, AI is not in a vacuum. It exists because of data 
centers, and those data centers are the key to continued U.S. 
domination of AI innovation worldwide.
    Data centers do require a lot of power, like all of the 
other activities that we engage in on a daily basis. And 
finding new energy solutions, including nuclear, are key to 
continued U.S. growth and economic activity around AI.
    So thank you for raising that issue, and thank you for your 
leadership on making sure that those energy pathways for data 
centers are available.
    Mr. Joyce. Thank you for your answer.
    Ms. Humpton, in the global economy that Siemens 
participates, we have seen other countries manipulate currency, 
we have seen unfairly subsidized industry, we have seen the 
theft of intellectual property, we have seen countries ignore 
environmental regulations and use captive labor to gain 
advantages for their domestic manufacturing.
    How can large companies like Siemens that follow the rules, 
how can they invest and make sure that AI allows you to 
outcompete these known bad actors?
    Ms. Humpton. Thank you, Congressman, for that question. And 
in fact, first I will say that the U.S. is Siemens' largest 
market. I like to brag about this. We are responsible for about 
25 percent of Siemens' work all around the globe. But, as you 
say, we are a global company and working in accordance with the 
regulations and principles that truly lift up the role of 
manufacturing globally in the way it is done.
    AI, industrial AI in particular, can be essential in making 
workers in these developed and friendly countries that we work 
with so closely, to help make all of our workers more 
productive.
    When we do that, we know that we all succeed. We are in a 
moment in time when bringing back American manufacturing in 
particular and taking advantage of American workers through AI, 
we are going to be able to enhance their ability to produce in 
a much more efficient way, and that makes us far more 
competitive here and at home.
    Mr. Joyce. And that efficient way will allow so many 
Americans to appreciate the new golden age of America.
    I thank all the witnesses for being present here today.
    Mr. Chairman, thank you for allowing me to waive on. I 
yield back.
    Mr. Bilirakis. That is a good way to end it. So we 
appreciate you so very much. I think that this committee is off 
to a great start. I think my ranking member will agree.
    And I want to thank the witnesses. You did an outstanding 
job, were very informative. So we will continue this 
discussion.
    I ask unanimous consent that the documents on the staff 
document list be submitted for the record.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    [The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.]
    Mr. Bilirakis. I remind Members that they have 10 business 
days to submit questions for the record, and I ask the 
witnesses to respond to the questions promptly. Members should 
submit their questions by the close of business February 26th.
    So, without objection, the subcommittee is adjourned. Thank 
you. Thank you, everyone, we appreciate it very much.
    [Whereupon, at 2:03 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
    [Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:]
   [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                 [all]