[Senate Hearing 119-253]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



                                                        S. Hrg. 119-253

                       NOMINATION OF PAUL DABBAR,
                    NOMINEE TO BE DEPUTY SECRETARY,
                      U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

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




                                HEARING

                               before the

                         COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
                      SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION
                               __________

                              MAY 1, 2025
                               __________

    Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
                             Transportation





               [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]





                Available online: http://www.govinfo.gov
                
                                ______
                                
                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

62-324 PDF                 WASHINGTON : 2025                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                


                



                
                
       SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION

                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                       TED CRUZ, Texas, Chairman
JOHN THUNE, South Dakota             MARIA CANTWELL, Washington, 
ROGER WICKER, Mississippi              Ranking
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska                AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
JERRY MORAN, Kansas                  BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska                 EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts
MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee          GARY PETERS, Michigan
TODD YOUNG, Indiana                  TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
TED BUDD, North Carolina             TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
ERIC SCHMITT, Missouri               JACKY ROSEN, Nevada
JOHN CURTIS, Utah                    BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico
BERNIE MORENO, Ohio                  JOHN HICKENLOOPER, Colorado
TIM SHEEHY, Montana                  JOHN FETTERMAN, Pennsylvania
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia  ANDY KIM, New Jersey
CYNTHIA LUMMIS, Wyoming              LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, Delaware
                 Brad Grantz, Republican Staff Director
           Nicole Christus, Republican Deputy Staff Director
                   Lila Harper Helms, Staff Director
                 Melissa Porter, Deputy Staff Director
                 




































                 
                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Hearing held on May 1, 2025......................................     1
Statement of Senator Cruz........................................     1
    Letter to Hon. Ted Cruz and Hon. Maria Cantwell from Dan R. 
      Brouillette, Former U.S. Secretary of Energy...............    44
    Letter to Hon. Ted Cruz and Hon. Maria Cantwell from Hon. 
      James (Rick) Perry, 47th Governor of Texas and 14th 
      Secretary of Energy........................................    46
    Letter dated March 13, 2025 to Hon, Ted Cruz and Hon. Maria 
      Cantwell from Paul Stimers, Executive Director, Quantum 
      Industry Coalition.........................................    48
    Letter dated March 26, 2025 to Senator Ted Cruz and Senator 
      Maria Cantwell from Ernest J. Moniz, Cecil and Ida Green 
      Professor of Physics and Engineering Systems (emeritus), 
      Special Advisor to the MIT President, Massachusetts 
      Institute of Technology....................................    49
    Letter dated April 8, 2025 to Hon. Ted Cruz and Hon. Maria 
      Cantwell from Persis S. Drell, Laboratory Director, 
      Emerita, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory and Chi-Chang 
      Kao, Laboratory Director, Emeritus, SLAC National 
      Accelerator Laboratory.....................................    51
    Letter dated April 29, 2025 to Hon. Ted Cruz and Hon. Maria 
      Cantwell from Christopher A. Mohr, President, Software & 
      Information Industry Association (SIIA)....................    53
Statement of Senator Cantwell....................................     2
Statement of Senator Sullivan....................................    20
Statement of Senator Klobuchar...................................    22
Statement of Senator Moreno......................................    24
Statement of Senator Baldwin.....................................    26
Statement of Senator Moran.......................................    28
Statement of Senator Kim.........................................    29
Statement of Senator Schmitt.....................................    31
Statement of Senator Peters......................................    33
Statement of Senator Blunt Rochester.............................    35
Statement of Senator Lujan.......................................    37
Statement of Senator Rosen.......................................    40

                               Witnesses

Paul Dabbar, Nominee to be Deputy Secretary, U.S. Department of 
  Commerce.......................................................     4
    Prepared statement...........................................     6
    Biographical information.....................................     7

                                Appendix

Response to written questions submitted to Paul Dabbar by:
    Hon. Ted Cruz................................................    57
    Hon. Roger Wicker............................................    58
    Hon. Marsha Blackburn........................................    59
    Hon. Dan Sullivan............................................    60
    Hon. Maria Cantwell..........................................    63
    Hon. Amy Klobuchar...........................................    73
    Hon. Brian Schatz............................................    73
    Hon. Tammy Duckworth.........................................    75
    Hon. Ben Ray Lujan...........................................    76
    Hon. Andy Kim................................................    76
    Hon. Lisa Blunt Rochester....................................    77

 
                       NOMINATION OF PAUL DABBAR, 
                    NOMINEE TO BE DEPUTY SECRETARY, 
                      U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

                              ----------                              

                         THURSDAY, MAY 1, 2025

                                       U.S. Senate,
        Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:06 a.m., in 
room SR-253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Ted Cruz, 
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
    Present: Senators Cruz [presiding], Moran, Sullivan, 
Schmitt, Moreno, Cantwell, Klobuchar, Peters, Baldwin, Rosen, 
Lujan, Kim, and Blunt Rochester.

              OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. TED CRUZ, 
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM TEXAS

    The Chairman. Good morning.
    The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation will come to order.
    Today we will consider the nomination of Paul Dabbar to 
serve as Deputy Secretary of Commerce.
    Mr. Dabbar, congratulations on your nomination. We look 
forward to hearing about your professional experience and your 
vision for supporting and complementing Secretary Lutnick's 
leadership of the Department.
    As Deputy Secretary, Mr. Dabbar will serve as the second in 
command at the Department. He will oversee daily operations and 
help tackle a wide array of issues, from fixing Biden's failed 
BEAD program, which connected not a single American to high-
speed internet, to countering climate alarmism at NOAA. These 
are not small tasks.
    Mr. Dabbar has an impressive background. After graduating 
from the United States Naval Academy he served as a nuclear 
submarine officer for six years.
    He then earned an MBA from Columbia University before going 
to work for JPMorgan for nearly two decades. There, he oversaw 
more than $400 billion in energy investments spanning oil, gas, 
nuclear, solar, wind, and geothermal energy.
    During the first Trump administration, Mr. Dabbar was 
unanimously confirmed as the fourth under secretary for science 
at the Department of Energy.
    In that role he managed a workforce of tens of thousands of 
personnel across more than 100 sites with a $14.5 billion 
budget.
    He oversaw the majority of U.S. national laboratories at a 
time when they faced a growing threat of Chinese espionage.
    He implemented the National Quantum Initiative Act and 
sought to spur the development of next-generation energy 
storage technologies.
    Following his tenure at the Department of Energy, Mr. 
Dabbar co-founded Bohr Quantum Technology, a pioneering 
cybersecurity company developing quantum networking systems.
    If confirmed, he will draw on his technical expertise and 
entrepreneurial experience to tackle complex challenges at the 
intersection of science, government, and industry.
    I will note that he has the explicit support of five former 
Cabinet secretaries from both Republican and Democratic 
administrations.
    This nomination comes as the Department of Commerce works 
to preserve access to the Gulf for oil and gas exploration, 
expand commercial access to mid-band spectrum, and maintain 
U.S. leadership in artificial intelligence, quantum, commercial 
space, and advanced manufacturing.
    It also comes amid a public trade battle. President Trump 
is rightfully standing up to China and working to reshore 
industries vital to our national security.
    But we should be mindful that long-term tariffs on 
manufacturing inputs and other goods would function as a de 
facto tax increase on small businesses and the American middle 
class.
    My hope is that the Commerce Department leadership will 
work alongside the President to steer a course that addresses 
our supply chain vulnerabilities and restores dignity to the 
American worker, but aims for freer and fairer trade with our 
allies, not simply protectionism.
    There are two paths before us, one that uses tariffs 
strategically to secure better trade deals, incentivizing our 
trading partners to lower the tariffs they charge to American 
goods and services in exchange for lowering our own tariffs.
    The other path is a path that locks in place high tariffs 
indefinitely. I very much hope we are on the former path and 
not the latter.
    Just this week Secretary Lutnick has touted an 
international trade deal now in its final stages. The President 
has also signed a proclamation offering relief to the auto 
industry following the results of a Commerce Department Section 
232 investigation into the import of automobiles and automobile 
parts.
    These are signals the administration wants to use its trade 
authorities to secure better deals for the American people.
    I am confident that Mr. Dabbar, an experienced dealmaker 
himself, can assist in this effort. I hope he will outline for 
us today the path that he plans to take under the direction of 
the President.
    I will now turn to Ranking Member Cantwell for her opening 
remarks.

               STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON

    Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and welcome, Mr. 
Dabbar. Congratulations on your nomination.
    Welcome to your wife and welcome to one of those energy 
secretaries here supporting you, Mr. Brouillette. I enjoyed 
working with both of you at the Department of Energy.
    I know this isn't the first time you have testified before 
a Senate hearing, and having been confirmed for the Under 
Secretary of Science at the Department of Energy we worked 
together in the implementation of not just the National Quantum 
Initiative but your role in Hanford cleanup, and I very much 
appreciate that.
    The Deputy Secretary of Commerce plays a significant role 
in shaping the U.S. economy and if confirmed you will be a 
representative for the day-to-day operations of the department 
in assisting American businesses and promoting policies that 
help us create economic growth.
    But your nomination comes at a time when we have had a 
significant period of disruption and chaos at the agency. Under 
Secretary Lutnick's leadership I believe we have had a series 
of alarming decisions and actions that are damaging the 
opportunities for economic growth.
    First and foremost, the Minority Business Development 
Agency, a 56-year-old agency that Congress permanently 
authorized in 2021, has been dismantled.
    For those unfamiliar with the MBDA, I believe my colleague, 
Senator Wicker, was quite accurate when he said, I quote, ``The 
Minority Business Development Agency has been a lifeline for 
many minority businesses, owners, and entrepreneurs seeking to 
grow their businesses,'' end quote.
    And, indeed, Secretary Lutnick testified before this 
committee that he would not support dismantling of the Minority 
Business Development Agency, which helped create and retain 
approximately 23,000 jobs in Fiscal Year 2024 alone.
    This is about capacity building. This is about capacity 
building within a community that may not necessarily have the 
same access to capital, may not have the same parameters, and 
this agency has been quite successful.
    But within two months of his confirmation he has fired all 
of its employees, canceled all of its grants, and even the sign 
that once marked the MBDA office at the Department of Commerce 
building has been pulled down under his watch.
    Meanwhile, the department continues to slash essential 
workers at NOAA with approximately 2,500 employees of the 12-
person workforce fired or otherwise departing since the start 
of this administration.
    These staffing shortages are already impacting NOAA's core 
functions including reduced and suspended weather balloon 
launches at many of our weather forecast offices, and I cannot 
tell you how important this is for us particularly related to 
fire season.
    These NOAA weather activities are giving us essential data 
about how best to prepare for fire season, and further cuts are 
expected in the coming weeks.
    On top of that, the Trump administration is pursuing a 2026 
budget proposal that would reduce NOAA's budget by more than 27 
percent including a 75 percent cut to the Office of Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Research, the closures of all its weather climate 
labs, and an 85 percent cut to the Office of Space Commerce.
    I can tell you this, Mr. Dabbar, as somebody who ran a 
science organization that we are going to hold this 
administration accountable for the cuts in science. It is not 
acceptable.
    Innovation is the way we are going to grow our economy. It 
is the way we are going to protect our industries that exist 
today.
    At the same time, the administration is calling for major 
reorganizations of NOAA including moving out the National 
Fisheries marine service to the Department of Interior.
    I am not sure why. The most important management resource 
we have for our fisheries, having our science management 
system, we would give up to the Department of Interior.
    I am particularly shocked to see this proposal, given that 
Mr. Lutnick promised to me during his confirmation hearing 
that, ``I have no interest in separating NOAA,'' and that 
breaking up NOAA, ``is not on my agenda.'' What changed?
    What is equally concerning is the Office of Management and 
Budget proposal to eliminate the Economic Development 
Administration entirely.
    I believe this would jeopardize important decisions that 
continue to help us grow our tech hubs and important 
investments that keep growing our economy across the United 
States.
    So I could go on and on about tariffs. While I appreciate 
many of the things that the Chairman just mentioned in his 
tariff statement, yes, I probably would be more comfortable 
with you leading our tariff charge than the current secretary.
    But I can tell you this. Tariffs are hurting small 
businesses today. They are significantly reducing our economic 
growth.
    They are significantly constraining opportunities and 
people just may not even be in business by the time these deals 
are done.
    And I know that some people think that might be the price 
to pay. I do not. I do not believe in that view of an American 
economy where we lead on alliance building and we lead on 
moving forward on economic opportunities by opening up markets, 
particularly big opportunities that I think we have in front of 
us.
    So that is to say I very much appreciate, Mr. Dabbar, your 
leadership in the past. I am outlining the big challenges I see 
in front of you in stabilizing the agency's core mission.
    I look forward to hearing the answers to our questions 
today. But, again, welcome to you and congratulations on your 
nomination.
    The Chairman. Thank you.
    Mr. Dabbar, you are now recognized for your opening 
statement.

STATEMENT OF PAUL DABBAR, NOMINEE TO BE DEPUTY SECRETARY, U.S. 
                     DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

    Mr. Dabbar. Thank you, Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member 
Cantwell, and members of the Committee. It is an honor to be 
here today.
    I am grateful to President Trump and Secretary Lutnick for 
their trust and confidence in me for this nomination to be 
Deputy Secretary of Commerce.
    Joining me today is my wonderful wife of 25 years Andrea. 
Our children, Katie and Will, are watching from their efforts 
at work and college. I greatly appreciate their support when I 
was Under Secretary for Science.
    Also here today is my former boss, former Energy Secretary 
Dan Brouillette and friends of my time in government, the Naval 
Academy, and the private sector.
    If my nomination is confirmed by this body it will be the 
fourth time I will have sworn to support and defend the 
Constitution of the United States, the first time when I was 17 
years old after my appointment by former Senator Don Nichols 
for Induction Day at the Naval Academy.
    My second time was when I was commissioned a Navy ensign. I 
joined the Nuclear Submarine Force and had the honor to serve 
in many operations including deployment to the Arctic with the 
Arctic Research Laboratory with a team supported by NOAA, and 
my third time occurred when I was sworn in as Under Secretary.
    Since my time in the Navy my career has spanned 
investments, trade, science, and technology. I recently helped 
startup two technology companies, one in energy tech and 
another, a spinout of Cal Tech in quantum.
    I stayed involved in public policy testifying regularly 
before Congress, serving as a fellow at Columbia University on 
policy and a contributor at the Wall Street Journal, the Hoover 
Institution, and elsewhere.
    During President Trump's first term, I was honored to serve 
as the fourth Under Secretary of Science at the Department of 
Energy managing research and operations at the National 
Laboratories.
    During my tenure, I worked with many members on driving 
America forward on science and technology, and I led our robust 
efforts in environmental cleanup efforts from our nuclear 
weapons program.
    I was the lead on the exascale computing program, which led 
to four number-one global computers including the first use of 
the GPU chip, and many of them were completed ahead of schedule 
and under budget.
    I also led the National Quantum Initiative. I broke through 
decades of long issues in environmental management at Hanford 
and elsewhere, and completed large nuclear projects including 
several ahead of schedule and under budget.
    As Under Secretary, I worked extensively with the 
Department of Commerce bureaus including USPTO, NIST, NOAA, and 
BIS.
    Earlier in my career I was a senior executive at JPMorgan 
leading several hundred billion dollars of global investment 
and helping lead our global--our efforts in global commodities 
trading including energy and critical materials.
    I am excited to join the Commerce Department and my 
experience will well fit me for this position. This is an 
exciting time for the sectors covered by the department. U.S. 
commercial competitiveness and trade are clearly at the front 
and center of many issues.
    Additionally, science and technology efforts including AI, 
semiconductors, quantum, intellectual property, the Blue 
Economy, and technology security are also at the forefront.
    My significant experience across the scope of the 
Department will enable me to manage and lead its various 
bureaus from experience and trade in the private sector, my 
maritime service in NOAA, DOE technology security efforts in 
BIS, my science and technology background in NIST, starting up 
a quantum communications company at NTIA, just to name a few, 
and I have deep experience in managing large government 
efforts.
    And, finally, I have the persistence to get things done and 
take on challenges of any magnitude. For example, I have 
completed a 146-mile Ironman triathlon and I am one of the few 
people who have been to both the geographic North and South 
Poles.
    I was honored and humbled to receive wide support from the 
Senate from my last confirmation including being confirmed by 
unanimous consent.
    Today, I humbly ask for every member's vote and support for 
my nomination. Thank you, and I look forward to answering your 
questions.
    [The prepared statement and biographical information of Mr. 
Dabbar follow:]

 Prepared Statement of Paul M. Dabbar, Nominee to be Deputy Secretary, 
                      U.S. Department of Commerce
                      
    Thank you Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member Cantwell, and members of 
the Committee. It is an honor to be here today. I am grateful to 
President Trump and Secretary Lutnick for their trust and confidence in 
me with this nomination to be Deputy Secretary of Commerce.
    Joining me today is my wonderful wife of twenty-five years, Andrea. 
Our children Katie and Will are watching from their efforts at work and 
college. I greatly appreciate their past support when I was Under 
Secretary for Science. Also here today is my former boss, former Energy 
Secretary Dan Brouillette, and friends from my time in government, the 
Naval Academy, and the private sector.
    If my nomination is confirmed by this body, it will be the fourth 
time that I will have the opportunity to swear an oath to support and 
defend the Constitution. The first time I was seventeen years old, 
after my appointment by former Senator Don Nichols, at Induction Day at 
the Naval Academy. The second time was when I was commissioned a Navy 
ensign. I joined the nuclear submarine force and had the honor to serve 
in many operations, including a deployment to the Arctic with the 
Arctic Research Laboratory, a team supported by NOAA. And my third time 
occurred when I was sworn in as Under Secretary.
    Since my time in the Navy, my career has spanned investments, 
trade, science and technology. Recently, I helped start two technology 
companies, one in energy tech, and the other a spin out of Caltech in 
quantum. I stayed involved in public policy by regularly testifying 
before Congress, serving as a visiting fellow at Columbia University, 
and as a contributor at the Wall Street Journal, the Hoover Institution 
and elsewhere.
    During President Trump's first term, I was honored to serve as the 
fourth Under Secretary for Science at the Department of Energy, 
managing research and operations at the National Labs. During my 
tenure, I worked with many members on driving America forward on 
science & technology, and I led our robust environmental clean-up 
efforts from our nuclear weapons program. I was the lead on the 
exascale computing program, which led to four #1 global supercomputers, 
including ones that were completed ahead of schedule and under budget. 
I also led the National Quantum Initiative. And I broke through decades 
long issues on environmental management at Hanford and elsewhere, 
completing large nuclear projects, including several ahead of schedule 
and under budget. As Under Secretary, I worked extensively with 
Department of Commerce bureaus, including USPTO, NIST, NOAA and BIS.
    Earlier in my career, I was a senior executive at J.P.Morgan, 
leading several hundred billion dollars in global investment, and 
helped lead efforts in global commodities trading in energy and 
critical minerals.
    I am excited to join the Commerce Department, and my experience is 
well fit for this position. This is a very exciting time in the sectors 
covered by the Department. U.S. commercial competitiveness and trade 
are clearly front and center issues. Additionally, the science and 
technology efforts, including AI, semiconductors, quantum, intellectual 
property, the Blue Economy, and technology security are also at the 
forefront.
    My significant experience across the scope of Department will 
enable me to help manage and lead its varied bureaus. From my 
experience in trade in the private sector, my maritime service and 
NOAA, my DOE technology security efforts and BIS, my science & 
technology background and NIST, and starting up a quantum 
communications company and NTIA, just to name a few. And I have deep 
experience at managing large government efforts. All of these 
experiences have prepared me to take on this role.
    And finally, I have the persistence to get things done and take on 
challenges of any magnitude. For example, I completed a 140.6 mile 
Ironman triathlon, and I am one of the few people ever who have been to 
both the geographic North and South Poles.
    I was honored and humbled to receive wide support from the Senate 
for my last confirmation, including being confirmed by unanimous 
consent. Today, I humbly ask for every member's consideration and 
support for my nomination. Thank you and I look forward to answering 
your questions.
                                 ______
                                 
                      a. biographical information 
                      
    1. Name (Include any former names or nicknames used): Paul M. 
Dabbar.
    2. Position to which nominated: Deputy Secretary, Department of 
Commerce.
    3. Date of Nomination: March 11, 2025.
    4. Address (List current place of residence and office addresses):

        Residence: Information not released to the public.
        Office: Information not provided.

    5. Date and Place of Birth: July 8, 1967; Passaic, NJ.
    6. Provide the name, position, and place of employment for your 
spouse (if married) or domestic partner, and the names and ages of your 
children (including stepchildren and children by a previous marriage).

        Spouse: Andrea Dabbar. Employment: None.
        Children: Katie Dabbar, 23. William Dabbar, 21.

    7. List all college and graduate schools attended, whether or not 
you were granted a degree by the institution. Provide the name of the 
institution, the dates attended, the degree received, and the date of 
the degree.

        U.S. Naval Academy, 1985-1989, B.S., May 1989
        Columbia University, 1994-1996, M.B.A., May 1996

    8. List all post-undergraduate employment, including the job title, 
name of employer, and inclusive dates of employment, and highlight all 
management-level jobs held and any non-managerial jobs that relate to 
the position for which you are nominated.

   U.S. Navy, nuclear submarine officer, Lieutenant. 1989-1994

   J.P.Morgan, energy mergers & acquisitions, investment 
        banking, commodities trading. 1996-2017

   Department of Energy, Member of the Advisory Board, 
        Environmental Management program. 2005-2017

   Department of Energy, Under Secretary for Science. 2017-2021

   Bohr Quantum Technology, Co-founder and CEO. 2021-2025

   Power & Digital Infrastructure I & II, board member, 2021-
        2024

   Dominion Energy, board member, 2023 to current

   AirJoule Technologies, board member. 2024 to current

   Warburg Pincus, advisor. 2021 to current

   Transition Equity Partners, advisor. 2023 to current

   Columbia University, Center on Global Energy Policy, 
        Distinguished Visiting Fellow & Adjunct Senior Research 
        Scholar. 2021 to current.

   Advisor, Department of Defense. 2023 to current

    10. Attach a copy of your resume.
    Attached.
    11. List any advisory, consultative, honorary, or other part-time 
service or positions with Federal, State, or local governments, other 
than those listed above after 18 years of age.

   U.S. Naval Academy, Midshipman. 1985-1989

   U.S. Navy submarine officer. 1989-1994

   Department of Energy Environmental Management Advisory 
        Board, board member. 2005-2017

    12. List all positions held as an officer, director, trustee, 
partner, proprietor, agent, representative, or consultant of any 
corporation, company, firm, partnership, or other business, enterprise, 
educational, or other institution.

   U.S. Navy, nuclear submarine officer, Lieutenant. 1989-1994

   J.P.Morgan, energy mergers & acquisitions, investment 
        banking, commodities trading. 1996-2017

   Department of Energy, Member of the Advisory Board, 
        Environmental Management program. 2005-2017

   Department of Energy, Under Secretary for Science. 2017-2021

   Bohr Quantum Technology, Co-founder and CEO. 2021-2025

   Power & Digital Infrastructure I & II, board member, 2021-
        2024

   Dominion Energy, board member, 2023 to current

   AirJoule Technologies, board member. 2024 to current

   Warburg Pincus, advisor. 2021 to current

   Transition Equity Partners, advisor. 2023 to current

   Columbia University, Center on Global Energy Policy, 
        Distinguished Visiting Fellow & Adjunct Senior Research 
        Scholar. 2021 to current

    13. List all memberships you have had after 18 years of age or 
currently hold with any civic, social, charitable, educational, 
political, professional, fraternal, benevolent or religiously 
affiliated organization, private club, or other membership organization 
(You do not have to list your religious affiliation or membership in a 
religious house of worship or institution). Include dates of membership 
and any positions you have held with any organization. Please note 
whether any such club or organization restricts membership on the basis 
of sex, race, color, religion, national origin, age, or disability.

   Council on Foreign Relations, member.

   U.S. Naval Academy Class of 1989 Fundraising Committee, co-
        Chair, 2004-2017

   POTUS Transition Team, volunteer, 2024-2025.

   America First Policy Institute, volunteer, 2023-2024.

    14. Have you ever been a candidate for and/or held a public office 
(elected, non-elected, or appointed)? If so, indicate whether any 
campaign has any outstanding debt, the amount, and whether you are 
personally liable for that debt. No.
    15. List all memberships and offices held with and services 
rendered to, whether compensated or not, any political party or 
election committee within the past ten years. If you have held a paid 
position or served in a formal or official advisory position (whether 
compensated or not) in a political campaign within the past ten years, 
identify the particulars of the campaign, including the candidate, year 
of the campaign, and your title and responsibilities. None.
    16. Itemize all political contributions to any individual, campaign 
organization, political party, political action committee, or similar 
entity of $200 or more for the past ten years.

   RNC, 2024. $360

   Campaign of D. Trump, 2024. $2940

   Campaign of D. Trump, 2024. $360

   Save America, 2024. $4640

   RNC, 2024. $4640

   Save America, $360

   Campaign of D. Trump, 2024. $3300

   NRCC, 2023. $2500

   Campaign of Chuck Fleischmann, 2023. $2000

   Campaign of Chuck Fleischmann, 2023. $2000

   Stand for America, 2022. $1000

   Campaign of Themis Klarides (CT governor), 2022. $500

   RNC, 2019. $250

   Campaign of D. Trump, 2019. $750

   Campaign of Steve Obsitnik (CT governor), 2018. $100

   Campaign of D. Trump, 2017. $1000

    17. List all scholarships, fellowships, honorary degrees, honorary 
society memberships, military medals, and any other special recognition 
for outstanding service or achievements.

   U.S. Department of Energy, James R. Schlesinger Award, 
        senior Secretary of Energy service award.

   Council on Competitiveness, Fellow.

   Navy Achievement Medal

   Navy Arctic Service Medal

    18. List all books, articles, columns, letters to the editor, 
Internet blog postings, or other publications you have authored, 
individually or with others. Include a link to each publication when 
possible. If a link is not available, provide a digital copy of the 
publication when available.
    All of these that are available are listed and linked on my 
Linkedin page, Publications section, link below:

   Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/public-profile/
        settings?trk=d_flagship3_
        profile_self_view_public_profile&lipi=urn%3Ali%3Apage%3Ad_flagsh
        ip3_profile
        _view_base%3BzoYKmzhDTB21h%2BcGDksa3Q%3D%3D

    19. List all speeches, panel discussions, and presentations (e.g., 
PowerPoint) that you have given on topics relevant to the position for 
which you have been nominated. Include a link to each publication when 
possible. If a link is not available, provide a digital copy of the 
speech or presentation when available.
    All of these that are available are listed and linked on my 
Linkedin page, link below:

   Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/public-profile/
        settings?trk=d_flagship3_
        profile_self_view_public_profile&lipi=urn%3Ali%%3Apage%3Ad_flags
        hip3_pro
        file_view_base%3BzoYKmzhDTB21h%2BcGDksa3Q%3D%3D

    20. List all public statements you have made during the past ten 
years, including statements in news articles and radio and podcasts and 
television appearances, which are on topics relevant to the position 
for which you have been nominated, including dates. Include a link to 
each statement when possible. If a link is not available, provide a 
digital copy of the statement when available.
    All of these that are available are listed and linked on my 
Linkedin page, link below:

   Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/public-profile/
        settings?trk=d_flagship3_
        profile_self_view_public_profile&lipi=urn%3Ali%3Apage%3Ad_flagsh
        ip3_profile
        _view_base%3BzoYKmzhDTB21h%2BcGDksa3Q%3D%3D

    21. List all digital platforms (including social media and other 
digital content sites) on which you currently or have formerly operated 
an account, regardless of whether or not the account was held in your 
name or an alias. Include the full name of an ``alias'' or ``handle'', 
including the complete URL and username with hyperlinks, you have used 
on each of the named platforms. Indicate whether the account is active, 
deleted, or dormant. Include a link to each account if possible.

   Twitter/X: @PDabbar https://
        na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%
        3A%2F%2Fx.com%2Fpdabbar%3Fs%3D11%26t%3DWu4E9wNLHfH-Z1bDTjkyV
        Q&data05%7C02%7C%7C194edb6319f34efe589208dd5e908b6c%7C84df9e7fe9
        f6
        40afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638770697083905657%7CUnknown%7C
        TWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOi
        JXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C57C%7C&sdata
        =3FioERCBHdfMj7aOVqph1qgucyC7NwVbtIHq6j5KbAM%3D&reserved=0

   Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/public-profile/
        settings?trk=d_flagship3_
        profile_self_view_public_profile&lipi=urn%3Ali%3Apage%3Ad_flagsh
        ip3_profile
        _view_base%3BzoYKmzhDTB21h%2BcGDksa3Q%3D%3D

   Truth Social:@PMDabbar https://truthsocial.com/@PMDabbar

    22. Please identify each instance in which you have testified 
orally or in writing before Congress in a governmental or non-
governmental capacity and specify the date, committee, and subject 
matter of each testimony.
    I have testified a significant number of times before the House and 
Senate. Starting from my Under Secretary confirmation hearing at SENR 
in 2017, subsequently as Under Secretary at many authorization and 
appropriations hearings, and subsequent to my role as Under Secretary 
over the last four years. I believe these are all of my testimonies:

   SENR, July 20, 2017. Nomination hearing for Under Secretary 
        DOE

   SENR, Sept 25, 2018. Hearing on Quantum Information Science

   SENR, Feb 7, 2019. Hearing on Energy Innovation

   SENR, Apr 15, 2021. Hearing on Role of DOE in Innovation

   SENR, Feb 20, 2025. Hearing on Research Security Risks

   SEPW, Nov 1, 2023. Hearing on Extreme Event Attribution

   House Science, Space and Technology Committee, Jan 30, 2018. 
        Hearing on DOE Reorganization

   House Science, Space and Technology Committee, June 7, 2023. 
        Advancing Leadership in Quantum Technology

   House E&C, Feb 7, 2019. State of Energy Innovation

   House E&C, Jan 31, 2023. Hearing on American Energy 
        Expansion

   House E&C, Oct 19, 2023. Hearing on Unlocking AI's Potential 
        in the Energy Sector

   Senate Appropriations, Apr 11, 2018. DOE budget request

   House Appropriations, E&W Subcommittee, April 3, 2019, 
        Budget proposal review

    23. Given the current mission, major programs, and major 
operational objectives of the department/agency/commission/corporation 
to which you have been nominated, what in your background or employment 
experience do you believe affirmatively qualifies you for appointment 
to the position for which you have been nominated, and why do you wish 
to serve in that position?
    My most applicable past experience that qualifies me for this role 
was my role as Under Secretary for Science at the U.S. Department of 
Energy. In that role I had a budget of $15 billion per annum, which is 
about the size of the Department of Commerce. I was also the manager 
and leader of 30,000 career employees and contractors. As a part of 
that, I directly managed 11 of the 17 National Labs, as well as over 
100 other sites. In that role I managed operations, research and 
construction of a wide set of facilities at the highest level of 
complexity, include large nuclear and scientific projects. As a part of 
operations, I managed CFO, General Counsel and Human Capital efforts of 
my organizations. I also led efforts of authorization and 
appropriations for my offices at Congress, EPA and other environmental 
requirements, and collaboration with other agencies, including DOC, on 
our joint efforts. I also was a major funder of research in the 
physical sciences at universities in all fifty states. And I led 
commercialization of technology developed at the National Labs, 
including generation of patents.
    I had significant overlap and cooperative efforts with many areas 
of DOC. Including efforts on atmospheric and estuary research with 
NOAA, quantum, neutron science and standard setting with NIST, Bayh-
Dole and other IP policy with the USPTO, and technology security policy 
with BIS.
    24. What do you believe are your responsibilities, if confirmed, to 
ensure that the department/agency/commission/corporation has proper 
management and accounting controls, and what experience do you have in 
managing a large organization?
    My responsibilities would be to manage the day-to-day operations 
the Department. From managing efforts of the various program offices 
run by the various Under Secretaries, to Department level management 
offices such as legal affairs, CFO, and legislative affairs. I would 
also help manage trade policy efforts as directed by the Secretary, as 
well as any additional new efforts that might be assigned to the 
Department during my tenure.
    I believe I am well qualified based on my experience as Under 
Secretary previously as described in #23 above. As well as a broad set 
of other professional experiences described in my attached biography.
    25. What do you believe to be the top three challenges facing the 
department/agency/commission/corporation, and why?
    Trade policy and negotiations will certainly be a significant 
effort of the department during my tenure. In addition, management of 
export controls of key U.S. technologies by the BIS office. And finally 
helping drive key new technologies and U.S. leadership at NIST, the 
Chips Act programs, and securing new technology intellectual property.

                   b. potential conflicts of interest
                   
    1. Describe all financial arrangements, deferred compensation 
agreements, and other continuing dealings with business associates, 
clients, or customers. Please include information related to retirement 
accounts, such as a 401(k) or pension plan.
    My only continuing dealing will be a 401K and a Defined Benefit 
penion from a previous employer that existed prior to my last 
appointment in 2017 as Under Secretary. They are a JPMorgan Chase 401K, 
and a JPMorgan Chase Defined Benefit Program. Both have has no 
additional contributions by my past employer or myself since my 
separation in 2017, and no more will be added going forward. I also 
have a past U.S. government Thrift Savings plan. I might sign up for 
the current U.S. government Thrift Savings plan if I am confirmed as 
Deputy Secretary.
    2. Do you have any commitments or agreements, formal or informal, 
to maintain employment, affiliation, or practice with any business, 
association, or other organization during your appointment? If so, 
please explain. No.
    3. Indicate any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other 
relationships which could involve potential conflicts of interest in 
the position to which you have been nominated. Explain how you will 
resolve each potential conflict of interest.
    The following are the companies and organizations which could 
involve potential conflicts of interest in the position to which I have 
been nominated:

        Bohr Quantum Technology: Past CEO/employee, current shareholder
        Dominion Energy: current board member, shareholder

        AirJoule Technologies, current board member, shareholder

        Warburg Pincus: current paid advisor

        Transition Equity Partners: current paid advisor

        Columbia University: current paid Adjunct Senior Research 
        Scholar

        Council on Competitiveness: current unpaid Fellow

        Clearpath: current unpaid advisory board member

        Energy Capital Ventures: current unpaid advisory board member

    I will step down from all of those that I am currently engaged upon 
confirmation and prior to being sworn in, and meet and abide by all 
requirements directed by the Office of Government Ethics, including as 
needed divesture or other directed mitigation steps as directed by OGE. 
I did these steps successfully when I was appointed Under Secretary for 
Science.
    4. Describe any business relationship, dealing, or financial 
transaction which you have had during the last ten years, whether for 
yourself, on behalf of a client, or acting as an agent, that could in 
any way constitute or result in a possible conflict of interest in the 
position to which you have been nominated. Explain how you will resolve 
each potential conflict of interest.
    In addition to the list in B3 above, I was also an employee of 
JPMorgan in the last ten years.
    I will have no ongoing relationship with any of the entities if I 
am confirmed, other than my disclosed JPMorgan pension plans. and will 
abide by all directions for the Office of Government Ethics on conflict 
of interest.
    5. Identify any other potential conflicts of interest and explain 
how you will resolve each potential conflict of interest. None.
    6. Describe any activity during the past ten years, including the 
names of clients represented, in which you have been engaged for the 
purpose of directly or indirectly influencing the passage, defeat, or 
modification of any legislation or affecting the administration and 
execution of law or public policy. None. 

                            c. legal matters
                            
    1. Have you ever been disciplined or cited for a breach of ethics, 
professional misconduct, or retaliation by, or been the subject of a 
complaint to, any court, administrative agency, the Office of Special 
Counsel, an Inspector General, professional association, disciplinary 
committee, or other professional group?
    None. If yes:

  a.  Provide the name of the court, agency, association, committee, or 
        group;

  b.  Provide the date the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or 
        personnel action was issued or initiated;

  c.  Describe the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or 
        personnel action;

  d.  Provide the results of the citation, disciplinary action, 
        complaint, or personnel action.

    2. Have you ever been investigated, arrested, charged, or held by 
any Federal, State, or other law enforcement authority of any Federal, 
State, county, municipal, or foreign government entity, other than for 
a minor traffic offense? If so, please explain. None.
    3. Have you or any business or nonprofit of which you are or were 
an officer ever been involved as a party in an administrative agency 
proceeding, criminal proceeding, or civil litigation? If so, please 
explain. None.
    4. Have you ever been convicted (including pleas of guilty or nolo 
contendere) of any criminal violation other than a minor traffic 
offense? If so, please explain. None.
    5. Have you ever been accused, formally or informally, of sexual 
assault, sexual harassment, or discrimination on the basis of sex, 
race, religion, or any other basis? If so, please explain. None.
    6. Please advise the Committee of any additional information, 
favorable or unfavorable, which you feel should be disclosed in 
connection with your nomination. None. 

                     d. relationship with committee
                     
    1. Will you ensure that your department/agency/commission/
corporation complies with deadlines for information set by 
congressional committees, and that your department/agency/commission/
corporation endeavors to timely comply with requests for information 
from individual Members of Congress, including requests from members in 
the minority? Yes.
    2. Will you ensure that your department/agency/commission/
corporation does whatever it can to protect congressional witnesses and 
whistleblowers from reprisal for their testimony and disclosures? Yes.
    3. Will you cooperate in providing the Committee with requested 
witnesses, including technical experts and career employees, with 
firsthand knowledge of matters of interest to the Committee? Yes.
    4. Are you willing to appear and testify before any duly 
constituted committee of the Congress on such occasions as you may be 
reasonably requested to do so? Yes.
                                 ______
                                 
               [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
                                 

    The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Dabbar.
    And just to clarify for the record, members of this 
committee will not be required to run an Ironman in----
    Senator Klobuchar. Speak for yourself.
    [Laughter.]
    The Chairman. You are encouraged to run an Ironman if you 
feel so inspired but you will be enabled----
    Senator Cantwell. She climbed Kilimanjaro.
    The Chairman. I climbed Mount Fuji, but I was 19.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Dabbar. I have my past staff behind me. I tried to 
encourage them to do a half Ironman when I was at DOE and I got 
some significant H.R. pushback on pressuring them.
    The Chairman. Understandably.
    And I will say on the Republican side of the aisle two of 
our members, Markwayne Mullin and Dave McCormick, are both 
former very accomplished wrestlers and more than a few of us 
have been trying to arrange a cage match which we think would 
sell a lot of tickets.
    We have been unsuccessful in scheduling that, but hope 
springs eternal. Senator Sheehy just--would just shoot them 
both, so it is all a difference in perspective.
    All right, to the work at hand.
    Mr. Dabbar, your experience at the Department of Energy, 
your two-decade career in financial management, your success as 
the founder of a quantum technology company, all of that makes 
you very well qualified for this position.
    Tell us why do you want to be Deputy Secretary of Commerce?
    Mr. Dabbar. As I mentioned, Senator, this is an exciting 
time for the scope. Obviously, trade, as was mentioned by both 
you and the Ranking Member, is obviously front and center.
    I have a significant amount of background to that in the 
private sector, and the bureaus that are primarily science and 
technology--no BIS, the Patent Office, the CHIPS Act, those 
are--those and others are--NTIA--are primarily science and 
technology efforts and, obviously, I have a great background in 
it but I am also very passionate about each and every one of 
those areas.
    The Chairman. So as you and I discussed in my office 
yesterday, the President and this administration has two paths 
before it. One path that I think is very, very positive, one 
path that I think is very, very negative.
    The positive path I think President Trump right now has 
extraordinary leverage--unprecedented leverage--to negotiate 
lower tariffs from our trading partners in exchange for 
lowering the tariffs that he has threatened to impose on them.
    I think if we end up 30, 60, 90 days from now in a world 
where we have got markedly lower tariffs across the globe that 
would be an historic victory for Americans, for American jobs, 
for American workers.
    On the other hand, the second path we could go down is a 
path that maintains very high tariffs in perpetuity, American 
tariffs on all of our trading partners, and we can expect 
retaliatory tariffs from our trading partners.
    I believe that would be a very bad path. I believe that 
would be a path that would hurt Texas and would hurt America.
    What is your view which path is preferable for the 
administration to take?
    Mr. Dabbar. So the President has been very clear on support 
of the President's positions on the different drivers of trade 
and the different potential accomplishments of trade.
    One of them may be to drive down barriers in tariffs and 
nontariff barriers in our trading counterparties. Another one 
is to reindustrialize the U.S. as we lost a significant amount 
of jobs, especially since the WTO acquisition of the PRC drove 
down industrial jobs.
    The third one is national security. I think yourself and 
many others here talk about the national security impact of the 
trade deficits.
    And the last one is, potentially, revenues. I am not 
certain of the exact negotiations between various parties but I 
could certainly see that some negotiations may be more focused 
on the accomplishment of one or two of those and some might be 
others.
    For example, I have testified many times before the Senate 
about China and national security issues, and I certainly think 
that when we talk about the PRC national security and 
reindustrialization it is going to be much more focused as a 
likely outcome of negotiations.
    The Chairman. I recognize you will not be the ultimate 
decisionmaker when it comes to the President's trade policy, 
but you will be one of the voices in the room and it is my hope 
that you will be a voice in the room advocating for using these 
tariffs as leverage to secure freer and fairer trade because I 
think that is the right direction for the administration to go.
    Let me shift to a different topic. One of the Department of 
Commerce's most consequential responsibilities is the 
allocation and management of spectrum through the NTIA.
    Last year Leader Thune, Senator Blackburn, and I introduced 
a bill to restore the FCC's authority and establish a clear, 
actionable spectrum pipeline, one that empowers commercial 
businesses to invest, innovate, and create jobs.
    We now have the opportunity to advance a pipeline through 
reconciliation, which will not only bring in significant 
funding to the Treasury but will also help unleash American 
prosperity through market innovation and investment.
    Notably, the bill does not contain the various--constrain 
the various parties in determining how to meet the goals of the 
pipeline. It provides instead a framework for success.
    It also enhances our national security as any agency that 
becomes more efficient in its use of spectrum will receive 
significant funding.
    The NTIA will play a lead role as the Federal Government's 
Spectrum Management Agency. Do you agree that it is important 
for the Federal Government to make additional spectrum 
available for commercial use and that this can be done without 
compromising national security?
    Mr. Dabbar. Yes, Senator.
    The Chairman. Tell this committee what the benefits are of 
making additional spectrum available for private development?
    Mr. Dabbar. So there are two in particular, Mr. Chairman, 
that I would highlight.
    One is satellite 5G, which is still very early stage, and 
then one that I am particularly interested in focusing on if I 
am so lucky to be confirmed is on satellite 6G where the U.S. 
needs to jump forward as the next competitive battlefield with 
the PRC.
    So the utilization of spectrum to not only get to 5G 
satellite, but also get to 6G satellite which, hopefully, by 
the end of my term if I am so lucky to be confirmed that we 
will be moving forward on that and showing leadership on that 
over the PRC.
    The Chairman. I very much agree that it is critical that 
America win the race for 5G and for 6G and that we not fall 
behind China, and if we find ourselves in a world where China 
and Huawei in particular has provided the global architecture 
for telecommunications worldwide that would do enormous damage 
both to our economic security and our national security, and I 
trust you will work hard in this new role to prevent that from 
happening.
    Ranking Member Cantwell.
    Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Again, I appreciate working together with you on many 
energy fronts including quantum and the Hanford cleanup.
    Mr. Dabbar, do you support the CHIPS and Science Act?
    Mr. Dabbar. Yes. I have been on the record and testified in 
support of that when it was going through Congress.
    Senator Cantwell. So you believe in honoring the agreements 
that are in place with companies?
    Mr. Dabbar. I am not familiar with actual agreements 
underneath the CHIPS Act at the Commerce Department but the 
President has been----
    Senator Cantwell. Generally, if you think we have signed an 
agreement with a company and allocated resources that we should 
fulfill them, barring any--you know, barring any major problems 
with them?
    Mr. Dabbar. So Secretary Lutnick and the President have 
been very clear about how to take the resources under the CHIPS 
and Science Act and how to get the most bang for the buck for 
the taxpayer.
    And I think the President and the announcement--and 
Secretary Lutnick was just in Arizona on the announcement 
around TSMC moving from one fab for $65 billion of support to 
three fabs and $165 billion with no additional chip support.
    And so I think that is a great example of taking the CHIPS 
Act subsidies and support and how to get the most out of it 
within agreements.
    I am not familiar, for example, with all the TSMC 
agreements but I think I have----
    Senator Cantwell. OK. I have more questions.
    I actually saw Secretary Lutnick last night and he was 
emphasizing how much he enjoyed being there. But I will tell 
you this, this committee and the last administration got that 
done.
    Now, I am glad you feel like you get to rearrange some of 
the chess pieces but the President of the United States saying 
he is not for CHIPS and Science and then all of us having to 
push back every damn day is nuts. OK?
    This is policy that we have implemented that will make the 
United States competitive and so I just need to know that you 
are not going to be another one of these people that is going 
to make this harder for us. That is all we want to know. OK.
    Will you commit to maintaining the NIST budget and the 
other R&D programs that are under the agency?
    Mr. Dabbar. Sorry. Yes. I did not know it was a question. 
Sorry.
    Senator Cantwell. Thank you.
    What about the money for the tech hubs?
    Mr. Dabbar. Yes. I think as appropriated and authorized I 
certainly know a bit about the tech hubs but assuming it is 
funded and authorized.
    Senator Cantwell. OK. What about moving marine fisheries 
out of NOAA and into Interior, also a ridiculous idea?
    Mr. Dabbar. So I only know what I read in the newspaper 
about different potential proposals. I do know that over time 
that various proposals have been made about NOAA including in 
the last Congress about separating it completely. So I would 
review any sort of proposal, given many has been made over the 
decades on NOAA.
    Senator Cantwell. I get this may not be one of your areas 
of expertise but if you could bone up a little bit more on this 
for the record and give us an answer.
    The science that NOAA does helps us manage our fisheries 
and right now we are being taken advantage of by both the 
Chinese and the Russians.
    And so we do not want to be more disenabled at NOAA to 
advocate for our fisheries. My colleague from Alaska who is 
here probably has a thought on this.
    But we want to be more empowered to fight and fight the 
injustices against the United States. We see a huge opportunity 
for the Department of Commerce to provide that leadership. You 
want to talk about a trade issue, talk about fisheries, and 
talk about the unfairness that is happening.
    But we need the science and we need that agency to be 
complete on its R&D mission in NOAA. So what about the Office 
of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research that also is being proposed 
to be eliminated?
    Mr. Dabbar. Well, just to address your first point, 
Senator, when I was Under Secretary for Science we had a--
smaller than NOAA but we did have a number of topics around 
fish and around atmospheric sciences. We had one plane rather 
than several. There is a bit of a history of that on nuclear 
weapons and so on.
    But the fish, as you know, Senator Cantwell, we had 
research in Washington State along the Columbia River that I 
helped run. Sequim, which was another facility----
    Senator Cantwell. A national lab, yes.
    Mr. Dabbar.--and at Senator Blackburn's state at Oak Ridge 
on so very----
    Senator Cantwell. OK. I have one more question to ask you. 
So I got that you have a little bit of--you will come back to 
me on this point.
    So but on the spectrum issue you do not--the warfare of the 
future is in the skies, correct?
    Mr. Dabbar. Sorry?
    Senator Cantwell. The warfare--on the spectrum issue the 
warfare of the future is in the skies, correct?
    Mr. Dabbar. Absolutely, Senator.
    Senator Cantwell. OK. And so we cannot give away DOD assets 
that could have interference if that hurts our warfare 
capabilities for the future. Is that correct?
    Mr. Dabbar. We absolutely need to be careful, and I do have 
a technical--a bit of a technical background in this and I know 
there are many people working on how to use the spectrum from a 
technical point of view more efficiently.
    So in addition to just what the actual spectrum set aside 
is but also how to manage it better from a technical----
    Senator Cantwell. But you do not believe in compromising 
DOD?
    Mr. Dabbar. Oh, absolutely not, Senator. Yes. Yes. Sorry.
    Senator Cantwell. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Moreno [presiding]. Senator Sullivan for more 
discussion on fish.

                STATEMENT OF HON. DAN SULLIVAN, 
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA

    Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I will save fish for a minute but, Mr. Dabbar, I am very 
impressed by your background. I think you are eminently 
qualified and I certainly plan on supporting you.
    And you mentioned, your father worked at the Kenai LNG 
facility or helped get LNG from Alaska sold to Japan. Is that 
correct in your testimony?
    Mr. Dabbar. He was--he worked for Phillips 66 in the late 
1960s selling LNG to Tokyo Gas.
    Senator Sullivan. That is amazing. It is great. Well, that 
fits perfect.
    Last night I also saw the Secretary at a dinner--Secretary 
Lutnick. He mentioned to me, and I agree with Senator Cruz, 
that we have enormous leverage right now to reduce tariffs.
    One of the things that we are also trying to do is get our 
Asian allies to commit like your father did to purchase Alaskan 
LNG from the large-scale LNG project that we are now working 
on.
    The Secretary is fully on board with that, he mentioned 
again to me last night. So is the President. So is the U.S. 
trade rep.
    Can I just get your commitment to work with them on that 
big opportunity we have? This is a huge strategic opportunity 
for our country.
    Mr. Dabbar. Yes, Senator.
    American energy superpower status, now we are in a better 
position than ever before on energy contributing to the 
positive trade.
    Senator Sullivan. Great.
    Speaking of superpowers, I like to refer to Alaska as the 
superpower of seafood. About two-thirds of all seafood 
harvested--commercial, sport, subsistence--of all the fish 
harvested in America over two-thirds comes from Alaska. So we 
are it. Multi-billion-dollar industry, multi-billion-dollar 
exporter.
    So Secretary Lutnick during his confirmation said he wanted 
to be, quote, ``The godfather of the American fisherman.'' I do 
not know if there is a another phrase I can use for you--
consigliere or something like that.
    But can you also commit to making this a high priority? He 
got tons of questions during his confirmation hearing on fish. 
Can I get your commitment on that?
    Mr. Dabbar. Yes, Senator.
    Senator Sullivan. So I think we are off to a good start, 
certainly, on fisheries. We have this unleashing Alaska's 
extraordinary resource potential executive order from President 
Trump on day one. This includes fisheries, LNG, all kinds of 
great things in Alaska.
    And then just a couple days ago Restoring America's Seafood 
Competitiveness EO, so we are off to a good start and I want to 
commend the President, Secretary Lutnick, on their team.
    But I am concerned, to Senator Cantwell's points--and this 
is a big issue--that we are not having the staffing to do the 
two things that Commerce has to do for fisheries. So American 
fisheries, unlike CHIPS and Science, 200--a quarter of a 
trillion dollar subsidies--my guys do not get subsidized at 
all.
    The Federal Government has to do two things. They need to 
do robust surveys to inform accurate stock assessments and they 
need to do timely promulgation of regulations to open 
fisheries. That is it.
    And when the Federal Government does not do that you screw 
the hardworking fishermen of Alaska and America. Just think 
``Deadliest Catch.'' They do have to compete with Russia and 
China.
    And to be honest, right now it is not starting to look good 
and I am starting to get really upset because when you got--
look, Biden was horrible on the surveys. Horrible.
    We threw a ton of money at NOAA and the guy did climate 
change and all this BS. He did not do the blocking and tackling 
of NOAA which is stock assessment surveys.
    So you guys came in, hey, we are not going to be like 
Biden, but you are not--I am getting really worried that you 
guys are not doing this either.
    And when you do not do stock assessment surveys you know 
what happens? My fishermen cannot fish. They do not go $240 
billion in subsidies. All they need is a survey and it is not 
happening.
    I got a whole list and I am going to mention them here, and 
I hope to hell someone from Commerce is watching, OK, because 
if you are not doing surveys--that is the basic stuff you are 
supposed to do at NOAA--then my guys cannot fish. They do not 
want subsidies. They just want to fish.
    So can I get your commitment? And I hope to hell someone 
from NOAA is watching this. I got a whole list of surveys right 
now that looks like you are not going to complete.
    So what happens? My fishermen do not fish. That is wrong.
    Can I get your commitment? And hope to hell someone from 
NOAA and Commerce is watching this right now. Get on with the 
surveys, God damn it. Can I get your commitment? As you can 
tell I am a little rattled about this.
    Mr. Dabbar. Yes. Yes, Senator, and I know that--I have read 
your proposed bill, the latest one, and also how understanding 
research of, for example, salmon in Alaska where some things 
are going well, you know, strong and some things are weaker and 
why. So certainly committed on that also.
    Senator Sullivan. We just need--I just need your commitment 
to get the staffing and money to do the surveys. That is it, 
and if we are failing on this this is not good.
    Let me ask one final question. This relates. There is a 
contract we are trying to get the Secretary to sign, like, 
right now that is for the Oscar Dyson. It is a NOAA survey 
vessel home ported in Kodiak, Alaska.
    It is coming up for its contract that needs to be signed 
this week. Again, I hope Commerce people are watching. OK. Just 
sign the contract so we can do the surveys from the Oscar 
Dyson. That is a NOAA survey vessel ship.
    If that is not signed in the next couple days that vessel 
will not be able to do surveys. So, again, this is blocking and 
tackling to take care of our fishermen, which is in the 
President's EOs.
    But we got to be able to support them with science, and can 
I get your commitment on that and maybe have someone get to the 
Secretary and sign this contract on the Oscar Dyson, like, 
today?
    Mr. Dabbar. I will follow up, and there are people behind 
me and watching, listening to you I am certain.
    Senator Sullivan. Really, really important. Thank you.
    Senator Moreno. All right. I will now recognize Senator 
Klobuchar and note that the swear jar is being passed around.
    [Laughter.]

               STATEMENT OF HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA

    Senator Klobuchar. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    I was up till 1 a.m. watching the Timberwolves beat the 
L.A. Lakers, just for the record. Kind of a surprise in that 
series. We are very excited so----
    Senator Moreno. The Cavs are ready for you.
    Senator Klobuchar. OK, great.
    So, I appreciate your background very much and your 
commitment to science and economic opportunity. I view this, 
being from a state with 15 Fortune 500 companies, fourth for ag 
exports, Mayo Clinic, a big medical device presence that we are 
literally on this cusp of economic expansion or were on it, I 
should say, with everything from mapping of the human genome to 
the work that has been done on AI, as long as we--and I am 
going to ask about this--put some rules in place.
    But I am concerned, and my colleagues have asked you about 
this, just about these tariffs setting us backward with the 
rest of the world.
    I cannot tell you how concerned I am about this because not 
everyone--you know, Tim Cook can get into the White House but 
my little company down that makes high chairs stuff, Busy Baby, 
she cannot get in there and she cannot get at the investment 
meetings. Does not know which tariffs are going to change, 
what's going to happen, and so I just hope you will be a voice 
on that front.
    So first question, I have National Science Foundation 
grants (and the administration has cutoff hundreds of these 
grants including at the University of Minnesota) and I just--
this scientific research going on again. Very exciting.
    Will you commit to funding the NSF and will you commit to 
restoring funding for the NSF grants?
    Mr. Dabbar. So Commerce does not fund NSF. I am reasonably 
familiar because when I was Under Secretary, and we also do 
work with NSF at South Pole and elsewhere.
    Senator Klobuchar. Right.
    Mr. Dabbar. And so, certainly, NSF is a very important 
aspect to the funding research. But I do not have that scope.
    Senator Klobuchar. Will you be an advocate for it was 
probably the better words?
    Mr. Dabbar. I will certainly be supporting S&T investment 
and I think as you know, Senator, when the sequester was lifted 
last time the President signed the quantum bill, the AI bill, 
and so on and I was certainly a part of both supporting that 
and executing on that.
    Senator Klobuchar. Speaking of AI, the--you know, we have 
had a lot of bipartisan work over here still haven't really 
passed. Senator Thune and I have a base bill for nondefense 
applications of AI.
    Talk about what your priorities would be for AI? I'm just 
concerned that we have not put in place any guardrails and that 
could actually set everyone back if we don't do that.
    Mr. Dabbar. So it is a long topic having----
    Senator Klobuchar. Yes, I do not--yes, you cannot 
filibuster----
    Mr. Dabbar. Yes. I will try to Senator. The opportunity set 
for AI is so incredibly broad. I think it is very important to 
allow every medical device maker and every company out there to 
look at AI for operations and allow people to expand.
    I am on the board of Dominion Energy, which is--currently I 
will be resigning if I am so lucky to be confirmed. But using 
AI for utility operations, for dispatching power plants, to 
storms. You could use this for weather so getting to NOAA.
    Senator Klobuchar. Got it.
    Mr. Dabbar. There is a long list and I want to try to 
facilitate all the different opportunities including within the 
scope of Commerce.
    Senator Klobuchar. Yes, and I just would hope that you 
would be an advocate--I can ask this more in writing--just for 
some rules of the road in place because even the companies want 
this, and we can talk about it more back and forth or meet 
about it.
    OK. Rural exports--Senator Hoeven and I passed legislation 
on this. You know, we have the Foreign Commercial Service, but 
in a lot of areas they do not have a--a big company might have, 
you know, a full time trade expert on a certain part of the 
world and this rural export center in Fargo assists rural small 
businesses to access international markets.
    And you may not be familiar with the details, but will you 
commit to supporting the work of the Commerce Department with 
rural exports?
    Mr. Dabbar. Yes, Senator.
    Senator Klobuchar. OK. Thank you.
    We talked about CHIPS and Science, Broadband Program. Had a 
confirmation come through this committee on that. As you know, 
we allocated a lot of money. Has not really gone out quite yet.
    We do not want to get back into that whole history but we 
do have to get it out, and are you committed to getting that 
funding out to the states and put to work?
    Mr. Dabbar. Yes, Senator.
    Senator Klobuchar. OK. Thank you very much. Appreciate it.

               STATEMENT OF HON. BERNIE MORENO, 
                     U.S. SENATOR FROM OHIO

    Senator Moreno. Thank you for being here. Thank you for 
serving your country for the fourth time. I appreciate that. 
Look forward to having you confirmed.
    Taking up from my colleagues who were talking about 
innovation, something that is near and dear to my heart, I 
recently introduced a very bipartisan bill called the 
``Deploying American Blockchain Act''. Passed this committee 
pretty unanimously, which is good to see, and I just want to 
make certain that you are committed to implementing that 
properly when it gets passed by both chambers to really look at 
what America can do to take that next step in being the center 
for the evolution of blockchain technology.
    Mr. Dabbar. So I have not read your bill, Senator, but 
certainly support American leadership on blockchain.
    Senator Moreno. All right.
    And shifting gears, you are somebody who has run pretty 
complex organizations. There is not a lot of people who have 
that in their background. So I look forward to having you run--
help Secretary Lutnick run Commerce.
    Is it fair to say in your experience in the government and 
in the private sector running complex organizations, does more 
money always equal better results?
    Mr. Dabbar. No, Senator.
    Senator Moreno. Sometimes the opposite, right? But that is 
something that I think most people who have not run 
organizations would feel that that is an odd paradigm, right, 
because typically the idea is more people, more money. You have 
a problem, throw money at it. Throw people at it.
    Can you talk about what you have seen in your experience 
why that is a fallacy?
    Mr. Dabbar. So a lot of times money can be spent on things 
that have not been--are not needed I think is a good way of 
putting it.
    So I will give you an example. When I was Under Secretary 
for Science we had just won--we were just winning when I showed 
up--the Nobel Prize for the lithium ion chemistry.
    But the department was still spending money on lithium ion 
battery discovery science--not scaling, not manufacturing, but 
discovery science. And so we were spending something that we 
won the Nobel Prize on and I think we could say that that was a 
declaration of victory for discovery science.
    And so that was not a really great place to kind of keep on 
spending money into something that we already had victory on so 
we refocused the money on the future, and so I think that is an 
example of, you know, the right way to think about where the 
taxpayer money should be looking at.
    Senator Moreno. So as we talk about cuts and assessments of 
different programs it is absolutely something that is 
essential, right, to see where is the money most efficiently, 
and setting up better processes, better systems, and taking 
advantage of technology is a much better way to go than just 
randomly throwing a bunch of money into a problem.
    Mr. Dabbar. Absolutely, and I am going to be mildly 
dangerous and bring up Hanford with Senator Cantwell. There was 
a lot of money spent for a very long period of time and a lot 
of different directions have been--I am always paraphrasing the 
senator from many years ago--heading in different directions 
that we are not accomplishing very much.
    And when the senator looked at me and Secretary Brouillette 
8 years ago and said, can you say that we are going to focus on 
the things that work rather than things that are not working, 
not pivot back and forth and get things done, and one of the 
proudest things I think the two of us and others did was the 
last couple of days of the previous administration was to call 
up the senator and say that we had completed construction.
    Senator Moreno. That is great.
    Shifting gears again, 25 years ago--so we are in the 25th 
year anniversary of what I think is the most toxic, most 
outrageously terrible bill in the history of the United States 
of America, which is the U.S.-China Normalization Act.
    The GDP of China at that point in time, 25 years ago, was 
$1.2 trillion. It is projected to be $20 trillion next year. 
Who won and who lost?
    Mr. Dabbar. The accession of China to the WTO and the 
normalization was very, very poor to the U.S. economy and in 
particular to the manufacturing workers that about 5 million 
people lost their jobs.
    And given the velocity of money in the communities that--
you can multiply that by five or six--we lost about 25 to 30 
million jobs in this country as a result of--to a large degree 
of that topic.
    Senator Moreno. And what kind of jobs?
    Mr. Dabbar. Well, certainly the manufacturing jobs were the 
5 million that had dropped.
    Senator Moreno. These are jobs that are family sustaining 
wages where you could live, provide for a family, retire with 
dignity?
    Mr. Dabbar. Yes. Dignity and middle class jobs is what was 
lost because of that.
    Senator Moreno. And what would happen, in your mind, if we 
just ignored it? If we just said, look, we can make cheap goods 
in some other country and bring them into the United States 
where would we be in 10 years?
    Mr. Dabbar. We are--I think the trends that we are seeing 
around fentanyl, trends that we are seeing on small town 
America that really accelerated over the last 20 years because 
of that collapse of manufacturing related jobs.
    Yes, I think you will see that continue and I think all of 
us, you know, do not want to see that continue.
    Senator Moreno. Well, thank you.
    I recognize Senator Baldwin.

               STATEMENT OF HON. TAMMY BALDWIN, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN

    Senator Baldwin. Thank you.
    Mr. Dabbar, congratulations on your nomination. I want to 
pick off or pick up on a point that our Ranking Member made in 
her opening comments.
    When Congress passed the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law we 
included a bipartisan amendment in this committee that put the 
Minority Business Development Agency into statute.
    Our intention was to invest in entrepreneurs and small 
businesses by expanding the reach of business centers that 
provide high-quality technical assistance to minority business 
enterprises including counseling and mentoring, assisting with 
access to capital and contracts, and supporting job creation 
and retention.
    That recent bipartisan accomplishment led by many members 
of this committee and, again, on a bipartisan basis has been 
dismissed by this administration, which is set on eliminating 
the agency and closing the business centers in our states.
    President Trump, in dismantling the Minority Business 
Development Agency, issued an executive order that requires a 
report and that report needs to explain which functions of the 
Minority Business Development Agency are statutorily required, 
which is what we did in this committee when we included our 
amendment.
    My calls for that report have gone unanswered. So, Mr. 
Dabbar, if confirmed I will be following up with you to get 
that report and the answers on the Minority Business 
Development Agency.
    Can I count on you to be responsive?
    Mr. Dabbar. I will certainly make certain that we respond 
to your letter.
    Senator Baldwin. Mr. Dabbar, we have seen the Minority 
Business Development Agency grant a termination notice that was 
signed by a DOGE member named Nate Cavanaugh.
    Mr. Cavanaugh signed a notice claiming that he was acting 
under the authority of the Acting Under Secretary of the 
Minority Business Development Agency, Keith Sonderling.
    We have since learned that Mr. Cavanaugh may have 
potentially sent these grant termination notices without Mr. 
Sonderling's approval, which if true raises very serious 
questions about whether DOGE is now running the Department of 
Commerce.
    So, Mr. Dabbar, if confirmed will you commit to review the 
MBDA grant termination notices that were signed by Mr. 
Cavanaugh and promptly inform this committee whether Mr. 
Cavanaugh sent those notices with proper approval?
    Mr. Dabbar. If I am so honored to be confirmed, I have a 
great amount of experience in running organizations including 
review criteria of who has certain approvals. I did that as 
Under Secretary. I will certainly----
    Senator Baldwin. So you will immediately let us know 
whether Mr. Cavanaugh had the authority and approval to sign 
those grant termination notices?
    Mr. Dabbar. I will certainly look into it, Senator. I do 
not know the details but I will certainly look into it if I am 
confirmed.
    Senator Baldwin. And provide those details?
    Mr. Dabbar. I will respond to any of the requests that you 
have submitted.
    Senator Baldwin. In Wisconsin our biohealth tech hub 
furthers the state position as a global leader in personalized 
medicine. The first tranche of funding provided by the CHIPS 
and Science Act has been disbursed, but there are millions more 
owed to the tech hub program over the next 5 years.
    I understand the administration is considering submitting a 
budget request to Congress that would eliminate the Economic 
Development Administration that disburses those funds.
    If confirmed, do I have your commitment to keeping the 
promises that were made to the technology hubs?
    Mr. Dabbar. So I am not familiar with the budget proposals 
that are being drafted and so on, but I will follow whatever 
the law is and whatever is appropriated by Congress.
    Senator Baldwin. So you would--I have your commitment to 
keeping the promises that we made to the tech hubs? Is that 
what you said?
    Mr. Dabbar. I will follow authorization and appropriations.
    Senator Baldwin. The tech hubs will have an enormous amount 
of potential to make strides in artificial intelligence, in 
quantum computing, in advanced manufacturing, in addition to 
advancements in personalized medicine like the one that is 
housed in Wisconsin.
    Under your leadership how will the Department of Commerce 
utilize innovation from these regional technology hubs?
    Mr. Dabbar. So I will give you a Wisconsin example.
    Senator Baldwin. Great.
    Mr. Dabbar. So of the four number-one supercomputers that 
were built at DOE three were built in Wisconsin.
    Senator Baldwin. Cray. HPE.
    Mr. Dabbar. And I was there. I went to go visit and they 
not only do, you know, DOE computers but many across the 
country including for national security.
    Senator Baldwin. Yes.
    Mr. Dabbar. So Wisconsin's leadership of that and 
manufacturing of high-performance computers and obviously the 
workforce in Wisconsin was highly important in order for us to 
do that.
    So I have personal experience in Wisconsin on workforce, on 
AI, and computing, and it was vitally important to me back then 
and will be vital for the country, going forward.
    Senator Baldwin. Thank you.
    The Chairman [presiding]. Thank you.
    Senator Moran.

                STATEMENT OF HON. JERRY MORAN, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM KANSAS

    Senator Moran. Chairman, thank you, and, Mr. Dabbar, 
welcome. Good morning.
    A couple of things, mostly related to budget and to trade, 
although Senator Klobuchar in her failure to ask one of her 
questions asked me to ask, and I just would remind you she and 
I co-chair the Travel and Tourism Caucus in the Senate and we 
are looking to see support from the Department of Commerce in 
regard to the events that are occurring in our country related 
to FIFA and all the potential business opportunities our 
country has there, plus then the international Olympics in Los 
Angeles.
    Our country has a lot of preparation to be prepared for 
those--that number of guests. What I want to talk to you about 
first is NOAA.
    I find some reports disturbing about the significant budget 
cuts at NOAA along with personnel shortages. I would like to 
hear you confirm that it is important for our Weather Service 
offices to remain open 24/7.
    It is essential for public safety. It is essential for the 
economy of Kansas and agriculture producers, the aviation 
industry, and that seems to be in jeopardy based upon where we 
are, and that these Weather Service offices need to be staffed 
24/7 and we will work in my capacity as an appropriator to see 
that the money is there as I think we have done in the past.
    We just need to make sure that that would be implemented 
and supported by the Department of Commerce.
    Mr. Dabbar. Yes, Senator. As someone who grew up just a few 
miles south of Independence, across the border, Tornado Alley, 
and the support that we have for many parts of the country but 
including your state is vitally important.
    Senator Moran. I thank you for your willingness to 
cooperate.
    In addition to agriculture we are the air capital of the 
world and manufacture more general aviation airplanes but now 
that is expanding into many other aspects of aviation and 
aerospace.
    One of the key frameworks that has made this possible is a 
1979 Agreement on Trade in Civil Aircraft, a pact among the 
U.S. and 33 other nations. That agreement is hugely important 
to the supply chain of the industry.
    The aviation industry is one of the bright spots in our 
export markets and I need to know that you are willing to work 
to make certain that we go forward under that agreement in our 
relationships with those countries in a way that does not 
interfere with the supply chain of producing airplanes and 
aircraft and aerospace in this country.
    Mr. Dabbar. Absolutely, Senator. I mean, clearly, in 
addition to agriculture, aerospace and defense is a comparative 
advantage industry for this country and the net trade benefit 
positive should continue to expand in that sector for us.
    Senator Moran. Mr. Dabbar, you just highlighted why trade 
and tariffs are so important to me as a Kansan. Aviation, 
aerospace, and agriculture--we are an export-dependent state 
and we earn our living doing so.
    I want to talk to you a moment, again, about the 
Manufacturing Extension Partnership, the MEP. Last month the 
Department of Commerce informed 10 states--the MEP program 
centers--that it would not renew their funding.
    This is true despite strong bipartisan support for the 
program and seemingly in alignment with the Trump 
administration's interest in improving the environment for 
increasing manufacturing in the United States.
    Do you have any thoughts about how MEP fits into the future 
of manufacturing and the level of support we can see from the 
Department of Commerce for that program?
    Mr. Dabbar. So I had the honor when I was Under Secretary 
to support manufacturing, R&D efforts for new advanced 
manufacturing when I was Under Secretary at a number of 
different senators' states here when I was running the National 
Labs.
    So at least from my point of view, how do we drive advanced 
manufacturing for the next step is vitally important and 
programs to support that I think are vitally important.
    So I would certainly look into that program and try to see 
how that advances advanced manufacturing for the future.
    Senator Moran. Mr. Dabbar, it seems like you have done a 
lot of traveling. I do not remember we have ever met in Kansas 
and I would like to take that 50th state off your list or put 
it on your list, and I assume by that smile and head shake you 
and I will visit my state together.
    Mr. Dabbar. I will be glad to visit Wichita and visit some 
factories or wherever else makes sense, Senator.
    Senator Moran. Thank you for answering my questions.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Moran, and I can attest 
Kansas is a wonderful place to be.
    Senator Kim.

                  STATEMENT OF HON. ANDY KIM, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY

    Senator Kim. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Earlier in this hearing when you were actually having an 
exchange with the Chairman you talked about something that 
caught my attention. You said, you know, we should be trying to 
reindustrialize in order to compete with China and improve our 
national security.
    You also expressed your support for the CHIPS and Science 
Act. Do you see the CHIPS and Science Act and what it is trying 
to do there as part of an effort to try to reindustrialize and 
try to push us further forward to be able to better compete 
with China?
    Mr. Dabbar. Yes, Senator.
    Senator Kim. So I guess I am interested. This is something 
I raised with Secretary Lutnick as well in his hearing.
    I was trying to think through, OK, you know, on that part 
when we deal with semiconductor chips we have used that as an 
effort to move forward.
    I guess I wanted to ask you the same question I asked him 
which is, do you think that there are other sectors, other 
types of technologies, where we can envision sort of a 2.0 not 
necessarily on semiconductors again but I am trying to think 
through where do we go from here?
    How do we try to take the lessons that we learned from 
CHIPS and Science and see whether or not there is another area 
of critical technology that we should be working together in a 
public-private partnership to be able to move forward?
    What are your thoughts on that?
    Mr. Dabbar. So let me hit on one that I know reasonably 
well which is energy technologies. America's leadership and now 
global leadership in energy certainly is in part on production 
but certainly part of it is on technology, and most of which--
what we are deploying today from the energy sector was not 
invented in a commercial form 20 years ago.
    And I know the pipeline quite well of energy technologies, 
given my background. Let me pick one that might be associated 
with your state, which is fusion.
    The fusion--the likelihood of fusion becoming commercial in 
the next decade and in the next couple of years, first 
commercial fusion cores having big accomplishments is very, 
very likely. Princeton and others are big supporters of that.
    So I think as we think about those sort of things some of 
the ideas that you were asking the question about can certainly 
make sense.
    Senator Kim. I know some of that crosses different 
jurisdictions of departments and agencies, but if you are 
confirmed is that something you would be willing to work with 
me on in terms of trying to think through how we move forward 
in terms of using some of those types of tools and try to see 
if we can create some bipartisan energy going forward?
    Mr. Dabbar. Yes, Senator.
    Senator Kim. Well, I am curious. You know, you also did a 
lot when it comes to quantum.
    Do you see space there as well to kind of further the 
government's role in terms of trying to supercharge that type 
of technology moving forward?
    Mr. Dabbar. Yes, Senator. I think what has been 
accomplished because of the National Quantum Act that was 
previously passed and in particular it is supported out of this 
committee with the various agencies that the opportunity there 
to move from research to first deployment of systems I think we 
are there.
    And so I think working with Congress and, obviously, I 
think Commerce within its--already within NIST primarily within 
its capabilities but how do we move forward I supported 
previously the National Quantum Initiative Reauthorization Act, 
which I still think is being considered.
    I would love to work with you and other members of this 
committee as that gets considered.
    Senator Kim. A lot of what we talked about just now was 
about efforts to move forward on advanced manufacturing, trying 
to supercharge it. But I would like to just kind of take a step 
back here.
    You talked earlier about the importance of science and 
technology investments writ large. I guess I just wanted to ask 
you what you think the government's role is when it comes to 
basic research, so not necessarily in the implementation side.
    But do you think that we are at the right level of basic 
research investment as a U.S. government? I just wanted to get 
a sense.
    Do you think it is too high? Too low? Where do you think we 
are at?
    Mr. Dabbar. So I have talked about this a lot over the last 
many years, given my last roles. You know, the best bang for 
the buck for the taxpayer many times is discovery and the 
reason why is that it is too far away from cash-flow for the 
private sector to fund well.
    So if you go to--and although there was history, certainly, 
in New Jersey and elsewhere but to a very large degree in 
today's environment you go to GE or you go to a lot of these 
companies and say, please invest in very early discovery 
science and they will say no, I need--you know, we want to do 
it higher up the TRL level.
    And so the best place to invest the Federal money is where 
the private sector really isn't and the best place for that is 
discovery. So----
    Senator Kim. So in terms of going back to that first--the 
quote that I asked you about, you know, that we need to 
reindustrialize in order to compete with China, would you also 
say then we need to be able to make sure we are investing in 
basic research in order to be able to compete with China?
    Mr. Dabbar. Yes, Senator.
    Senator Kim. OK. Thank you. And with that, I will yield 
back.
    The Chairman. Thank you.
    Senator Schmitt.

                STATEMENT OF HON. ERIC SCHMITT, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSOURI

    Senator Schmitt. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    It is good to see you. Now, am I right you grew up in 
Independence then?
    Mr. Dabbar. No. I was right south in a little town called 
Bartlesville.
    Senator Schmitt. I know Bartlesville. I know Bartlesville.
    Having run statewide three times in 8 years I know a lot of 
those towns. It is good to have you here.
    I did want to talk a little bit about--I know that, you 
know, trade is, obviously, a hot topic and I think one of the 
things that has been illuminating for a lot of folks is to 
really kind of understand how we got here.
    I think, you know, after World War II there were a lot of 
favorable conditions created so that our allies could get back 
on their feet principally to defeat Soviet communism.
    That happened, and our foreign policy was sort of dedicated 
to that same proposition. That happened. But after the Cold War 
ended there was not an adjustment by way of foreign policy nor 
on economic policy.
    So that is how you end up. You wake up and you go to--you 
know, you have Liberation Day and you find out that all these 
countries have not just tariffs but all these sort of trade 
practices that make it difficult for our goods to get into 
their markets.
    You cannot sell beef in Australia. You cannot--you do not 
see an American car in Europe. You do not see an American car 
in Japan.
    And so from my perspective it is about time that we 
rebalanced that equation and that is exactly what is happening 
right now, and I think you have got--from my perspective you 
got two buckets.
    You have got China and you have got everybody else, and 
everybody else that is what everybody is working through right 
now.
    Is that how you see it?
    Mr. Dabbar. Yes, Senator.
    Senator Schmitt. That is fair? And I think ultimately you 
are seeing this investment. You are seeing the commitment from 
a lot of companies to start to do their advanced manufacturing, 
their production in the United States.
    I do not think it is--no one is naive. We are not going to 
produce everything here but getting back our fair share as 
opposed to those jobs going to China or to Mexico.
    I think it is time that we have an administration that 
stood up for working folks who have been kind of left behind by 
this globalist dream that borders do not matter and, you know, 
it is just--nations do not matter and I think that is what we 
are sort of on the precipice of.
    So anyway, you know, not to put a bow on the debate because 
it is ongoing but I did want to ask you also last--the first 2 
years I was here I was the Ranking Member on the Space and 
Science Subcommittee.
    We dealt a lot with commercial space, and I just wanted to 
get your thoughts. There is--this is a really important area 
for us. You talk about this global--this competition we have, 
this great powers competition with China. It is not confined to 
the terrestrial. It is not confined to the sea.
    It is in space, too, and having a robust commercial space 
sector is really important for us to compete. You talked about 
discovery.
    We do not really know what those discoveries might be on 
the Moon or in Mars but we know that we better find them before 
China because they certainly have designs.
    Have you been brought up to speed or can you speak to how 
your office intends to sort of operate both with respect to 
NOAA and AST over it?
    Because what you do not want to have is this sort of turf 
battle that defines so much of what happens in Washington and I 
think the newness of all this provides opportunities for 
greater alignment.
    How do you see that? Where do you--how do you plan to deal 
with that?
    Mr. Dabbar. So I have a little bit of a background at DOE. 
We actually did Mars work with JPL and with NASA, and we looked 
at nuclear propulsion. So there is a lot of technology 
advancement.
    Certainly, I would work very closely with NASA and the 
facilities at Kennedy and elsewhere that--to make certain that 
we continue to suck in more investment and more launches and 
more commercial and use of footprint that we have in this 
country, and part of that in order to drive the economy and the 
aerospace sector, which we are so incredibly strong lead in 
including interstate.
    And so I would advocate very strongly with my fellow 
science and technology--other partners at NASA and elsewhere to 
make certain that we open up for the world as well as our own 
launches and expand our leadership that we are already doing 
pretty well on.
    Senator Schmitt. Well, we would love to get you back home 
to Missouri and because, as you mentioned, there is a lot going 
on particularly in the aerospace sector and the defense tech 
industry that sort of exists I think is really important.
    And then, finally, I just want to put it on your radar I 
think one of the concerns with AI is it is a huge opportunity.
    I do not think it is Skynet about ready the universe to be 
destroyed nor do I think cancer is going to be figured out 
tomorrow. It is probably somewhere in the middle, but it is a 
lot of opportunity.
    But one of the concerns I think a lot of folks have is that 
what you do not want to have is AI manipulated in a way that 
affects people's right to express themselves or free speech, 
and that will be sort of on your plate, too.
    We just want to make sure people, regardless of your 
opinion or your point of view, have the ability to speak your 
mind and you do not have this--we saw some of the efforts from 
the previous administration put their thumb on the scale with 
big tech and you are going to be in a position to make sure 
that does not happen, and I am sure that you share those 
concern and want to make sure that it is an open platform right 
for folks.
    Mr. Dabbar. Yes, Senator.
    Senator Schmitt. OK. Thank you.
    The Chairman. Thank you.
    Senator Peters.

                STATEMENT OF HON. GARY PETERS, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM MICHIGAN

    Senator Peters. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Dabbar, congratulations on your nomination. Good to 
have you here today.
    Sir, I believe the Department of Commerce has an absolutely 
critical role in supporting U.S. manufacturing. That is why I 
was so concerned when last month the department briefly tried 
to cancel funding for 10 states' Manufacturing Extension 
Partnership programs, or MEPs.
    The Department appeared to quickly reverse course on this 
decision and announce that these centers would be, quote, 
``under review'' until the end of the Fiscal Year.
    I hope you are aware of MEPs, but the MEPs are essential to 
the U.S. manufacturing base. Every state has a center that is 
charged with helping small and medium manufacturers make their 
businesses successful, especially through workforce training 
and integration with advanced manufacturing as well as putting 
AI into their manufacturing process to increase efficiently, 
oftentimes dramatically.
    Michigan's MEP--the Michigan Manufacturing Tech Center--has 
been extremely successful in helping businesses save money.
    Last year alone they helped nearly 600 businesses save, 
roughly, 5,000 jobs in my state. MMTC generates a lot of its 
own operating costs but they still rely on Federal funding in 
order--for about a third of their operations.
    The Michigan Center contract is up for renewal on July 1st 
and they are waiting for some funding certainty even sooner 
than that. Otherwise, they risk losing services so that they 
can provide to these small and medium manufacturers.
    Historically, the MEP program has been bipartisan. That is 
why I think it is unconscionable that this administration is 
trying to eliminate something that has had broad, broad 
bipartisan support and support within the business community as 
well.
    So my question for you is--this is basically a yes or no--
if confirmed do you commit to carrying out any appropriated 
funding for MEPs and providing certainty for these centers in 
accordance with congressional intent?
    Mr. Dabbar. We will certainly follow through on 
appropriation--appropriated line items and authorization. I 
would need--I certainly know about the program, Senator, that 
you mentioned and will certainly execute as per appropriated 
and authorized.
    Senator Peters. So you are familiar with the program and 
your assessment of it, at least based on what you know?
    Mr. Dabbar. I have not--I have not done. I am just--I just 
have awareness.
    But I will say, Senator, that having run advanced 
manufacturing development, R&D work, for new advanced 
manufacturing work while I was running the National Labs for 
the country was a clear area of mine that I ran.
    So I have a great amount of experience in that area 
including in some things that people may not think of such as 
FRIB at Michigan State in which manufacturing of isotopes, 
which may not be normal manufacturing but certainly was in my 
scope, which was very important. Obviously, isotopes is 
particularly important, given what has happened with supply 
chains and Russia.
    Senator Peters. Right. Well, it was good to bring up FRIB. 
Those are bonus points right there, and you are right, the work 
that they do is amazing with isotopes.
    I was just talking to the MSU President about that earlier 
this week. It is quite a program.
    Mr. Dabbar, since the President's so-called Liberation Day 
the better--probably the better title would be National Sales 
Tax Day. We have seen just immense chaos in the U.S. economy.
    I am constantly hearing from Michigan businesses, 
especially small businesses, that indiscriminate tariffs and 
facing the higher costs associated with those are also creating 
supply chain disruptions, and we all know that customers are 
basically going to bear the blunt of these effects. They are 
going to see higher costs as they shop and buy everyday goods.
    So given the short- and long-term expected consequences of 
these tariffs, economic forecasters have actually updated, 
unfortunately, their projections to show for a likelihood of a 
U.S. is going to face a recession by the end of this year.
    JPMorgan increased their odds of a recession to 65 percent. 
Goldman Sachs just increased their forecast to 45 percent 
likelihood that we are going to have an economic recession, 
which is going to hurt Americans all across the country.
    I understand the administration is now in the midst of a 
90-day pause on the vast majority of these reciprocal sales 
taxes to allow time for negotiation with trade agreements.
    The fact of the matter, though, is that even with this 
pause there is still just widespread confusion as to how 
businesses are going to be impacted by these tariffs.
    I had one businessman just recently in my office saying, 
basically, a pause is not good. I cannot do anything. I cannot 
hire people. I cannot make business decisions. This is going to 
hurt my business. A pause hurts my business as well.
    And I think you would agree the one thing businesses want 
is certainty. If they have changes in rules they can adapt. 
They may not like them but they can adapt. But you have to have 
certainty and that certainty just does not exist.
    So my question for you, if confirmed, how do you plan to 
provide greater certainty to U.S. businesses so they can do 
what they do best, which is provide services to their customers 
and grow and create jobs instead of being in a world of chaos?
    Mr. Dabbar. So, Senator, as Deputy Secretary I will be 
supporting Secretary Lutnick and the President as directed, as 
a general point.
    I am fully in support of the President and the Secretary's 
positions on the negotiations. I think one of the great steps 
the President took previously was tariffs on China that 
prevented the U.S. car industry from being really decimated 
like Europe's is right now by the Chinese.
    And so I think that was very good steps that were made back 
then that really have protected the car industry, amongst other 
industries.
    But, still, since 2000 there has been about a net $20 
trillion of net trade deficit, which is a stunning number, and 
the numbers have been getting higher every year on the annual 
basis.
    So the President and the Secretary have taken action, 
building on the action of the first administration of the 
President to try to do what was, I think, bipartisanly 
supported, actually, on those topics.
    And the challenge is quite high and I think the steps that 
are going to go from now until where I think the President is 
targeting will accomplish a lot of pulling back that 
increasingly problems for Michigan and elsewhere.
    Senator Peters. Very good.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Thank you.
    Senator Blunt Rochester.

            STATEMENT OF HON. LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM DELAWARE

    Senator Blunt Rochester. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and 
welcome, Mr. Dabbar.
    You have heard from some of my colleagues voice their 
concerns but I also want to be very clear about my concern over 
the gutting of the Minority Business Development Agency.
    At his hearing before this committee I personally asked 
Secretary Lutnick if he opposed dismantling the MBDA and he 
said yes, and then gutted the agency's leadership and core 
functions anyway.
    And it has been reported that the agency has gone from 100 
people to one person. I have heard they have been fired. I have 
heard they are on leave. That broken commitment undermines 
decades of bipartisan work.
    It was created by a Republican president in 1969. 
Organizations like the National Urban League fought to codify 
the agency and, ultimately, the goal and what it has done is 
expand economic opportunity for communities in my state as well 
as across the country.
    I was proud to join Senators Cantwell and Baldwin in 
writing letters opposing any effort to dismantle the MBDA. So 
my questions--first, I have a yes or no question. If you cannot 
answer it in a yes or no just say I cannot answer it.
    Do you support the gutting of the MBDA?
    Mr. Dabbar. I do not have enough information.
    Senator Blunt Rochester. Could you talk about what steps 
that you would take to invest in minority-owned businesses that 
have the potential to transform our economy for the better?
    Mr. Dabbar. As Deputy Secretary my role would be primarily 
besides the direction of the President and the Secretary is to 
execute on the authorization and the appropriations of the 
Senate.
    Senator Blunt Rochester. I actually served as a Deputy 
Secretary in my state so I understand the role of deputy 
secretary. I also understand that it is an opportunity to also 
provide wisdom, direction, and advice.
    And I know you have worked in many different capacities--
public sector, private sector. In your work and in your career 
have you worked to unlock opportunities for minority-owned 
businesses and what recommendations would you give to the 
Secretary toward those goals?
    Mr. Dabbar. Probably the one time where that--when I dealt 
with that was when I was Under Secretary for Science and there 
was a program at DOE that did not report to me but there was a 
DOE program on the topic.
    Senator Blunt Rochester. I will follow up with more detail.
    But I have to say I have a lack of confidence after the 
Secretary sat here and said he would not dismantle it and now 
it is being gutted.
    I want to shift gears. We are, as has been said by many on 
the dais, in a competition with China on quantum. They have 
spent over $15 billion in quantum--public quantum funding, far 
outpacing the U.S. which has invested my understanding $932 
million in 2023.
    There is also a major shortage of skilled quantum 
scientists and engineers with McKinsey stating there is only 
one qualified quantum candidate for every three openings.
    And DOGE is not helping. It is, again, reported that they 
fired over 70 NIST employees in March. This is also a 
concerning trend for a technology area that has the potential 
to revolutionize computers and our economy, as you have stated.
    Are you concerned that we are not currently meeting the 
moment when it comes to our quantum competition with China and 
what are your thoughts on this?
    Mr. Dabbar. So it is an area I know well. I think the 
investment that was made previously under the National Quantum 
Initiative Act was a very good first step.
    I supported in testimony before how science--about the 
reauthorization and if I am so lucky to be confirmed I would 
love to work with this committee on that.
    I do think that the science has now moved to the point that 
we could actually start building real devices, real computers. 
I have quite a bit of experience in that, and I think this is 
the time to go do that.
    Senator Blunt Rochester. I know--I want to turn to cyber 
security as well.
    Quantum is a critical technology for the future of this 
industry and NIST works on quantum cryptography including 
encryption designed to resist quantum-based computer attacks.
    While these quantum attacks have not occurred yet, security 
experts warn bad actors are stockpiling encrypted data to take 
advantage of future breakthroughs called ``harvest now, decrypt 
later'' attacks.
    Given the current Federal employment environment how will 
you grow the quantum workforce to help protect our economy from 
potential quantum attacks?
    Mr. Dabbar. So the Secretary is very focused on post-
quantum crypto efforts by NIST. We will continue and accelerate 
that. I have personal experience in this quantum topic.
    The President's letter to Director Kratsios also highlights 
this topic, and so I think we would love to work with you and 
the rest of the Senate to try to accelerate that with the next 
quantum bill amongst other program offices.
    Senator Blunt Rochester. I will submit some more questions 
for the record on supply chains and also artificial 
intelligence.
    And thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    The Chairman. Thank you.
    Senator Lujan.

               STATEMENT OF HON. BEN RAY LUJAN, 
                 U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO

    Senator Lujan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate that 
very much.
    Mr. Dabbar, thank you for being before us today.
    The first question I have, Mr. Dabbar, is a continuation of 
something that my colleague was just inquiring about and having 
a conversation with you.
    Congress appropriated over $68 million to the MBDA. Are you 
aware what the MBDA is?
    Mr. Dabbar. Yes, I am, Senator.
    Senator Lujan. Now, the $68 million that was funded here is 
under the current funding bill. So this is recent. This is now.
    So the agency could effectively carry out its mission to 
promote growth and expand economic opportunities.
    But as you may be aware, and I will ask you if you are 
aware, Secretary Lutnick and the Trump administration have 
dismantled the MBDA. Are you aware of that?
    Mr. Dabbar. I only know what I have picked up from the 
press.
    Senator Lujan. You are here today to be a leader at the 
Department of Commerce. Have you taken time to study the 
Department of Commerce?
    Mr. Dabbar. I certainly have but I do not know every detail 
at the Department right now and that is one of the ones that I 
do not know the details on the current stats.
    Senator Lujan. What areas are you strongest in your 
knowledge base with the Department of Commerce?
    Mr. Dabbar. Well, certainly the area of China security. As 
you know, I ran lab efforts in your state extensively as well 
as some of the nuclear operations. So the China topic, which I 
recently testified before ENR on about two months ago I think I 
have quite a lot of experience.
    Obviously, I ran the bulk of the National Quantum 
Initiative. They built four number-one supercomputers. So while 
I was at DOE I ran WIPP.
    So we also generated vast amounts of patents, as you know, 
under Bayh-Dole and Stevenson-Wydler. I could keep going, 
Senator, but those are a reasonable amount of things that I 
have quite a bit of exposure to.
    Senator Lujan. In all of those responsibilities did you 
ever work with small businesses?
    Mr. Dabbar. Absolutely, in particular at environmental 
management at DOE if you are--if you may remember the small 
business topic at DOE that certainly New Mexico was part of.
    Senator Lujan. Is it fair to say you support small business 
success?
    Mr. Dabbar. Yes, Senator.
    Senator Lujan. I would encourage you to learn more about 
the MBDA. The MBDA was created to help with small business 
success, subcontracting with prime contracts. Looking at the 
major initiatives and investments that America has always had 
depends on success with small businesses.
    The MBDA is one of its own--the only kind that exists to be 
able to provide more support, and I would argue it is the only 
one within the Department of Commerce. It is why there was 
broad support--bipartisan support--for this very small 
investment, I would argue, when you look at the United States 
budget--$68 million.
    And it is very concerning when the Secretary when he was 
here before us as a nominee said he also supported small 
businesses and he is leading efforts with Donald Trump to 
eliminate one of the components that exists and, I would argue, 
ignoring law.
    This is in the laws that were passed by the legislative 
branch of government and one of the prime responsibilities. I 
am sure you have been asked by several of my colleagues about 
the MBDA today.
    So my question simply is because this was under current 
funding is where did the money go. So do you know where the 
Department has diverted the millions of dollars Congress 
appropriated to the MBDA?
    Mr. Dabbar. As I mentioned, Senator, I do not--I am not 
confirmed. I do not have, you know, insight into individual 
line item spending at the department right now.
    Senator Lujan. So if confirmed, will you commit to tracing 
these funds and reporting back to this committee on where 
specifically our money--taxpayer money--for the MBDA has been 
rerouted?
    Mr. Dabbar. I can absolutely commit that I have, and I have 
a long track record of being--of coming back in for oversight 
before the Senate and the House when I was Under Secretary and 
that I will continue to do that if I am so lucky to get your 
vote.
    Senator Lujan. I appreciate that. I am looking for a 
specific commitment in this very narrow space.
    Will you commit to tracing these funds and reporting back 
to this committee on where specifically this money has been 
rerouted?
    Mr. Dabbar. I do not know if it has been rerouted or not, 
Senator, but when it comes to financial accountability for 
anything in the Department including that program you have my 
commitment.
    Senator Lujan. Let me ask the question differently then if 
the word rerouted is what we are going to get hung up on. Will 
you commit to tracing these funds and reporting back to the 
Committee where they are?
    Mr. Dabbar. Absolutely. About any funding at the Department 
you absolutely have my commitment that you will have proper 
feedback for oversight like I did when I was Under Secretary.
    Senator Lujan. Does that include specifically this money 
for the MBDA----
    Mr. Dabbar. I will certainly look into that, too, Senator. 
Yes.
    Senator Lujan. Do you commit to getting back to this 
committee and reporting where the money is?
    Mr. Dabbar. I will certainly--I will certainly look into 
it, and if you ask a question we will respond.
    Senator Lujan. I am asking--I am asking right now will you 
commit to get back to--it is yes or no. It is not I am going to 
look into--I am going to theoretically try to figure out 
something. The money may be somewhere. It may have--rerouted is 
a word that clearly is a bit of distance between us.
    Can you just say yes or no? If the answer is no the answer 
is no. I respect that.
    Mr. Dabbar. I will commit to follow every dollar and report 
back as you request on anything in the Department.
    Senator Lujan. I will be very surprised if you do not get 
confirmed, given the votes and the natures with all these 
confirmations. You will be in this role.
    If you keep your word you will be back for oversight 
hearings and I am sharing with you right now I will be asking 
about it.
    If I need to I will send a formal letter. I will ask all my 
colleagues that voted for this funding to get onto that letter 
so that one of the first letters that you have when you go and 
you sit at your new desk will be this question, if I can be 
clear about that. Is that clear?
    Mr. Dabbar. It is clear and I would like to highlight that 
having run vast operations in your state including very, very 
sensitive environmental management topics in Carlsbad and at 
Los Alamos and quantum operations at Sandia, I think I have a 
large track record with many, many people in your state on many 
topics in terms of all sorts of things including 
accountability.
    Senator Lujan. Appreciate that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Thank you.
    Senator Rosen.

                STATEMENT OF HON. JACKY ROSEN, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM NEVADA

    Senator Rosen. Well, before I begin my questions I want 
to--of course, thank you, Chair Cruz, and thank you to our 
nominee for your willingness to serve again.
    But I want to associate myself with what Senator Lujan has 
been speaking about because our MBDAs are very important in 
Nevada.
    As you may or may not know, 99 percent of businesses in 
Nevada are small businesses, many of them minority businesses. 
We rely heavily on these services, and so I just want to 
support my colleague on that.
    I am going to move on to something I know we also care 
about is our BEAD proposals. So Nevada's BEAD proposal was 
approved over 3 months ago. The Department of Commerce has 
still not released the $417 million allocated to connect all 
Nevadans to high-speed reliable internet.
    The proposal is tech neutral, cost effective, uses all of 
its funding to building broadband to reach 100 percent of 
unserved Nevadans--100 percent.
    We have a rural frontier state, the most mountainous state 
in the lower 48. Each type of technology is used with over 10 
percent of our unserved locations to be covered by satellite.
    Nevada BEADs awards' average cost per location is so much 
lower than any federally funding broadband programs in the 
state in recent years.
    So, Mr. Dabbar, I would like to just again ask you a simple 
yes or no question. If confirmed, will you commit to releasing 
the funding for the Nevada BEADs proposal?
    It has been approved. It has been fully approved. It is 
tech neutral, cost effective. Fulfills the mission of bringing 
high-speed reliable broadband to every Nevadan.
    Will you commit to releasing that funding, yes or no?
    Mr. Dabbar. I will commit to certainly look at improving 
what has been going on----
    Senator Rosen. I will take that as a no then.
    It has been approved.
    Mr. Dabbar. I do not know, Senator. I apologize for not 
knowing the Nevada----
    Senator Rosen. It has been approved. So you are saying you 
are not going to release funding that has been approved?
    Mr. Dabbar. If something has been fully approved then----
    Senator Rosen. It has been fully approved.
    Mr. Dabbar.--I would want to make certain that it is, 
Senator.
    Senator Rosen. It has been fully approved. I will go under 
oath and tell you it has been fully approved according to the 
proposal. The money has been frozen. Will you commit to 
unfreezing approved appropriated money by the United States 
Congress?
    Mr. Dabbar. So, Senator, I feel very passionate about the 
BEAD program and the fact that the 14-step processes have not 
actually gotten to deployment to Nevada and elsewhere.
    It has, obviously, been quite topical by many people, 
including a recent book. I agree with you on the general point 
that I think I hear from you amongst others about that process 
has not gone as well as it should have.
    Senator Rosen. The process--our process is complete. I am 
trying to be clear. It has been completed. It has been 
approved. The money is coming and now it is frozen.
    So it is not that something is in process or under review 
or any of those things. This is a project that has been 
completed according to the appropriate specifications and 
approved. That is all.
    Well, we will move on to extreme heat because I know--I am 
not going to spend my time fighting about this.
    But Nevada is home to two of the fastest warming cities in 
the country, Las Vegas and Reno, and in 2024 our emergency 
rooms experienced a record number of visits for heat-related 
illnesses, and in southern Nevada alone over 500 people died as 
a result of extreme heat.
    I know in Texas the Chairman's state is pretty hot too so 
you have some of these similar issues with extreme heat.
    NOAA's CAP program builds community resilience to extreme 
weather and in Nevada it supports the Nevada Heat Lab which 
focuses on mitigating the effects of extreme heat and 
protecting families from extreme heat.
    So if confirmed, would you support the continuation of 
programs like CAP that aim to address the challenges of extreme 
heat?
    We just do not have them in Nevada. Like I said, Texas is 
known for being pretty hot in the summer, and what role do you 
think the Department of Commerce should have in helping us?
    Mr. Dabbar. So NOAA has a broad set on a regional basis. A 
lot of them are university centric for drought and for heat.
    Senator Rosen. We have them both. We have both in Nevada.
    Mr. Dabbar. And also there is--you know, there is some 
current work being done by what I would think is kind of lower 
tech but important things like planes, helicopters, balloons 
for some of the mapping and providing feedback and input to 
farmers and others around the topic.
    And, you know, there is some prospect around using 
satellites, and I think moving the technology stack forward on 
your exact point, Senator, to get faster information, better 
information out of NOAA, moving up the technology stack is 
something I think would be very valuable for me to look at.
    Senator Rosen. Thank you. If the Chairman would indulge me 
for a question about tourism.
    Thank you. I so appreciate it.
    Travel and tourism are not only the backbone of Nevada's 
economy but I can tell you every single state in this Nation it 
is a top economic driver for us, supporting 15 million jobs 
nationwide, and international tourism contributes over $180 
billion alone toward the U.S. economy.
    So in the coming years the U.S. is hosting several 
important, major international sporting events that attract 
visitors, of course, from across the country but from around 
the world--this year's Formula One Grand Prix in Las Vegas to 
the FIFA World Cup in 2026 to the 2028 Summer Olympics. So much 
more.
    Unfortunately, I have concerns that some of the recent 
administration's actions could make traveling to the U.S. a 
little harder, a little less attractive, at a crucial time for 
us to prioritize tourism, particularly the Olympics.
    It is just such a shining light for everyone around the 
world and everybody looks forward to that.
    So, Mr. Dabbar, if confirmed will you ensure that 
supporting travel and tourism is a priority at the Department 
of Commerce, understanding how important it is to our Nation 
within the Trump administration, and will you work with me to 
quickly confirm a qualified individual to serve as the first 
ever assistant secretary for travel and tourism?
    That was a position I was proud to create through 
bipartisan legislation with Senators Wicker, Sullivan, 
Klobuchar, and many others on this committee?
    Mr. Dabbar. Yes, Senator.
    Senator Rosen. Thank you. I appreciate it.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Thank you.
    Mr. Dabbar, there is reportedly a backlog of contracts 
awaiting approval at the Department of Commerce with only five 
or six being approved per day.
    NOAA alone has 5,700 contracts set to expire this year. 
These contracts include everything from post-hurricane flood 
assessments to janitorial services.
    Recently, NOAA came close to letting the contract expire 
for the advanced weather interactive processing system. The 
system is critical for weather forecasters to access weather 
data from satellites, radar, surface stations, and computer 
models and to issue weather warnings.
    More recently, a data center at Texas A&M was shut down for 
several days because of bottlenecks in the department's 
contracting process, depriving Texas emergency and water 
managers of critical drought forecasts that helped them manage 
reservoirs and track storm surge data and hurricane forecasts 
in real time.
    There are other critical contracts for Texas that are in 
Commerce's contracting backlogs such as routine maintenance 
repairs to NOAA's aging Hurricane Hunter fleet.
    Can you commit to addressing the problems with the 
Department of Commerce contract process and resolving the 
backlog of contracts?
    Mr. Dabbar. Yes, Chairman.
    The Chairman. Thank you.
    The Department of Commerce plays an underappreciated role 
in U.S. science policy--something you have a great deal of 
experience with--emphasizing applied science, technology 
transfer, and commercialization to drive economic growth.
    Given your experience managing national laboratories and 
advancing tech transfer at the Department of Energy, what 
lessons could the Commerce Department apply to better 
accelerate public-private partnerships and the 
commercialization of federally funded R&D?
    Mr. Dabbar. So, Senator, my kind of philosophy around 
Federal Government spending is it should be the equivalent of 
venture money. It should be the equivalent of triggering money 
to get the private sector moving in a certain direction.
    Certainly, discovery science is a big part of it. But how 
do you translate it, as your question posed, is vitally 
important.
    So taking a look at the structure around Bayh-Dole and 
Wydler-Stevenson that actually makes that possible. But how do 
we make that easier? And also how do we set up better 
communities for people to see what we have invented or 
supported invention either in the private sector or in the 
universities, and how do we make it easier for people to go do 
that is certainly something I did at DOE and would look to push 
that forward at Commerce.
    The Chairman. Thank you. I look forward to working with you 
in that regard.
    Finally, the United States has been a global leader in 
technological innovation due to our free enterprise system and 
strong rule of law.
    Our nation's leadership in critical emerging technologies 
like artificial intelligence will hinge on whether we embrace 
entrepreneurial freedom or instead adopt a European style 
command and control regulatory scheme.
    You correctly recognize that the United States must 
continue to outpace China and remain the global leader at AI. 
What is at risk if we go the direction of Europe and the Biden 
administration and adopt heavy-handed AI regulations requiring 
prior approval before new innovations can be implemented?
    Mr. Dabbar. So the AI sector--a sector, but the AI 
applications are so darn broad everything from energy to 
agriculture to financial services, and I could keep going, is 
so wide that regulating something with that breadth and that 
width and people's ability to invent things across those and 
many other industries would impede economic progress and that 
whole sector, and productivity for the whole economy and the 
welfare for everyday American citizens. So free enterprise and 
allowing everyone to develop across those and every other 
industry is vitally important for a broad set of reasons.
    The Chairman. During the Biden administration the National 
Institute of Standards and Technology--NIST--including the AI 
Safety Institute looked at the worst of the European Union tech 
regulation policing, quote, ``misinformation'' as a part of, 
quote, ``measuring AI'' and its, quote, ``risks.'' This was all 
nonsense.
    If confirmed, how will you restore NIST to its apolitical 
statutory mission and eliminate Trojan horse social policy?
    Mr. Dabbar. So NIST has certain strengths that it is, 
clearly, leader in the world--the ones on standards, ones on 
identifying the kind of the capabilities of certain 
technologies and measuring those.
    And so those--you know, I think trying to have NIST stick 
to the traditional area that it does very well in versus 
expanding it into other areas I think that is probably the 
right way to go for NIST in this particular area.
    The Chairman. Terrific. So my final question is required of 
all nominees.
    If confirmed, do you pledge to work collaboratively with 
this committee to provide thorough and timely responses to the 
Committee's requests and to appear before the Committee when 
requested?
    Mr. Dabbar. Yes, Senator.
    The Chairman. Thank you.
    I have letters of support from various organizations for 
Mr. Dabbar's nomination and I ask unanimous consent for them to 
be inserted in the hearing record.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    [The information referred to follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 
    

    The Chairman. Senators will have until the close of 
business on Friday, May 2, to submit questions for the record. 
The nominee will have until the close of business on Monday, 
May 5, to respond to those questions. So you will have a busy 
weekend.
    That concludes today's hearing. The Committee stands 
adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 11:44 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                            A P P E N D I X

      Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Ted Cruz to 
                              Paul Dabbar
                              
    Question 1. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's 
(NOAA) Atlantic Oceanographic & Meteorological Laboratory and National 
Severe Storms Laboratory lead research to improve the Federal 
government's hurricane and tornado forecasts. Hurricane forecasting has 
improved but is far from perfect, as tragically demonstrated by 
Hurricane Helene, which resulted in over 250 deaths across six states 
last year.

    a. How will you leverage NOAA's labs to improve storm forecasting 
and save American lives?
    Answer. The tragic impacts of Hurricane Helene serve as a sobering 
reminder of the stakes involved in timely and accurate storm 
forecasting. NOAA's labs, including the AOML and the NSSL represent 
critical assets in advancing the science that underpins forecasts and 
warnings. Continued support for innovation, workforce expertise, and 
mission-driven science will help ensure that forecasting improvements 
translate into meaningful benefits for communities at risk.

    Question 2. My hometown of Houston was hit hard by Hurricane 
Harvey. Fortunately, the accurate hurricane path predictions provided 
by the National Weather Service, which incorporated data from the 
Hurricane Hunters flown by the NOAA Corps, helped emergency management 
prepare for the hurricane and save lives. These aircraft provide vital 
data that satellites and drones cannot capture. NOAA only has three 
Hurricane Hunter aircraft and a limited number of pilots who fly very 
long hours. A March 2025 GAO report (GAO-25-107210), which I requested, 
reviews the challenges faced by NOAA's Hurricane Hunter fleet.

    a. How will you ensure the Department of Commerce complies with 
Chapter 8549 of Title 15, United States Code, which requires NOAA to 
``acquire backup for the capabilities of the WP-3D Orion and G-IV 
hurricane aircraft of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration that is sufficient to prevent a single point of 
failure,'' as well as Pub. L. 117-263, which requires NOAA to 
``maintain the ability of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration to meet agency air reconnaissance and research mission 
requirements by acquiring new aircraft prior to the end of the service 
life of the aircraft being replaced with sufficient lead time that the 
replacement aircraft is fully operation [sic] prior to the retirement 
of the aircraft it is replacing''?
    Answer. I recognize the vital role Hurricane Hunter aircraft play 
in protecting lives and property through accurate and timely forecasts. 
I will work with NOAA to ensure that they meet the statutory 
requirements in order to maintain these capabilities.

    Question 3. Last year, an activist Maryland judge vacated NOAA's 
existing biological opinion for the then-Gulf of Mexico. NOAA must file 
a new biological opinion on offshore work in the Gulf by May 21, 2025. 
If this does not occur, oil and gas operations in the Gulf could be 
shut down.

    a. Will you hold NOAA's feet to the fire and make sure it meets the 
May 21st deadline for re-issuing this biological opinion, if confirmed 
before then?
    Answer. If confirmed, I will work with NOAA to ensure that they 
meet the May 21st deadline. I understand that the biological opinion is 
essential to avoiding disruption to vital oil and gas operations in the 
Gulf of America, which play a key role in the Nation's energy security 
and economy. Timely completion is critical to providing the certainty 
the industry needs while maintaining environmental compliance.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Roger Wicker to 
                              Paul Dabbar
                              
NOAA Cooperative Institutes
    The Ocean Exploration Cooperative Institute (OECI) was established 
in 2019, with five institutions, University of Southern Mississippi, 
University of Rhode Island, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, 
University of New Hampshire, and Ocean Exploration Trust, bringing 
together world-class talent, expertise, enterprise, and experience. 
Through OECI, members leveraged resources, infrastructure, and 
intellectual focus in its national effort to discover nearly four 
million square miles of submerged U.S. territory. With NOAA, and other 
Federal and industry partners, OCEI explores the unknown parts of the 
U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) for the explicit purpose of 
advancing prosperity of the United States.
    The Ocean Exploration Cooperative Institute has and continues to 
support the Trump Administration's priorities through U.S. leadership 
in ocean exploration and technology development. The OECI is the go-to 
for critical minerals discovery in the ocean due their expertise with 
long-endurance autonomous surface and subsurface vehicles. This work is 
accelerated through public-private partnerships with industry.

    Question 1. What are your priorities for further implementation of 
public-private partnerships with NOAA Cooperative Institutes? How do 
you plan to utilize your authorities to incentivize innovative ocean 
research and training in the United States?
    Answer. Ocean exploration, mapping, and characterization of the 
U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone and beyond are critical to advancing 
national interests, from scientific discovery to economic development. 
Public-private partnerships offer opportunities to accelerate 
innovation and expand capacity in ocean science and technology. As part 
of this effort, there should be a careful assessment of how Cooperative 
Institutes can help achieve these goals and support NOAA's broader 
mission through research, training, and collaboration.
Oceans and Fisheries Data Collection
    Background: The Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) is the 
Nation's leading resource for community-driven coastal, ocean, and 
Great Lakes sensor information. This vital program supports a vast 
network of buoys, gliders, high frequency radars, and other sensors 
that monitor U.S. waters. This efficient, reliable, and cost-effective 
system supports emergency preparedness, underpins a thriving blue 
economy, and bridges the gap between scientific research, federally 
certified data, and sound management. Recently, the Gulf Coast Ocean 
Observing System funded a project to modernize High Frequency Radar 
stations to enhance Coast Guard search and rescue operations. IOOS 
deploys, operates, and maintains more than 300 observing assets at 11 
Regional Associations. It supports 17 Federal agencies, including NOAA, 
where the IOOS program office is headquartered. The IOOS program was 
reauthorized unanimously in 2020 and signed into law by President 
Trump.
    In addition to IOOS, the Gulf Maritime Fisheries Commission and 
other regional fisheries commissions work with NOAA to collect critical 
data for fisheries management. The Gulf States Marine Fisheries 
Commission's cooperative agreement with NOAA expired on March 31 and a 
renewal agreement is under review. Until a renewal is in place, the 
commission cannot fully distribute funds to the state partners and 
contractors who do the on-the-ground data collection. While the 
commission is extending some limited resources to provide for short-
term operations, I am concerned that a delayed review would cause 
significant disruptions in the collection of fish stock data. Such 
disruptions would have a negative impact on fisheries and coastal 
communities in the Gulf of America.

    Question 2. The Integrated Ocean Observing System, or IOOS, and the 
Gulf Marine Fisheries Commission collect essential scientific 
observations like ocean, weather, and fish stock data to support 
navigation, forecasting, and fishing. Would you agree that it should be 
priority to maintain critical data collection programs which monitor 
U.S. waters?
    Answer. Collecting high-quality ocean, coastal, and fisheries data 
is critical to supporting safe navigation, accurate forecasting, 
effective resource management, and the broader blue economy. The value 
of maintaining continuity in these data collection activities is well 
recognized and will continue to be an important consideration.
Manufacturing Extension Partnership Program
    Background: The Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) is a 
public-private partnership that provides resources to manufacturers, to 
advance U.S. manufacturing. The program is based at the National 
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The MEP program was 
created in 1988 by the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act to improve 
the competitiveness of U.S.-based manufacturing by making manufacturing 
technologies, processes and services more accessible to small and 
medium-sized manufacturers (SMMs) through MEP Centers in every state 
and Puerto Rico. The MEP Centers provide expertise to help 
manufacturers reduce costs, create new products, develop the next 
generation workforce, find new markets and achieve business success. 
The MEP program office provides Federal funding to 51 Centers located 
in all 50 states and Puerto Rico. As a public-private partnership, the 
MEP National Network helped manufacturers achieve $15 billion in new 
and retained sales, $5 billion in new client investments, $2.6 billion 
in cost savings and over 108,000 jobs created or retained in Fiscal 
Year (FY) 2024.
    At the beginning of April, NIST notified 10 MEP centers, including 
the Mississippi Manufacturers Association-Manufacturing Extension 
Partnership, that it was not going to renew its funding for the 
centers. On April 15, NIST announced that after further review, it 
would renew funding for the 10 centers until the end of the Fiscal Year 
as the Department reviews the program.

    Question 3. President Trump rightly wants to revive American 
manufacturing and the Manufacturing Extension Partnership program under 
NIST helps achieve just that by providing targeted investments to small 
and medium sized manufacturing businesses. As the Department of 
Commerce reviews its programs, will you commit to supporting critical 
initiatives to grow domestic manufacturing?
    Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to working to support 
President Trump's and Secretary Lutnick's efforts to grow domestic 
manufacturing.
                                 ______
                                 
  Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Marsha Blackburn to 
                              Paul Dabbar
                              
    Question 1. U.S. advancement of quantum technology is critical for 
our Nation to compete on the global stage, but without a coordinated 
effort at the Federal level, we risk falling behind our adversaries. 
The results of failure would be disastrous for our Nation. What do you 
view as the most important pieces of a National Quantum Initiative 
Reauthorization bill, and will you commit to prioritizing advancing 
quantum innovation in your role at the Department of Commerce?
    Answer. Quantum is a technology that can define the success of our 
Nation and the quality of our lives and is highly prioritized by 
President Trump and Secretary Lutnick. I join them in committing to 
advance our quantum success through wise investment in research, 
including efforts to speed commercialization of American-developed 
technology.

    Question 2. Before the National Quantum Initiative lapsed, I 
convened industry and government for a roundtable to discuss priorities 
for the reauthorization and we heard a great deal about siloing and a 
lack of coordination between the departments. We all need to be on the 
same page if we're going to win the quantum race and defeat China. In 
your view, what do we need to do to make certain the reauthorization 
improves agency to agency collaboration?
    Answer. As a former Under Secretary of Energy charged with science 
and research responsibilities, I am keenly aware of the need and 
advantages for agencies to coordinate quantum research and innovation 
work. If confirmed, I look forward to regular engagement with agency 
leaders across the government to ensure that we achieve quantum success 
at the fastest reasonable pace.

    Question 3. Our allies and adversaries are building quantum and 
hybrid applications today to tackle a wide variety of issues across 
industries--including optimization of manufacturing, drug discovery, 
supply chain, and more. And they are doing it quickly. For example, the 
UK has called for applications that could be developed and deployed in 
18 months or less. I've reintroduced my Quantum Sandbox for Near Term 
Applications Act, which would provide more opportunity for public-
private partnerships to develop quantum pilot programs, test 
demonstrations and proofs of concept within 24 months. Do you support 
added focus on near-term application development and deployment?
    Answer. Our natural principal focus should be on research that 
rapidly develops commercially-available quantum technology. Preparing 
for deployment of American-developed quantum technology to customers 
should be part of the effort in order to ensure our Nation's continued 
technological lead.

    Question 4. I have also recently reintroduced my Advancing Quantum 
Manufacturing Act, which would establish a Manufacturing USA Institute 
for Quantum Manufacturing. In his first 100 days, President Trump has 
been focused on bringing American manufacturing back home. Technology 
is one of the keys to onshoring manufacturing--enabling faster, more 
efficient, and cheaper transitions. No technology has more promise in 
this area than quantum. When applied to manufacturing, quantum will 
increase energy efficiency, advance robotics, secure our 
communications, design stronger materials, and improve our supply chain 
logistics. So, can you elaborate on the need for quantum applications 
in manufacturing, and will you commit to working with me to establish a 
Manufacturing USA Institute for Quantum Manufacturing?
    Answer. Quantum is one of the few technologies that will determine 
continued manufacturing success for our Nation and the quality of life 
for our citizens. I look forward to working with you on this important 
issue.

    Question 5. The Biden administration's NTIA BEAD program added 
partisan requirements to the program that went beyond the letter of the 
law and were never envisioned by Congress, including burdensome climate 
change mandates on infrastructure projects, mandates for unionized 
labor, and overhanded attempts to control broadband rates. We need to 
ramp up broadband deployment by cutting red tape--especially where 
infrastructure already exists--and letting contractors do what they do 
best. How will you work to ensure taxpayer dollars are spent 
efficiently, empowering states to partner with broadband providers to 
reach unserved and underserved communities without further delays?
    Answer. It is unacceptable that the Broadband Equity, Access, and 
Deployment (BEAD) program has been bogged down by burdensome 
regulations. If confirmed, I will work with Secretary Lutnick and NTIA 
to expedite the BEAD program, get funding to the states, and expand 
broadband buildout, consistent with the law.

    Question 6. If confirmed as Deputy Secretary of Commerce, you will 
play a key role in managing U.S. spectrum policy. Will you commit to 
review currently held government spectrum and ensure it is used 
efficiently and put to its best use?
    Answer. Yes.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Dan Sullivan to 
                              Paul Dabbar
                              
Alaska Salmon Research Task Force Act
    Salmon is a way of life in Alaska and a primary food source for 
many in the state. Fisheries closures and depressed stocks shake the 
foundation of our daily lives.
    Luckily, you've got a basis to work on. My Alaska Salmon Research 
Task Force Act was signed into law in 2022 and had NOAA collaborate 
with salmon experts in Alaska to chart a path forward to research why 
we are seeing such variability in the abundance of salmon.
    The report was released last summer with suggestions of discrete, 
meaningful research projects that we can undertake to get to the bottom 
of this issue.

    Question 1. Mr. Dabbar, can you commit to working with me to 
prioritize and build upon the work we have started to better understand 
why our salmon runs are decreasing in Alaska?
    Answer. The significance of salmon to Alaska's way of life and food 
security is fully recognized, and understanding the causes behind 
declining runs is an important priority. The work initiated under the 
Alaska Salmon Research Task Force Act provides a strong platform, and 
the recommendations outlined in the report present clear opportunities 
for further research. I look forward to working with you to build on 
this foundation and advance efforts to better understand and address 
the issue.
Consultation
    Mr. Dabbar, the previous administration had a history of taking 
unilateral executive actions that affected our state--to my count 70--
executive orders and actions that affected Alaska. On the vast majority 
of those, neither our Congressional delegation nor our state were 
consulted.

    Question 2. Can you commit to consulting with our office before 
your agency takes any action that would directly affect my state and my 
constituents?
    Answer. Alaska contributes significantly to the Nation through its 
fisheries, minerals, energy resources, and unique ecosystems. Given 
this importance, it will be my priority to engage with your office to 
gain insight and perspective on actions that directly affect the state 
or its communities.
Data and Technology
    Data and technology are critical drivers of our Nation's economy, 
and I commend this administration for its focus on unleashing 
technology and innovation. As Alaskans know firsthand, nowhere is this 
more important than in our coasts and oceans.
    During President Trump's first term he released the EO 13921, 
``Promoting American Seafood Competitiveness and Economic growth.'' 
This EO highlights the need for improved data collection, including 
improved fisheries data and modernized data collection. The economic 
basis our fisheries rely on thorough and up-to-date survey data. 
However, NOAA and NMFS staff must be available, and contracts signed in 
a timely manner, in order for these surveys to happen on time. As of 
today, we are seeing serious uncertainty.

    Question 3. As Deputy Secretary of Commerce, will you commit to 
empowering NOAA to continue its important work in improved ocean and 
fisheries data collection, and accelerate the deployment of innovative 
marine technologies to enhance economic growth, maritime safety, and 
national security?
    Answer. There is strong alignment between the goals of economic 
growth, maritime safety, and national security and the need for timely 
and accurate ocean and fisheries data. The role of data and technology 
in supporting America's coastal and ocean-based industries, 
particularly in regions like Alaska, is well recognized. If confirmed, 
I will work with NOAA to ensure that it continues its important work in 
this area.
Restoring American Seafood Competitiveness
    Over the last several years, the U.S. seafood industry has 
experienced significant economic hardship and drastic declines, 
primarily due to unfair and predatory practices from Russia and China. 
In addition, a strong NOAA and National Marine Fisheries Service--along 
with a dedicated, professional workforce--is critical to revamping the 
industry to further the goals of the President's EO 14276, Restoring 
American Seafood Competitiveness to help our fishermen. This EO 
provides a roadmap to restore the U.S. domestic fishing industry to 
greatness. To accomplish this, U.S. fishermen need robust fish surveys 
to inform accurate stock assessments; and timely promulgation of 
regulations to manage--and open--fisheries.
    There is a concern that some of these important Alaska surveys will 
not happen this year. There is a reason these surveys take place, and 
we need to make sure that adequate personnel who conduct survey and 
regulatory work are available and funded not just this year, but in 
future years.

    Question 4. Will you commit to ensuring that NOAA personnel and 
funding is available at sufficient levels to support the needs of our 
hard-working fishermen and meet the demands of our President's mission 
to unleash Alaska's extraordinary resource potential and restore 
American seafood competitiveness?
    Answer. The U.S. seafood industry, especially in Alaska, plays a 
vital role in the Nation's economy, and the impacts of unfair foreign 
practices have only underscored the need to strengthen our domestic 
capabilities. Executive Order 14276 lays out a clear path to restore 
American seafood competitiveness, and achieving that vision requires 
reliable fishery surveys, timely stock assessments, and responsive 
regulatory action. If confirmed, ensuring NOAA supports these critical 
activities will remain a priority to fully realize the potential of 
Alaska's resources.
Program Funds, Grants, and Contracts Approvals
    There are several programs, grants, and contracts that fall under 
the Department of Commerce's review that benefit the state of Alaska. 
These cover a vast number of topics supporting areas such as fisheries 
development, scientific research, and marine mammal rescue and 
stranding response. I understand that one such grant is held up has 
major implications in my state.
    For example, a NOAA Prescott Grant has been submitted by the Alaska 
SeaLife Center, located in Seward, Alaska. The Alaska SeaLife Center is 
important not only as a public aquarium, but for its marine mammal 
research and care capabilities. It is also the number two private 
employer in Seward after the hospital. The SeaLife Center attracts a 
large volume of visitors due to cruise ships and other tourism 
opportunities that Seward receives. The grant funds provide the Center 
the necessary rescue, care and recovery of stranded marine mammals in 
Alaska. In fact, they are the only entity that has the authority and 
capability to carry out this work in the state. This grant has been 
reviewed and approved by NOAA but still awaits final approval by the 
Department of Commerce.

    Question 5. Mr. Dabbar, I ask that you commit to ensuring the 
disbursement of approved funds and approval of program grants finalized 
so these important entities can continue to support the economic growth 
and opportunities necessary for my state--both which meet the mission 
of the Department of Commerce?
    Answer. The Alaska SeaLife Center clearly provides valuable 
contributions to marine research, wildlife response, and local economic 
development in Seward and the broader region. If confirmed, I commit to 
give all funding decisions the appropriate consideration in my role as 
Deputy Secretary.
Russian Seafood Reciprocity
    Russia has banned U.S. seafood from its markets since 2014. 
However, for many years, Russia was not subject to any special import 
duties in the U.S. Meanwhile, Russia has drastically increased seafood 
production since 2022 and is openly working to flood both U.S. and 
global markets with cheap seafood to push out U.S. product.
    All the while, our hardworking fishermen could not export a single 
fish to Russia. For nearly 10 years, we allowed them to do this until I 
was finally successful in getting the previous Administration to issue 
a couple of executive orders to put a stop to this and restore 
reciprocity. If we can't enter the Russian market, they shouldn't be 
able to flood ours.
    EO 14068 in 2022 banned imports of Russian seafood. However, Russia 
laundered their seafood through China to circumvent the ban. EO 14114 
in 2023 closed this loophole and made it abundantly clear than any 
seafood harvested in Russia is banned from import into the U.S.--even 
if it goes through processing in another country.
    Russia is our biggest competitor in a lot of the seafood market, 
and just like China, they don't play fair. We are finally beginning to 
see this ban have effects on the market. American importers are 
beginning to buy Alaskan ``Freedom Fish'' instead of Russian 
``Communist Fish'' and prices are beginning to stabilize for our 
fishermen.
    This is about fair trade and reciprocity--not the war in Ukraine.

    Question 6. Mr. Dabbar, will you commit to keeping these reciprocal 
executive orders--EO 14068 and EO 14114--in place? They are critical to 
keeping our seafood trade fair.
    Answer. Russia's longstanding refusal to allow U.S. seafood into 
its markets, while expanding access to ours, has harmed American 
fishermen, especially in Alaska where seafood is vital to the economy. 
Executive Orders 14068 and 14114 were important steps to restore fair 
trade by banning Russian seafood imports and closing transshipment 
loopholes. These actions are showing positive effects, stabilizing 
markets and supporting U.S. producers. Ensuring fair and reciprocal 
trade remains a key priority of this Administration.
AK LNG
    The Alaska LNG [liquefied natural gas] Project, a proposed 800-mile 
natural gas pipeline to transport natural gas from the Alaska North 
Slope to the Kenai Peninsula for the purposes of in-state energy 
security and the export of LNG to our Asian allies, with an export 
capacity of 20 million metric tons of gas per year, is a priority of 
the President of the United States.
    Executive Order 14153 entitled ``Unleashing Alaska's Extraordinary 
Resource Potential'' states in section 2 that, ``it is the policy of 
the United States to . . . prioritize the development of Alaska's 
liquefied natural gas (LNG) potential, including the sale and 
transportation of Alaskan LNG to other regions of the United States and 
allied nations within the Pacific region.''
    Section 3(ii)(a) of President Trump's Executive Order 14153 
entitled ``Unleashing Alaska's Extraordinary Resource Potential'' 
directs ``The heads of all executive departments and agencies, 
including but not limited to the Secretary of the Interior; the 
Secretary of Commerce, acting through the Under Secretary of Commerce 
for Oceans and Atmosphere; and the Secretary of the Army acting through 
the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Public Works, shall exercise 
all lawful authority and discretion available to them and take all 
necessary steps to (ii) prioritize the development of Alaska's LNG 
potential, including the permitting of all necessary pipeline and 
export infrastructure related to the Alaska LNG Project, giving due 
consideration to the economic and national security benefits associated 
with such development.''
    Additionally, in President Trump's March 4, 2025, Address to a 
Joint Session of Congress, he mentioned Japanese and Korean interest 
surrounding an investment into the project.
    Furthermore, Section 3(f) of Executive Order 141453 states ``The 
Secretary of Commerce, in coordination with the Secretary of the 
Interior, shall immediately review, revise or rescind any agency action 
that may in any way hinder, slow or otherwise delay any critical 
project in the State of Alaska.''

    Question 7. Mr. Dabbar, can you commit to using your role as Deputy 
Secretary of Commerce to implement the President's executive orders on 
Alaskan energy?
    Answer. Yes.
China Phase One Agreement
    We all know that China lies and does not follow through on its 
promises--what I refer to as promise fatigue. During President Trump's 
first term, I worked closely with him and his team on the first phase 
of the Economic and Trade Agreement Between the United States of 
American and the People's Republic of China. Under that agreement, 
China was supposed to double its purchases of American seafood over 4 
years, moving from about an $800 million baseline in 2017 and amounting 
to about $400 million annually.
    For the first two years after the agreement, China's purchases 
actually decreased. Four years later, their purchases are still about 
7.8 percent below pre-COVID levels. This latest lie from the Chinese 
government is dramatically hurting our hardworking American fishermen.

    Question 8. Mr. Dabbar, if you end up reengaging with China on this 
issue, will you commit to bringing this up and pushing to hold the 
Chinese to their end of the agreement?
    Answer. Upon confirmation, I will work with the Secretary and 
others to ensure the Department takes a holistic approach in addressing 
the U.S.-China trading relationship, including consideration of past 
practices and behaviors by the Chinese government. I will work 
diligently to ensure our trading partners fully comply with all terms 
of our agreements.
Broadband Equity Access and Deployment (BEAD)--Discard Extraneous 
        Requirements
    In October, NTIA announced that Alaska will be obligated over $1 
billion. I know you are aware of the criticisms that have been made 
that the Biden Administration layered on requirements that are beyond 
the IIJA law in the BEAD NOFO.

    Question 9. Will you commit to remove the Biden-era extraneous 
regulations as you review the BEAD program, and do so quickly as time 
is money for applicants?
    Answer. Yes.
BEAD--Empower the State
    The BEAD program's success depends on allowing states to lead. 
Alaska knows best where broadband is lacking and understands the 
challenges presented by our low population density, extreme weather, 
and difficult terrain. Federal requirements should not impose one-size-
fits-all solutions but instead empower states to design deployment 
strategies that work for their specific circumstances.

    Question 10. Will you commit to me that NTIA will defer to states 
in making choices that they believe will deliver the best possible 
broadband for their consumers and communities given the amount of 
funding they have?
    Answer. Yes.
BEAD Technology Neutral and Needs
    The unique challenges due to our vast, remote, and rugged terrain 
make technology neutrality truly critical to serving Alaskans. We need 
a combination of technologies to be available, including fiber, fixed 
wireless, and satellite. Notably, Alaska lacks middle mile fiber, and 
these projects play a critical role bridging the gap between core 
Internet networks and local communities. Given Alaska's vast and remote 
geography, reliable middle mile infrastructure is essential to 
connecting underserved and unserved areas and for supporting 
healthcare, education, and economic development. By addressing the 
unique challenges of Alaska terrain, middle mile fiber ensures Internet 
access for generations to come. If a one-sized-fits-all per location 
cap is put in place for fiber for projects in Alaska, it is hard to 
imagine how any projects will be built for my constituents.

    Question 11. Will you commit to working with me to ensure that 
resources are allocated in a manner that takes into consideration the 
needs of Alaskans?
    Answer. Yes.
                                 ______
                                 
   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to 
                              Paul Dabbar
                              
Secretary Lutnick's stewardship of the Department of Commerce (DOC, 
        Department, Commerce)
    As I mentioned in my opening statement, the Commerce Department has 
been in a state of chaos and disruption since Secretary Lutnick's 
confirmation. Not only is the Secretary failing to honor commitments he 
made to this Committee; I believe he is also failing to focus on the 
Department's core mission and workforce.
    According to recent press reports, Secretary Lutnick is spending 
much of his time these days at the White House--not the Commerce 
Department. And by all accounts, he is focused primarily on playing 
defense for the Administration's disastrous tariffs agenda--not on the 
Department's essential programs.
    If confirmed as the Deputy Secretary, it would be our expectation 
that you would come in and help right this ship swiftly.

    Question 1. Yes or no: If confirmed, will you commit to spend the 
majority of your time at the Commerce Department working on the 
programs and policies that fall squarely in its remit?
    Answer. I look forward to working with Secretary Lutnick in support 
of his and the Administration's tireless efforts to create the 
conditions for economic growth and opportunity for all Americans.

    Question 2. Yes or no: Will you honor the commitments you make to 
Congress?
    Answer. Yes.
Dismantling the Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA)
    Under Secretary Lutnick's leadership, the MBDA--a 56-year-old 
agency that Congress permanently authorized in 2021 with bipartisan 
legislation--has been dismantled. During his confirmation hearing, 
Secretary Lutnick told our Committee that he did not support 
dismantling the MBDA. But, within months of taking office, Secretary 
Lutnick's Department has gutted the MBDA. And now, the Trump 
Administration's FY 2026 budget proposal acknowledges that the 
Department has ``fully eliminated'' the agency unilaterally.
    I, along with multiple colleagues on the Committee, have sent two 
letters to Secretary Lutnick seeking information about his dismantling 
of the MBDA. In response, the Department sent a woefully inadequate 
letter that failed to address any of our concerns. On April 30, we sent 
another letter to the Department, this time to the acting 
Undersecretary for MBDA, demanding answers and accountability.

    Question 1. Yes or No: Do you agree that funds Congress 
appropriated for MBDA's statutory mission must be used for that 
purpose? If not, explain.
    Answer. If granted the privilege of confirmation, I will promptly 
look into this matter.

    Question 2. Yes or No: If confirmed, will you commit to tracing the 
money Congress appropriated to the MBDA and reporting back to this 
Committee on the status of those funds within 30 days? If not, explain.
    Answer. If confirmed, I will look into this matter.

    Question 3. If confirmed, will you examine the precise role held at 
the Commerce Department by Nate Cavanaugh, who is reportedly a member 
of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), and 
promptly provide the Committee a complete description of any such role, 
including an explanation for why Mr. Cavanaugh signed grant termination 
notices on behalf of the MBDA?
    Answer. If confirmed, I will look into this matter.

    Question 4. If confirmed, will you commit to promptly providing 
this Committee the appropriate paperwork reflecting Labor Department 
Deputy Secretary Keith Sonderling's appointment as the acting 
Undersecretary for MBDA?
    Answer. If confirmed, I will look into this matter.

    Question 5. Yes or No: You told my staff you respect congressional 
authorizations, appropriations, and oversight. Do you support the Trump 
Administration's full elimination of an agency that Congress 
statutorily authorized and appropriated funds to operate?
    Answer. If confirmed, I will review and execute on this program as 
required by law.

    Question 6. Yes or No: If confirmed, will you commit to fully 
responding to my letters and requests on this topic? If no, explain.
    Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will be responsive to the Committee.
Tariffs
    Senator Grassley and I recently introduced the Trade Review Act of 
2025, a bill that would reassert Congress's constitutional control over 
tariffs. As we've seen, President Trump has vastly exceeded his legal 
tariff authority and ushered in economic chaos. This bill would require 
Congressional approval for tariffs and help dial back Trump's 
unilateral trade war.
    Meanwhile, the Trump Administration's start-and-stop approach to 
tariffs is giving American families and business economic whiplash as 
we seem to be stumbling into a trade war with no clear end game.

    Question 1. Do you agree that Congress has constitutional authority 
over trade policy, including tariffs?
    Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to working with Congress, 
including on potential legislation, on efforts to help combat decades 
of unfair trade practices that have harmed American workers, 
manufacturers, and critical supply chains.

    Question 2. If confirmed, do you expect to play a significant role 
in formulating the Administration's tariffs policies?
    Answer. If confirmed, I would work to support Secretary Lutnick, 
Under Secretary Kessler, and Ambassador Greer in formulating the 
Administration's tariff policies.

    Question 3. Are you aware of whether the Administration intends to 
use tariffs primarily as a revenue generating tool or for leverage as a 
negotiating tool? If yes, please detail your basis for this 
understanding.
    Answer. The Administration has made clear that tariffs imposed by 
President Trump serve multiple strategic purposes, including protecting 
our national and economic security, combatting large and persistent 
trade deficits that have harmed American workers, businesses and 
communities, and supporting negotiations for more fair and reciprocal 
trade agreements.

    Question 4. How do you plan to assess the impact of current and 
proposed tariffs on working-and middle-class Americans, especially with 
respect to essential goods?
    Answer. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that Americans are able 
to continue to access all of the essential goods they rely on a daily 
basis and ensure that critical supply chains are not disrupted by an 
overreliance on foreign manufacturers not subject to American standards 
of production.

    Question 5. Even Secretary Lutnick has acknowledged that tariffs 
will cause prices to increase for consumers. Given that, do you think 
retailers should be required to disclose the portion of their list 
prices reflecting the additional cost from tariffs?
    Answer. No.
Secretary Lutnick's Statements regarding Elon Musk and Tesla
    Mr. Dabbar, serious concerns have been raised regarding Secretary 
Lutnick's compliance with Federal ethics laws. On March 19, 2025, 
Secretary Lutnick went on national television and urged Americans to 
``buy Tesla'' stock and said anyone who doesn't buy a Tesla robot ``is 
going to be silly.''
    As I'm sure you know from your prior Federal service, Federal 
ethics rules generally prohibit Federal officials from using their 
public office to endorse any product or service.

    Question 1. Yes or no: If confirmed, will you pledge not to 
publicly call for Americans to buy stock in any of Elon Musk's 
companies? If not, why not?
    Answer. If confirmed, I will abide by all Federal ethics laws and 
regulations.

    Question 2. Yes or no: Will you commit to fully complying with all 
Federal ethics rules?
    Answer. Yes.
Dismantling the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
    The Trump Administration is pursuing an FY 2026 budget proposal 
that would reduce NOAA's budget by at least 25 percent, eliminate 
Congressionally mandated programs, and transfer part of the National 
Marine Fisheries Service to the Interior Department.
    During his confirmation hearing, Secretary Lutnick told me that he 
has, ``no interest in separating'' NOAA and that breaking up NOAA, ``is 
not on my agenda.'' Yet, that is exactly what the Administration is 
trying to do.

    Question 1. Do you support any function, mission, or 
congressionally authorized or appropriated work within NOAA, or 
executed by NOAA, being moved out of the NOAA or the Department of 
Commerce? If so, please describe.
    Answer. NOAA's core mission is to protect life and property and in 
pursuit of that, NOAA plays a vital and unique role in advancing 
science, stewardship, and services that benefit the American people. 
That is what NOAA is currently doing and what it will continue to do 
during the Trump Administration.

    Question 2. Have you discussed any plan to do so with Secretary 
Lutnick? If yes, specify the date(s) of these conversations and 
describe the contents of any such conversation.
    Answer. No.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) at the Department of the 
        Interior
    Moving the protected resources, including endangered and threatened 
fisheries, to the Department of the Interior would separate scientists 
from the fishery managers for species like salmon. We have the best 
managed fisheries in the world because of science. It would also create 
substantial additional layers of red tape because the Secretary of 
Commerce is required to execute many functions, including regulatory 
functions, under law.

    Question 1. Do you support moving the National Marine Fisheries 
Service, Office of Protected Resources, or any of their activities and 
functions out of NOAA? If yes, explain why.
    Answer. Every decision made throughout the next four years will be 
made to best serve the American people and will only be acted upon if 
and when it is appropriate. Ensuring that regulatory responsibilities 
are fulfilled without unnecessary duplication or delay remains an 
important guiding principle of this Administration.
Eliminating the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research
    You told me that you are proud of your leadership on research and 
development (R&D) at the Department of Energy (DOE). The Trump 
Administration's FY 2026 budget proposal terminates $1.311 billion in 
climate research, data, and grant programs which would functionally 
eliminate NOAA's R&D program, known as the Office of Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Research (OAR). This R&D includes enhancing predictive 
models for emergency management and improving forecasts and early 
warnings for natural disasters. Recent OAR efforts have improved NOAA's 
hurricane track forecasting by 8 percent in a single year, helping to 
save lives as well as prevent unnecessary evacuations and disruptions 
to the American economy.

    Question 1. Yes or No: Do you support eliminating OAR? If yes, 
explain why.
    Answer. Ensuring that core scientific functions, particularly those 
that support public safety, economic resilience, and operational 
readiness remain effective is a responsibility shared across NOAA 
leadership and the broader department.

    Question 2. Do you support the work of NOAA's Cooperative 
Institutes?
    Answer. As with all programs, continued alignment with national 
priorities, scientific standards, and available resources remains 
essential. Engagement with external research institutions, including 
Cooperative Institutes, has historically contributed to NOAA's ability 
to deliver accurate forecasts, support resource management, and respond 
to evolving changes.

    Question 3. Do you support the work of the NOAA Research 
Laboratories?
    Answer. NOAA's Research Laboratories often serve as the bridge 
between fundamental research and operational capability, helping to 
ensure that scientific achievements are translated into real world 
benefits. They should continue to produce results that align with 
NOAA's mission.
NOAA Workforce
    On February 19, 2025, I sent a letter to Secretary Lutnick urging 
him to protect NOAA's critical workforce from the Trump 
Administration's reduction-in-force initiatives and hiring freeze, 
which would jeopardize the safety of the American public. Despite this 
warning, on February 27, 2025, the Department fired approximately 650 
probationary employees from NOAA.
    In addition to probationary employees, roughly 900 employees took 
the deferred resignation offer in the so-called ``Fork in the Road'' e-
mail, while another 1,000 employees are planning to leave through 
voluntary early retirement and separation. These roughly 2,500 
employees do not include cuts from the additional RIF initiative that 
the Administration is planning to implement in the coming weeks or the 
potential reclassification of thousands of NOAA employees as ``Schedule 
F/Schedule/Policy Career'' which would make them easier to terminate.
    These staffing shortages are already impacting NOAA's core 
functions, including reduced and suspended weather balloon launches at 
many Weather Forecast Offices, reduced forecasts, and at least 10 
Weather Forecast Offices with insufficient staff to remain open 24 
hours a day. NOAA fisheries managers are not attending fishery 
management meetings and may miss stock assessment cruises. And with the 
hiring freeze, there are not enough credentialed mariners to sail up to 
one third of NOAA's research fleet.
    Underscoring this point, today, May 2nd, every living former 
Director of the National Weather Service came together in an open 
letter to the American people to sound the alarm about these staffing 
shortages and the direct threat to public safety. The Directors ``stand 
united against the loss of staff and resources at NWS and are deeply 
concerned about NOAA as a whole. . .[Their] worst nightmare is that 
weather forecast offices will be so understaffed that there will be 
needless loss of life.''

    Question 1. What will you do to protect NOAA's workforce and ensure 
staff capacity to execute NOAA's core missions?
    Answer. Workforce management decisions, including hiring policies 
and staffing levels, are shaped by a combination of statutory 
requirements, Executive Branch directives, and agency-specific mission 
needs. If confirmed, I will work with NOAA to evaluate impacts from any 
staffing shortages in the context of operational continuity, public 
safety, and science.

    Question 2. What will you do to ensure NOAA has the staff capacity 
for permitting, consultation, and other review activities critical for 
construction of roads, bridges, ports, and other priorities of the 
Administration?
    Answer. NOAA's review and consultation responsibilities under 
statutes, such as the Endangered Species Act, Marine Mammal Protection 
Act, and the Magnuson-Stevens Act play an important role in supporting 
the advancement of infrastructure and development projects while 
ensuring environmental compliance. If confirmed, I will work to ensure 
that NOAA is able to meet these obligations.

    Question 3. What will you do to ensure the National Weather Service 
has sufficient staff for all Weather Forecast Offices and to provide 
Americans with accurate and timely weather warnings?
    Answer. I will work to ensure the National Weather Service remains 
able to deliver timely, accurate forecasts. NOAA's top priority is 
maintaining essential services and protecting the American public.

    Question 4. Will you ensure NOAA is adequately staffed so that 
Tribes are able to access meaningful government-to-government 
consultation and technical assistance on NOAA programs, including 
grants?
    Answer. I am fully committed to supporting meaningful government-
to-government consultation and ensuring Tribes have access to the 
technical assistance they need across NOAA programs.

    Question 5. Executive Order 14170 implements a Federal hiring 
freeze until July 15, 2025, but it allows for exclusions for positions 
related to public safety. Will you pursue an exemption to the hiring 
freeze under for any NOAA positions related to public safety? If so, 
which positions?
    Answer. If confirmed, ensuring continuity of public safety 
activities at NOAA will be one of my priorities.
NOAA Contracts
    I understand that all NOAA contracts and grants greater than $100k 
require Secretary Lutnick's personal approval. There are hundreds of 
contracts and grants that meet that threshold.
    As you can imagine, this has resulted in a significant bottleneck, 
causing critical contracts to terminate, lapse, or be signed mere hours 
before they expire. For example, contracts for both the operations of 
weather satellites and the software that forecasters use to access 
weather data were hours away from expiring, which would have 
jeopardized NOAA's ability to issue extreme weather warnings. 
Additionally, the contract for the R/V Oscar Dyson's midlife repair is 
at risk of expiring, and the Dyson is critical for the Alaskan Pollock 
industry's stock assessments that are used to establish catch limits.
    If confirmed, you will be responsible for the day-to-day operations 
of the Department. I understand you told my staff that you would end 
this new burdensome approval requirement if given the chance.

    Question 1. Will you end this practice?
    Answer. The Administration is committed to cost efficiency and 
ending wasteful government spending. Having worked extensively on 
contracts and grants in previous government roles, I understand 
firsthand how essential it is to keep these processes moving 
efficiently to support mission-critical operations, stay on budget, and 
deliver results for the American people.

    Question 2. What will you do to ensure DOC contracts are reviewed 
in a timely and efficient manner without inadvertent lapses?
    Answer. If confirmed, I will support Secretary Lutnick in his 
efforts to ensure taxpayers receive the benefit of the bargain. I will 
look into existing processes and collaborate with the relevant 
stakeholders within the Department.
Fisheries
    According to the latest statistics from 2022, U.S. commercial and 
recreational fisheries generated $321 billion in sales, 2.3 million 
jobs, and $149.8 billion in value-added to the U.S. economy. Commercial 
fisheries landings alone were valued at $5.9 billion, and recreational 
fishermen took 201 million fishing trips that year. Communities across 
the country rely on these fisheries and the benefits they provide. They 
also rely on NOAA Fisheries providing world class science and 
management to support this fishing activity.

    Question 1. Will you commit to investing effort and resources into 
improving fishery data systems, navigating climate change, and other 
pressures on fisheries?
    Answer. The figures cited reflect the significant economic value of 
NOAA's fisheries and any future decisions regarding investments, 
priorities, or organizational efforts will be guided by NOAA's core 
mission. If confirmed, I will work with my colleagues in the Department 
to ensure the American fishing industry continues to strengthen and 
grow.

    Question 2. Will you commit to ensuring stock assessment surveys 
are completed?
    Answer. Stock assessment surveys are foundational to effective 
fisheries management, and there is broad agreement on their value to 
the economic and ecological health of U.S. fisheries. Maintaining and 
improving these assessments remains a priority across the scientific 
and stakeholder communities.
Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund (PCSRF)
    PCSRF provides critical funding to facilitate the recovery of 
Pacific salmon and steelhead and the commercial, recreational, and 
tribal fisheries that rely on them. The leaked FY 2026 Passback would 
eliminate funding for this program, which has restored salmon access to 
over 12,000 miles of streams and leveraged $2.2 billion in non-PCSRF 
contributions.

    Question 1. Do you commit to protecting the PCSRF program and to 
distributing FY 2025 PCSRF funds?
    Answer. The Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund has been an 
important source of support for salmon recovery efforts and the 
communities that rely on these fisheries. I understand the strong 
interest in the program and the significant outcomes it has helped 
achieve.
CHIPS Research and Development
    In addition to the CHIPS Incentives Program, CHIPS and Science also 
created several programs at NIST--funded by an $11 billion 
appropriation--to ensure U.S. leadership in semiconductor research and 
development, and to develop the workforce required to domestically 
manufacture legacy, advanced, and next-generation semiconductors for 
years to come.

    Given that R&D and workforce development are vital to our long term 
competitiveness in lab to market microelectronics innovation, will you 
commit to maintaining the staff and budget at NIST that is needed to 
ensure the success of CHIPS R&D programs? If not, why not?
    Answer. The Department plays a key role in advancing the Nation's 
technological competitiveness in everything from semiconductors to AI, 
to increasing the availability of spectrum. If confirmed, I will work 
to ensure that America leads in these key areas.
Economic Development Administration (EDA)/Tech Hubs
    The Economic Development Administration (EDA) is charged with 
investing in local communities to encourage and enable growth and 
innovation in the private sector, with a particular focus on distressed 
or underserved areas. One of the investments currently managed by EDA 
is the Tech Hubs program, established by the CHIPS and Science Act, 
which represents a historic opportunity to strengthen American 
technological leadership and create thousands of high-paying jobs 
across the country. The Fiscal Year 2026 President's Budget Request 
proposes eliminating EDA; however, it does not comment on the Tech Hubs 
program.

    Question 1. Do you agree with eliminating EDA?
    Answer. I support President Donald J. Trump and look forward to 
implementing his agenda.

    Question 2. If so, how will you and the Administration meet the 
Congressional intent of the Chips and Science Act to administer a Tech 
Hubs program that is vital to economic and national security and has 
already awarded grants to 18 of 31 designated regional tech hubs?
    Answer. The Department of Commerce has a strong track record of 
supporting innovation. If confirmed, I will examine each program to 
ensure that it is providing taxpayers the benefit of the bargain.

    Question 3. I was able to secure an additional $220 million in 
immediate funding for this program through the NDAA, with the potential 
for $280 million more to come from a future spectrum auction. Mr. 
Dabbar, will you commit to ensuring that this $280 million is preserved 
specifically for the Tech Hubs program as Congress intended? If not, 
why not?
    Answer. The Department of Commerce has a strong track record of 
supporting innovation. If confirmed, I will examine each program to 
ensure that it is providing taxpayers the benefit of the bargain.
Quantum
    The global race for leadership in critical and emerging 
technologies--especially in quantum computing--is intensifying. Our 
competitors are pouring in billions of dollars to get there first. This 
year, Microsoft announced the development of a new quantum processor, 
which could be the transistor of the quantum age.
    When you were the DOE Undersecretary for Science, you led the 
implementation of the National Quantum Initiative Act and helped create 
5 DOE quantum centers. Last December, I, along with Senators Young, 
Durbin, and Daines, introduced the National Quantum Initiative 
Reauthorization Act. I plan on reintroducing this bill again this 
Congress.

    Question 1. Mr. Dabbar, do you support the National Quantum 
Initiative Reauthorization Act?
    Answer. President Trump recently wrote in support of his National 
Quantum Initiative to the Director of OSTP. I support the continued 
emphasis on promoting and funding quantum research and technologies, 
including the practical application of quantum technologies, as 
embraced in this legislation. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that 
the Department of Commerce and NIST continue to prioritize quantum 
research and development.

    Question 2. If confirmed, will you commit to working with me and my 
staff to advance it?
    Answer. If confirmed, I will work with Congress to prioritize 
quantum research and technology implementation.
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and AI
    The Commerce Department plays a prominent role in advancing 
critical and emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, 
quantum, advanced manufacturing, and biotechnology through investing in 
fundamental R&D at agencies like NIST, NTIA, and NOAA. Last year, I 
introduced the Future of AI Innovation Act with Senator Young and some 
of my other colleagues that would ensure that the U.S. leads on AI 
reliability and transparency, as well as mitigating potential national 
security risks from AI, by authorizing the AI Safety Institute at NIST.

    Question 1. Will you support continued focus by NIST on promotion 
of AI standards and developing testing for AI reliability and safety?
    Answer. Secretary Lutnick has stated that NIST should ensure 
American leadership on AI standards. He further stated that NIST will 
continue its testing of AI products. If confirmed, I look forward to 
supporting these activities.

    Question 2. Will you work with me, Senator Young, and Chair Cruz as 
we consider legislation to authorize the work that needs to continue to 
be done in this area?
    Answer. If confirmed, yes, I commit to working with Congress to 
ensure U.S. leadership in this area.
Funding Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) Centers
    The MEP program at NIST connects small and medium-sized 
manufacturers with resources to improve their manufacturing processes, 
adopt the latest cybersecurity practices, and strengthen their supply 
chains.
    Each state and Puerto Rico have their own MEP Center, and they are 
the gold standard of public-private partnerships.
    I was alarmed to see NIST announce on April 1 they were withholding 
funds for ten of the 51 centers, including in Delaware, Hawaii, Kansas, 
Mississippi, Nevada, New Mexico, and Wyoming. I led a letter with 
Senator Baldwin and 13 other Senators, demanding a full explanation 
from Secretary Lutnick and asking him to reconsider.
    Fortunately, after we sent our letter, we were notified that NIST 
decided to renew funding for those 10 centers through the end of the 
Fiscal Year. However, there are still upcoming funding renewal 
deadlines for MEP Centers coming up on July 1, October 1, January 1, 
2026, and March 12, 2026, and the Department's intentions remain 
unclear.

    Question 1. Do you commit to supporting and fully funding the MEP 
program and its centers, which are both statutorily authorized as well 
as appropriated by Congress? If no, why not?
    Answer. As stated during the hearing, if confirmed, I will follow 
the law as authorized and appropriated by Congress. The Secretary and 
this administration are strongly committed to supporting U.S. 
manufacturing, reducing reliance on foreign manufacturing, and creating 
American jobs, all of which are essential to ensuring the long-term 
strength of American economic and national security.
American Aerospace Manufacturing Competitiveness
    The United States aerospace and defense sector has the largest 
positive trade balance among all U.S. manufacturing sectors, valued at 
over $110 billion, and supports over 2.2 million good paying jobs. 
China's aircraft manufacturer, COMAC, is a growing threat to United 
States' market share of commercial aircraft in the global aerospace 
sector. COMAC's narrowbody C919 aircraft competes with the 737 series 
aircraft, produced by Boeing, our leading domestic aircraft 
manufacturer. Boeing has experienced significant challenges in recent 
years including concerning aircraft production safety and quality 
issues that must be corrected before production of the 737 MAX can be 
allowed to increase beyond the cap of 38 per month instituted by former 
FAA Administrator Mike Whitaker. This will take time and so will 
Boeing's overall recovery efforts as a company to improve many of their 
product lines.
    Boeing has estimated that Chinese airlines will need 8,830 new 
total commercial planes by 2043. However, if the current Administration 
were to issue broad retaliatory tariffs against China without 
considering the impact that they could have against Boeing's ability to 
sell aircraft in the Asian-Pacific market, Boeing and the greater 
domestic aerospace supply chain would be at risk of losing its 
competitive standing in the global aerospace sector. Such tariffs could 
have harmful impacts on U.S.-based aerospace supply chain companies and 
jobs.

    Question 1. Do you commit to ensuring that the U.S. aerospace 
manufacturing sector and supply chain are not subject to new costs and 
burdens associated with tariffs, restrictions, or economic sanctions?
    Answer. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that our trade policies 
are implemented in a manner that supports fair competition, 
transparency, and the economic and national security of the United 
Sates, including for our aerospace manufacturing sector.

    What actions will you take to protect our domestic aerospace supply 
chain and its highly-skilled American workers from new disruptions--
such as issues that would jeopardize U.S.-based jobs and increase costs 
for U.S.-based companies?
    Answer. If confirmed, I would be happy to work with Congress to 
help protect American jobs.
Office of Space Commerce
    The Office of Space Commerce (OSC), currently within NOAA, serves 
as the principal unit in the Executive Branch for representing 
commercial space interests in policy deliberations, and also regulates 
the satellite-based commercial remote sensing industry. As a result of 
Presidential Policy established in the first Trump Administration, the 
Office of Space Commerce (OSC), is also developing the Traffic 
Coordination System for Space (TraCSS) to provide basic space 
situational awareness (SSA) data, space traffic coordination (STC), and 
services to civil and private space operators and to support 
spaceflight safety, space sustainability, and international 
coordination.
    OSC still requires additional authorities to carry out its mission 
to ensure safety in orbit, and the SAFE Orbit Act, sponsored by 
Senators Cornyn, Peters, Wicker, Blackburn, Hickenlooper, Kelly, 
Schmitt, and Lujan, was approved by the Committee on March 12, 2025, 
with an amendment from Ranking Member Cantwell. The bill provides SSA 
and STC authorities to OSC and establishes a five-year transition 
period to move the office from within NOAA to a bureau reporting 
directly to the Secretary.
    However, it is not clear if the Administration is following through 
with the resources needed to enable OSC to fulfill either its 
longstanding or expanded responsibilities. Although not addressed in 
the President's FY26 Discretionary Funding Request released on May 2nd, 
the earlier FY26 OMB passback for NOAA proposed providing the office 
with only $10 million--a reduction of $55 million from the enacted FY24 
funding level. The proposed budget would also eliminate TraCSS system 
development, in favor of transferring existing TraCSS capability to a 
non-government entity.

    Question 1. Given that TraCSS development already involves 
significant partnership with industry and when completed, will provide 
government validation of commercially-provided SSA data, do you believe 
it is appropriate to transfer responsibility for SSA, which underpins 
the safety of the entire space economy, to a non-government entity?
    Answer. If confirmed, I will work to support the safety, 
sustainability, and continued growth of the commercial space sector.

    Question 2. Will you commit to maintaining the OSC staff and budget 
at a level that is sufficient to carry out the offices current 
commercial advocacy and commercial industry oversight responsibilities, 
while also enabling the completion of TraCSS and support to SSA and STC 
standard setting?
    Answer. If confirmed, I will work to support the safety, 
sustainability, and continued growth of the commercial space sector.

    Question 3. Do you believe that elevating the Office of Space 
Commerce within DOC would allow the office to be more effective at 
supporting the global competitiveness of the U.S. commercial space 
industry?
    Answer. If confirmed, I will work to support the safety, 
sustainability, and continued growth of the commercial space sector.
Spectrum
    During the first Trump Administration, there were failures to 
coordinate on Federal and commercial spectrum policy. I believe we must 
create a coordinated approach to domestic spectrum policy, where 
agencies such as the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department 
of Transportation (DOT), Department of Defense (DoD), and National 
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) work together with the 
National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) and 
Federal Communications Commission (FCC)--cooperatively--on spectrum. If 
confirmed, Mr. Dabbar, as Deputy Secretary of Commerce, you will play a 
vital role in that coordination process.

    Question 1. Yes or no: Do you agree that we cannot put our national 
security and public safety at risk in order to free up spectrum?
    Answer. Yes.

    Question 2. Yes or no: Do you agree that NTIA, DoD, and other 
Federal agencies must complete the ongoing studies of the lower 3 
Gigahertz and 7 and 8 Gigahertz bands before a decision is made to 
reallocate that spectrum?
    Answer. Yes.

    Question 3. Yes or no: Do you agree that spectrum cannot be made 
available for commercial use in a way that interferes with aviation 
safety?
    Answer. Yes.

    Question 4. Yes or no: Do you agree that spectrum cannot be made 
available for commercial use in a way that interferes with NOAA's 
ability to predict and forecast weather?
    Answer. Yes.

    Question 5. Yes or no: Do you agree that spectrum cannot be made 
available for commercial use in a way that interferes with the 
functionality of the GPS system?
    Answer. Yes.

    Question 6. Yes or no: Do you agree that spectrum cannot be made 
available for commercial use in a way that interferes with the 
functionality of airplane altimeters?
    Answer. Yes.

    Question 7. Yes or no: Do you agree that spectrum cannot be made 
available for commercial use in a way that interferes with the 
functionality of military satellite communications and sensing systems?
    Answer. If confirmed, I would work with Secretary Lutnick and NTIA 
to protect national security and public safety in any spectrum 
decisions.
Infrastructure and BEAD Allocations
    The bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) of 
2021 appropriated $42 billion for the BEAD program, $1.2 billion of 
which was allocated to the State of Washington to connect households to 
broadband. The commitment that Congress made to reach the goal of 
connecting unserved and underserved households is well underway, with 
plans in all 56 states and territories approved by NTIA, in compliance 
with the law.

    Question 1. Do you agree that states need the flexibility to 
implement the BEAD program, and ensure that it works for the people in 
each state and territory-and that what works in Rhode Island may not 
work in Texas?
    Answer. Every state is different and there is no one-size-fits-all 
solution. States should have flexibility to tailor solutions to their 
unique needs, consistent with the law.

    Question 2. Yes or no: Will you commit to providing states with the 
flexibility to use their BEAD funds to select the providers and 
technologies that work best for their unique circumstances, rather than 
imposing new burdensome requirements such as forcing states to redo 
their subgrantee selection process or establishing a national per 
location cap?
    Answer. Connecting every American to broadband is my top priority. 
If confirmed, I look forward to working with Secretary Lutnick and NTIA 
to expedite the BEAD program and get funding to the states, consistent 
with the law.

    Question 3. Yes or no: If confirmed, will you commit to releasing 
all allocated funds to the states that have already had their final 
proposals approved? If not, why not?
    Answer. Connecting every American to broadband is my top priority. 
If confirmed, I look forward to working with Secretary Lutnick and NTIA 
to expedite the BEAD program and get funding to the states, consistent 
with the law.

    Question 4. Yes or no: Will you commit to preserve the BEAD 
allocations that NTIA made to states in 2023?
    Answer. Connecting every American to broadband is my top priority. 
If confirmed, I look forward to working with Secretary Lutnick and NTIA 
to expedite the BEAD program and get funding to the states, consistent 
with the law.
Tribal Connectivity
    NTIA oversees the Tribal Broadband Connectivity Program, which 
Congress appropriated $3 billion to support Tribal governments for 
deployment projects, telehealth, and online education opportunities. 
Roughly $1 billion in funding for this program is currently frozen.

    Question 1. Yes or no, will you commit to completing the Tribal 
Broadband Connectivity Program as it currently exists?
    Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to working with Secretary 
Lutnick and NTIA to execute on the Tribal Broadband Connectivity 
Program, consistent with the law.
Middle Mile Infrastructure Program
    To date, NTIA has awarded nearly $980 million across 40 states and 
territories through the Enabling Middle Mile Broadband Infrastructure 
Program. This Program funds projects to deploy future-proof fiber over 
nearly 12,500 miles, connecting over 7,000 anchor institutions.

    Question 1. Will you commit to completing the Enabling Middle Mile 
Broadband Infrastructure Program as it currently exists?
    Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to working with Secretary 
Lutnick and NTIA to execute on the Enabling Middle Mile Broadband 
Infrastructure Program, consistent with the law.

    Question 2. Will you commit to working expeditiously to ensure that 
funded projects are able to proceed to deploy fiber across the country?
    Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to working with Secretary 
Lutnick and NTIA to execute on the Enabling Middle Mile Broadband 
Infrastructure Program, consistent with the law.
Digital Equity Grants
    Congress intended to not only establish a once-in-a-generation 
investment in broadband infrastructure, but also to ensure individuals 
and communities have the skills necessary to take advantage of the 
digital opportunities created by high-speed Internet connectivity. One 
example is how the State of Washington is developing a cybersecurity 
literacy program to ensure Washingtonians have the necessary skills to 
protect themselves from cyber criminals.

    Question 1. Will you commit to fully and swiftly implementing the 
Digital Equity Act and its focus on all of the core targets identified 
in the statute, including rural Americans, seniors, and veterans?
    Answer. If confirmed, I will commit to fully and swiftly reviewing 
all NTIA programs, including the Digital Equity Act, and following the 
law.

    Question 2. Can you commit not to leave any of the statutory 
``covered populations'' outlined in the Digital Equity Act behind and 
implement the Act fully, as intended by Congress?
    Answer. If confirmed, I will commit to fully and swiftly reviewing 
all NTIA programs, including the Digital Equity Act, and following the 
law.
Innovation Fund
    Authorized under the FY 2021 National Defense Authorization Act and 
funded through the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022, the Public Wireless 
Supply Chain Innovation Fund is a 10-year, $1.5 billion grant program 
will help drive wireless innovation, foster competition, and strengthen 
supply chain resilience. Around $814 million remains unobligated. 
President Trump has called to roll back the CHIPS and Science Act, 
which funded this program.

    Question 1. Do you support the current funding opportunities 
announced and underway?
    Answer. I support the program and its implementation, consistent 
with the President's executive order 14080 detailing the focus on 
delivering the benefit of the bargain for taxpayers.

    Question 2. Will you commit to implementing these programs and to 
complete open funding rounds?
    Answer. I support the program and its implementation, consistent 
with the President's executive order 14080 detailing the focus on 
delivering the benefit of the bargain for taxpayers.
                                 ______
                                 
   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Amy Klobuchar to 
                              Paul Dabbar
                              
Travel and Tourism
    Travel and tourism is vital to the U.S. economy, generating 
billions in revenue and supporting millions of jobs. That's why I 
helped create Brand USA to promote the U.S. as a premier destination. 
But this administration is jeopardizing this progress. Bookings from 
Canada are down 70 percent from this time last year, causing our 
economy to lose billions of dollars.

    Question 1. If confirmed, how will you work to restore travel and 
tourism?
    Answer. If confirmed, I will work to strengthen international 
visitation by promoting the U.S. as a premier destination.

    Question 2. If confirmed, how will you work to strengthen programs 
like Brand USA to ensure the U.S. remains competitive in attracting 
international visitors-especially considering major upcoming events 
like the World Cup, 250th Anniversary celebrations, and the 2028 
Olympics?
    Answer. Major global events are an opportunity to showcase American 
excellence and attract international visitors. President Trump recently 
established a White House Task Force on the FIFA World Cup to 
coordinate Federal efforts around the 2025 Club World Cup and 2026 
World Cup and maximize the economic benefits of sports tourism. If 
confirmed, I will work to ensure these and other events help drive job 
creation, investment, and global interest in visiting the United 
States.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Brian Schatz to 
                              Paul Dabbar
                              
Marine National Monument
    On April 17, the President issued a proclamation that opened the 
Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument to commercial fishing 
after asserting that the ``prohibition on commercial fishing is not, at 
this time, necessary for the proper care and management of the PRIMNM 
or the objects of historic or scientific interest therein.''

    Question 1. Please explain the scientific basis for the President's 
conclusion, including citations for the peer-reviewed literature that 
supports this Action.
    Answer. If confirmed, I will consult with the NOAA team to 
understand this issue.

    Question 2. Since the President concluded that the ban on 
commercial fishing was not needed ``at this time,'' please explain the 
circumstances when such a ban would be necessary, and describe how the 
Pacific ocean will be monitored to determine when such circumstances 
arise.
    Answer. If confirmed, I will consult with the NOAA to team to 
understand this issue.
Tariffs
    Secretary Lutnick stated that President Trump's tariffs are 
``playing for the strength of America'' despite costing American 
families over an estimated $5,000 a year, risking a stagflationary 
recession, and undermining our international competitiveness in 
scientific and technological advancement.

    Question 3. If confirmed, will you commit to pursuing a tariff 
regime that lowers costs for American families?
    Answer. If confirmed, I will do everything in my power to ensure 
that trade measures are implemented in a manner that supports fair 
competition, transparency and our national interest.

    Question 4. If confirmed, will you commit to pursuing a tariff 
regime that strengthens supply chains critical to U.S. science and 
technology sectors?
    Answer. Given my background and as I stated during my hearing, I am 
committed to ensuring that science and technology efforts, including 
AI, semiconductors, quantum, intellectual property, the Blue Economy, 
and technology security are at the forefront of issues we focus on at 
the Commerce Department. Building a stronger, more resilient economy 
that is less dependent on unfair or unstable foreign supply chains is a 
critical part of that.
Data Transparency
    The Commerce Department is charged with maintaining data pertaining 
to the U.S. economy, weather, and the Census. The availability of this 
data is critical to upholding government transparency and the 
dissemination of critical public information. Despite this, the Trump 
administration has deleted records of important taxpayer-supported 
research with no warning.

    Question 5. If confirmed, will you ensure that the Commerce 
Department's data remains accurate, up-to-date, and that the Commerce 
Department will not permanently delete research supported by taxpayers?
    Answer. If confirmed, I commit to following all applicable Federal 
laws and regulations pertaining to the publication and retention of 
Commerce data and research.

    Question 6. Will you ensure the Bureau prepares to implement a 
Census in 2030 that counts every person?
    Answer. If confirmed, I commit to ensuring that the Census is 
implemented consistent with the law.
Support for CHIPS Act
    You described the CHIPS and Science Act as a ``historic down 
payment'' for American leadership in semiconductor technology. The 
Trump administration has criticized and worked to undermine this 
bipartisan law by terminating vital staff from the office overseeing 
the program.

    Question 7. If confirmed, please describe your vision for carrying 
out the CHIPS and Science Act as Congress intended.
    Answer. I recognize that semiconductors are essential to our 
national security and economic and technological competitiveness. I 
look forward to continued implementation of the CHIPS and Science Act 
as written and as guided by the President and Secretary Lutnick.

    Question 8. Will you commit to ensuring that vital investments in 
scientific research, including in areas such as AI and quantum 
computing, continue for educational institutions?
    Answer. I look forward to continued investments in areas such as AI 
and quantum and will work with educational institutions that are 
qualified and eligible to participate.

    Question 9. Will you commit to ensuring that vital investments in 
workforce development continue to prepare the next generation of 
scientists, engineers and technologists?
    Answer. I look forward to supporting effective, efficient and 
proven workforce development activities to prepare the next generation 
of scientists, engineers and technologists.
Artificial Intelligence
    President Trump has rolled back the Biden Administration's AI 
Executive Order in favor of his AI Action Plan, but there are 
commonsense, bipartisan provisions that are worth protecting.

    Question 10. Do you plan to support the continuation of the U.S. AI 
Safety Institute, which has broad support across the aisle and within 
industry, to ensure U.S. leadership on AI standards development?
    Answer. If confirmed, I will support continued testing of AI 
models, the sharing of results by NIST (where the AI Safety Institute 
resides) and the development of AI standards.

    Question 11. Will you commit to ensuring that the Department of 
Commerce maintains the technical expertise and staffing capacity 
necessary to maintain U.S. leadership on AI?
    Answer. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that the U.S. continues 
to lead on AI.
Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS)
    The BIS advances U.S. national security, foreign policy, and 
economic objectives by ensuring effective export controls for advanced 
semiconductors. Competition with China and technological developments 
have complicated BIS's work and added new responsibilities. As a 
result, they must now oversee more commerce than even a decade ago, and 
face more sophisticated adversaries. Unfortunately, their resources 
have been essentially flat with inflation since 2010.

    Question 12. Do you commit to ensuring that BIS has the resources 
necessary to complete its job, including technical expertise and 
modernized infrastructure, such as IT systems?
    Answer. I am committed to ensuring that the Department, including 
the Bureau of Industry and Security, completes its mission.
                                 ______
                                 
  Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Tammy Duckworth to 
                              Paul Dabbar
                              
Manufacturing in the U.S.
    Question 1. The Department of Commerce's Manufacturing Extension 
Partnership Program is a crucial program to help strengthen the U.S. 
industrial base by providing a number of services to small and medium-
sized manufacturers. There is one center in each state and in Illinois, 
the Illinois Manufacturing Excellence Center (IMEC) leads a variety of 
initiatives to grow manufacturing, including supporting the development 
of quantum technologies in our state. IMEC has created and retained 
more than 7,000 jobs and assisted nearly 3,000 companies. Despite 
Secretary Lutnick's promises, the DOC announced that it had decided to 
cancel funding for MEP centers in a number of states. After that 
announcement, I joined 14 other Senators to express our concerns and 
call for a reversal of that decision. One week after our letter, the 
DOC confirmed that it would reverse its previous decision.

    A. Mr. Dabbar, if confirmed, will you stop efforts to defund the 
Manufacturing Extension Partnership, which help American manufacturers?
    Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to working to support 
President Trump's and Secretary's Lutnick's efforts to grow domestic 
manufacturing.

    B. Mr. Dabbar, will you commit to fighting against cuts to programs 
in addition to the MEP that support manufacturing in the United States?
    Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to working to support 
President Trump's and Secretary Lutnick's efforts to grow domestic 
manufacturing.
Quantum
    Question 2. Mr. Dabbar, you spent a lot of time working on quantum 
technology policy, including a number of engagements with the Chicago 
Quantum Exchange and our quantum community throughout Illinois.

    A. Mr. Dabbar, as the White House continues to slash funding for 
research, will you commit to use your position to protect investments 
in quantum?
    Answer. I am in support of quantum efforts nationally, as has been 
delineated by the President in his recent public letter to the OSTP 
Director, and public comments on quantum by Secretary Lutnick.

    B. Do you agree that the Federal government should invest in places 
like the Chicago Quantum Exchange and the new Illinois Quantum 
Microelectronics Park, in order to maintain American leadership on 
quantum?
    Answer. I am in support of those and other quantum efforts 
nationally, as has been delineated by the President in his recent 
public letter to the OSTP Director, and public comments on quantum by 
Secretary Lutnick.
Section 232 Tariffs
    Question 3. If you are confirmed, you play a significant role in 
tariff and trade policy. Considering your lack of background in trade 
and tariffs, I want to understand how you are planning to engage with 
career experts at the Department of Commerce on these topics.

    A. Mr. Dabbar, who have you already reached out to at the 
Department to discuss trade and tariffs and get up to speed? Have you 
seen any indication that Secretary Lutnick is consulting with the 
experts at the Department of Commerce prior to making decisions on 
tariffs?
    Answer. Secretary Lutnick is an expert on trade, and I know he 
discusses trade topics with a wide group of experts. I have had several 
meetings with Commerce Department officials to get up to speed on 
public information on a range of trade issues that will come before me.

    B. Mr. Dabbar, are you aware of a 2019 Commerce Department 
Inspector General report that found that Section 232 tariff policy was 
conducted with ``a lack of transparency'' and ``the appearance of 
improper influence in decision making?''
    Answer. I am not familiar with that report.

    C. How would you ensure that is not repeated during the second 
Trump Administration?
    Answer. I am committed to working collaboratively and transparently 
with Administration officials and Congress to ensure that any 
exclusions would be administered in a manner that is consistent with 
the strategic goals of the tariffs as well as the legal authority under 
which they are imposed.
                                 ______
                                 
   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Ben Ray Lujan to 
                              Paul Dabbar
                              
    Question 1. Sec. Lutnick is calling on states to use the lowest 
cost option when building out broadband under the BEAD Program. 
Although satellite is cheaper and quicker to deploy in the short-term, 
it will be more expensive in the long-term. Fiber is considered the 
gold standard in Internet connection. Yes or no, do you support 
deprioritizing fiber in favor of fixed wireless or LEO satellites?
    Answer. I support an all-of-the-above solution, including fiber as 
well as alternative technologies where appropriate. If confirmed, I 
will work with Secretary Lutnick and NTIA to deliver the best broadband 
service possible to all Americans, consistent with NTIA's statutory 
authority.

    a. Are you aware of any small LEO operators that satisfy IIJA's 
100/20 mbps speeds and low latency conditions?
    Answer. If confirmed, I will consult with NTIA on whether specific 
products, services, and technologies meet the statutory speed and low 
latency requirements.

    Question 2. Earlier this month, Secretary Lutnick put out a 
statement saying that the Commerce Department is ``revamping the BEAD 
program to take a tech-neutral approach that is rigorously driven by 
outcomes, so states can provide Internet access for the lowest cost.'' 
Yes or no, do you support requiring states to overhaul and resubmit 
their BEAD plans?
    Answer. Connecting every American to broadband expeditiously is a 
top priority. It is unacceptable that the Broadband Equity, Access, and 
Deployment (BEAD) program has been bogged down by delays and 
administrative processes for years. If confirmed, I will work with 
Secretary Lutnick and NTIA to expedite the BEAD program, get funding to 
the states, and expand broadband buildout, consistent with the law.

    Question 3. The Digital Equity Act provides $2.75 billion to 
establish three grant programs that promote activities consistent with 
the Act. They aim to ensure that all people and communities have the 
skills, technology, and capacity needed to reap the full benefits of 
our digital economy. According to recent reporting, the Trump 
Administration froze those funds last month. However, grant awardees 
were not notified of such a freeze. Yes or no, if confirmed, will you 
commit to release and distributing these funds?
    Answer. I will commit to fully and swiftly reviewing all NTIA 
programs and following the law.

    Question 4. Did Joe Biden lawfully win the 2020 presidential 
election?
    Answer. Joe Biden was sworn in as President in January 2021.

    Question 5. Did Donald Trump lawfully win the 2024 presidential 
election?
    Answer. Donald Trump was sworn in as President in January 2025.
                                 ______
                                 
      Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Andy Kim to 
                              Paul Dabbar
                              
Section 232 Exclusion Process
    Question. Over the last few months, the Trump Administration has 
announced numerous tariffs on steel, aluminum, and other materials to 
the United States. Will you commit to working with the U.S. Trade 
Representative to set up an exclusions process to these tariffs for 
imports that fit section 232 exemptions criteria?
    Answer. The President is the leader of the Administration's trade 
agenda and there is not currently an exclusions process, as the 
President is determined to strengthen domestic manufacturing and not 
allow our strategic competitors to infiltrate the United States market 
at the expense of American manufacturers. If confirmed, I would work 
with Secretary Lutnick, Under Secretary Kessler, and Ambassador Greer 
on the strategic goals of tariffs and the broader interests of the 
United States.
                                 ______
                                 
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Lisa Blunt Rochester to  
                              Paul Dabbar
                              
Supply Chains
    Mr. Dabbar, in recent years, we've seen firsthand how fragile our 
supply chains can be, in areas like medical PPE and semiconductor chip 
shortages.
    That's why I proudly joined Senators Cantwell and Blackburn to 
introduce the bipartisan Promoting Resilient Supply Chains Act, which 
empowers the Department of Commerce to work with the private sector to 
prevent future disruptions in critical industries and emerging 
technologies.

    Question 1. Mr. Dabbar, how would you strengthen supply chain 
resilience and better protect American industries and consumers from 
potential disruptions?
    Answer. In order to strengthen supply chain resilience and protect 
American industries and consumers, if confirmed, I would work with the 
Secretary and others at the Department and across the Administration to 
tighten export controls on critical and emerging technologies, conduct 
Section 232 investigations to assess whether imports of certain goods 
threaten national security, and push for the reshoring and bolstering 
of domestic manufacturing capacity in key sectors.
Supporting American Leadership in AI for Energy Innovation
    Mr. Dabbar, AI is already transforming the energy sector by helping 
improve grid resilience, optimize energy efficiency, and accelerate 
clean energy research.
    However, China is investing heavily to lead the world in AI and 
energy technologies. Maintaining our edge is critical to U.S. economic 
and national security.

    Question 1. Mr. Dabbar, how would you prioritize the use of AI in 
advancing U.S. energy innovation if confirmed?
    Answer. If confirmed, I would prioritize utilizing AI to increase 
U.S. competitiveness by advancing energy innovation. While at the DOE, 
I had the opportunity to oversee a partnership using AI to increase 
discovery of energy technologies, and there are many other similar 
opportunities for innovation. If confirmed, I look forward to exploring 
opportunities in coordination with inter-agency partners.

    Question 2. How can the Commerce Department help support 
partnerships between national labs, universities, and private industry 
to keep America competitive?
    Answer. Robust collaboration between these entities is essential 
for American competitiveness. Commerce currently partners with national 
labs, universities, and private industry, and can play a role in 
strengthening and facilitating those partnerships. If confirmed, I will 
work to review existing programs and identify opportunities to 
strengthen those vital relationships.
Promoting Ethical AI Standards
    Mr. Dabbar, AI technologies developed for energy applications must 
also be deployed responsibly, to ensure transparency, security, and 
public trust.

    Question 1. If confirmed, how would you approach promoting 
responsible AI energy standards through Commerce Department 
initiatives?
    Answer. As stated above, Secretary Lutnick has expressed his belief 
that NIST should ensure American leadership on AI standards. AI 
industrial consensus energy standards need to be developed in 
coordination with industry and other agencies, such as the Department 
of Energy, if they are to be understood, trusted and utilized. If 
confirmed, I look forward to supporting such work.

                                  [all]