[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 151 (Thursday, November 18, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8003-S8005]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   BIOTECHNOLOGY: HOPE FOR THE FUTURE

  Mr. BOND. Madam President, as I will be leaving the Senate in a few 
weeks, I ask my colleagues to indulge me as I speak for a few minutes 
on a subject I believe is very important, and that is continuing the 
policies and funding that help drive scientific advancement in new 
areas, particularly agricultural biotechnology.
  It goes without saying that we are living in a time of breathtaking 
scientific discovery, whether the field is aerospace, information 
systems, or biotechnology.
  In the last hundred years, science has taken us from the Wright 
Brothers first flight to manned space flight. Science has taken us from 
Henry Ford's first car to today's vehicles hosting full-fledged 
entertainment systems and global positioning systems. Science has taken 
us from typewriters to supercomputer and from candles to electricity.
  Science is moving even faster now. Advances in technology will 
continue to reach far into every sector of our economy.
  Future job and economic growth in the areas of health care, life 
sciences, industry, defense, agriculture and transportation is directly 
related to scientific advancement. And America's

[[Page S8004]]

future wealth and economic preeminence is tied to technological 
advancement.
  Technological advancement will continue to drive our economy, job 
growth and our quality of life.
  While most of the work is being done by our scientists, engineers, 
entrepreneurs and educators, government can play a role in helping 
create the conditions for them to succeed: through research funding, 
through tax policy, and through free trade agreements. This is 
especially true when it comes too agiotechnology.
  Looking back about 15 years ago, I received a strong push for a new 
idea--mapping the corn genome, one of the first real biotech projects 
for commercial agriculture. This push came not from leaders in 
education, science or the corporate world--and we have many--but from 
corn growers and soybean producers in Missouri.
  Our producers convinced me that biotechnology was not only key to 
improving farm incomes and the rural economy, but in revolutionizing 
the world in the same way the steam engine revolutionized industry, and 
the computer revolutionized the sharing of information.
  At that time, it was tough to get anyone interested in the project--
Congress, the media, even my own staff. Imagine running for reelection 
and telling your staff: hey, great idea, I'm going to campaign on the 
corn genome.
  As Mark Twain said:
  A crank is someone with a new idea--until it catches on. Back then, 
those of us peddling biotechnology sounded like cranks.
  The first time I asked the Agriculture Appropriations Committee to 
fund biotech projects, I didn't get a single dime.
  But we persisted, anyway. I teamed up with my colleague and good 
friend, Senator Barbara Mikulski, on a bipartisan initiative to fund 
biotech research through the National Science Foundation.
  Through the years we have provided nearly a billion dollars to NSF.
  With the help of Missouri's-own Chancellor Bill Danforth and Roger 
Beachy as well as others, Senator Tom Harkin and I sponsored 
legislation creating the National Institute of Food and Agriculture to 
support the competitive research at the Federal level needed to advance 
agriculture science.
  Fifteen years later, we now have the proof that this idea really is 
changing the world, as promised.
  Already, hundreds of millions of people have been helped by 
biotechnology drugs and vaccines that can cure diseases and eliminate 
the need for surgery. And there are many more drugs and vaccines being 
tested which will eventually help us treat other diseases.
  Agricultural biotechnology is bringing hope to those in the 
developing world by providing crops that are more pest and disease-
resistant and more nutritious.
  It helps our farmers by consistently increasing crop yields, 
especially as our global population continues to increase while 
available farmland decreases.
  From an environmental perspective, the use of transgenic seeds has 
reduced pesticide application on our fields by tens of millions of 
pounds annually in the United States alone.
  And--especially important now during the tough recession we are in--
agriculture biotech creates good, high-paying jobs and helps revitalize 
rural economies.
  The sky is the limit for the future of biotech. Advances here will 
continue to impact the entire world.
  Madam President, 2005 marked the year that the billionth acre of 
transgenic crops was planted worldwide, a notable achievement in a 
field of science that was at the time only a decade old.
  In 2008, the second billionth acre of a biotech crop was planted only 
3 years after the first.
  All this while a handful of professional antitechnology activists are 
still, unsuccessfully in search of their first stomach ache. Their 
persistent Luddite-type hatred of ag biotech, though without any 
scientific support, has fueled fear of genetically modified, GMO, 
foods, even in less developed countries, where near-term starvation is 
a real prospect without a ag biotech.
  The growth of biotech will continue to explode in future years. 
Developing countries using ag biotech out number industrial countries 
by a ratio of three to two.
  In fact, resourceful farmers in some countries are approving 
biotechnology before their lagging governments do.
  Growth brings with it many opportunities for scientists from the 
``developed world'' to collaborate on biotechnology projects with 
scientists in the developing world.
  But how do we ensure that all people, especially those who need it, 
are not left behind?
  We must do it. There is a humanitarian imperative. People who are 
well fed have many problems, a people who are hungry have only one 
problem.
  As Norman Borlaug put it:
  Without food, man can live at most but a few weeks; without it, all 
other components of social justice are meaningless.
  We simply cannot afford not to tap into the promise of biotechnology. 
By 2050, developing countries will be home to 90 percent of the 
expected population of 9 billion.
  However, while the world is expected to increase its population by 
more than 30 percent the area of productive agricultural lands in the 
world remains relatively unchanged. Traditional agriculture cannot keep 
up.
  Increasing crop yields--and income--is especially important in a 
world where according to the United Nations Food and Agriculture 
Organization, FAO, 925 million children go to bed hungry every day and 
several million of them die from nutrition-related illnesses every 
year.
  For these individuals, a crop failure can mean the difference between 
surviving and starving.
  We are not without challenges.
  Although diminishing, a vocal and aggressive group of advocacy 
organizations continue to market fear rather than sound science, 
especially in Europe.
  When public policy decisions are based on fear, rather than sound 
science, we are in trouble.
  My good friend Dr. Martina McGloughlin has argued that some 
multinational corporations operating as NGOs shamelessly hype fear of 
biotech GMO and use fear to solicit funds for their salaries--these are 
the modern-day Luddites who know how to profit from their self-
generated hysteria.
  The result: the science cannot get to the marketplace and improve 
people's lives.
  Fortunately the European Union is perhaps beginning to see they are 
missing out. They have begun to soften their opposition--however 
slightly--on genetically- modified imports.
  The stakes, of course, are higher in developing nations than in 
Europe, where most are well fed.
  The late Dr. Norman Borlaug, the unassuming humanitarian credited 
with feeding a billion people and saving the lives of hundreds of 
millions, warned us about the biotech naysayers.
  He worried that ``fear-mongering'' by environmental extremists 
against pesticides, fertilizers and genetically-improved foods would 
put millions at risk of starvation while damaging the biodiversity 
those extremists claim to protect.
  So we must do a better job, as policy makers, educators, business 
leaders, and scientists to communicate the value of biotechnology to 
those around us.
  As my colleagues know, we are struggling to find our way out of this 
recession and create new jobs.
  Some of the millions of jobs lost during the last 2 years are never 
coming back.
  Biotech shows the promise of replacing some of those jobs. And 
biotech will provide the jobs of the future. Whether in the research 
lab, the incubator, in a small company or a large corporation, biotech 
is creating good, high-paying jobs. It is extremely important for 
producing enhanced revenues and jobs.
  That is why ongoing workforce development and job training in new 
fields like biotechnology is so important.
  And it is good to see some of our educational institutions getting 
involved.
  Missouri Western University in St. Joseph, MO, has built a biotech 
incubator to encourage new businesses in the area and to help train 
workers.
  Not long ago, I visited a St. Louis Community College program that is

[[Page S8005]]

training young people to work in biotech labs. They are getting on-the-
job training at an incubator known as BioBench.
  That's a win-win. It's a win for young people trying to find jobs in 
the new economy, and it is a win for the companies who need the skills 
of these workers.
  Efforts like these keep high-paying, cutting-edge jobs right here in 
the United States.
  One key to making sure the benefits of biotech continue to grow is 
making sure the American public and press, beyond farmers, researchers, 
a few company leaders and policy makers understand the value of 
biotech. Those who understand biotech must make a conscious effort to 
educate their peers and leadership across the country.
  We need to develop advanced science and technology curriculum that 
prepares our students for the high-tech jobs of the future. A growing 
industry needs a pipeline of future talented workers. We need to 
continue to expand hands-on training opportunities to prepare and 
transition our current workforce into these new high-tech jobs.
  So there is good news on many fronts when it comes to the future of 
the biotech movement. But we need a continued, strong, public-private 
partnership going forward.
  As I mentioned earlier, in the last 12 or 13 years, Congress has 
provided nearly a billion dollars to the National Science Foundation to 
conduct plant biotech research, building on the initiative Senator 
Mikulski and I introduced in the VA-HUD-Independent Agencies 
Appropriations Subcommittee.
  The need for continued investment in basic research is crucial to the 
growth of biotechnology and I hope Congress will continue to fund 
research in this area.
  While I won't be around to beat the drum next year from the inside, I 
have worked with my colleagues Senator Johanns and Senator Klobuchar to 
create a new Biotech Caucus. I hope those of you who understand the 
challenge and promise of ag biotech will choose to join the ranks and 
communicate the benefits of ag biotech to our peers.
  While we have much to be proud of when it comes to developments and 
advancements in biotechnology--we cannot rest on our laurels. We must 
continue to support basic research in our Nation's labs. We must 
continue our investment in the buildings and equipment that make it 
possible. We must continue to create policies that allow biotech 
businesses to flourish--bringing critical research from the lab shelves 
to the marketplace and the benefits to our citizens. We must support 
job training for new workers and help transition the current workforce 
into these high-tech jobs of the future. And, maybe most important, we 
need to continue to educate those who do not understand the full 
magnitude and benefit of biotech.
  Only through effective communication can we ensure that sound 
science--not myths and fear--guide public policy.
  In closing, let me say that in 40 years of public life, I have seen a 
lot of great ideas come and go. I strongly believe ag biotech is here 
to stay and will grow. We are only just beginning to see the many 
exciting applications biotechnology can offer. It is truly changing 
lives, for the better.
  In my opinion, a dedicated and collaborative investment by 
policymakers, researchers, educators, and farmers will result in a 
vibrant industry that will fuel our economy, improve our environment, 
and feed our world for years to come.

                          ____________________