[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 21 (Wednesday, February 2, 2022)]
[Senate]
[Pages S481-S482]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                        Research and Development

  Ms. CANTWELL. Madam President, I come to the floor because this week, 
hopefully, our House colleagues will be taking up legislation that they 
have named America COMPETES. My colleague was just here on the Senate 
floor talking about the legislation we passed last year, and we are 
glad our colleagues are finally addressing this in the House of 
Representatives.
  I said ``glad'' they are ``addressing''--we are happy about that 
because, between 1996 and 2015, federally funded research led to over 
$1 trillion in economic growth and millions of new jobs. So we know 
that when we invest, we see a big return in our economy.
  What we know, however, is that R&D investment is at its lowest point 
in nearly 45 years, as measured as a percentage of GDP. That is where 
we have been going. And the rest of the world isn't waiting.
  Overall, U.S. R&D spending places us ninth globally, behind advanced 
economies like South Korea, Japan, and Germany, and far below the fifth 
place ranking that we held in the 1990s.
  So this is why we need to do something, and that is why we passed 
what was called the United States Innovation and Competition Act last 
year and why we encouraged our colleagues to take it up. There is a 
competition for global leadership in technology in a range of areas--
semiconductors, manufacturing, artificial intelligence, low-Earth orbit 
satellites. And there are countries that are very eager to make 
investments to try to capture those jobs that I mentioned that come as 
a result of investment in technology.
  We know that we tried to solve this problem before; that is, to stay 
competitive. We passed an America COMPETES Act in 2007, and we passed 
one in 2010. And we were trying to stay competitive with changing 
economies and the information age that we now are in. These acts were 
intended to double the key research accounts at the National Science 
Foundation and the Department of Energy, but, unfortunately, the 
appropriations authorized did not materialize. In large part, we had a 
2008 recession and subsequent fiscal sequestration, and we reduced the 
NSF and DOE budgets.
  So we had the right idea. We had a year or so of activity that really 
tried to get us on the right track, and then fiscal issues put us 
behind.
  So job openings today and the opportunities for us to grow our 
economy by making this investment are just monumental. And that is why 
we hope that this is a bipartisan effort by the Senate and, ultimately, 
a bipartisan effort by the House to come together to make the 
investments to help fill these jobs of the future.
  Job openings in computer science occupations are expected to exceed 1 
million in the next few years, nearly 400,000 just in the area of cyber 
security alone.
  The Wall Street Journal reported that planned growth in the U.S. 
semiconductor industry will require up to 90,000 more workers by 2025--
90,000 more workers just in that 1 sector. And these are very well-
paying jobs.
  According to the National Science Board, the only way that the United 
States can fill the gaps in these STEM workers is to double the number 
of women in the STEM workforce and double the number of other 
unrepresented minorities in these jobs. And that is exactly what we are 
trying to do with this legislation.
  On our manufacturing sector--which we have a very large manufacturing 
sector in the Northwest, driven by aerospace but also other forms of 
transportation, and it also includes small and medium-sized 
manufacturing--but one organization estimated that it will take up to 
$250 billion over 10 years to help us upgrade our existing 
infrastructure in manufacturing and equipment to be competitive.
  So that means we must do our part. Many of these industries will do 
their part. But on the R&D side, we must continue to do our part.
  Other countries are investing heavily. On the semiconductor advanced 
manufacturing facilities, which are very, very expensive to build, we 
just heard of a major announcement by Intel a few weeks ago about their 
investment in the State of Ohio. These facilities can cost $30 billion 
over 10 years, including $20 billion in just the capital expenses. 
Other countries are making huge investments to help build cheaper 
foundries, anywhere from 30 to 50 percent of the investment in Asia.
  So, as a result, over the last several decades, the United States has 
lost a big share of what they had in the semiconductor manufacturing 
chip sector, going from about 37 percent of the market for production 
from the United States down to 12 percent today.
  So the United States must respond, and we must continue to make 
investments in these sectors. My colleagues, as we had this floor 
debate, will remember, we talked about a $52 billion investment--an 
enormous amount of money. But I asked my colleagues who helped us get 
this legislation and those who weren't with us at that moment to 
consider this information: The semiconductor shortage cost vehicle 
manufacturers, just in 2021, $210 billion. In 1 year, our shortage cost 
us $210 billion.

  So I think making this investment in chip production in the United 
States is critical. It is time we try again with our House colleagues. 
It is time that we engage in a bipartisan legislative process to get 
this legislation to the President's desk.
  I know the House will consider many amendments on Friday when they 
are supposed to take up this bill. We in the Commerce Committee had 
over 230 amendments filed. We approved 130 amendments. We had a 6-hour 
markup. We had healthy debate on amendments, and then the Senate 
proceeded to an open-floor debate and hundreds of amendments were filed 
here on the Senate floor.
  So I encourage our colleagues in the House to have their amendments, 
to consider these ideas, and to come to an effort with us to get this 
legislation passed.
  We know that this would be the largest 5-year commitment to public 
R&D in our Nation's history. We need it for the job growth. We need it 
to stay competitive.
  This legislation would also make a $15 billion investment in growing 
and diversifying that STEM workforce. As I said, given the large amount 
of job openings in this sector, we are not going to find the people to 
take them unless we are diversifying our workforce.
  This would establish a Senate-confirmed position on improving STEM 
diversity and make sure that NSF and the investments we would make 
would help us not only assure diversity but geographic diversity within 
the United States.
  This legislation would also create a first-of-a-kind NSF--National 
Science Foundation--tech directorate to help accelerate the development 
and translation of new technologies within the United States to the 
future and helping those jobs grow more quickly.
  Now, I know a lot of people, probably at the beginning: If NSF was 
already doing a good job, if DOE was already doing a good job, why do 
we have to do something different?
  Well, the issue is the United States is producing a lot of R&D, and 
that R&D is being used by other people. It is actually documented 
public information that ends up getting used and translated by somebody 
else hungrier, faster moving, with opportunity, and thereby getting 
translated. So this bill addresses that. This bill, with the creation 
of a tech directorate, is about accelerating the R&D that we do and 
turning it into real manufacturing at a faster rate.
  We call this tech transfer. And if you have any kind of university in 
your State, you know exactly what I am talking about, and these 
universities play a key role in tech transfer. In fact, tech transfer 
in this realm of university has been responsible for about 4 million 
jobs over the last 20 years, I think it is--the last 20 years. So these 
are big investments that they have supported. They have supported over 
4 million jobs.
  So USICA would make an investment of 17 billion in the Department of 
Energy and authorize the tripling of the manufacturing extension 
partnership to help with those manufacturing opportunities and also 
make investments in tech hubs to help create private sector investment 
and the same kind of workforce opportunities for the future.
  As I mentioned, the announcement by Intel in Ohio to build a new 
foundry and the expensive cost of building a new foundry was 
interesting news because it wasn't in the same places that

[[Page S482]]

investments in chip fabrication has been done so far. And yet the CEO 
of the company said, if we pass this legislation, there could be 100 
billion in investment.
  That is important because we have to understand how important chip 
fabrication is, semiconductors are, to the information age that we live 
in today--how important it is that we not lose market share any lower 
than 12 percent and we actually start going back in the other direction 
so that we can grow these jobs in the future.
  So I just want to emphasize: There is a lot to agree on with House 
colleagues. Both bills call for a $52 billion investment in the 
semiconductor industry. Both bills call for major investment, about 
$160 billion, in critical R&D Agencies like the National Science 
Foundation and the Department of Energy. Both bills recognize the need 
to invest in creating tech hubs and making investments in the domestic 
supply chain. Both bills call for growing the diversity of our STEM 
workforce to meet workforce gaps. Both bills attempt to address 
disparities in our trade and research policies that I was just 
mentioning--trying to not let people just grab the R&D that the United 
States does and translate that, but make sure that we have strong laws 
in preventing intellectual property theft where it occurs and making 
investments in American businesses. And we know that there are other 
provisions that we will be able to agree on as well. So with our 
investment in R&D reaching a 45-year low, now is the time to grow our 
economy.

  I hope our colleagues in the House will join in a bipartisan effort. 
We stand ready in the Senate to join a serious discussion to get this 
legislation onto the President's desk and grow these jobs. It is a very 
important economic opportunity for the United States and continues our 
leadership.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.