[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 6]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 7856]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




           ENGINEERING A SOLUTION; BRING WOMEN INTO THE FOLD

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. ZOE LOFGREN

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                        Tuesday, April 26, 2005

  Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, amidst the controversy 
surrounding recent disparaging remarks regarding women in science, I 
was encouraged to read an editorial from a shining star in Silicon 
Valley, Carol Bartz, the President and CEO of Autodesk and a member of 
the President's Council of Advisers on Science and Technology. Ms. 
Bartz is right, while the controversy of women in science rages on, 
``unless we bring the other half of our population [women] into the 
engineering ranks, that [U.S.] leadership [in engineering] inevitably 
will evaporate.''
  I would like to include Ms. Bartz' editorial, printed in the San Jose 
Mercury News on March 24, 2005, in the Record.

            [From the San Jose Mercury News, Mar. 24, 2005]

           Engineering a Solution: Bring Women Into the Fold

                            (By Carol Bartz)

       Last week, Harvard University President Lawrence Summers 
     suffered the sting of a faculty no-confidence vote, stemming 
     from his remarks in January about women in science.
       But every day, U.S. companies and the U.S. economy suffer 
     the far more significant sting of girls avoiding science and 
     engineering career paths in droves.
       Despite interesting work and excellent pay--an average of 
     $81,000 a year, almost twice U.S. median household income--
     employers are begging people to fill positions. Yet just one 
     in 10 engineers is a woman, a far worse track record than 
     science or math.
       Why are girls who are fully capable of planning cities, 
     designing jet engines or creating the next iPod avoiding 
     engineering? Is it some biological difference in the female 
     brain, the premise that cost Summers so dearly? Or is it 
     simply a lack of encouragement during those crucial teen 
     years when career paths are forged?
       Does it matter?
       Even with top salaries, the free-market supply of 
     electrical and mechanical engineers is well below U.S. 
     demand. Something is clearly wrong. The answer is obvious: We 
     are relying on archaic, boys' club traditions to supply an 
     industry that instead should serve as a role model for pure 
     efficiency and reason. And we risk global competitiveness as 
     a result.
       No responsible CEO would try to build a business by 
     ignoring the value of half her available capital. That would 
     abrogate her responsibility to shareholders, employees and 
     customers. Yet the engineering world is engaged in precisely 
     this irresponsible corporate behavior by failing to take 
     advantage of one-half of the available human ``capital.''
       And in America we do so at our peril, because a perfect 
     storm is brewing.
       On one side of our nation looms international competition 
     in engineering-dependent industries we once dominated. The 
     only answer to maintaining our competitive edge is to use our 
     engineering expertise to create innovation.
       Looming on the other side is an immense gap between the 
     demand for innovative young engineers and the number of 
     students awarded degrees in mechanical and electrical 
     engineering. Every day the gap grows, as an aging national 
     workforce of some 2 million engineers gradually retires 
     without nearly enough graduates to take their place.
       With our national competitiveness for the 21st century at 
     stake, we have no choice. We must work to change the status 
     quo and ensure that the female half of our population makes 
     its proportional contribution to the ranks of engineering.
       As a software engineer by training, and the CEO of a 
     company whose products are used by millions of engineers 
     globally, I have seen the current system firsthand.
       Even at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's School 
     of Engineering, the No. 1-ranked school in the country, U.S. 
     News & World Report found women made up only 25 percent of 
     graduate enrollment last year.
       The private sector must shoulder much of the burden of 
     attracting women to the field. Offering competitive salaries 
     is not enough. It is incumbent on companies to make an 
     engineering career compelling in all of its aspects to young 
     women--to re-energize the field and reintroduce the ``cool'' 
     factor that engineering once possessed.
       There is some hope. Already, the National Science 
     Foundation, the Business-Higher Education Forum and other 
     organizations are working hard to encourage women to join the 
     ranks of American engineers. As for the ``cool,'' this 
     weekend, San Jose State University will host the regional 
     round of the FIRST Robotics competition, offering high school 
     students (girls included!) the opportunity to solve 
     engineering design problems using robotics.
       For more than a century, America's global economic 
     leadership has rested on innovation by our engineers, the 
     best in the world. Through them, we have been able to meet 
     tremendous challenges, building the world's most complex 
     infrastructure, some of the world's largest and most 
     important cities, and products that have changed the lives of 
     people everywhere. Unless we bring the other half of our 
     population into the engineering ranks, that leadership 
     inevitably will evaporate.

                          ____________________