this report issued will provide our committee with good policy options to explore to ensure new ideas and innovation.

In June of this year, Chairman Boehlert and Ranking Member Gordon wrote to NAS to endorse the Senate request for a study of "the most urgent challenges the United States faces in maintaining leadership in key areas of science and technology," to provide advice and recommendations for maintaining U.S. leadership in science and technology in the face of growing global competition. Today, Americans are feeling the effects of globalization because a substantial portion of our workforce finds itself in direct competition for jobs with lower-wage workers around the globe. It comes as no surprise that high-tech jobs are being out-sourced to foreign countries like China and India. Without high-quality, knowledge intensive jobs and the innovative enterprises that lead to discovery and new technology, our economy will suffer and our constituents will face a lower standard of living. I am very concerned about the issue of off-shoring and out-sourcing and how these trends will affect current scientists and engineers, as well as the future employment opportunities and career choices of students.

A few months ago, Ranking Member Gordon and I hosted our first in a series of several bipartisan roundtable discussions to frame what is known and unknown about supply and demand for the Science and Technology workforce, outline factors that influence supply and demand, and explore policy options. From the first Roundtable, we learned that it is difficult to determine how many jobs we have lost because we do not have sufficient or accurate data on the problem. I believe we have to raise awareness of this issue the federal research and development budget—in order to keep high wage science and engineering jobs here in the U.S.

Despite claims to the contrary by the Administration, the Federal R&D budget is not faring well, particularly the non-defense component which has been flat for 30 years. In FY06, the Administration proposed a 1.4 percent spending reduction in the federal science and technology budget. Reductions like this continue to chip away at the U.S. research base and jeopardize our economic strength and long-term technological competitiveness. Innovation does indeed drive our economic growth, but we must have the knowledge base to drive innovation. Encouraging more children in careers in math and science is a needed start but only the beginning. We must do better in understanding the global competition facing our science and engineering workforce.

I hope this hearing will draw us closer to an answer of how we can ensure the U.S. benefits from innovation, compete with foreign scientists and engineers without lowering salaries, increase funding for basic research in the physical sciences and engineering, and improve teacher recruitment and retention so we can increase student interest levels and their knowledge and understanding of these valuable subjects.

I welcome our panel of witnesses and look forward to their testimony. [The prepared statement of Ms. Johnson follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member.

The United States has slashed its federal investment in scientific research. In 1965, in the Sputnik era, funding for federal research and development as a percentage of gross domestic product was slightly over two percent. In 2005, it is estimated to be 1.07 percent.

As a result, scientists are not getting the money they need and are pursuing alternative careers. Young people see the trend and opt not to study science.

Meanwhile, other nations have ramped up their technical infrastructure and workforce. The National Academies' recent report on the United States and global competitiveness found that in Germany, 36 percent of undergraduates receive their degrees in science and engineering. In China, the figure is 59 percent, and in Japan 66 percent. In the United States, the corresponding figure is 32 percent.

I concur that these are "worrisome indicators" indeed. Our competitiveness is quietly slipping. We are a net importer of high technology products, and soon we will be a net importer of people with high technology expertise.

I am glad the National Academies published this report and hope the leadership of this Congress will act on these recommendations. Progress is expensive, but decay is intolerable.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Honda follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL M. HONDA

Chairman Boehlert and Ranking Member Gordon, I thank you for holding this important hearing today and for requesting that the study "Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future" be undertaken.

This report makes a many good recommendations in a number of areas. In the area of education, for example, it suggests that we should recruit new science and math teachers, that we should strengthen the skills of teachers the math, science, and engineering subject areas, and we increase the number of students who take math and science courses.

But what I do not see in the recommendations troubles me. What I think is missing is the idea of teaching innovation.

I'm worried that if we simply try to produce a bunch of new scientists and engineers with the same skills as the ones who are unemployed back home in my district today, things aren't going to get any better here. China and India will be able to produce more scientists and engineers than us, and if they are paid less, work will still be done overseas.

We have been lucky in the past that a few people who were innately innovative and inventive also had enough knowledge in math and science to make breakthroughs in these areas that started entirely new industries. Skilled scientists and engineers have been able to sustain incremental progress in these new industries, but the pressure from other nations is growing ever greater.

While some people are simply blessed with the special skills of innovation and invention and they have prospered in the past, we need to realize that these skills are teachable and bring them into our curriculum. An MIT-Lemelson/NSF study on invention recognized this and suggested incorporating innovation into our curriculum, and Singapore's Minister of Education has begun to make such changes to his own country's curriculum to prepare his country for the future.

I hope that the witnesses will address this shortcoming of their report during the hearing, and that the Committee will pay attention to this important issue in the future.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Carnahan follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE RUSS CARNAHAN

Mr. Chairman and Mr. Ranking Member, thank you for again bringing this important issue to our attention in the Science Committee.

For years, the U.S. has felt the backlash of an increasingly competitive global market, most sharply felt in the loss of jobs as they shift overseas. I applaud the effort to look beyond the problems and causes associated with competing in a global marketplace and to look toward solutions.

It is our duty as leaders of this nation to wisely consider options and vigorously advocate for the right changes. Our workforce, and thus many of our constituents' livelihoods, depend on it.

Mr. Augustine, Dr. Vagelos, and Dr. Wulf, thank you for your efforts with this report and for appearing before us today. I look forward to hearing your testimony. [The prepared statement of Ms. Jackson Lee follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE SHEILA JACKSON LEE

Mr. Chairman, let me first thank you for holding this important hearing regarding the recent report published by the National Academy of Sciences. I would also like to thank our witnesses, Mr. Augustine, Dr. Vagelos, and Dr. Wulf, for being here today.

The report being presented to us today highlights what is becoming more and more apparent in recent years, that the United States is losing footing as the dominant knowledge, innovation, and business center of the world; our policies are resulting in the deterioration of our economy. As highlighted in the testimony, an overwhelming amount of evidence points to this. Students today are less prepared to face the global market than they once were, and foreign students are becoming more and more prepared. The most glaring statistic to me contained in the testimony was that in 2003, foreign students earned almost 60 percent of engineering doctorates awarded in U.S. universities!

Our children today are not being given the tools necessary to compete in the world of tomorrow. We are not giving them the proper training, the proper teachers or incentive to succeed. This is an issue that must cross party lines and rest at the heart

of all Americans because this is about the future strength of our nation. We became the world's greatest economic power through innovation and education, and today we must renew that challenge to push the boundaries of discovery.

The importance of a strong scientific and technological enterprise is a primary factor in driving economic growth. Substantial and sustained U.S. investments in research and education over the last 50 years spawned an abundance of technological breakthroughs that transformed American society and helped the U.S. to become the world's dominant economy. Economists estimate that these technological advances have been responsible for half of U.S. economic growth since the end of World War II. The relationship between innovation and economic growth has only grown in recent years as the world shifts to an increasingly knowledge-based economy. In an age where information travels around the world at previously unimaginable speeds, the United States must continue to stay steps ahead of everyone else. This means that status quo policies on education will not work.

At the same time, other nations-particularly emerging nations such as China and India—have recognized the importance of science and technology to economic growth, and are pouring resources into their scientific and technological infrastructure, rapidly building their human capital and dramatically increasing their ability to compete with U.S. businesses on the world stage.

As was mentioned in the testimony, there unfortunately will not be a Sputniklike event, where the United States gets a powerful wakeup call. Instead, our decline in competitiveness is occurring slowly, and from a combination of many factors. The foundation our mothers and fathers laid for us slowly crumbles around us. This is why I find this hearing to be so important. We as the Federal Government must ensure that our nation does not lag behind in innovation and discovery. We must ensure that our children are properly prepared to face the increasingly challenging global market. Finally, we must continue to ensure that we in the United States continue to be the Nation that sets the bar for everyone else.

I would again like to thank our witnesses for being here today, and I look forward to an open and enlightened conversation on the powerful suggestions made in this report.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Baird follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN BAIRD

Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you and Ranking Member Gordon for raising importance to the issue of math and science education as it relates to scientific and technological competitiveness. I would also like to thank the witnesses-Mr. Augustine, Dr. Vagelos, and Dr. Wulf-for testifying today on the recently released National Academy of Sciences report entitled, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future." One of the recommendations made in this report is to vastly improve K-12 math and science education. I could not agree more. This should be one of the highest priorities of the Federal and State governments and I look forward to reviewing the testimony of our witnesses and the specific recommendations from this report to translate these recommendations into Congressional action.

With the topic of today's discussion centering around science competitiveness, it could not be more appropriate to honor a guest visiting the Committee today, as she can speak directly to the importance of a quality science education-and she can do so quite well I might add. This honoree is Neela Thangada, the winner of the Discovery Channel Young Scientist Challenge, and her mother, Mrudula Rao Thangada. Neela was named "Top Young Scientist" at an awards ceremony yesterday evening for her project, "Effects of Various Nutrient Concentrations on the Cloning of the Eye of the Solanum Tuberosum at Multiple Stages" or, in laymen's terms, she set out to explore potato cloning.

I had the chance to meet with her and her mother before the hearing, and was impressed with her enthusiasm for science and discovery and her ability to effectively speak about her research. She is indeed an incredible young lady.

Her trip to the House Science Committee today from her home in Texas was the result of an important public-private partnership initiated by the Discovery Channel. Every year since 1999, Discovery has launched the competition in partnership with Science Service to nurture the next generation of American scientists at a critical age when interest in science begins to decline. The cutting-edge competition gives 40 of the Nation's top middle school students the opportunity to demonstrate their scientific know-how and push the limits of their knowledge in the quest for the title of America's "Top Young Scientist of the Year."

More than 9,500 middle school students have formally entered the Challenge since its inception, and these students are drawn from an initial pool of 75,000 students annually. Previous winners have attained more than $500,000 in scholarship awards and participated in science-related trips that have taken them to the far corners of the globe, from the Galapagos Islands to the Ukraine.

This year's finalists traveled to Washington, D.C., to compete in team-based, interactive challenges designed around the theme of "Forces of Nature." In the wake of the recent natural disasters that ravaged the Gulf Coast of the United States and Southeast Asia, each student faced simulated challenges-from fog banks to hurricanes to tsunamis-that utilized their broad range of knowledge in order to understand the implications and scope of natural disasters.

Public-private partnerships such as these exist to challenge and engage our students and we must continue to support such programs. However, we must also better prepare and inspire our math and science teachers to provide the highest-quality education for all students throughout the country. We can start by implementing some of the recommendations laid out here today.

Chairman BOEHLERT. Thank you very much.

And you will notice the similarity in theme between, you know, this is not a division. The center of this committee separating the Democrats from the Republicans doesn't separate us at all on the importance of the subject matter today. This is something that Mr. Gordon and I and every single Member of this committee, on both sides, believe passionately in and work, we think, hopefully, effectively on. And that is why we welcome what you bring to the table. And we want to give it as much attention as possible.

I would suggest that this probably, if we are looking on the grand scheme of things on the Hill today of what is going on, there is probably no more important discussion than the one we are having right here. And quite frankly, it doesn't have a lot of sex appeal for a lot of the media. And so we don't get a lot of coverage. I don't care if they print what I say, but I darn sure care about printing what you guys are going to say to us. That message has to get out. And the other observation I would make, and we have had it in private conversations, but I will make it again for the official record, I know that some of the captains of industry, in circles you travel, you know and they know and we know that we have got to do better. And in the polite conversation we have at these various functions, they will talk about such needs as getting back to the basics of greatly improving K-12 science and math education. There is no more basic building block for the foundation of the future development of this nation than that. And they will talk to me all of the time about it. Some of the great names in the captains of industry will talk to me about that. And then they will talk to me about the importance of our investment in long-range research, about how magnificent the National Science Foundation is, sponsoring university-based research, and why we need young scholars like I have been privileged to introduce here today to inspire them to greater heights. And I say to them, "You know what?" I have told these guys, "You people have got more lobbyists running around this Hill, high-priced lobbyists who know what they are doing, and they are very smart, and they are very effective, and they knock on the door and they come in. You know, they don't come in to talk to me about the importance of K-12 science_and math education or investing more in the science enterprise. They are in to discuss the latest tweaking needed in the tax policy or the adjustment necessary for trade policy. They are thinking of the moment and the bottom line for the next quarterly statement." And

I understand that. But there is never enough time to get to the second part of their agenda, which is what we are discussing today.

So that is why I think this is very important, and that is why I applaud what you have done, and so does Mr. Gordon. I mean, we have had conversation about your work, and boy, we couldn't be happier. And we just want to try to-we are going to play the role of dentist this morning and sort of pull from you some new ideas on what we can do beyond the report, because this town is filled with reports that have gone on for years and the libraries of the various Committee rooms and offices have reports that are gathering dust. They read them initially and say, "Oh, what a great report," and then go on to the next thing and never go back to look at the report.

I pledge to you, and I think I can do it for both of us, that we are going to follow through, because some of the things that you have mentioned here we are already doing, but we are nickel-anddiming the issue. We have got to make some substantial investments, and it is an investment that is going to pay handsome dividends.

With that, let me present our distinguished panel.

Mr. Norman Augustine, Retired Chairman and CEO, Lockheed Martin Corporation. Mr. Augustine is a frequent visitor to this committee and to Capitol Hill and has served in so many capacities in government and in the private sector with great distinction. Dr. P. Roy Vagelos, Retired Chairman and CEO, Merck & Company. And Doctor, you are preceded by your reputation, and we thank you for the great work you are doing. And a dear friend of long standing who is constant counsel for this committee, Dr. William Wulf, President of the National Academy of Engineering.

Every day, what good comes from government usually comes because government has the common sense, to work with leaders in the private sector to interact and to be guided and to develop an agenda that offers some positive approaches to some thorny problems. And we have before us three people who are always there to propose workable solutions. And for that, we are eternally grateful. With that, let me say the general rule, and you know the ground rules, is don't get nervous when the light comes on, but we would ask that you summarize your opening statement. And I'm not even going to put an arbitrary time limit on it, because this is so important and you are the only panel. And we will go right to it. With that, Mr. Chairman, the floor is yours.

STATEMENT OF MR. NORMAN R. AUGUSTINE, RETIRED CHAIRMAN AND CEO, LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION Mr. AUGUSTINE. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Members of the Committee. And I thank you in particular for all of your efforts in this area in the past-really, it was by virtue of your committee and your colleagues in the Senate that gave us the opportunity to take on our study. And we, all 20 members, I can assure you, feel very compassionate about the topic.

Also, I would like to congratulate Neela. My congratulations and ours. She is an example to why we are here.

I would, Mr. Chairman, with your permission, like to submit a longer statement for the record and brief