ok this hearing will come to order and good afternoon and welcome to the day's hearing to review the administration's fiscal year two thousand and resource development budget and i'd like to begin today by congratulating dr holdren on your new welcomed we just received the budget a week ago so we are still absorbing the details but as far as i look for i'm impressed that the president obama has committed the resources to back up his eloquent words about the importance of science to our society even before his inauguration the president called me and the first thing you said was i'm a science guy and he clearly has affirmed that two weeks ago and here is an precedent for the national academies and last week in his research and development budget proposal so far this year this committee has reported out legislation to medication nanotechnology information technology water resources electronics recycling design of green buildings and international cooperation every one of those bills is bipartisan and all but two have already passed the house what we share what they share in common is that they address brawl multi disciplinary multi sector issues that require resources leadership and planning across several and often a dozen or more of our federal agencies president obama said in his inaugural address address that he's not about it's not about bigger or smaller government it's about smarter government the american recovery and reinvestment act is providing funds to help us work smarter but we are facing tough budget times and we won't always have new money at hand that's why we must make more efficient and effective use of the limited resources we have to tackle these difficult issues and that is where dr holdren always come in i know we have been putting a lot of responsibility on you in our legislation dr holdren but we will try to get you more resources so you and your able staff can carry out those duties but i also want to assure you and remind everyone else that the burden is not entirely oh no way these enormous task will confront such as the strengthening stem education improving m water resources require leadership and willingness to cooperate coordinate and share information on the part of many federal agencies a lot of opportunities to use science and technology to tackle our nation's greatest challenges  neglected or seem to a fall between the cracks in the last several years so i know that dr holdren and many other fine scientists leaders that the president obama has appointed to senior positions in the administration will take this task to heart and i'm optimistic that they will succeed in helping us to turn the tide on many of these challenges now i look forward to a good discussion about the president's proposal for research and development funding in the next year's budget and how funding will be targeted to address the development budget and related science and technology policy priorities i think it's very important and dr holdren i'd like to welcome you here today and congratulate you thank i congratulate you on your appointment as president o continue under your leadership in the new administration and i really look forward to working with you have heard good things about you and i have listened to the many bad things about you and i hope i don't hear any bad thing from you today today's her obviously covers a great deal of grand isle by just a few brief comments on the budget the president delivered to us last week one passed a one legged even one it's a big question mark first of all the policy of d holdren i want to menu and president obama for continuing the commitment initiated by president bush and the committee of the hundred ninth congress and acted by the last congress and the america competes act and to double funding  key areas of basic research most important and evasion and long term economic competitiveness this is long been a priority of mine and of many of us here and and certainly a as well as others on the committee so for you to pick up for the last administration left truly see mance this i think as an issue with deep bipartisan support and that's what i think the president's looking for this  achieving the doubling significantly easier now second the negative i'm very concerned about the direction of our human spaceflight program at nasa by nasa has made tremendous progress over the last five years it's still on a path to retire the space shuttle without having developed its replacement vehicle and allow it to capabilities for the budget reduces a out year funding for the constellation system about more than three billion dollars and even though we're more than a hundred days into this ministration the president is still not appointed the head of nasa i'm sure he has his reasons for that but it seems to me that we need someone to start working with and to start trying to see if we can have a bipartisan thr dr holdren recognize and appreciate that you ordered a review of human spaceflight plans and i commend you for tappan norm augustine my gosh what a terrific american and how you got him to do that and i thank you please everybody that knows anything about him and you got him to head that review but i have to register my strong concern with both the budget gap and the leadership gap at nasa and i hope you will work to close both this soon as possible third the question mark as well you know just two weeks ago president obama announced the great great band their goal to devote quote more than three percent of our gross domestic product to research and development unquote this is an aggressive goal that warrants full consideration by this committee and others unfortunately though the budget and testimony before us today include no mention of it whatsoever so i hope to learn from dr holdren from you the details regarding h when the administration plans to achieve this goal especially since the presidents are in the budget request for next year is essentially flat last i want to take the opportunity to reiterate my concerns with the direction the president's taken us on energy policy which of course includes a significant ass and take component with which this committee is involved and the chairman and i are both known on committees that are heavy own energy with science space and technology and the energy and commerce committee from actively oppose and expanded energy exploration and production to cutting funding for fossil fuels or in the to aggressively pursuing increased taxes through cap and trade raising the cost certain while the benefits are minimal and highly uncertain i'm afraid and you minute administrations come out of the gate with this energy policy on backwards dr holden i know you're going to be a key player to white house and farm in advance in this policy as we go forward so i'm eager to work closely with you to identify some areas where we can work together i don't know any other way than to be plain with you and maybe even help to change your mind or if you think that mr chairman i thank you for holding this hearing i think i believe and i look forward to a productive discussion thank us all i found your very persuasive that dr holdren must have a very large hat rack because he is the assistant to the president for science technology he's the director of the white house office of science technology policy and he co chairs co chair of the president's council of advisors on science and technology so we welcome you here typically we have our way to speak for about five minutes you are the only witness so we want to we're here for you on you take the time it's necessary and you can will we will have you written testimony made a part of the record and so dr rhoden you now be able to beg well thank you chairman garden ranking member hall members of the committee it is a pleasure to be here today to talk with you about the president's budget for research and development for the two thousand and ten fiscal year and certainly i appreciate those opening remarks both by the chairman and the ranking member before i get to some details of the budget proposals for r and d for this year i want to mention the wider array of initiatives in the domain of science technology and innovation that this administration has gotten underway in its first few months in office those initiatives all stem from the president's conviction which i know the members of this committee share that nourishing and fully utilizing this country's world leading capabilities in science technology and innovation is going to be key to mastering practically every major challenge that we face from creating new and better jobs for economic recovery and growth to providing improved health care for all americans at lower cost to reducing dependence on energy imports while also reducing the carbon pollution that is affecting earth's climate to ensuring that we always have the defense homeland security and national intelligence technologies that we need to protect our troops  citizens and our national interests the president has been clear from the beginning of his campaign for the office about his understanding of the importance of science technology and innovation for meeting these national challenges and he's been clear about his commitment to providing the resources the incentives and the ground rules that science technology and innovation we'll need in order to realize that potential the initiatives that the administration is already taking based on that insight to advance science technology and innovation in this country are much broader than the increases in r and d budgets to which i'm shortly going to turn those initiatives include the executive order and associated pending guidelines on federally funded stem cell research the executive order and associated pending recommendations on scientific integrity in government include making permanent the research and experimentation tax credit a range of energy science and technology initiatives that are aimed at building a clean energy economy that creates green jobs shrinks our dependence on foreign oil and reduces the impact of climate change they include an equally wide range of science technology engineering and mathematics education activities including the use of the clean energy challenge as a way to inspire interest in science and technology among young people in much the same way as the space race did in the one nine hundred sixty s they include increased coordination of interagency efforts on earth observing satellites climate change science and climate services and include a major effort in support of the president's executive memorandum on open government all of these initiatives and some more are elaborated in my written  statement now i would like to offer some thoughts on the science technology and innovation components of the president's f y two thousand and ten budget proposal that entails which were released as the chairman mentioned just under a week ago the new budget proposes one hundred forty seven point six billion current dollars for the total federal investment in research and development in fiscal year two thousand and ten which under o m b is assume one point one percent inflation rate from two thousand and nine to two thousand and ten would mean a drop of seven tenths of a percent below the two thousand and nine omnibus in real spending power but two elaborations are important here one is that all of the real decrease and more is accounted for by a drop in the development part of defense r and involving terminations of some programs secretary gates has concluded have poor prospects for low tillett in the second and more important elaboration is that the real magnitude of federal and d budgets for f y two thousand and nine and flight two thousand and ten can only be judged with the inclusion of the american recovery and reinvestment act funding and that funding added an estimated eighteen point three billion dollars for r and d in f y two thousand and nine dollars to be spent mostly over those two years nearly all of it on the non defense side there's no year by year allocation of those funds currently available but it's clear that there are addition the approved regular budget for two thousand and nine and the proposed one for f y two thousand and ten would give those two years the two largest federal investments in r and d in united states history the f b i two thousand and nine and two thousand and ten by just give particularly good at tention to research as contrast it with development with the aims of bolstering the fundamental understanding is better at the root of all innovation and fostering significantly new and potentially tr formative technology as with r and d as a whole if the president's budget isn't acted the two years two thousand and nine and two thousand and ten will provide the largest federal investment in research in u s history in achieving all of that the president's two thousand and ten budget and what came before in the omnibus bill and the recovery act would fulfill a number of the important visions of stablish by congress in the america competes act which the ranking member mentioned that of course could not have become law without this committee's strong leadership with past of the two thousand and ten budget the combine two thousand and nine two thousand and ten and recovery act appropriations will in fact meet the two thousand and nine and two thousand and with congress next year on reauthorization for these important science agencies my written testimony elaborates on the research and development and science technology engineering and math education budget for n interagency initiative on networking and information technology r and d the national nanotechnology initiative and the climate change science program without trying to summarize that material now though let me move to my conclusion while the nation faces a man's challenges in the economy hell energy the environment national and homeland security among other domains it's clear that science technology and innovation can help turn many of those challenges into opportunities the president understands thoroughly and his f y two thousand and ten budget reflects that understanding in proposing a robust investment in science technology and stem education today to produce the new knowledge the new technologies and the scientists engineers mathematicians and science and technology literate citizens that our country will need in the future to meet the challenges and seize the opportunities i look forward to working with this committee to make the vision of the president's twenty ten budget proposal into a reality and i will be pleased to answer any questions the members may i have thank you very much thank you dr holdren and thank you particularly the president for your commitment to american repeats we do think  let me give sort of a game plan for everyone here if you feel comfortable with it in about probably forty or forty five minutes we're going to have the final votes today if obvious series at least two could be more and so  think we will conclude that i know people have flights they want to catch we will also give an open invitation dr holder to come back and we're more sure well we'll see him later and to move forward i'm going  acknowledgment of america competes chairman gordon worked so hard on that and we all appreciate his leadership on that two quick issues i'd just like your input on one is the role of oceans as you see it in our research for polio and as we look at the effects of overheating of the planet in the city of acacia sixty eight percent of the world service is oceans and they're under assault as you know from invasive species overfishing etc so comments on that secondly what do you see  the role of social science in the research portfolio my perspective as a former social scientist is we look at energy health care national security and a host of other measures behavior change may be as important to the solving some of those riddles as  technological innovation so let me put that out there and hear your response again thank you mr thank you first of all on the oceans i think one can already see something about this administration's has already been heard from before this committee or otherwise will be soon i've talked with her extensively about the importance of the oceans i agree with that in my presidential address to the american association of the advancement of science a couple of years ago i listed the oceans as one of the five major priorities in science and technology that we absolutely have to get right it's important to everything you mentioned the role of the oceans and climate change the acidification of the oceans these are huge challenges the country has got to address them in an integrated and unified and coherent way and i believe that between o s t p know and the many other agencies that deal in various ways with ocean issues we are going to start to get it right with respect to social science i also agree with your point i think the social behavioral and economic sciences are crucial across the whole range of challenges i mentioned and when i say the word science i don't just mean physics chemistry biology and so on i include the social sciences that effort in terms of research of course is extensively find in the national science foundation but there are also social behavioral and economic science research activities underway and a huge range of departments even including the department of defense but also homeland security department of energy precisely because you are correct in saying that these science domains are going to be critical to finding solutions to these problems one other quick note our committee has done a fair bit of work on the issue of science diplomacy and chairs the subcommittee which i formally chaired and we working with the foreign affairs committee on we've already passed with the chairman's support legislation to promote the diplomacy within department of state and n s c see but what if you could comment briefly on the role of as you see science center to diplomatic efforts fail that i q test i've been involved myself in in international science diplomacy since the beginning of the one nine hundred seventy s i think it's extremely important i think it provides important avenues of communication even when other aspects of relations are challenging i think it contributes to us national interests in a wide variety of ways and certainly we need to be nourishing it and expanding it since the time i was confirmed on march twentieth which was the moment i became able to meet with representatives of other countries i've had the chief science advisor to heads of state and governments to about eleven countries come through my office talking about things that could do together to improve science and technology cooperation between the united states and these other countries i've had the ambassadors of at least six countries in my office since being confirmed and i'm spending a lot of time down at the state department working with the folks there and i think it's the responsibility of o s t p to work with all of the other departments in the executive branch as well of course as working with the congress on every area in which science and technology play a role and certainly science and technology i'm talk regularly down there and and oh s t p folks from state department coming down i'm going down there with my colleagues we are watching they gather what how do you get it done the state department has the responsibility for orchestrating our international interactions and in that sense what o s t p is is a provider of insight about the science and technology content of those interactions and as a facilitator because we have many contacts of our own that we make the state department a i think two other committees you're supposed to be attending then i want to let him go ahead and then out stand in his position to speak about objection thank you thank you very much and welcome aboard and we look forward to working with you you're talking about international cooperation just one note those of us who've been around here for a long time realize that one area that we can that we have had cooperation internationally  and an area that can be expanded upon deals with cooperation on space technology and space endeavors we have challenges that have not been addressed internationally although i have spoken to the leaders of various space agencies in europe and russia and in various parts of world japan and they are very cognizant of the of the fact that we do not have a strategy right now to either clear space debris or deal with the near earth objects that may at some time be identified as a threat to the planet so i know that i'm looking forward to working with you and the administration to see how we can set up better cooperation internationally on these two vital areas that just really need to work another area i'd like to point out to you is that  while you are focused on science and technology issues there are some legal issues that go directly to america's competitiveness and our ability to remain a technological leader in the world and one is the patent issue which does not go through this committee but there will be a patent bill on the floor within the next few months and let me just note this bill like many bills that have been before the last ten years is a bill that has been put together by very powerful special interests in this society namely some fifteen mega corporations or international corporations who are trying to destroy the patent system they no longer want to  guy and these people of these corporations have been continually brought to court as infringers and they're just trying to change the whole structure so the little guy can't enforce his patents and that's a very important segment of america success is the strong patent protection that we've had one last issue is again back to space the chinese now and i understand this administration is leaning in that direction trying to break into the space launch market if you want to deal a death blow to america's high tech industry in terms of aerospace especially the space rockets and and missiles let the chinese get involved in  taking the technology they stole from us ten years ago and using it against us as competitors in the world market those are just three things that i thought i would throw in your direction and have any comment go right ahead and thank you very much i'll make brief comments i need to those points first first of all i very much agree with you that both space debris and near earth objects are important issues that are not being fully attended to at the moment and we need to get organized to do that we do propose to stand up a space council again and have it address some of these tough questions we've got some people on the president's council of advisors on science and technology who are experienced in space and interested in those issues and i've spoken with the acting nasa administrator chris kali's who is also interested in getting better organized to address those particular problems i'm sure the new nasa administrator whom we hope to name soon will share those  will share those concerns on the on the patent on the patent issues intellectual property is clearly a big issue that cuts across the science and technology domain innovation  the economic domain we have a new chief technology officer a nation chopra who is assistant to the president and c t o but also will we trust be confirmed by the senate as the associate director for technology and o s t p he's deeply knowledgeable about those issues and interested in them i think there's going to be an appointment another appointment in the in the white house in this area if you and he take a very close look at that bill and figure out who is behind it we've stopped for about ten years now but these are very powerful interests and well we will certainly be taking a look at that this is not my personal domain that is i cannot claim any expertise in patent law but we do have folks on board who do and we're going to be working across the agencies including with the any c thank you to try to get that right on the trying to issue and trying to being in the in the launch business i think it would probably be an overstatement to say the administration is leaning in the direction of facilitating that in one interview i said with respect to the gap launch capability that we ought to look at china i think looking at china is a long way from leaning toward doing any particular thing i'm well aware as is the rest of the administration that there are some downsides and big obstacles to working with china in that domain but there are also some benefits even to looking at china in terms of the situation we're in in terms of a gap sure you know that this committee has been concerned with scientific integrity issues for some time and i applaud the statement of principles on scientific integrity that the administration has already issued you all have said all the white things  d i'm confident that you will do all the right things as well but a lot of times the same conduct may either support scientific integrity or attack it depending on what the motive is why you're doing it there may be perfectly good reasons to have someone sit in all in a meeting between someone from the press and the scientist is not always a political minder there to intimidate so i'm sure if you set as you purpose and convey throughout government that you want to support scientific integrity that by itself will do a world of good one of the abuses of science has actually taken the form of a claim for a need to do more we need to have more sides and you'll never find the scientists who say we don't need to do any more research but that has been used as a pretext for action and that's particularly through a lot of the office  our system under e p a there was an initial listing that is now such an exacting process that was seven hundred new chemicals entering widespread commercial use every year  our system is producing two new listings a year but they are very carefully considered listing formaldehyde was first listed in the seventy's has been under review since the late eighty's there was thank you i guess i could be brief and say yes on all counts but i will answer in a little more detail first of all on the scientific integrity issue generally i agree with you in the implication that it's complicated terrain and sometimes in the name of science integrity one could do things that were not helpful one could imagine situations in which you suppose that science integrity means that science is the whole answer to every thing and that there's no proper place for values politics and other considerations none of us in the administration believe that we understand that science is an input to policy making but that other factors are always going to matter and science integrity doesn't mean that science  has to be the determiner of all results and and all circumstances we are doing a very careful job of trying to construct recommendations in response to the president's executive order that have started with soliciting input from all of the departments agencies and offices about what their current practices are about what they think about what's working and what isn't what their concerns are in respect to  balancing the different considerations that have to enter into procedures and practices and guidelines and we're going to shortly open that process up for public comment as well and i believe in the end that we will have a set of recommendations for the president on science integrity that will be both helpful and suitably balanced with respect to ira the answer is yes i have talked to professor  i think will prove to have a balanced position on this we've actually exchanged a number of our writings he's well aware of the need to act on imperfect information because as we all know information is never perfect we never know as much as we would like people in politics of course understand that you're making decisions every day on the basis of incomplete information about the problems you nonetheless have to decide on  people who say we don't have enough information to decide should understand that not to act is also to decide to make a decision in favor of the status quo i think we're going to get that right i think  is a very smart and very reasonable person and whatever oh ira's shortcomings in the past have been i would have confidence that he will move to fix them i know my time is close to having expired  the need for more scientific exactness was yes there is obviously always a need for that but that was frequently used by wire as a pretext for an action they wanted not to act and they use  that that has been a problem and my point is not to deny that that is a real problem and has been a real problem but i believe we're going to move to fix it because this administration is not interested in using uncertainty as a pretext for inaction more than three percent of our gross domestic product to research and development and and i stated we don't have any further information on how to administrative plans to meet this goal and i also stated the budget document released by your office did not even mention it that  y not have been completely fair with you so let me write your letter to that effect and give you a chance to look at your records and give me an answer on that i want to ask you something else while i have the time here though in the fossil feel fossil energy r and d budget the administration is zeroed out that all petroleum technologies program and record the ultra deep water you familiar with that deep water provision vision i tried to pass for ten years and i got it passed once and in the senate like a year and a half ago we put it in the energy bill or rode west with the president he signed it there with me watching him and since then he's tried this he tried to zero it out but i won't talk to you about that quote i really want you to look at that very closely and i'm giving you my reason now back in a hurry and back in march of this committee secretary chu stated in response to a question that i asked him quote the type of research  describe for example improving our ability to recover all from reservoirs i think it's appropriate for the department of energy to be funding things like that how do you explain this discrepancy and we're talking about five million for the whole technologies program and while the budget is fifty million a year that amount of money according to statute come from fund generated from federal lease rotis and rents and bonuses paid by and not from taxpayers that's what i want to hope you'll understand it's not just a technology nor an energy bayless both technology and industry because we saw at the aid of several universities and it's i think it's a little bit interesting that two of the universities that we've sought aid from and are receiving aid from and are working with and are paying for stanford and where you have an engineering and a theoretical plasma physics degree from mit are stanford are both so you know something about that have probably been involved with it hope you have because i think you're a fair guy and i think you know that it's something where we have a provision where we pay to get technology to get energy up out of the out of the base and we can't get it to the top but we've bought technology that helps us get to the top and we pay for that technology out of the energy we get and we don't get that energy if we don't get that technology we've got the technology and we need to get the energy at no cost to taxpayers and it's and president bush took it back on it because he was getting some heat on thinking that they'd help the big major majors don't find stuff like that they've bought from the little people that look for it and find this doesn't cost the taxpayers anything we get energy  wouldn't get if we didn't have that technology from not just stanford and mit but penn state university of south carolina university to take it austin texas at austin state and others there's i think fifteen or twenty that are working with us and are providing that technology that we need please look at that very closely because it's going to come across your desk sooner or later to try to take a shot at president bush took a shot at it we turned him down on the floor and i think most everybody on this list committee here republicans and democrats voted against her tail end of facility a lack that that will help us get rid of our legation to the arab states and make us less dependent upon them and it doesn't cost our taxpayers and i just don't see how anybody can turn their back on that employer upon you to look closely at it i don't even ask you to comment on it now  congressman paul i well i first have to say that is the chairman said you are a persuasive man this is not something that's been in my area of focus i don't i don't know the details of the history of it and i wouldn't presume to answer for secretary true but i will as you suggest take a look at it and become better informed about it so that when it comes across my plate i'll have constructive to say i do also want to say just a word about the three percent target we were not deliberately avoiding that issue i didn't think you were in my testimony the current level of r and d in the united states as a fraction of g d p as about two point six percent three percent would be above the peak of almost two point nine that was reached at the height of the space race currently of the two point six percent or so that's going to our indian g d p about one third of that is coming  from government from the federal government and about two thirds is coming from the private sector mostly another smaller entities if you ask how do you get to three percent there are two parts to that problem one is how  where do you boost the federal contribution in the other is how do you create the incentives to boost the private contribution we think we're already creating a good part of the incentive for the private contractor contribution by making the research and experimentation tax credit permanent if the president's commitment to spend one hundred fifty billion dollars over ten years on clean energy technology is made a reality that would actually be a very large down payment on getting the government's contribution up to the  first of all the n s t c which of course is the body managed by o s t p that tries to coordinate all the interagency science and technology issues that arise certainly will be deeply involved in this one that means that the department of agriculture will be represented along with e p a o s t p and the other relevant agencies i've already had some conversations with all of them about this particular issue it's an important one it's a complicated one indirect land use is certainly part of it there is a range of opinions about the state of science regarding  indirect land use impacts of growing biofuels that is under what circumstances would a us troy's to devote more of its agricultural land to biofuels create changes in land use elsewhere that themselves would have  greenhouse gas implications that is something we will be looking at very closely we'll be looking at the sustainability of biofuels as a general matter very closely again it's one of those complicated issues in which we're going to have to exercise ourselves to get it right but i believe we will ultimately get it right i would not venture to predict a particular set of outcomes at this point but it's on the table it's going to be looked an interagency way i've spoken with secretary vilsack about it as well as with administrator jackson and i think we'll succeed in working together to figure it out i guess part of my question is as we look at the energy the energy bill in front of us you know soon sometime where do you think that research is currently in terms of using it as we go forward with that initiative to answer that i think would be prejudging a bit what the what we will be asking the appropriate subcommittee in the n s t see to figure out ok thank you my other question i will stay on the subject of  in january this year the national science and technology council committee on science friday's report which includes a five year plan for the national plan genome initiative and over the last several years biomass for energy production has become an area of focus for many plant genome initiatives we've also heard that some of the research is too focused on energy and not other characteristics of plants such as drought resistance do you think there's enough research on the multiple beneficial characteristics of plants my general impression is that we need to be doing more there i myself have given talks about adaptation to climate change which stresses the importance of developing crops that are heat resistant that are drought resistant that are salt resistant  again without claiming deep expertise in that domain my impression is that we need to be doing more thank you  thank you very much mr chairman and dr holdren welcome to the committee appreciate your test but it is a all of my questions are going to focus on nasa and the future of our human spaceflight program as a member of congress who is fortunate to represent the johnson space center the home of our human spaceflight program i can tell you there's a lot of consternation and concern over its future getting administrator pointed and in your written testimony you listed eight of the important scientific issues facing the administration the future of american human spaceflight and the challenges nasa is facing was not among them were now nearly four months of the administration and as a nasa administrator has yet to be name much less nominated and confirmed the administration has recently announced a blue ribbon task force to review our human spaceflight program without any indication as to what concerns a president have about our human spaceflight program that he feels warrant an independent review the jail list of the top of the space shuttle as one of the top ten issues facing this administration that was ministration wide not just of then of us t v now more than ever nasa needs leadership and administr committed to our goal of reaching the moon by two thousand and twenty as a national priority my question to you is where does the administration per ties human spaceflight and where do you see the role of your office and giving priority at nasa is in our nation's human spaceflight program thank you congressman let me let me start by saying that the positioning of nasa in the testimony was not in those items briefly listed at the beginning which are initiatives that we already have well underway but there's a big treatment of nasa in the middle in which we talk about among other things the president's emphatic commitment to continuation of the human spaceflight program and and its importance i might  i might mention that the president has demonstrated his interest in that program in a number of ways we had a terrific event when in the previous shuttle flight our astronauts were on the international space station and we orchestrated a video link from the roosevelt room in the west wing of the white house the president surrounded by middle school science students and a number of members of congress with close links to the space program talking with the astronauts when the astronauts came back by the way  i was able to introduce him to the president in the oval office as well just about a week ago he is absolutely enthusiastic about space and about the manned space flight the human spaceflight component that he lights up every time space is on the agenda as you know we have some challenges those include budget challenges we're in a time of budget stringency we're not able to do everything that we'd like to do across the domains even the high priority ones but the reason that  we are standing up this blue ribbon panel chaired by norm augustine is to take a fresh look at what options we have to maximize our capacity to do the things we need and want to do in the human space flight program in the face of the budget challenges that we confront that panel under normal augustine is being tasked with looking at what we can do to minimize the gap in the capacity to put americans in space on american launchers they're being tasked to look at the workforce issues and the maintenance of capability between the end of the shuttle program in the beginning of the successor program they're being tasked to look at the international space station and what we can do to extract more of the value from what we've already invested there these are all issues that are important to the president and the jobs issues that i know are of concern to all of the members of congress who have districts and states in which their major spaceflight activities are very important the president as well this president is not interested in losing jobs in this country at this point he's interested in maintaining them and expanding them and one of the challenges to the augustine panel is to try to help us figure out how to better do that under the constraints that we face yes certain jobs are certainly important but it's critical that the united states maintains its leadership as the human spaceflight country we've had it for over fifty years we should give it up to any other in the world about the blue ribbon panel it sounds like everything is on the table they're going to be able to look at budget architecture and overall direction of the program is that a fair statement well it's close to a fair statement the current guidelines for the review are to examine options that can be carried out within the budget trajectory laid out by the two thousand and ten request if norm augustine and his panel conclude that something needs to be said about the implications of that constraint i expect it will be hard to keep them from saying time but i appreciate your answers thank you  you mr chairman thank you dr holdren for being here today and thank you for the opportunity to be on the conference call with you earlier i come from central florida and kennedy space center happens to be  my district so i am echoing many of the comments by congressman olson and express my deep concern for the potential job losses there having said that we are  register some of the concerns earlier mentioned and wanted to ask a couple of questions specific to space exploration documents show that we might not be able to meet the goal of returning to the moon by tw the goals of human space exploration and it's important to this administration do you know what the vision is at this point well i can answer part of that question first for percival the vision is in agreement with your comments in the previous ones that u s leadership in space is critical and that we need to maintain it second part of the vision is we need a balanced program in space has to include the human space flight component robotic exploration of space is important too but we need both and in fact we need a larger balance within that so that includes space exploration earth observation fundamental science aeronautics and more and one of the difficulties that we face is that in the last administration there was a grand vision for human exploration of space but the budget was never provided to achieve that vision and the absence of the budget to achieve the vision led indeed to raiding a number of the other budgets within nasa to try to get on that trajectory still not successfully because there wasn't enough money to be raided in those other pots to really get us on the trajectory to achieve the vision that president bush had articulated and so we're starting where we are unfortunately in terms of the gap between our aspirations and our means and what that blue ribbon panel headed by norm augustine has as its primary challenge is figuring out how to reduce the gap between our aspiration and our means i can't prejudge  what they will find in terms of what our options are for reducing that gap but i can assure you being myself an old friend and colleague of norm augustine's that if anybody can figure out the best approach is available to us it will be that panel and we will be i think announcing the names of the other panelists shortly they're investing now but it's going to be a very impressive group thank you for that answer i think there are many of us who are acutely aware of the fact that the budget to go with the vision never matched in the past and that that has to some degree put us in a situation where the potential for a gap is huge and could be very devastating in terms of job  retention having said that the recent announcement that the russians intend to charge now fifty one million dollars which is significantly greater over the last couple of years than what we up until now that indicates that we're looking at fundamentally changing that relationship it does when the price goes up very rapidly indicate the perils of monopoly and again i think at  least starting to think about other options could have some benefits in that domain but we certainly have no plans at the moment to go in a different direction thank you i think the suggestion that we were paying the russians t ere at this time of critical economic crisis within our own country is hard for many people to swallow and the potential also to lose our professional workforce during that five year gap is also a very serious problem in my in my district so i hope that we will take a very close look at what our options are there is kosmos i'm going to interrupt you just a bit because we're going to be called for votes and members are welcome to submit their additional working with you she is chairman of the research and science education subcommittees a lot of good things that i know we'll be doing in the next few years especially looking forward to workin want to to ask you about the energy innovation how it's very happy about the president's commitment to transformative energy technologies and it's great to see  that that commitment there that enthusiasm and my understanding is the energy innovation hubs are inspired by the success of the legacy of industrial labs like bell labs unfortunately you don't see those anymore but i want to ask do you see these houses being located in industrial academic or national lab settings the second part is what what culture you think would be best for technology transfer which is always a critical issue that that we are facing thank you for those questions they're good ones i think first of all the energy innovation notion is not to build entirely new institutions not not more bricks and mortar but to use existing institutions in innovative ways to promote energy innovation in my judgment they'll probably be located in a couple of different kinds of settings some may be academic some national lab maybe some industrial i think the most important thing is that they involve partnerships among all of those sectors we should be using the resources the insights and the perspectives of the academic community the private sector the national laboratories together and when you talk about technology transfer that underlines the importance of having the private sector intimately engaged because it is the private sector that has the best understanding of the markets in which these technologies ultimately have to work if they're going to succeed so i believe it is a historical matter we have underutilized of the potential of partnerships of these sorts and i think the innovation hubs definitely have an opportunity to begin to rectify that i certainly agree with you that the work and the partnerships encouraging partnerships is really critical and that's something i look forward to working with you on doing what we can to to do more to it  grad school i was just a little disappointed that the that the directorate for social behavioral economics sciences had recommended in the in the budget the smallest the recovery act my concern is what happens next after that funding is gone in you rightfully said we have to consider not just what's budgeted right now but also what was in the recovery act but what happens next what first of all we share your concern about the potential boom and bust characteristics of funding research if you have a big infusion like the recovery act and then it goes away and what do you do so there are a couple of approaches to  that and we're trying to work them all one is to get the baseline budgets up so that when the recovery money runs out you don't have a big plunge in the money that's available the second thing is to have some of that recovery act money go into multi year grants where it doesn't all have to be spent in the two years in question has to go out the door in the sense of commitment but the money in terms of the research that's done can be extended over a longer time another aspect of it is putting some of that money in these and equipment that don't lose their utility and their value at the end of the recovery act period all three of those strategies are being employed to try to minimize any boom and bust characteristic joyed when you receive the appointment from the president you've done a lot of good work for this country and various tests that you've been have been placed in your lap and i'm sure you do very well in this job to do so except that in the spirit in which it's offered you may not receive very many compliments as things go along you know how that goes i just wonder raise an issue about the national science foundation the overall budget going up i believe something like eight point five percent which we're all delighted about personally worked very very hard to get n s f increased over the years my concern is education and human resources which has the lowest increase about one and a half percent i spent a good share of my life both before the congress and in the congress trying to improve my sense education in this country we are making substantial progress  for budget under the previous administration at a certain point someone on the apparently decided that since we had started the the math and science program in  education department that n s f no longer needed any money so they zeroed out that portion of the n s f budget we fought very hard to get it back and we got some interest but it took it took quite a jolt that year and it has never recovered  was hoping that under this administration that would be changed and that the education and human resources would get an increase comparable to the total overall increase in honest and assess budget  comments on that or your explanation well congressman nadler first of all thank you for your kind remarks at the beginning i'm going to bottle those and save them for the for the grammer moments i have sometimes said that this this job that i've taken on is mostly like a drink from a fire hose except when it's a drink from a flame thrower and i do expect to experience a good deal of the latter as well as the former on the  r funding recommendation one of the things i would say about that is that in recent years the pattern of how education gets supported n s f has changed in the sense that across virtually all of the directorates education is explicitly a part of the mandate so it's not just concentrated in the h r anymore all across the agency grantees are being asked to develop education components of whatever it is they're working on it makes it harder to determine easily exactly how much money and effort is going into education at n s f but my sense of things is that f leadership as well as the administration are very strongly committed to advancing the stem education the science technology engineering and math education through through that agency and others were committed to tripling the number of n fellowships over a period of three or four years we are advancing stem initiatives through the department of education which you mentioned as well as in other dimensions so i'm basically optimistic we have a big challenge there as you very well know in terms of how far we have to go in lifting the quality of science technology engineering and math education from preschool to graduate school but we're committed to doing it i think we're going to get it done with they help the folks like you and the rest of this committee well i appreciate the comments and the reassurance and i was aware that in fact it is expanding across the various  agencies and departments within and i says but but to have the overall drop one point five percent there still needs to be a lot of direction from the central direction to to this issue and i  can say that having spent so many years in it it means a lot of different things to a lot of different people and i would worry about not having adequate direction and a centralized direction as to what the various departments or groups or agencies or what have you would do i'm also very concerned about working with the department of education that that was sort of an add on in the last few years of the bush administration and i very much appreciate what was done there  but i don't think they really had the time and the personnel to devote to that effort that it really needs and you're the logical one to bring that all together and make sure that the department of education is on the right track because of the n s f and also i would hope you can assist in getting additional money for our not that worried about the graduate fellowship part and worry about the k twelve in this lesson so i'm going to pretend that i'm down the line and i just well i use the time to just share with you that i represent a district that also services goddard space flight center and worked at the space program for a time and i have to tell you i my concern when looking both at the budget and the goals is that the budget doesn't quite match the goals especially in the out years for the space program and so i'm looking forward to hearing more from  then you know essentially kind of flat line but increased responsibilities and so i look forward to a review that enables us to have a budget for nasa that really matches the goals rather than expectations for the agency that it can't possibly meet given the budget and i think i will express another concern and allow you an opportunity to respond to it but it is that you know you're in the process of a review being conducted for on human spaceflight but we don't have an administrator in that reviews due by august and so i hope that it will be conducted with the kind of leadership that we need to make sure that we're operating off of may i just say that number one i think it is the perception that there is a mishmash mismatch between budget and goals which is one of the drivers of calling for this review and saying you know how we're going to deal with this and and  i'm certainly looking forward to the results of that review as much as anybody i also have some reason for optimism that the president will be nominating a permanent administrator for nasa  very shortly and that that will put at least that concern to rest because i think it will be an outstanding person the president and the president's concern has been to get the right person for that job the fact that we don't have one until now is nt was tremendously positive news and i thank you for your willingness to serve my questions on green buildings and as you know last october when the national science and tech consul issued its report on  net sero energy and i perform its buildings there was a lot of r and d that they focused on obviously our buildings are major concerns out there as it relates to energy policy but also a major bit of solution so just how do you see the coordination with d l we and other agencies including where you sit how all of that's going to come together and how we're going to invest in getting to that green building goal couple of  points congressman tom cole first first of all i agree with you about the importance of the building sector there's mendus opportunity there for big improvements in energy efficiency and and big gains there for both in three at the same time that our rosenfeld was starting the building energy program at the lawrence berkeley lab adjacent to the campus and i mention that because art rosenfeld is now an energy commissioner in the state of california remains one of the leading  experts on how you get this stuff done in the building sector and he's been pursuing a number of innovative approaches including a white rube's approach that both reduces the energy use in the building in the summer by reflecting more  sunlight that would otherwise be heating the building over heating the building and also addressing in the process some of the global climate change issue we have big opportunities there the other assets i would mention is d steve chu the new secretary of energy who is deeply knowledgeable having been the director of the lawrence berkeley lab among other things deeply knowledgeable about the potential of technology in this area and also a good friend of mine we probably speak five or six times a week so i'm not particularly worried about our ability to coordinate approaches to these challenges in the in the energy domain between o s t p the department of energy and i should mention that  secretary donovan and housing and urban development is also much seized with the importance of this issue and has himself meeting regularly with secretary chu and with me and with others to figure out how to get this done in an interagency way which oh if you don't have just a really burning question good or if you need to follow up do that and then let's try to get mad one question apiece for those that are left just make mention that at nicira to where i was just before this people were thrilled with your work and were looking forward anticipation areas in the reduction in the area of cleanup of legacy waste on weapons production recognizing that i was very supportive of the increase associated and contained in the recovery act but we do have a certain responsibility not only in utilize some of the investment they want to be making in energy supply and conservation specifically in the area of energy storage that we look to some of our energy front your research centers one of which is los alamos national laboratories where we're going to be taking seriously our oversee currently in order to pay for these centers one third of the cost of comes from the state a third from the federal government and a third from manufacturers but given the significant financial difficulties both of those small manufacturers in the area  well as the budget shortfalls of the state of michigan as well would the administration been to revising some of these costs with the n d p as you know it provides a very very valuable function that is essential for us to maintain our competitiveness in the manufacturing sector but given the financial meltdown that is occurring in michigan with the auto industry it is critical we maintain that but it also is putting a stress both on the small manufacturers as well as the state how would you respond pl e i would say first of all i agree with you that the m e p is valuable and important and i'm not an expert on the details of what might or might not be possible in terms of renegotiating the terms but i will certainly take that point back and bring it up with others in the executive office of the president who who have those responsibilities and see what we can do i appreciate that thank you thank you note that this committee has had strong about solar energy a lot come from arizona where we have an abundance of sunshine i was pleased to see the president proposed budget for solar at three hundred twenty million which was a significant increase but when i look at the potential not just for the southwest but the country even for the planet it seems to me that if we're really going to transition different energies that need to be reflected in the budget secretary if you could please just address how we can possibly continue to improve funding for solar and other types of renewa energies in light of the discussions that are happening around budget issues here well again i would note that the president is committed to a large increase in this hundred fifty billion dollars over ten years for clean energy technologies certainly stanfield chunk of that when it materializes and i hope that will be soon we'll go to to solar energy there is as you say enormous potential there it's one of the technologies where we really have the capacity to become leaders in the deployment and the development of advanced ways to harness sunlight and i trust it's going to happen we're going to have a substantial solar abbreviated hearing today you have much to bring us we're very interested in working with you and we will continue our conversation and i will say now that the record will remain open for two weeks for additional statements from members and for answers to all the follow up questions that th