little more on the specific case in point. in general, what president has stood for strongly is limiting, reduce i reducing -- >> decreasing electric generating facilities is likely to increase the cost of electricity. yes or no. >> let me address regulation. utilities, if i could. regulation is -- with regard to regulation is things that bear strictly on help -- has not allowed us to go forward with regard to what happens to

utility power costs, new form of generation are less expensive that old forms of generations in many cases. >> if they're subsidized. the last is that comment that congressman from new jersey mentioned about the letter. about russia. this is the let e sent on february 17th so for your staff to find that, there was a letter directed asking perhaps they need to communicate that to you. >> all right. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> all right, the chair recognizes mr. pompeio. >> thank you for joining us. i appreciate your enthusiasm for the growth of american manufacturing. the president, i represent south central kansas, the air capital of the world. the president has more times than we have minutes remaining in our day, talked about

corporate fat cat jet owners. would just like to have more supersizer, stop talking down this incredibly important industry. can you walk me through how he thinks the customers, engineers that live in the heart land of america, how talking down that industry has anything to do with job creation in america? >> so, i'm sorry. just take me a little further. what industry -- >> the general aviation industry cessna. beach craft and learjet and boeing and hundreds of suppliers that live in south central kansas building these very airplanes that are sold to the folks that the president refers to as corporate fat cat jet owners and it hurts the

industry -- to fly around in a business tool. i'm asking you for what the talking down could possibly be? >> my experience in my and i know this directly. i was for 18 and a half years, a member of the boeing board of dr directors. the president has been very, very supportive of the u.s. aviation and when i do the tours that i do around the world, i am again and again and again espousing u.s. aviation. component, parts -- >> i appreciate that. >> it's what i do. >> i appreciate that. it's incredibly important industry. one of our largest export industries. he may be supportive of it, but the things he says when he speaks and his notion that we should increase user fees and he wants to increase taxes are inconsistent with your statement that he is supportive of that, so anything you can do to help

make sure that folks want to use these as business tools, they're very efficient, they're a great product and we make them here in the united states of america. i want to turn to a second topic. you said you go out to a lot of manufacturers. i was a manufacturer for a few years before i came here. when you ask them the things that restrict their ability to create and grow jobs and they list the top three or four, do any of them talk about federal grants as important? do you say mr. secretary, the most important thing you could do for me would be to provide a federal grant to my business? >> any advanced manufacturing area and principally, possibly exclusive to the advance manufacturing area, yes, because the focus there is in a global and competitive world to retain the smarts, the most outstanding

means of retaining and enhancing our competitive position, in technology and the form of advanced manufacturing will be a significant part of that and if the role that the federal government playing by way of a stimulus by the way of the work that is missed, the work we're doing on nano technology right now, and that has opened every case. the only thing i know, let's just say in the united states, as a manufacturer focused on advanced manufacturing could go and use the lab and bring in the best people. >> i appreciate that. the economic development administration is a good example. aren't providing for and vanced manufacturing technologies,

programs that are going to online industries. do those folks talk about grants? i hear get the government out of my way. get regulation out of my way. help me with trade so i can have access to markets. even the president. said when he was campaigning, we need to cut back waste at agencies like the economic development administration. his words. september of 2008. i haven't seen that. i've seen continued efforts of this to pick winners in the manufacturing space. >> the federal government is involved in manufacturing in multiple ways. the work of the manufacturing extension partnership works with so many of these small and medium size d manufacturers and the communities and colleges that work with them, so yes,

there's federal government. there are dollars associated with that. what we try to do is use those dollars really, really well. with ralph regard to -- >> i'm sorry. go ahead. >> economic development administration likewise small budget, very tight rollover cost and is the only development economic administration across the entire federal government and does things we could provide -- >> i'd welcome that. appreciate that. thank you. so many good things, i just wish you'd spend less time trying to redistribute wealth and more time trying to create opportunities for everyone. >> do you have time for one more question from the last member if it's a brief question? the last member has a quick question for you. >> okay, yes, we can do one. >> your staff is indicating

you'll drive quicker to the airport. the chair recognizes miss blackburn. >> mr. secretary, you've been patient with you today and we are appreciative of that. i knew that congressman dingle asked you a little bit about information technology. in my district in tennessee, we've got a lot of performers as well as having a lot of small business manufacturers who purchase information technology in order to try to get a competitive edge. and then it turns around that they are competing with companies that in china or russia or somewhere that have stolen that information technology. and what i want to know from you is what can you do and can the federal government do anything about the competitive harms that are caused by the theft of that information technology that drives the efficiencies and also, about other u.s.

intellectual project that is stolen and specifically, are you going to put any strong ip protections in trade agreements like the trans pacific partnership? >> the short answer is intellectual property that we do not get compensated for, that is taken in other countries and there's no compensation and no recognition of where that initially came from. is flat out a loss to the people in our country who deserve the right to be compensated for what they provide and with that, those people could only make better products rather than not getting the compensation they should have. so that is our responsibility at the commerce department. to see to it that those obligations are honored and that when it's not done, that we file these many proceedings against

them that i've described earlier to see to it that it's done and that is a non-stop job at the commerce department. >> and then are you going to insert stronger ip protections with trade agreements like the transpacific? >> yes. >> thank you. yield back. >> thank the gentle lady. mr. secretary, you've been very gracious with your time. we appreciate you being with us today. we look forward to working with you in the future and let's just make printing help wanted signs a booming business in america. we wish you safe travels -- >> one thing on the record i was going to ask to be sure that i have less -- with regard to this question that i had about the manipulation of currency in china and what i repeatedly answered is that's the u.s. treasure ary's role, but what i don't want to let stand is that we believe that china absolutely must allow its currency to

aappreciate. that is critical. so -- and thank you very much. apologize for putting this last word in. >> that's okay. appreciate your clarification there. again, safe travels to and fra california and we'll take a very brief recess as we see the second panel. >> thank you.

we're ready to begin with our second panel. joining us today are dr. robert atkinson, president of innovation foundation. al fan zoe lubrano, small and medium manufacturers. craig giffi, vice chairman and u.s. leader at deloitte and dr. kenneth tindall, from the north carolina biotechnology center. good afternoon. thank you all for being here with us today in front of our subcommittee. you'll each be recognized for five minutes. please watch the timers in front of you. when it turns yellow, you have a minute to wrap up and make sure to turn on your microphone and bring it close to your mouth. the audience at home needs to hear you and only can if you're

speaking clearly into the microphones. dr. atkinson, you are recognized for five minutes. >> thank you madam chairman. it's a pleasure to be here. itif has been doing a fair amount of research on what's happened to the u.s. manufacturing economy and we'll be releasing a report shortly on what we need to do to fix it. we lost a larger share of our manufacturing jobs in the last decade than in the great depression. consensus is a reflection of superior performance that all of these jobs were lost due to high productivity and our analysis says that's partially true. companies get more xhisht sh don't have to hire as many workers. but two-thirds r were lost due to the fact u.s. companies were not able to be competitive and the analysis, my testimony goes into more detail on that, but

one important point, 13 of 19 manufacturing sectors are actually producing less today than they were in 2000 in inflation adjusted terms. this is unprecedented in american history. it's never happened before. every decade before this, we've had expansion of manufacturing. we argue that when measured properly, u.s. manufacturing output declined 11% in the last decade in inflation adjusted terms and one indicator of that is when you look at the amount of capital investment that investors make, capital stock, the amount of machines, computers, everything that they have. and in most decades from 1940 to the present, capital stock is growing about 30% a decade. sometimes 50%. in this last decade, it grew 1.2%. there's a big challenge. we think we have to respond. so what it's trying to do. i think there are a number of

areas that are important. clearly, we, i should say, there, i don't want to sound overly pessimistic. there are some trends in the right direction. we heard earlier about natural gas and the input costs like chemicals. that's an important new benefit the u.s. economy didn't have five, ten years ago. certainly, some costs are going up in countries like china. many companies are taking a look offshore and using full cost. what are some of those? three major ones. one is on the tax side. we have the dubious honor now of april 1st to have the highest corporate t tax rate in the world and that's also close to on the effective rate. we've got to do something on the corporate tax side that doesn't just rejigger the deductions and

incentives and leaves the effective rate the same. we've got to focus on reducing the effective rate. i would argue before, we should do that in a way that keeps key incentives thr critical to manufacturers. one of those is makers or modified accelerated cost recovery system, which is essentially being able to write-off committee sooner than you would. that's a critical incentive. the rnd tax credit, those are all very critical tax incentives that help u.s. manufacturers become more competitive. i think one other area we need to focus on, we should be focusing on a new kind of regulatory reviews so that major regulations have to go through a competitiveness screen. if we, there are needed regulations, but impacts on sectors that are globally traded, we need to look at that

more carefully. those could have bigger impacts. having said that, i think it's not enough to focus just on cost reduction. it's important, but the germans, their wages 45% higher than ours, so we have to get better. not just cheaper. one key area is trade. a number of people have talked about that. our view, there is invasion mercantile going on in brazil, china, india, russia. we have to get a lot tougher. that's about defending globalized trade. defending the free trade system, which they are systemedly violating. last point is technology. i don't think we can win this without doing all three things. we have to have the tax system, the trade system. we have to have a technology system and i give the

administration credit and this national network of manufacturing institutes, many have these partnerships that help develop this technology and get it out to companies. thank you very much. >> thank you. mr. lubrano, you're recognized for five minutes. >> thank you members of the subcommittee in allowing me this opportunity to testify on the national association of manufacturers. i'd like to start by saying this is an extremely exciting time for our country and manufacturing. i am president of -- in rhode island, where a subsidiary of the corporation headquartered in mayfield heights, ohio. we have officers in north america, europe and asia and serve customers in more than 50

countries. it is the world's leading resource fringing in specialty strip products and offers a wide range of products and expertise in numerous markets including automotive and consumer electronics. i have been leading the company since 1992. it is my privilege to serve of nam's board of directors as vice chair of the small to medium sized group, manufacturing group an on the board in general. i also serve as xharm of the rhode island manufacturers association and on itac 11 here in washington. i'd like to make a quick statement and what creates jobs and critical component for sustained economic recovery is job growth. with 95% of the potential consumers out of the united states, manufacturers everywhere have to compete globally.

the way jobs are created is we go out and have to compete for that global business. if we're competitive, we book the business. if we book the business, we have to make things. we make things, we hire people. very simple. manufacturers have been proud to be leading the nation's economic recovery. with increased productivity, renewed investment, employment, export and innovation. as we have heard many times today, we're the top manufacturing economy in the world accounting for 21% of global manufacturing. none the less, we remain extremely concerned about the challenges facing us in the united states. it's 20% more expensive to manufacture products here. if you look at that 20% and add china's currency manipulation, we come out of the box at a 60% in some cases, disadvantage. not to mention the trade barriers that put up. as president of the small business, i deal directly with

these costs on a daily basis. i have an e-mail on my laptop about a new opportunity in china. their trade barers are likely going to prevent me, for a small company called apple. that's two to five jobs i'm not going to be able to get potentially. so the situation on a global bases and the uncertainty really, really hurts our able toy create jobs. we created roughly 150 in the last five months. you could be talking about 600,000 jobs. in order for us to continue to create jobs in this country, we need congress to help us get more competitive. it's all about global competition. there are four goals nam has put

together. i defer you to lead those, but the united states needs taxes for global markets to enable us to get and reach 95% of these consumers that lif outside our borders. to do that, we need effective tax policy, energy policy. we need to stop these insane regulations and quick point about the environment. i have children, grandchildren. i want them to breathe clean air. overregulating is going to hurt the environment into other countries that are not as careful with the environment as we are. so in theory, overregulation is going to backfire and hurt the global economy. lowering the tax rate is important. the back is another important parameter that we need. we need ftas.

the ftas we have in place actually have trade surfaces. as a matter of fact, over the last four years, we have accumulative trade surplus of $120 billion. that brings the record to jobs. we need jobs for the sustained economy. i've talked about that earlier. workforce development. i have three technology jobs i can't fill right now. you multiply that, we could be talking 600,000 to a million and a half jobs unfilled because of workforce. i know i'm out of time. i just want to end with this is a time of great optimism for manufacturing in the united states. we ask for your help. help us get more competitive. please. i'm begging you. we can do it. we can get those jobs back here. we can make this economy rock,

but we need your help. we can't do it without your help. >> thank you. >> mr. giffi, you're recognized for five minutes. >> good afternoon. thank you for inviting me to testify this afternoon. the work of this committee and your leadership to help bolster u.s. manufacturing competitiveness is essential to this country and well appreciated. for the past several years, deloitte has had the privilege of working with the world economic forum and manufacturing institute to understand the capabilities to drive through competitiveness. deloitte has con zuducted a sur in the last three years. the results indicate americans remain steadfast to creating a competitive manufacturing. 85% believe that the

manufacturing sector is important for our standard of living. ask how they would prefer to create a thousand jobs with any facility, americans indicated they wanted the jobs to be in the manufacturing sector. as part of the world forum, we uncovered compelling research which indicates it is linked to economic prosperity, important link to the prosperity of its middle class. this also indicates that the capabilities of the manufacturing sector is the best predictor of prosperity of the long-term. and trade and the more advanced the manufacturing capabilities possesses. finally, for the benefits that their citizens could derive from

a manufacturing sector and this is showing an increased emphasis on advanced capabilities and products. and a parallel effort, deloitte conducts a survey of ceos of manufacturing organizations around the world to gain their perspective, as well as their views of the relative ranks on terms of competitiveness. we conducted a series of one-on-one interviews on behalf of the counsel, ceos, labored union and the directors of some national lab tors. many of the leaders participating describe the critical relationship between manufacturing and innovation in an ecosystem that including community colleges, universities national laboratories and the private and public sectors and they refuted any notion that america can retain its

competitive research over the long run without also maintaining strong capabilities in manufacturing. they must go hand in hand. not surprisingly, all identified talent driven innovation as the key driver while also noting the growing skills gamble in america is one of the most concerning challenges affecting the u.s. according to a recent survey of u.s. manufacturers, 67% of executives reported moderate to severe shortages of qualified workers for open positions translating into more than 600,000 available jobs that can't be filled today because employers can't find workers with the skills they need. america's secret sauce for success must lie in a workforce equipped with science and math backgrounds needed to compete with the very best and the creativity of leadership to be

solution pace setters for the the world. a common theme, the counsels ignite series of recommendations to policymakers from u.s. business leaders, and the labor union leerds, the input from the american public or perspectives on the future of manufacturing from our work with the world economic forum is that the u.s. needs a comprehensive strategy for the 21st century and we will need an effective collaboration with the united states being recognized as the leader in workforce talent, innovation and in business climate. actions that facilitate that will enable the u.s. to drive high value job creation and economic prosperity for generations to come. thank you for this opportunity. i look forward to addressing your questions. >> mr. tindall, five minutes is

your time. >> good afternoon. thank you for the invitation to share my experience that you're hearing today. my answer, can american -- let me explain. my organization, the north -- for a state funded non-profit to create an -- recretement and growth resulting in bio tech jobs. critical to the industry, these factories make some of our most advanced therapies. processed technicians may have associates or bachelors degrees. and virtually all these facilities employ from certificate to ph.d. these are great jobs. salaries begin around 30,000 for a high school graduate with s