testimony. >> chairman hall, ranking member johnson and members of the committee. i am pleased to be with you today to discuss the organization that i lead in the executive office of the president, namely the office of the science and technology policy. as you know, science, technology and innovation have been at the core of the american success story since the days of the founding fathers. advances in egronomy, electrification, mechanized transportation, among others have each in their time brought waves of economic growth and generated new opportunities, industries and jobs while also raising policy challenges. it was in recognition of these challenges that congress in 1976 created ostp to advise the president on the scientific, engineering and technological aspects of the issues before him and to help coordinate, lead and develop budgets for federal rnd programs. today ostp's work is accomplished by a staff of about

100 people spread across four divisions and the director's office. almost 90% of these are science and technology professionals. many of them detailed to us from agencies. this diversity of talent is essential given the scope of the interelect all terrain we discover and the coordination functions which include running the science technology council and the major inter-agency initiatives that fall under it, for example, the u.s. global change research program and the initiative as well as supporting the president's council of advisers on science and technology on the development of its reports for the president. i've submitted for the record a detailed summary of ostp's activities and in my brief remarks this morning i will highlight just a few of these. first, reflecting the administration's strong focus on jobs and the economy, ostp has been active in efforts to leverage science and technology for economic growth. we partnered with the council of

economic advisers and the national economic council to develop the administration's strategy for american innovation and we launched such job-focused initiatives as start-up america, focused on small businesses and entrepreneurs and the advanced manufacturing partnership which brings together universities, industry and others to invest in emerging technologies that have the potential to create high quality, am doestic, manufacturing jobs and most recently u.s. ignite aimed at accelerating availability to u.s. users of ultrafast internet and new products and services based on it. second, in support of the administration's goal that the united states lead the world in clean energy technology, we have prioritized budgetary support for basic and apply red search in this important domain, and have pushed the development of advanced materials in part through the materials genome initiative which is another

private/public partnership combining the both sectors. third, ostp has supported engineering and math education. we work with the president and the domestic policy council to innovate a public, private innovate to improve k through 12 education that has attracted more than $700 million in corporate and philanthropic commitments to work in classrooms across the country to improve instruction in science and mathematics and change the equation, a non-profit organization that is mobilizing the business community to improve stem education across the united states and we've been aggressively addressing stem education tasks specified in the america competes, re-authorization act including completion of a comprehensive inventory of the stem education programs. fourth, i want to mention ostp's leading roles with other white house offices in the implementation of the president's open government initiative. under the leadership of the u.s. chief technology officer todd

park, we have been opening the workings of government to the american people and focusing heavily on making government data a driver of private sector innovation and job creation. in closing, let me simply say that with continuing support with our partners in congress, ostp is working every day to ensure that the policies and proposals emanating from the executive branch are informed by the most up-to-date and objective insights about the relevant science and technology and to strengthen the u.s., science, and technology enterprise and the benefits to the nation that flow from it. i look forward to continuing to work with this committee to these ends and i'll be pleased to answer questions that the members may have. thank you. >> thank you, sir. i'll start out with three questions for you. ostp released a fact sheet high. ing the energy priorities and the fact sheet stated, quote, we

now face a make or break moment for the middle class and those trying to reach it, unquote. it's unclear whether the president's energy agenda is for the middle class these policies, policies to restrict oil and gas exploration and production and reject the keystone pipeline which would enhance domestic energy security and an avalanche of epa regulations on coal plants and the automobiles and numerous other industries and they ultimately raise energy prices for all americans and the clean energy standard that would mandate america's bielectricity and less reliable sources such as wind and solar power which are both good and not as reliable. how has it regulated any cost approach to the middle class and the overall american community, not just the middle class and explain that to us, if you

would, sir. >> first of all, mr. chairman, the president and the administration have what the president has described as an all of the above energy strategy in which oil, gas and coal plays an important part. renewable energy which you mentioned plays an important part in increasing energy efficiency plays an important part. we recognize we need all of these energy options to secure our energy future and we are working to enable all of them and lift all of them to their highest potential. we do not have a policy of regulation no matter what the cost. in fact, regulations are reviewed very carefully in light of the science evidence that is available before they are put forward. and i think we've been doing a good job in this administration to put forward in regulations that are strongly based in solid science.

it is certainly our intention to provide an energy future in which the united states imports less energy, therefore pays less to other countries for its imported energy and relies on a wide diversity of domestic energy sources to provide the affordable and reliable energy supply that our economy needs and that our consumers need including, of course, the middle class. well, i totally agree with you, and i think some of the indications have a disdain for energy and certainly declared war on agriculture and got around to energy. we have enough energy access to lease it rather than buy it.

i think it's a sad situation when we're in the situation we're in here. in july or august, i accept the statements that you made. i just don't agree with it. in july and august, nasa's commercial crew program will select the next round of companies for the third phase of dom of theic development known as commercial integrated capability program. nasa plans to give 300 million to 200 million possibly three companies used in the space act agreements which stood a more typical government contracts and according to the space act agreements don't permit nasa to impose design or safety requirement on the contract. with regard to nasa, the use of space act agreement on the commercial crew program, how can we assured that nasa's developing safe systems if it's prohibited from leffening any design requirements to demand a

performance task from the companies? before i turn to that nasa question, let me just mention, mr. chairman, that our energy imports have been sharply declining under this administration. we are moving in exactly the direction that you also endorse which is a moving toward importing less and i think that's very beneficial. on the nasa question, it's my understanding that nass had has in fact been able to apply the vehicle requirements to the cargo transportation development efforts that have been taking place. the contracts that have been awarded in the next phase of the commercial cargo and crew will allow nasa to specify safety requirements and to oversee them. i am confident, and the president is confident that we will continue to maintain nasa

oversight of safety in these operations. i surely hope so. my time expired and i recognize mrs. johnson for five minutes. >> you forgot to look to see who is over here. >> miss woolsey. >> i'm sorry. i can make a five-minute speech about miss woolsey. we're going to lose you, and if miss johnson was here i'd recognize her. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. >> yes, you do. more discerning about your women. so dr. holdren, thank you for all you do. we put a lot of importance on your office and we expect a lot and we get a lot. how is the united states stacking up as compared to the rest of the world as the science

and technology in the policies that we put in place and feel free to tell us where we can do better. first of all, i would say that the united states continues to lead the world in science, engineering and innovation across a very wide array of crucial fields of fundamental research and applied research, the united states leads the world. we remain by far the largest funder of research and development around the world. the sum of our expenditures on rnd and the public? private sector is over $400 billion a year and that's in the vicinity of 30% of all of the world's expenditures on rnd. we continue, as well, to lead the world in space although sometimes the contrary is asserted. our planetary exploration programs have absolutely no

peer. we have missions or on the way sen of the eight unofficial planets and now the voyager, and no one is even close. when you look at the firsts in space, some people say china is overtaking us. well, china just put its first woman in space a few days ago. we put our first woman in space, sally ride in 1983. one can go on through the list. china is talking about maybe being aible to land someone on the moon in 2020 and we did it in 1969. the one area where we need to work much harder is one i've already mentioned. the area of stem education where the united states that used to lead the world in most indices in stem education has now fallen to the middle of the pack. that is a bad trend and one we are working very hard across a wide variety of fronts to help

remedy. at the same time, i would argue that across the board we cannot afford to be complacent. one of the areas that is clearly crucial in linking science and technology and innovation to the economy is the translation of discovery from laboratories and research universities and our great national laboratories, accelerating the translation of those discoveries into commercial products and services and new processes and there the american manufacturing partnership, the turls gene only initiative and the start-up america initiative are all aimed at accelerating and making more efficient the processes by which we turn scientific and engineering advance into economic advantage. >> so -- because we are increasingly on the cutting edge of science and there are intersections of multiple disciplines. what are the challenges that you

face involving different federal agencies, academia and industry in the efforts of our country to go forward with science and technology? >> thank you for that question. >> let me answer it in two parts. first is the interagency engagement and coordination and there as mentioned in some length in my testimony, ostp has the responsibility and i have the responsibility as its director to oversee and lead efforts to coordinate, science, technology and innovation across agency boundaries and for that purpose we have the science and technology council which is nominally chaired by the president, but in practice i normally chair it. it has five standard committees, one on science, one on technology, one on stem education and one on national security and international affairs and one on environmental and natural resources and sustainability. under those standing committees

are many subcommittees. this entity is exceedingly active and the departments and agencies are stepping up and participating energetically in cooperative efforts to build these interagency initiatives that have to draw on the competencies and the resources of the wide range of agencies that we have engaged. the global change and the research program has 13 agencies engaged and the technology initiative and the networking and information technology and the rnd initiative have a large number of agencies and are stepping up, even in tight budget times they understand you cannot afford the interagency collaborations. with respect to the private sector and the other part of your question, it is really remarkable and inspiring to me the extent to which private companies and universities are stepping up. folks from coalitions of private companies and universities are

in my office almost every day asking how they can help and how they can do more and we've engaged them across the range of these partnerships that i've already mentioned a number of. i think the private sector is particularly interested in being sure, number one, that we maintain the foundation of basic research on which the private sector needs to draw for the research and development of the more applied nature that they primarily undertake. they're also very interested in helping with and helping us maintain our emphasis on stem education because they are well aware of the need to maintain the pipeline of the next generation of innovators, inventors and discoverers and the skilled workforce that they need across the board in the high tech industries in order to continue to compete and succeed. >> thank you, mr. chairman. my time is up. >> the young lady's time has expired and i recognize mr.

rohrabacher for five minutes. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i'm noticing that the department of energy and the nuclear program still seems to be focused on light water reactors and i'd like to ask you your view on that and it seems that what we've been doing at least from what i can see from the budget request that the d.o.e. is basically going from 25% of its nuclear energy program aimed at the spectrum reactors and the new high temperature reactors. we've spent 25% of our research on that going down to 15% while

the spending on light water reactors which is essentially old technology is being increased in the budget request. is this the policy out of the administration? >> the light water reactors are not investments in old technology. they're investments in light water technology including modular light water reactors which we think have an enormous potential to energy in the country, but to a substantial export market. >> basically, it's an old concept, but a new approach. is that a -- >> when you say it's an old concept -- it's a 67-year-old -- >> well, it's a very -- congressman rohrabacher, fast spectrum reactors are also a very old content and have been deplored for a long time and we are of the view that if you want

nuclear energy to be an expanding contributor to a low-emission energy supply in this country in the near future, that's going to happen largely on the basis of advanced light water reactors and they need to make sure that succeeds to provide a continuing base for nuclear energy. >> then it will leave us with reactors rather than the new reactors that i'm referring to that would somewhat solve the nuclear waste program and many scientists are telling us that. as compared to the light water reactors that you are now suggesting that you approve of in that direction. would they not leave the same nuclear waste problem that we have? first of all, i approve of advanced light water reactors for the next phase.

with those that youio are approving with the next phase leave us with the same nuclear waste prob tlaem we've been having so much trouble dealing with? >> the problem would be the same if we didn't take steps to solve it. >> unless we focused on a completely new approach in which 97% of the waste is consumed rather than having so much left over. we are, congressman, focusing on research and development focusing on the new approaches with the possibilities. >> you are decreasing the spending on that and decreasing the spending on the nuclear program that actually leaves us with the same old problems. i'd like to shift this now, too, because i only have a couple of minutes here. it's very clear in the appropriations act in 2011 that we have the congress as directed

with the administration not to be cooperated on science projects with china. we have the world's worst human rights abuser and a country that still murders religious believers. a country whose government has mandated a massive technology theft program towards our country and is using that technology, but they're stealing from us to try to leapfrog us in the number of technological areas. is your office complying with this law and that is suggested that he should not be engaged in cooperating with the chinese on scientific matters? >> congressman rohrabacher, the current law does not say that we should not be cooperating with china. it says that when we do we must notify the congress 14 days in

advance and a sure the congress that we are not in the course of this cooperation, surrendering national security secrets or corporate secrets or dealing with people that are directly involved with the rights violation. the gao doesn't agree with you with the gao report. the meeting of section 1340 is clear that the ostp may not -- may not -- this is a quote from the gao here, may not use its appropriations to participate, collaborate or coordinate bilaterally in any way with china. you're suggesting, that it was wrong in that assessment? >> the gao was right at the time it wrote and the language is superseded by the subsequent appropriations legislation which clearly specifies that we may cooperate with the conditions that i was mentioning and so we are in complete compliance with the current law on that. >> why is it that you feel this administration feels so

compelled to reach out to the worst's world human rights abuser that is already in the process of stealing so much from us and whom we have examples over and over again that scientific cooperations turned into a transfer of wealth and technology to our adversary, to what appears to be economic, if not military and political adversary. >> first of all, the administration is no admirer of the human rights policies in china and we constantly, when we travel to china for whatever purpose raised the human rights issues with them. we also raised with them the issue of the theft of intellectual property. >> if when you raise issues like that, when you go to china don't your actions speak louder than your words because you were there to find ways to cooperate with the people whom you are now saying we're very concerned about this, now we met that

responsibility. so let's go do this. >> actually, congressman rohrabacher, the point that i make. >> okay. >> with my interlock outors in china is selected to be beneficial us to as well as china is jeopardized by china's human rights and intellectual property theft and that if those activities do not stop that these beneficial activity, mutually beneficial activities will not be able to continue. that is an explicit point that i make. >> thank you very much. >> i don't think you get the answers that you expected to get, mr. rohrabacher. i, too, have seen the president bow to the enemy on many occasions. the chairman recognizes miss bower for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman and mr. holdren for the work that you do.

you described advising the president on the application of science and technology on the matter of importance. one matter of serious importance in my district and to the nation more general is the aftermath of the devastating tsunami that hit japan last year. the oregon coast has beaches and a coastline that thrives on tourism and fishing industry. oregon is the only state where the entire coastline is public. three weeks ago a 66-foot long dock washed up on to the shore from japan and thus far it's the biggest piece to land on our shores, but we've seen an increase in smaller debris. scientists at noaa are predicting that more is on the way. last week i held a roundtable discussion to discuss the coordination of efforts to detect, mitigate and clean up the debris resulting from the tsunami. it's an effort that involves multiple federal agencies and also state and local governments and even the public at large. additionally, the cost of the debris removal is looking

certain to stretch the budgets of our state and local governments, but beyond this year, the cost of the debris, the potential of the debris to carry invasive species from japan such as those that were discovered on the dock poses a challenge to our scientists who have to assess the threat to the marine ecosystems. the two other federal agencies that have been working on the detection of the tsunami from the epa and noaa, considering noaa office's coordination on science matters and the potential impact on the debris of our coastal ecosystems, where do you see your office fitting into the response effort at a federal level and please describe any efforts that you've taken thus far on this issue. thank you. >> thank you for that question. my office is advisory and analytical more than operational and so we try to work with the departments and agencies that have operational

responsibilities to be sure that what they're doing is coordinated and consistent with the best understandings of science as we know them and we are in close coordination in that sense with noaa and epa in their responsibilities around the coasts including the responsibilities for monitoring and responding to what reaches us from japan as a result of that devastating tsunami. >> we have been particularly engaged in my office, in conducting and overseeing assessments at levels of radio activity that have reached or could reach the united states and the reassuring thing i can say about that is although our ability to monitor is so good that we are able to detect even very tiny concentrations of radio activity. the radio activity that has, in fact, reached the united states so far is all on that very tiny category and does not reach levels of public health concern, but we will continue to work with noaa and epa to monitor,

particularly that radio activity aspect of what reaches our coast and it reaches our aspects. i will say that i think noaa, as with many agencies has been struggling with 20 pounds of missions and a ten-pound budget and we all struggle with that challenge today. i think noaa would tell you if the administrator was here today that while they're working very hard at fulfilling these responsibilities it would be easier to do if they had a little more money. >> i appreciate that, dr. holdren, and i must say that many people around the table understood that this is something unprecedented and not knowing what and when and where the debris will wash up has been challenging. in the minute that i have left, would you please discuss some of the work that you're doing on increasing stem education?

we all understand the importance of it, but could you discuss the deficiencies in the skilled workforce in promoting stem education among young people in this country? >> i would mention since time is short, just a couple of things. one is that the president's 2013 budget proposal calls for 3 billion in programs across the government in stem education which is 2.6% increase over 2012 enacted and a considerable part of that investment is in two specific, critical aspects of the education system, one is k through 12, teacher effectiveness and teacher preparation where we're working very hard to prepare 100,000 new high-quality stem ed teachers at the k through 12 level in the next decade and the post-secondary stem education domain is one in which we currently lose about 60% of the students who enter college