there's $29 billion in this bill for the national science foundation. so don't you think the american people deserve to know where their money is being spent? this was from their sister agency, the n.i.h. but we can't get started without talking about it. this is over $800,000 to study whether or not japanese quail are more sexually promiscuous on cocaine. i'm not making this up. $800,000 of taxpayer money to study whether japanese quail are more sexually promiscuous on cocaine. you think we could have just polled the audience. you think we could have just said, what do you think? because that's sort of the answer. the answer is yes. and yet your government spent 800 grand on that. when we pointed it out five years ago, did they do anything to reform it? no, they're here today to give the agencies that are doing this research more money. another one that i think is quite revealing is this study is about panamanian male frog calls. half a million dollars and they wanted to know whether or not the male mating call is different in the country than it is in

we spend the national science foundation. is it getting any better? are they doing a better job at overseeing their money? i don't know. they increase their funding by 68 percent. there's $29 billion in this bill for the national science foundation. don't you think theamerican people deserve to know where their money is being spent ? this is from their sister agency nih. this is for $800,000 to study whether or not japanese quail are more cosexually promiscuous oncocaine . i'm not making this up. $100,000 of taxpayer money to study whether japanese quail are more sexually promiscuous on cocaine. ouyou think we could have just pulled the audience and said what do you think because that's sort of the answer, the answer is yes and yet guard your government spent 800 grand on that and did they do anything to reform it? no. they're here to give the agencies doing this research more money . another one that i think is quite revealing is this study is about panamanian male frog calls. a half $1 million and they wanted to know whether or not the male mating c

so, fast-forward and we spend st about $8 billion a year with the national science foundation. is it getting any better? do they have better jobs overseeing their money? i don't know. this bill is going to increase the funding by 68%. there's $29 billion in this bill for the national science opfoundation. do you think the american people deserve to know where their money is being spent? this one is from their sister agency. but you know we can't get started without talking about it. this istu over $800,000 to study whether or not japanese whale are more promiscuous on cocaine. i'm not making this up. 800,000 to study whether japanese quail are more promiscuous. you think we could have just pulled the audience. you think we could have just said what do you think because that is sort of the answer. the answer is yes. and yet your government spent 800 grand on that and then when we pointed out no, they are here today to give the agency more money. another one that i think is quite revealing is this study is about the frog calls. half a million dollars and they wanted to know wheth

that's what goes on with the national science foundation. close thome and you may have seen -- close to home and you may have seen it. we call it a streetcar named waste. it's about a couple of blocks from the capitol on h street. it's a streetcar they spent millions of dollars on. for years there was nobody on it and for years didn't go anywhere. it was a streetcar to nowhere basically. burr we spent $1.6 million -- but we spent $1.6 million on this and basically you could see it as basically a trolley car with nobody in it. it was sort of this nostalgia. it's one thing to preserve but something that existed for 50 years. often you see it sitting vacant or not in use at all. now, we've decided that -- i don't know why they even think this anymore because i think climate alarmism has really penetrated all of our education. but just in case there's a child in the country that's not afraid that the oceans will rise and cover the land and that we're all going to drown and that the polar bears are going to drown, we need to make sure they know i

i understand the role the national science foundation and the department of energy and national laboratories played in the broader landscape and i support this organization. i want to focus my question the relationship between the d.o.e. and the nsf. with the birds to research and development. i think i can ask if you agree that the department of energy and national labs played very critical role in technology research felt meant and commercialization and the endless frontier act. >> before he walked in i was just talking about the partnerships we have with the department of energy in the areas of quantum and the high-performance and ensuring high-performance areas are available. so we might combat the a.c.t. to make -- the pandemic. the fantastic facilities that we have rather thin switzerland are chile. we partner with them and we look forward to those partnerships. i spoke to senator van hollen and i reached out and i said i'd very much like to talk to you and extend my partnership even more. she and i are talking about how we might work together. >> madam chairwoman if you allow me the a

this congress is going to increase the budget of the national science foundation by 68%. al science foundation spent $.5 million -- $2.5 million to research the effects of daydreaming. i'm not kidding. you can't make this stuff up. so what are we going to do, increase their budget $29 million more. they should be ashamed. one side doesn't give a fig of what they are spending, but the other side of the aisle that i reside on pretends to care about the debt, but the majority of them will vote for this monsterus bill. the national institutes of health spent $1.5 million to determine how to make tomatoes taste better. they spent a lot of money and time and wrote up reports. this is shocking, this is groundbreaking research, they found if you add sugar to tomatoes, they taste better. you can't make this stuff up. but it goes on and on and on. i'm glad to be joined on the floor by the senator from utah, and i will reserve the remainder of my time and pass the baton. mr. lee: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. lee: mr. president, i've got significant

today the committee will consider fiscal year 2022 budget request of the national science foundation discuss the agency's role in securing u.s. competitiveness. i think it is appropriate that we start this year's budget hearing with the national science foundation because the agency is so instrumental in our country's economic success given the challenge ahead of us, it's particularly fitting this year. much of the nation's global leadership in economic prosperity over the 20th century an early 21st century stems from innovation which is rooted in scientific discovery. this would not have been possible without significant public investment in research and development. the space race in the 1960s, the development of the internet mapping of the human genome in the 90s an early part of this century. with that investment of significant taxpayer resources, these milestones and importantly, all the industries and innovations that have resulted would not have occurred. as a country, we are at a crossroads. global competitors in china or resources to scientific technological innovation. if we

congress and open session and today we will consider fiscal year 2022 budget request of the national science foundation to discuss the role to secure us competitiveness. i really think it'ss appropriate we start this year's budget hearing with the national science foundation because the agency is so instrumental in the country's economic success in the challenges ahead of us it is fitting this year. and with that economic prosperity of the 20th century and early 21st century stems fromio innovation which is rooted in scientific discovery. this would not have been possible without significant public investment and research and development. federal r&d help to drive the space race in the sixties the development of the internet and gps then the mapping of the human genome in the early part of the century. with that investment significant taxpayer resources these milestones and all the industry and innovations have resulted would not have occurred as a country we are now at a crossroads the global competitors, china are pouring resources into scientific and technological innovations if we want to sustain o

group of researchers and i use the term loosely national science foundation $700,000 to study one word. the preposition a. did neil armstrong use theletter a or did ? they listened to this 22nd over and over again i think it took a year they wrote reports and had findings and you know what theirconclusion was ? we just don't know. was it one small step for man or one small step for a man. this is something you could fix. before even more borrowed money, maybe we could say you can't subcontract money meant for alzheimer's or ridiculous research. maybe you would have a committee that reviews the grants that has someone on ulthe committee from one of the big five diseases that says should we be spending the money on autism n or should we spend the money on neil armstrong's statement on? should we spend it on this versus diabetes. teverybody comes to washington and you ask them people who advocate for alzheimer's or cancer, are you getting enough money and i tell the parents that their money went to study neil armstrong and you know what i get? people going you got to be fkidding me. my mo

and i understand thergy and rol national science foundation and the department of energy and national laboratories play in the broader innovation landscape. and i support the mission of each organization.ir i want tods to focus my questi doe and nsf with regards to research and development. so id think natio i can ask, dof you agree that thehe departmentf energy and national labs play a critical role in technology ends researchs development commercialization mentioned in r the end less frontier rships antibiotic? >> senator, i was just, before w you walkede h n i was just talk about the strong partnership that we have with the department of energy in the areas of quantum, in the high performance computer area partnered with them ensuring high performance cycles were available between infrastructure that we have. so we might combat the pandemic fairly and squarely. we partnered with energy and wecilities we have. and whether it's facility in switzerland or chile, we partnered with the doe and looko forward to strengthening theut o partnerships. >> i was saying i spoke to senator graham

it is not the role of the national science foundation or the inspector general of the national science foundation to police speech on campuses. deciding what is appropriate regulation of speech should not be left to agencies that are not experts in constitutional analysis or in issues related to first amendment protections at our institutions of higher education. i believe it would be a mistake to use today's amendment to make substantial change without the opportunity for input from students, educators, and stakeholders. i've heard from many institutions of higher education as well as civil rights groups who strongly share my concerns, so i urge my colleagues to vote no. mr. sullivan: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from alaska. mr. sullivan: with all due respect to my colleague from washington, when the universities say they can't do this because it's too burdensome, again, to me that actually demonstrates the very problem my amendment, my simple amendment is trying to resolve. all it is saying is in exchange for the tens of billions of dollars that america's univer

we talked a little bit and my opening remarks about a proposal that would create a new national science foundation focusing on technology development it is the idea in the endless front tier act the senate is expected to take up soon. the directorate would be focused on ten priority topics you have already mentioned you are looking at. but those include quantum computing, robotics, clean energy and ain president biden infrastructure plan proposes investing $50 billion in this new technology directorate. can you talk about if you need any new authorities and how word the creation of that technology directorate benefit and sfr what kind of challenges would it present? >> as i said earlier in my comment, this directorate will be a cost-cutting directorate which means it does not stand alone but leverages the technologies sourced out of those sectors take a i and quantum and others with decades of such investment that have brought us to the point to have the maturity to invest in the technologies in a highly competitive way and speed and scale otherwise it takes a long time because of the nature of in

that's why this bill is plussing up this number here from the national science foundation. we had discussions here about plussing up the number from the department of energy. obviously we had a vote in the senate even increasing the defense advanced research program agency and their dollars. so what works about the united states of america is that we're an ecosystem. we're not a top-down. it's not like we basically are the government saying this is what's going to be done. we create an ecosystem that's really based on american know-how. our ingenuity and how to get things done. and what we're asking for as it relates to not only n.s.f. funding to continue the work of r&d as it relates to semiconductors, but also to make sure that we're going to continue the focus of manufacturing and design and r&d and development and clustering and supply chain and companies working together. i know how important this is because in the seattle area, in washington state we are a leader in aerospace technology. we're 49% in the united states of aerospace manufacturing. if you don't keep manu

money to develop a more efficient algorithms to censor us.ro $80 billion to the infamous national science foundationl science foundation that has spent $500,000 in taxpayer money studying how long it takes pandas to poop. the answer is 12 minutes, by the way, they need more fiber. and spending money to see if it students can tell the difference between port water and bottled water. another $500,000 to study where the shrimp can run on treadmills underwater, and i could keep going for an hour. here is my point and this is my opinion, others disagree with me, my mother did not raise a fluke.ho and if she did, it was one of my brothers. this is not a fight communism bill. if you look at this bill and study it, you will see that thic is a all 4 feet and the snout spending bill with virtually no money going for military defense.al >> tucker: can i ask a stupid question, and i'm sorry about your brothers, by the way. why would a bill designed to help american manufacturing contain foreign aid? >> i have no idea.tu well, yes, i do, tucker. here's what happened, the started out as a fairly small bill if you

those that authorized budget increases for the national science foundation and energy department. it would also ban us scientists from federal funding to participate in shiny sponsored talent recruitment programs. the senate will take up the bill on monday. >> booktv on c-span2 has top nonfiction books and authors every weekend. at 9:00 pm eastern, english in the gutter, then, now, and forever. columbia university professor john mcwhorter looks at how profanity has evolved over time. sunday at 9:00 pm eastern on afterwords in her latest book persist, massachusetts democratic senator liz before and talks about persistence in her life as a professor, us senator and democratic presidential candidate and is interviewed by washington post white house reporter annie linsky sunday at 10:00 pm eastern, the department of precision bombing during world war ii, the subject of best-selling author malcolm gladwell's new book the bomber mafia:a dream, temptation, and the longest night of the second world war. watch booktv this weekend on c-span2. >> first lady jill biden made remarks for the gr

i believe that national science foundation should be working with the department of energy and other agencies to advance mining research and the development of related technology to make sure the best use of american rare earth resources is occurring and is advanced now. so could you talk about your perspective on this? how will you use your position at osgp to make this a reality? >> senator, thank you. the rare earth minerals is -- is such an important issue because they're used in so many critical technologies today -- from lithium-ion batteries to semiconductors, and because there are a real supply chain problem because in many cases perhaps half of cases major supply is china. and if we were to ever lose that -- we would be in a bad way. so there's a -- urge to scare for 100% of the supply comes from china it is not that we don't have supplies at some of the minerals here. it is that we don't have the mining and refining capacity for those. so i would like to see systemic plans if confirmed i would like to push for systemic plans to make sure that we know how to secure supply ch

this bill does so by increasing research at the national science foundation and dramatically increasing r&d at a new national science foundation directate. other federal agencies will see dramatic increases in the important research they perform. the endless frontier act as reported by the commerce committee is a part of this legislative effort. other committees have been important partners in this legislation. in particular i congratulate chairman menendez and ranking member risch of the foreign relations committee for producing the strategic competition act. which was reported out of their committee on a 21-1 vote. i also commend homeland security and government affairs chairman peters and ranking member portman, committee chairman brown and ranking member toomey, the health, education, labor and pension, and judiciary chair durbin and grassley for their contributions to the substitute product. i will focus my remarks on the commerce committee's contributions to the endless frontier act. last week the commerce committee held a markup to consider this legislation. we considered hundred

this legislation created a framework for science agencies such as noaa and national science foundation to dedicate resources to study. as a result, we made significant advancements in understanding ocean acidification. h.r. 1447 re-authorizes the funding for noaa through the fiscal year 2026, which lapsed in fiscal year 2012 and modernizes the activities by the plan governing the government's efforts and strengthening efforts. the coast research act designates noaa for coordinating the response. this is an important step to streamline and organize efforts across the government. this bill ensures that the voices of stakeholders in the industry are heard through a newly established advisory board. this input is critical to integrate the research, monitoring and adoption strategies for coastal acidification. this bill is a result of years of work of building a consensus including conserves groups, sportsmen and coastal communities. coastal communities and businesses will benefit from this legislation and how better knowledge of ocean acidification improves our ability to respond to its ef

as i mentioned, it creates a new tech directorate in the office of n.s.f., the national science foundation, so that it will be like a darpa system. that is that they work with the private sector, they create technology centers, they build partnerships between government and academia, they support rapid-technology demonstration, they advance the competitiveness of the united states in important fields like artificial intelligence, quantum computing, biotechnology, and they focus on these ideas similar to how darpa has done where the individuals involved are critical to the effort. that is to say to get the best and brightest minds who are working in these areas to be part of this effort and concentration. we also looked at and approved in this legislation the fact that universities and academia provide a lot of research and development, but oftentimes don't even, in the academia world, people are focused on publishing, publishing their research. that's kind of how they get known. that's what they get basically almost rewarded for at the university system. and you'd be surprised how little t

the work of the national science foundation is important as well. i support that work. t that research. but the research is broad. darpa's research is directly applied to our most critical national security challenges. cutting edge tech development is in darpa's ndaa. when we talk about the c.c.p. enabled information campaigns, we want darpa to lead the work. when we talk about developing new technological tools to push back on the c.c.p.'s hybrid warfare, we want darpa to lead the work. if we want american dmoscy to outlast chinese authoritarianism, we need darpa's vestment. it bolsters the work of the front tiers legislation we're debating this week and i encourage all of my colleagues to support this amendment. thank you, mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator is recognized. mr. rubio: a year ago saturday, the trump administration launched something called operation warp speed. it was -- at that time it was a $10 billion program by the government, and it was designed to incentivize pharmaceutical companies to invest and develop -- to invest in developing, r

by building blocks to stem access expanded the national science foundation program. it helped increase participation for girls in computer science. there is just so much more work we have to do, particularly in breaking down barriers that stand in the way of students of all ages, of all genders, all backgrounds, urban, rural, across the board. what role do you see you have in helping promote stem education and workforce training? how can you partner with all of us? the 21st century economy needs a 21st century workforce to find wonderful breakthroughs. how can you use your platform to help promote these exciting things and the work you can do when you pursue any career in the stem field? >> senator rosen, thank you. it was great to talk to you the other day. i am a veteran teacher. for 25 years i have taught the introductory biology course at m.i.t.. i have seen what happens when you can light the fire of imagination in someone's eyes. i think we need to lift up the possibilities and invite people in to stem in a way we have not done before. we need to create curricul

priorities in congress and to build the stem workforce the building blocks that expanded national science foundation program signed into law last job one - - last year. i'm glad it was funded in the last omnibus. but there is so much more work we have to do particularly breaking down the barriers that stand in the way of all genders and background and just across the board. so what role do you see to promote stem education? how can you partner with us with the 21st century workforce? and how can you use your platform to promote these kinds of exciting things in the work you can do when you pursue any career? >> thank you. it was great to talk to the other day. has mentioned, a veteran teacher teaching introductory biology course at mit. i have seen what happens when you can might the fire of imagination in someone's eyes. we need to lift up the possibilities and invite people into stem and away we have not done before. create curricula working for teachers in many different settings so everyone, wherever they are can get as excited about these possibilities. there are many different approaches. i do

we can compare our portfolio with other agencies like the national science foundation and department of defense and identify if there are instances where somebody is trying to double-dip, and if we find those we will take appropriate action. i can reassure you that we are on top of that, using a lot of the latest tools to discover things like that. rep. pocan: madam chair, i yelled back. rep. delauro: congresswoman frankel. rep. frankel: i have a couple of questions. first, i think this should go to dr. sharpless. i am told that we are experiencing a decline in funding levels and there is a huge disproportionate amount between what is funded for example prostate cancer versus ovarian, cervical, and uterine cancer. i will give one example, not that i want less for prostate cancer, that is not the point. 1.8 million of lives lost, so i guess the question is do we need more money for research for winning -- women's gynecological cancers? dr. sharpless: thank you for raising the issue and this is something that we've looked at carefully. i share your concerns about funding major diseases

calendar number 58, s. 1260, a bill to establish a new directorate for technology in the national science foundation and so forth and for other purposes. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the following amendments will be called up and reported by number. the clerk: ms. cantwell for other senators proposes en bloc amendments 1975, 1565, 2003, 1507, 1787, and 1891. mr. carper: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. mr. carper: mr. president, i rise this afternoon along with several of our colleagues to discuss the need to end the policy of taxation without representation, which millions of americans in the district of columbia have endured over -- for over 200 years and hundreds of thousands still endure today. this policy was wrong in 1776 when 13 colonies took on the mightiest nation on earth to end it. it is wrong today. and we seek to end it through the enactment of s. 51, the washington, d.c., admission act. in just six days our country will observe memorial day, a holiday often observed to mark the start of summer, celebrate it the start of summer. but on

whether it's in the national science foundation, nih, or what have you.hat's both in the united states and abroad. so as we're making these massive investments into robotics, artificial intelligence, the chinese are stealing it all. left, right, and center, through the researchers that they are sending here, through cyber, and if we fund start-up companies, then they just buy they will -- them up. i, myself, and others are fighting this reflex of throw money abroad, throw money at the scientific institutions, academia, and research, only to have the chinese steal all of it, and then hand it over to their military and leapfrog ahead. >> let's talk also about the middle east. in a fox news.com piece under the headlines state department admits possibility palestinian aid will fund hamas arsenal. i have a question about u.s. dollars flowing to something that would be positive. this is a humanitarian effort here. potentially, but of course not wanting that money to end up with a terrorist organization, as other countries have designated, the senior state depar

lab was doing work with usaid, eco health health alliance, homeland security department, national science foundation tens of millions of dollars of contracts to work with risky viruss to see what's what, and all of those documents could tell us something about what the wuhan labs might have been working on. that's not to say we funded the research that caused the pandemic. that is to say we know a lot about the labs that we're not saying that the administration hasn't revealed and also the intelligence that went into that statement which says the "wall street journal" reports the researchers went to the hospital in november 2019, there's a whole body of intelligence that the biden administration is sitting on that the state department has in its files that they won't reveal for some reason. what you're seeing is increasing calls, mostly republicans, but it's starting to be democrats, too, including what's going through the senate for the state department to release all of that information so we can see what's what, so we can see how much we actually know about the help we were giving these wuhan lab

federal government is doing its share, actually, there's an important program funded by the national science foundationhere are about 70 or so, 78 universities, colleges and universities involved, they produce about 380-400 graduates a year. they fund four years of college, and like the rotc, basically when you graduate, you commit to providingg service back to the federal government. it's got a 95% placement rate, but it's relatively small, and it's been growing at a very modest rate. in fact, it's been around for 21 years, and 1 in 5 of those institutions are minority-serving institutions, and wee n really need all handsn deck in america when we're dealing with these kinds of challenges. we have to get folks working on the cybersecurity challenge. so that ram really, really needs to be -- larry: so, kelvin -- >> it's not just the federal government's responsibility. larry: okay. so i'm just thinking about, you know me, you have to teach me all this stuff about 5g and cyberspace and spectrum and all that. i actually got pretty good at it. i was one of your better students, not maybe your best. but the

vehicle for lots of other china related stuff and it starts with $100 billion to revamp the national science foundation. since we heard from secretary that we shouldn't try to slow down china, we should be trying to run faster but the bill is already being in bickering and bureaucratic dysfunction so how is congress going to perform on this? are you going to be able to come together to put forth a program for meeting with china on the innovation front and a comprehensive bipartisan way or not? >> thank you for the question. you been doing a great job writing about it. i made a production a couple of years ago, a speech on china that the more this challenge becomes apparent not just members of congress but to the american people, the more i think it is going to drive bipartisan action to get our own house in order and our own act together whether it's on the issues of what secretary just mentioned or innovation or infrastructure so i don't think we're there yet and i think this will be an important aspect, in some ways an important first test in regard to how we look at these issues and truly come toget

he says i object to this study on love because no one, even the national science foundation, can argue that falling in love sf a science -- in love is a science. not only because i'm sure that even if they spend $84 million or $84 billion, they would

>> the senate is working on a science and technology bill that includes funding for the national science foundation. republican senator paul of kentucky spoke about what he called wasteful spending by the agency. fifty years ago william rose in this body and told us about government waste because the award they were studying things like dating and love and we had these great scientific studies about love. these are the words from the early 1970s. he was a conservative democrat. he says i object to this

bill that we are debating right now, a bill that will make substantial investments in the national science foundation and the department of energy, our national labs, both great national assets, in this bill as well we're actually doing more than authorizing new ideas and new advancements; we're actually finally -- finally -- putting our money where our mouth is. that's why i included the utilizing the strategic communications act, which is basically $2 billion to invest in making sure that in america we have and in the west we have a competitor against huawei. i've come to this floor and talked about the national security threat huawei presents to america and to a lice. if you don't have a -- and to our allies. but if you don't have a competitor priced on a fair basis, what do you expect to do? what do you expect an ally country to do? or for that matter, what do you expect many of the rural telcos to do? i was proud to work with two of my colleagues, senator burr and senator rubio. we put up a public wireless supply chain innovation fund to spur investments towards open architecture, innovative, le

with a once-in-a-generation investment in national science foundation, the department of energy, the department of commerce, and other vital entities, this legislation will set our country on a path to outinnovate, outproduce and outcompete the world in the industries of the future. as the week goes on we'll consider a number of amendments from both sides of the aisle as well as a managers' amendment to bring together a package of bipartisan changes to the bill. this is regular order in action. the bill itself is the product of at least six senate committees and includes input from nearly every member of the senate. as promised, we are working in a bipartisan way in a much more open way than the senate used to act to allow amendments and debate. when a bill passes 22-4 out of one of its major committees and 21-1 out another, it is truly bipartisan. and we should be able to move this bill forward without any dilatory obstruction. with so much cooperation happening, i see no reason why we can't finish the legislation by the end of the week. so far this bill has flown a bit under the ra

some of the proposals would inject more money to the national science foundation, not to its traditionals, but toward a new entity inside called the directory of technology, which would be more focused on applied research, meaning to turn research findings and basic science into technologies like artificial intelligence, quantum computing. that is coming from an understandable place because that is where china was posing the most significant threat to u.s. technology. i don't think that is a good use of government funding on research. instead, they should focus on basic research, which is the strength of the national science foundation. i think there are elements that may not be that bad. we still have to see how it will play out. host: this comes as the backdrop of greater tension between our country in china. how would you assess relations between president biden, president xi jinping, and our two countries? guest: that is a very important question. after two decades of engagement, very romantic engagement since china joined the wto, the united states in terms of china policy has tried

ehlmann received her master of science and doctorate in geological sciences in the national science foundation welcome dr. ehlmann. dr. luther beegle is a principle scientist of the jabber person library. your beegle has raised done research is a t. i n. coli of military science focus on detection andd characterization of molecules with the identification of potential biosignatures. doctors said they received a bachelor of science in physics and astronomy from the university of delaware and a master of science and of science in physics and a doctorate in astrophysics at the university ofp alabama. dr. said three i'm sure president will please to know we have a university of delaware graduate and their final witnesses. ear tanja bozak rick hess sergio bub did -- biology scully that the mars 2020 perseverance rover. doctors so they's russ research focuses on chemical mineral in sedimentary rock. the lab uses researcher pritzer square modernn geochemical and sentimentality goal processes on life and environment during the first 80% of earth's history and looks for signs of past life on mars. doct

and of the national science foundation has those concerns. are you aware of that issue? don't expect you to be, but if you are, great. i would like to ask for your thoughts after the hearing on whether nasa has any take your thoughts on governance because we want to get this right. it is invaluable to our astronomic efforts across the world. mr. nelson: i am aware, simply because we have great staff that made me aware of it anticipating that you might ask about it. we do not expect a change in the management organization to have zero impact on nasa's role in the observatories. nasa provides the funding directly to the management organization which is at the university of hawaii. >> that's a great staff, administrator. at appreciate the response and the preparation. i would love to work with you on those locations and nasa overall. mr. nelson: i went to those two mountains and they had all kinds of experimentation going on noaa. two thirds of noaa's budget goes back to nasa because they built and designed the very specific instruments that measure all of the climate that

she went back when the sputnik went up the government funded the national science foundation and she got a scholarship to go get her master's in science and teach science. so then i got exposed to my mother going back to college in a master's program in science. so i got exposed a lot of science and so i was always interested in those kind of things. model airplanes and the eighth grade i said in the library was my home room, and i said next to the age. i think it was by chance, but i sat next to the a's and that we go in for 15 minutes every morning and get the roll call and i'd reach over and pull a book out with an a on it like aeronautical engineering airplanes aircraft recognition and i would sit there and read for 10 or 15 minutes and becoming more familiar with airplanes. then in high school, i got into athletics and in my mother's brother had played football at the university of georgia in the late 1920s, and he had two sons that were playing at university of georgia in the 1950s when i was so, you know ten eleven twelve years old and so football. my mother was a great footba

right now, that bill makes the national science foundation the lead agency in directing $100 billion in government investment. the problem is that's the same agency that time and again has had the research we fund stolen by professors and graduate students who are on the payroll for china. darfa and other advanced research agencies within government have a much better record of protecting research, and i believe would be a far better choice to administer these investments instead. the second thing a real china bill must do is communicate that while we do not seek an armed confrontation with china, we will confront any military aggression. we will maintain our defense commitments with our allies and we will win any conflict china starts. we must never do anything that leads beijing to doubt our commitment to taiwan, and we must never accept the chinese communist party's illegitimate claims on the world's most important chipping lanes in the south and east china seas. the strategic competition act we recently passed out of the foreign relations committee is largely silent on this topic

we can compare our portfolio with other agencies like the national science foundation and department of defense and identify if there are instances where somebody is trying to double-dip, and if we find those we will take appropriate action. i can reassure you that we are on top of that, using a lot of the latest tools to discover things like that. rep. pocan: madam chair, i yelled back. rep. delauro: congresswoman frankel. rep. frankel: i have a couple of questions. first, i think this should go to dr. sharpless. i am told that we are experiencing a decline in funding levels and there is a huge disproportionate amount between what is funded for example prostate cancer versus ovarian, cervical, and uterine cancer. i will give one example, not that i want less for prostate cancer, that is not the point. 1.8 million of lives lost, so i guess the question is do we need more money for research for women's gynecological cancers? dr. sharpless: thank you for raising the issue and this is something that we've looked at carefully. i share your concerns about funding major diseases like ovari

one of the national socialists did using no shape and hair and eye color that was pseudo science because the race is nothing more than a societal construct as it lacks any scientific foundation in the division of humanity into races was and is 1st and foremost a societal and political classification. and if skin color is added as a differentiating characteristic then as present day scientists we must say that skin color is the poorest characteristic you could use to ascertain races on all of us and fists new research shows that everyone was dark skinned until around a 1000 years ago africa is the cradle of humanity for all peoples africa is for elimination d.v. get a mention the main point of this is that the concept of race should never be used again because there have never been races so needless and gave them the same constructor these are constructs and it is impossible to create an artificial hierarchy of categories using something like hair skin and eye color was under the need of a window should you wouldn't violent ones induced you've been high in putting in. an interview done. functional if you include the bust. in foster vice or lawsuits or stool. then on pulley to

what the national socialists did using no shape and hair and eye color that was pseudo science because the race is nothing more than a societal construct as it lacks any scientific foundation in the division of humanity into races was and is 1st and foremost a societal and political classification. and if skin color is added as a differentiating characteristic then as present day scientists we must say that skin color is the poorest characteristic you could use to ascertain races on all of us and fists new research shows that everyone was dark skinned until around a 1000 years ago africa is the cradle of humanity for all peoples africa is for elimination d.v. get a mention the main point of this is that the concept of race should never be used again because there have never been races so needless and gave them this in constructor these are constructs and it is impossible to create an artificial hierarchy of categories using something like hair skin and eye color. under the need of a winter should you wouldn't vagabonds induce digging in high and putting in. an interview duncan one. functional if you see the bust. in fast advice or lawsuits or stool and. then on pulley titi

science and technology. this conference, hosted by the free state foundation. >> this is part of the free state foundation's 13th annual conference. this year, we had to go virtual. usually, we are at the nationalss club for our annual conference.

science and technology. this conference, hosted by the free state foundation. >> this is part of the free state foundation's 13th annual conference. this year, we had to go virtual. usually, we are at the national press club for our annual conference. many of you have been with us. i am hopeful we will be back there next year. i am pretty certain that we will be. we are delighted to have this conference as a virtual event with two fcc chairs, to sec chairs, to fcc commissioner's, two ftc commissioners, a panel with prestigious academic board members. and now, today we are delighted to have with us a key congressman, who i am going to introduce any moment. by the way, this is the free state foundation's 15th annual -- excuse me, 15th anniversary this year. we started in 2006. we are excited about that and sometime before the end of the year, we are going to have a proper celebration of that key milestone. one other by the way, i know c-span is joining us today. we are always delighted when we have our c-span audience with us, and we are grateful that c-span is covering another one of the free state foundation's events, as they have many times in the past. so now, we are pleased to welcome back,