SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, & TRANSPORTATION
SUBCOMMITTEE HEARING
For questions on the note below, please contact the Delta Strategy Group team.
On July 21, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation held a hearing entitled “Measuring What Matters: Science, Standards, and Strategic Competition.” The witnesses in the hearing were:
- Walter Copan, Vice President Emeritus for Research and Technology Transfer, Colorado School of Mines Transfer, Colorado School of Mines
- Dr. Drew Endy, Director of Bio-Strategy and Leadership, Hoover Institution
- Dr. Robert Atkinson, Founder and Senior Fellow, Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
- Dr. Julia Phillips, Science Policy Advocate
Below are several key takeaways from the hearing prepared by Delta Strategy Group.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Strategic Competition with China
- Members and witnesses broadly agreed that China has emerged as both a formidable strategic competitor and a major trading partner, particularly across critical technology fields. Comments cited how China’s position is supported by coordinated investment, extensive research infrastructure, and long-term industrial planning.
- Discussions focused on Chinese participation in strategically important industries. Dr. Atkinson framed how heavily subsidized Chinese firms do not operate as normal market competitors, voicing support for restrictions on Chinese investment and equity stakes in critical U.S. companies.
- Witnesses warned that China’s growing scientific and industrial capacity could allow it to shape global standards, intellectual property frameworks, and emerging technology markets. Copan emphasized the need for a long-term U.S. strategy and institutional continuity to compete effectively.
- Subcommittee Chairman Budd (R-NC) noted that China accounted for thirty percent of global R&D spending in 2024, compared with 29 percent for the U.S. He characterized China’s 15th Five-Year Plan as an effort to build technological self-reliance and reduce dependence on Western economies.
U.S. Research Model & Security
- Members raised concerns about Chinese access to U.S. scientific knowledge, university research, sensitive data, and dual-use industries. Dr. Atkinson called for tighter research-security rules, greater scrutiny of Chinese nationals participating in sensitive research, and stronger limits on the transfer of scientific and technological knowledge to China.
- Witnesses agreed that the U.S. research system must respond more effectively to strategic competition, but differed over the appropriate balance between foundational and applied research. Dr. Atkinson called for more outcome-oriented federal funding directed toward strategically important industries with greater emphasis on competitiveness, while Dr. Endy and Dr. Phillips emphasized the importance of sustained, long-term support for foundational science and STEM talent.
- Ranking Member Baldwin (D-WI) criticized recent disruptions to federal research funding, arguing that weakening agencies and laboratories undermines U.S. competitiveness. Dr. Phillips described the National Science Board (NSB) as effectively filling the role of a department of science the U.S. otherwise lacks.
Scientific Infrastructure & Biotechnology
- Discussions identified biotechnology as a critical strategic domain in which early advantages in measurement tools, infrastructure, and standards could compound over time.
- Dr. Endy warned that China is building large-scale biotechnology infrastructure and argued that the U.S. risks losing influence over the standards and conditions that will govern future biological innovation.
- Dr. Endy called for National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to establish a fully resourced Biological Measurement Laboratory to strengthen U.S. measurement capabilities, improve biotechnology standards, and help ensure U.S. leadership in the emerging global bioeconomy.