WASHINGTON, March 20, 2003 — Lawmakers and a Bush administration official pledged support for nanotechnology Wednesday during the first hearing in the House of Representatives devoted to the field.
null
In a wide-ranging, two-hour discussion before the full House Science Committee, lawmakers, scientists, officials and an investor waded through a stream of important nanotechnology issues, including federal funding, technology transfer and international competition.
 |
null
Given the intensity of nanotechnology investments in Asia and Europe, it’s “an area we are going to have to continue to fund aggressively,” said Richard Russell, associate director for technology at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, during the hearing. “We look forward to making nanotechnology and the future of nanotechnology as strong as possible. This is one of the issues that makes my job worthwhile.”
null
The hearing revolved around a bill introduced earlier this year called “The Nanotechnology Research and Development Act of 2003,” sponsored by the chairman of the Science Committee, Rep. Sherwood Boehlert, R-N.Y. The bill, which is widely supported by industry, would make the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) a permanent part of government.
null
Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., a sponsor of companion legislation in the Senate who testified during Wednesday’s hearing, said lawmakers need to start engaging more energetically with nanotechnology.
null
“It’s time for Congress to think big about the small sciences,” he said.
null
Quoting Proverbs, 19th century English poet Alfred Lord Tennyson and 19th century French writer Alexis de Tocqueville, Sen. George Allen, R-Va., urged lawmakers to get up to snuff on the fledgling field.
null
“No more than 5 percent of senators or House members understand what nanotechnology is, but it is something all members need to be conversant on,” said Allen, the sponsor of the Senate bill with Wyden. “Leadership is needed.”
null
Boehlert’s bill calls for giving the NNI more bureaucratic ballast, and sharper teeth, than it has now. The bill would give the NNI its own dedicated staff. It also would create an oversight body out of the White House, ensure that ethical and environmental issues are continually aired and loosely direct the sprawl of federal nanotechnology research.
null
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, plans to make the nanotechnology legislation in the Senate a priority in his committee, Wyden said.
null
In coming months, there likely will be several hearings in both houses of Congress exploring the policy issues implicit in nanotechnology research and development. Boehlert said he will schedule another nanotechnology hearing in early April.
null
The bill is not controversial, and the people who testified, as well as most of the lawmakers who spoke, championed the legislation as the right next step for nanotechnology.
null
“IBM believes that nanotechnology has a big place in the future of the company, and in the future of society,” said Tom Theis, director of physical sciences in the IBM Research Division of the Thomas J. Watson Research Center. “We urge the committee to pass this legislation.”
null
Concern about the pace of nanotechnology investment among foreign governments dominated a chunk of the testimony.
null
“With a plethora of products in the market and more on the way, it’s not longer prudent to think of nanotechnology as just a science,” said Alan Marty, who is responsible for leading nanotechnology investments for JP Morgan Partners, an investment firm. “Our focus must be widened to include commercialization and the global race.”
null
The international competition, he said, is focused much more on driving nanotechnology economic development than the U.S. government.
null
Marty said one valuable step government could take would be ensuring that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) “is the very best in the world when it comes to nanotechnology.”
null
The USPTO is “challenged” right now by nanotechnology, he said, because of its interdisciplinary nature and the rapid pace of developments in the field.
null
Another big topic during the hearing was potential trouble with ethical and environmental issues associated with nanotechnology.
null
“I do urge the committee to anticipate that there will be societal implications, not every one of them positive and comfortable,” Theis said.
null
Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga., asked whether, “in light of the recent bill we passed in the House banning human cloning,” there were any similarly explosive problems with nanotechnology.
null
“Some individuals have suggested that nanotechnology developments may raise concerns,” he said.
null
Members of the panel rejected the idea that nanotechnology was riddled with ethical land mines, but they all championed the idea of dealing with potential problems aggressively and often.
null
There is a danger that people will associate nanotechnology with “guys in scary suits” making mysterious concoctions in the deserts of New Mexico, said Carl Batt, co-director of the Nanobiotechnology Center at Cornell University. “Until we broaden the education base of the general public, the arguments are between academic scientists on one end, and the fringe on the other, which is not productive.”