 Patti Glaza, VP/Publisher – Small Times |
Feb. 1, 2007 — Ok, Small Times is a big offender. This is the first year we attended the NanoBusiness Alliances’ public policy tour in Washington, DC. It always seemed like something we should do, but, like many of you out there, other priorities came up.
If you didn’t attend, you missed out. Are you concerned about EH&S? Research incentives? Early-stage funding? Sarbanes-Oxley? Overall competitiveness of the US in technology? The nano policy tour, which runs about the same time every year, is your time to dialog with the congressional members and staffers that make the laws you like to sit around the table and grip about.
While I’m not an expert on public policy (though ironically my undergrad is in political science) it was fascinating to watch the dialog between the executives, lawyers, lobbyists and the professional politicians. Instead of pitching to venture capitalists, we were conducting elevator pitches to lawmakers. Some of the meetings I attended were better than others – the messaging wasn’t always as focused as it could be. However, the intent and interest in working collaboratively was clear.
What was the agenda of the policy tour? Three key messages this year were as follows:
– Co-sponsor and/or support the Research Competitiveness Act of 2007 (S. 41), which creates a tax incentive for investors in innovative small businesses and makes the R&D tax credit permanent.
– Re-authorize the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act and continue growth in its funding.
– The nanotech sector recognizes the need and is actively participating in the EH&S and is recommending that funds are made available to prioritize risk research, fund agencies to execute on the risk priorities, support of the voluntary programs being established by the EPA and NIOSH, and clarify how existing regulatory frameworks apply to nanomaterials.
Although I wish I had been able to attend all three days of the tour (my mistake), these are a few interesting tidbits I picked up along the way:
– Staffers are like the rest of us – too busy. Make their lives easier by summarizing the issues, what you would like the congressperson to do, and provide clear examples of how nanotechnology can impact their representative’s district. This last bit is important. Not surprisingly, “manufacturing” was a key theme in many of the meetings.
– Companies that are not nanomaterials focused, are quick to distance themselves from the EH&S issues.
– SOX is an incredible burden to small companies. One of the public nano companies speaking to the Small Business Senate Commerce Committee noted that they were paying $30,000 per employee to be SOX compliant. An interesting point was made that it wasn’t necessarily SOX itself that was the problem, but the interpretation of SOX by the accountants. Yes, folks, this is big business to accountants. Partner rates of $900-$1000 for SOX guidance were being quoted. In Michigan, we prosecuted gas stations for taking advantage of 911 by inflating their fuel prices during the crisis. Has anyone called the large accounting firms in for a Senate hearing on price gouging for SOX services?
– There seems to be general agreement that the federal labs are doing great basic research, but they have a long way to go before understanding how to commercialize the technology they are working so hard to develop.
Obviously there is much more, but my hope is that you will take advantage of this policy tour next year to show the Hill that the nanotechnology sector can stand together and push for an agenda that helps all of us. It is easy to sit back and hope the right thing will be done, it is much better to stand up and make sure our views are known. Maybe there is a lesson in the old saying – “it’s the squeaky wheel that gets the grease”.
To learn more about the policy agenda and how you can assist, please contact Sean Murdock, Executive Director, NanoBusiness Alliance at [email protected].
Small Times also welcomes your comments on this subject [email protected].