Extension of Sbir and Sttr Authority

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I support H.R. 5100, a bill that I cosponsored along with the Chair of the Science Committee, Representative Babin, and the Chair and Ranking Member of the Small Business Committee, Representatives Williams and Velazquez. Like my colleagues, I am a strong supporter of the SBIR and STTR programs and it is my priority to see these programs continue without disruption.

For more than 40 years, and Small Business Innovation Research Program (SBIFR), and later its companion program the Small Business Technology Transfer Program (STTR), have been contributing to U.S. leadership in technological innovation through support for small business research and development.

My home state of California has long been one of the Nation's leading states for science and technology. Because of our rich and diverse culture of innovation and entrepreneurship, our small companies--across sectors--have successfully competed for SBIR/STTR funds since the programs' inception. In 2022, California companies won a total of $887 million in SBIR/STTR awards. I celebrate the success of California's small businesses. But more importantly, I celebrate the return on investment (ROI) that benefits the entire Nation. While estimates vary depending on the scope and methodology of each study, the studies I have seen report a ROI of at least 10:1. That is a remarkable win for the taxpayer for a relatively small investment.

While the Small Business Administration administers the overall program, it is the science agencies themselves that solicit and fund SBIR/STTR award proposals. As the Ranking Member of the Science, Space, and Technology Committee, I am familiar with the diversity of our Federal scientific enterprise and the vast differences in missions and needs across our science agencies, including the Department of Defense (DOD). So, it is no surprise to me that over the lifetime of the SBIR/ STTR programs, each agency has evolved the particulars of their individual programs to align with their specific needs. That also applies to how they approach risk assessment in their due diligence programs. While clear, standard definitions are an important goal that I share, an agency like NSF is rightfully going to assess and mitigate risk differently than an agency like DOD.

It is with that context in mind that I have serious concerns about the INNOVATE Act as currently proposed by the Chairs of the House and Senate Small Business Committees. Even DOD itself has flagged significant concerns. I do support a long-term comprehensive reauthorization of the program, and I am committed to taking a serious look at where the program has challenges and needs good governance updates. I am also committed to discussing the opportunities to continue to strengthen the outcomes of the program, including by doing more to attract new entrants across the Nation. I have instructed my staff accordingly and they have been at the table for more than a month negotiating in good faith with staff from the other committees. However, we remain far apart on certain key issues and simply need more time to work through them. At the moment, we don't even have agreement on the fundamentals. What I do not accept is a repeat of the 2022 process, in which one corner out of six effectively dictated the process and rammed through a bill that narrowly reflected only their priorities and completely omitted Science Committee priorities, among others.

That is why I am encouraging all of my colleagues, in the House and the Senate, to support a clean one-year reauthorization of the SBIR/ STTR programs. We must be allowed time to engage in the kind of thoughtful deliberation and debate that the public and the stakeholders expect from us before we enact monumental changes to a program that has been an undisputed success for more than 40 years.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source